NATO
Nov 28, 06:58 PM
I believe, correct me if I'm wrong, that microsoft suggested it in the first place to universal.
So they say.... :rolleyes:
So they say.... :rolleyes:
notabadname
Apr 25, 03:32 PM
There is also a difference in whether the phone keeps and uses data to function and perform services, and whether that data is transmitted to Apple and used by Apple for tracking. The burden of proof (it would seem - in my non-laywer opinion) would be to show that Apple is specifically collecting that data and using or storing it. Not just that the phone keeps it resident, on-board for use by Apps which the user may "allow" to use location data.
I'm betting Apple is smart enough not to be collecting the data outside the SLA.
I'm betting Apple is smart enough not to be collecting the data outside the SLA.
nostrum
Aug 8, 04:38 AM
Pretty underwhelmed by Leopard to be honest. Time Machine looks like the best new feature, but i doubt that I'll even use it that much. But does it really matter? OS X is the best OS out there, its still a significantly better than anything MS can produce. Its stable, doesn't crash, freeze, lock up. Its secure. It does everything you want without the hassle you get from XP. In truth it doesn't even need to be updated. It works and thats the most important thing to me as a user.
I'm happy with Tiger and unless there's something significant that will be in Leopard, i doubt that I'll upgrade unless I get a new Intel Mac.
I'm happy with Tiger and unless there's something significant that will be in Leopard, i doubt that I'll upgrade unless I get a new Intel Mac.
Timepass
Jul 15, 10:57 AM
I disagree. Using ATX power supplies is a stupid idea. I am sure Apple uses higher quality power supplies than you would pick up at your local CompUSA.
If they allow this there will be a lot of dead Macs, from power supplies whose rails aren't strong enough.
Not to mention those who buy the 400W model because it is only 20 bucks and drastically underpower there Mac.
This would cause too many problems. Keep it proprietary IMO.
Well I wouldnt worry about that in the case of a mac. Only people who are really going to replace there PSU are going to be people who know something about computers. A lot of people replace there ram. PSU are not upgraded very offen if ever at all.
Also the people who do replace PSU most of them know dont cheap out on them. Among home builder comminty a thing most agree on is NEVER cheap out on a PSU. Go name brand. Reason being is why would you build a 1k system and then risk it all with a cheap PSU (rule can be cut if pretty much using dirt cheap parts to begin with and trying to go as cheaply as possible (less than 500 and in old spare parts). My own PC rig using an Antec True Power PSU in it (that i pick up from compUSA oddly enough).
I think going ATX is a good thing because it means Apple is going to be using more standardized parts so it will be cheaper for apple to get them.
If they allow this there will be a lot of dead Macs, from power supplies whose rails aren't strong enough.
Not to mention those who buy the 400W model because it is only 20 bucks and drastically underpower there Mac.
This would cause too many problems. Keep it proprietary IMO.
Well I wouldnt worry about that in the case of a mac. Only people who are really going to replace there PSU are going to be people who know something about computers. A lot of people replace there ram. PSU are not upgraded very offen if ever at all.
Also the people who do replace PSU most of them know dont cheap out on them. Among home builder comminty a thing most agree on is NEVER cheap out on a PSU. Go name brand. Reason being is why would you build a 1k system and then risk it all with a cheap PSU (rule can be cut if pretty much using dirt cheap parts to begin with and trying to go as cheaply as possible (less than 500 and in old spare parts). My own PC rig using an Antec True Power PSU in it (that i pick up from compUSA oddly enough).
I think going ATX is a good thing because it means Apple is going to be using more standardized parts so it will be cheaper for apple to get them.
SWC
Aug 7, 08:01 PM
great . . . i just get a new macbook with tiger now i'm gonna have to get leopard . . . how much will this put me back?
$129 is history proves true
$129 is history proves true
xStep
Apr 11, 08:20 PM
There are thousands if not more of us who would gladly pony up and stick with Apple.
Nailed it
Difinitely not. I won't say where I'd agree and disagree with for the rest of it, but that last sentence isn't right. Thousands implies a rather low number. Not nearly enough revenue for Apple to keep working on FCS. ;)
Nailed it
Difinitely not. I won't say where I'd agree and disagree with for the rest of it, but that last sentence isn't right. Thousands implies a rather low number. Not nearly enough revenue for Apple to keep working on FCS. ;)
jwdsail
Apr 6, 12:08 PM
Maybe, just maybe, this would be the first Air I'd consider buying..
If, this update would bring Thunderbolt to the Air..
USB-only is still a deal-breaker for me, I'd rather walk to the internet, uphill, both ways, in the snow, than be that limited in a laptop..
An Air, with Thunderbolt... Wouldn't be my primary Mac, but would make an Air/iMac combo look better than a maxed-out 15" MBP...
Shrug..
If, this update would bring Thunderbolt to the Air..
USB-only is still a deal-breaker for me, I'd rather walk to the internet, uphill, both ways, in the snow, than be that limited in a laptop..
An Air, with Thunderbolt... Wouldn't be my primary Mac, but would make an Air/iMac combo look better than a maxed-out 15" MBP...
Shrug..
dejunky
Apr 6, 03:41 PM
What is the obsession with back-lit keys?
Do you actually look at the keyboard when you're typing?
Yes.
Do you actually look at the keyboard when you're typing?
Yes.
ergle2
Sep 20, 03:51 PM
Umm. What happened in here?
Can we reurn to some common respect please? This spat isn't constructive.
True enough.
I ... well, I won't go there, too likely to throw more fuel on the fire.
I'll drop it if she does, fair enough?
Can we reurn to some common respect please? This spat isn't constructive.
True enough.
I ... well, I won't go there, too likely to throw more fuel on the fire.
I'll drop it if she does, fair enough?
aohus
Apr 19, 01:52 PM
wow @ post 2.
apple will have a hard time fighting this in court.
apple will have a hard time fighting this in court.
peskaa
Apr 28, 06:15 AM
Wow, this thread and the ridiculous nature of this issue are hilarious. Seriously, you wonder why the US is going down the pan when the entire nation seems to get caught up in a fight over a bloody birth certificate?
iliketyla
Mar 31, 02:33 PM
Let the Apple fanboys begin patting each other on the back, and taking something and running wild with it.
By the end of this thread, it'll be impossible to decipher what the original story was about.
By the end of this thread, it'll be impossible to decipher what the original story was about.
LaDirection
Jul 14, 04:36 PM
"Steve Jobs really must have been embarassed after claiming we'd have 3 ghz when we still can't even pass 2.7 ghz without a huge unstable liquid cooling system."
I think we'll see more cores per cpu before we see 3GHz. IMHO, 4,8 or more cores at 2.66 is far better than 1 or 2 cores at 3GHz.
""Steve Jobs really must have been embarassed after claiming we'd have 3 ghz when we still can't even pass 2.7 ghz without a huge unstable liquid cooling system."
IBM never produced chips that could run at 2.7GHz. In IBM was stuck at 2.2GHz instead of the 3GHz promised. Apple requested that chips be overclocked to 2.5GHz. In IBM was stuck at 2.3 GHZ, these chips were also overclocked to 2.7GHz. This year we are at Dual Cores 2.5Ghz. Even if Apple uses nothing but 2.66 GHz Dual cores, they will still be the fastest, non-overcloked chips that Apple has ever used.
"IMHO, 4,8 or more cores at 2.66 is far better than 1 or 2 cores at 3GHz."
8 cores?! Wow, maybe one day! But 2 or more cores/CPU are only good if your app can use them. Most applications, and in fact many of Apple, do not use more than 2 cores/CPUS. The Quad core G5's are a good example how the 3rd and 4th core are 98% or the time unused. A Dual 3GHz to a user would be much more usuefull than an 8 core 2.5GHz!
P.S. The number ONE problem that Apple must address in their pro line is the lack of Hard Drive bays! We need at least 4 HD, please! An internal 10,000 RPM RAID array is music to teh ears of pro video and film users.
I think we'll see more cores per cpu before we see 3GHz. IMHO, 4,8 or more cores at 2.66 is far better than 1 or 2 cores at 3GHz.
""Steve Jobs really must have been embarassed after claiming we'd have 3 ghz when we still can't even pass 2.7 ghz without a huge unstable liquid cooling system."
IBM never produced chips that could run at 2.7GHz. In IBM was stuck at 2.2GHz instead of the 3GHz promised. Apple requested that chips be overclocked to 2.5GHz. In IBM was stuck at 2.3 GHZ, these chips were also overclocked to 2.7GHz. This year we are at Dual Cores 2.5Ghz. Even if Apple uses nothing but 2.66 GHz Dual cores, they will still be the fastest, non-overcloked chips that Apple has ever used.
"IMHO, 4,8 or more cores at 2.66 is far better than 1 or 2 cores at 3GHz."
8 cores?! Wow, maybe one day! But 2 or more cores/CPU are only good if your app can use them. Most applications, and in fact many of Apple, do not use more than 2 cores/CPUS. The Quad core G5's are a good example how the 3rd and 4th core are 98% or the time unused. A Dual 3GHz to a user would be much more usuefull than an 8 core 2.5GHz!
P.S. The number ONE problem that Apple must address in their pro line is the lack of Hard Drive bays! We need at least 4 HD, please! An internal 10,000 RPM RAID array is music to teh ears of pro video and film users.
other
Aug 7, 04:29 PM
*shrug* I don't think TM is a copy of System Restore. But I think how much that feature has caught on with Win users is also not unrelated to the presence of TM in Leopard. All's fair in love, war, and operating systems. :)
Well, do you think it's a copy of "Previous versions", which someone posted a link to in this thread?
(Here's the link again: http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060730-7383.html)
Well, do you think it's a copy of "Previous versions", which someone posted a link to in this thread?
(Here's the link again: http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060730-7383.html)
SuperSnake2012
Aug 5, 11:42 PM
Here, let me show you the art and science of rumoring (http://www.misterbg.org/AppleProductCycle/), Apple-style.
The funny thing is that the website is almost spot on with everything. :D
The funny thing is that the website is almost spot on with everything. :D
DoFoT9
Aug 12, 04:48 AM
Multi-quote madness!!! :eek:
haha thats nothing ;)
haha thats nothing ;)
Super Dave
Aug 8, 12:50 AM
Also a very good point, so I need a bigger main HD for my MacBookPro (the new Seagate 160GB becomes interesting) for Time Machine, but i still need to back the hole thing up to an external HD in case of a HD crash (I had 2 in the last 8 months!). So Tine Machine doesn't make Backups obsolete, I didn't even think of that up to now. Hmmm..
Time Machine is backup, it's not for on the same drive (or nothing implied it was).
David :cool:
Time Machine is backup, it's not for on the same drive (or nothing implied it was).
David :cool:
dethmaShine
Apr 12, 03:11 PM
3am.
Thanks.
And that's not good.
Thanks.
And that's not good.
littleman23408
Nov 23, 12:53 PM
My copy shipped from Amazon, Can't wait for tomorrow!:D:D:D
miniConvert
Mar 22, 12:47 PM
Samsung redesigned the 10.1 'just like that' did they? Wow, that's going to be one impressive piece of carefully considered and crafted engineering if they poured over it for such an extensive amount of time.... </sarcasm>
Seriously, either Samsung have pulled something incredible out of the bag or, more likely IMHO, this 'new' 10.1 wont be all that. They're certainly desperate to have a tablet success!
Seriously, either Samsung have pulled something incredible out of the bag or, more likely IMHO, this 'new' 10.1 wont be all that. They're certainly desperate to have a tablet success!
andrewsd
Mar 31, 02:27 PM
Say What I thought a closed system was bad..hahahhaahahahah
cult hero
Mar 26, 12:32 AM
Can't believe it's anywhere near GM time. Way too many bugs and inconsistencies in behavior. New networking tools in Server have to be implemented now that SMB is being canned - that's not a minor addition. Calling it a release candidate is a stretch, but calling it GM is just plain crazy.
The GPL3 issue with Samba has been around for a LONG time. The announcement was made in 2007. I have some feeling that Apple's been brewing their Samba replacement for a long time. (Although I don't think this is a GM either.)
About the only thing that I find disappointing about this release is the lack of a new filesystem. However, that might just be because coming from a Linux background I probably payed WAY more attention to filesystems than most people.
The GPL3 issue with Samba has been around for a LONG time. The announcement was made in 2007. I have some feeling that Apple's been brewing their Samba replacement for a long time. (Although I don't think this is a GM either.)
About the only thing that I find disappointing about this release is the lack of a new filesystem. However, that might just be because coming from a Linux background I probably payed WAY more attention to filesystems than most people.
milo
Jul 14, 03:21 PM
Except Conroes don't support dual processor configuration. Woodcrest does, hence the reason it will be in the Pro line machines while Conroe is put into new iMacs.
So why use woodcrest WITHOUT dual processor configuration? Makes no sense, any single proc models should be conroe.
- copying DVDs - you can't legally copy 99% of DVDs anyway, if there was no need for twin CD drives, why would there suddenly be for DVDs?
- burning two at once - few people need this, and it's a great sales opportunity for a Firewire external burner anyway. Hell, why stop at TWO?
- Blu-ray - not unless they're really screwed up BR and drives with BR will be incompatible with existing media or something.
Against this, you have the confusion generated by a Mac with two optical drives. I have a Mac with two optical drives (an in-built combo drive, and a FW DVD burner), and it's not terribly elegant. It's fine when reading disks (obviously), but writing them generates some confusion. How sure am I that I'm burning to the right drive? I'm not saying you can't do it, I'm just saying this would be unbelievably un-Mac like. It'd be like the next version of iTunes coming with a menu at the top of its window.
Macs have ALREADY had two optical bays (including twin CD drives). And none of these configs include two drives, you'd only have a second one if you wanted it.
Copying DVD's, nowadays people are backing up their own materials. Most dvd copying would be making backups of your own discs. Burning multiple discs would be a great option as well. And bluray drives will be INCREDIBLY expensive when these machines ship, not to mention who knows how well they will burn cd's and dvd's (assuming that all bluray drives will be burners, none of them readers only). Many people will want to wait and add a bluray or hd-dvd later, especially since nobody knows which will be the winning format.
So why use woodcrest WITHOUT dual processor configuration? Makes no sense, any single proc models should be conroe.
- copying DVDs - you can't legally copy 99% of DVDs anyway, if there was no need for twin CD drives, why would there suddenly be for DVDs?
- burning two at once - few people need this, and it's a great sales opportunity for a Firewire external burner anyway. Hell, why stop at TWO?
- Blu-ray - not unless they're really screwed up BR and drives with BR will be incompatible with existing media or something.
Against this, you have the confusion generated by a Mac with two optical drives. I have a Mac with two optical drives (an in-built combo drive, and a FW DVD burner), and it's not terribly elegant. It's fine when reading disks (obviously), but writing them generates some confusion. How sure am I that I'm burning to the right drive? I'm not saying you can't do it, I'm just saying this would be unbelievably un-Mac like. It'd be like the next version of iTunes coming with a menu at the top of its window.
Macs have ALREADY had two optical bays (including twin CD drives). And none of these configs include two drives, you'd only have a second one if you wanted it.
Copying DVD's, nowadays people are backing up their own materials. Most dvd copying would be making backups of your own discs. Burning multiple discs would be a great option as well. And bluray drives will be INCREDIBLY expensive when these machines ship, not to mention who knows how well they will burn cd's and dvd's (assuming that all bluray drives will be burners, none of them readers only). Many people will want to wait and add a bluray or hd-dvd later, especially since nobody knows which will be the winning format.
BRLawyer
Aug 19, 07:08 AM
I wonder if there is still any Winblows fanboy out there willing to justify the purchase of a PC...horrible OS, slower machine, more expensive...no damn way. The Quad MacPro is THE most powerful desktop in this world...period.