baryon
Apr 26, 12:52 PM
I don't even think the word "App" is really officially a word. As for generic terms, everyone uses generic terms to describe their company's products and brand names, as that's the only way you can allow people to make a link between something they already know, and the product.
"Apple" is also generic, yet everyone agrees that it's fairly reserved for Apple inc. So are many other names that companies patent to avoid others using it.
"Apple" is also generic, yet everyone agrees that it's fairly reserved for Apple inc. So are many other names that companies patent to avoid others using it.
BabyFaceMagee
Jan 13, 01:34 PM
Apple dosent registor domain names like that...
Apple doesn't purchase individual sites for its products. They put everything under the www.apple.com site. go try looking for www.macbook.com or www.powerbook.com and you'll see they just go to individual user's sites. So no MacbookAir.com site registered to Apple doesn't mean anything.
Apple doesn't purchase individual sites for its products. They put everything under the www.apple.com site. go try looking for www.macbook.com or www.powerbook.com and you'll see they just go to individual user's sites. So no MacbookAir.com site registered to Apple doesn't mean anything.
drewyboy
May 2, 04:47 PM
No, Microsoft have not got it right. There should be not need for a specific tool to uninstall applications. applications should be self-contained and be deletable with the press of a button�
Amen my brother!!! Preach it!
Amen my brother!!! Preach it!
kelving525
Sep 14, 11:29 PM
Thanks!
Says it's available, but from working in retail in the past in a store with online checking of stock I know that what is listed as "available" is not always accurate. But I will walk over there tomorrow and check it out, not far to go anyhow. :)
I haven't noticed that case today, they were all Griffin. They may have it there tmr, so who knows? :)
Says it's available, but from working in retail in the past in a store with online checking of stock I know that what is listed as "available" is not always accurate. But I will walk over there tomorrow and check it out, not far to go anyhow. :)
I haven't noticed that case today, they were all Griffin. They may have it there tmr, so who knows? :)
odyssey924
Apr 13, 12:16 AM
Here's the deal...(and I just realized that the way this is written might make it look like I have earlier posts in this thread. I don't. I'm jumping in right here.)
The reason that I think pros fear "dumbed down" isn't so much because they want something that is difficult to use, but rather because sometimes making difficult things easy makes things that were previously easy difficult, or impossible.
So just this week I had to help somebody with an iMovie problem. There was a part where they had 3 overlapping audio tracks. Movie audio, voiceover, and music. Try as they might, and try as I might, we could not get the movie audio to actually go away -- even though we had set it's volume level to "0%."
Oh...and did I mention that they're on a white iBook? Fine machine, but a little slow. So I copy their iMovie stuff onto an external drive so we can look at it on my Core i7 iMac instead.
Except iMovie on my iMac won't recognize the project on an external drive. I know that supposedly iMovie is supposed to...but it won't work. So I have to copy the files onto my iMac, and then iMovie magically sees them...because they're in the spot that iMovie wants files to be in.
Well the only way to get the clips to work right that I could come up with, was to actually run all their clips through Quicktime 7 and just delete the audio track off them. Voila! No audio track for iMovie to play, when it's not supposed to.
My point is that I spent 30 minutes dinking around with the "Easy" iMovie to do what would have taken me 10 seconds to do in Final Cut. (Select audio. Delete.)
And that's pretty much my experience every time I get lulled into trying to run a quick project through iMovie. Everything seems to be going well, I'm even sort of enjoying myself (Don't tell anyone), then I hit a snag or a wall...bump up into some limitation of iMovie that there isn't a very good work-around to...and wish that I'd just used Final Cut to begin with.
So while I agree that there are those who want pro tools to be difficult simply for the sake of having a high barrier of entry...
...I also think there are a ton of us that are just afraid that the cost of these new and handy features will be that some of the things we rely on doing, especially things that are a little "hackish," will become difficult/impossible. In the name of simplicity.
It's like my iPhone. I love it to pieces, and I don't plan to have any other type of phone any time soon, but sometimes I wish for a few more advanced features...features that are available (Usually through third-party tools) on Android. Instead I'm stuck hoping and wishing and praying that Apple will implement them.
+1 here. Every time I've tried to use iMovie for a "quick" edit it always ends in disasters like this. In my case, I was trying to move some music around and time my edits with the music. It was really infuriating trying to do this in iMovie compared to how fast I could have done it in FCP. I guess we'll have wait till Apple posts more info or we get it in our hands to really tell if it can be run like the current FCP.
The reason that I think pros fear "dumbed down" isn't so much because they want something that is difficult to use, but rather because sometimes making difficult things easy makes things that were previously easy difficult, or impossible.
So just this week I had to help somebody with an iMovie problem. There was a part where they had 3 overlapping audio tracks. Movie audio, voiceover, and music. Try as they might, and try as I might, we could not get the movie audio to actually go away -- even though we had set it's volume level to "0%."
Oh...and did I mention that they're on a white iBook? Fine machine, but a little slow. So I copy their iMovie stuff onto an external drive so we can look at it on my Core i7 iMac instead.
Except iMovie on my iMac won't recognize the project on an external drive. I know that supposedly iMovie is supposed to...but it won't work. So I have to copy the files onto my iMac, and then iMovie magically sees them...because they're in the spot that iMovie wants files to be in.
Well the only way to get the clips to work right that I could come up with, was to actually run all their clips through Quicktime 7 and just delete the audio track off them. Voila! No audio track for iMovie to play, when it's not supposed to.
My point is that I spent 30 minutes dinking around with the "Easy" iMovie to do what would have taken me 10 seconds to do in Final Cut. (Select audio. Delete.)
And that's pretty much my experience every time I get lulled into trying to run a quick project through iMovie. Everything seems to be going well, I'm even sort of enjoying myself (Don't tell anyone), then I hit a snag or a wall...bump up into some limitation of iMovie that there isn't a very good work-around to...and wish that I'd just used Final Cut to begin with.
So while I agree that there are those who want pro tools to be difficult simply for the sake of having a high barrier of entry...
...I also think there are a ton of us that are just afraid that the cost of these new and handy features will be that some of the things we rely on doing, especially things that are a little "hackish," will become difficult/impossible. In the name of simplicity.
It's like my iPhone. I love it to pieces, and I don't plan to have any other type of phone any time soon, but sometimes I wish for a few more advanced features...features that are available (Usually through third-party tools) on Android. Instead I'm stuck hoping and wishing and praying that Apple will implement them.
+1 here. Every time I've tried to use iMovie for a "quick" edit it always ends in disasters like this. In my case, I was trying to move some music around and time my edits with the music. It was really infuriating trying to do this in iMovie compared to how fast I could have done it in FCP. I guess we'll have wait till Apple posts more info or we get it in our hands to really tell if it can be run like the current FCP.
rasmasyean
Mar 28, 11:29 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8F190 Safari/6533.18.5)
You are very selective with your figures- both the French and Italians also have carriers in position, the US didn't send all but two of the missiles. The French sent the first planes in and as far as I know are the only nation to have engaged Libyan planes.
Like I said, about 50% of the planes involved are US. Which makes sense as the US has a bigger airforce than France/UK (and the rest of the coalition) which is what you would expect from a country with many more people!
Perhaps it us you that doesnt like the fact that the US isn't the only real player here? The US, France or UK could do this whole thing alone- it isn't that big an operation! Or perhaps, as firestarter points out, you don't like the idea of US working as NATO currently headed by a Canadian?
This is a true coalition with all sorts of countires involved, and we should be happy about that.
All I'm saying is that behind the scenes when you look at the facts, there's a different story and you can't take everything at face value...and you should know that about politicians too. I think some of you are "glad" that it's finally not purely lead by the US and this is like some "dream team" thing. But I'm just afraid that you are just in denial. :cool:
You are very selective with your figures- both the French and Italians also have carriers in position, the US didn't send all but two of the missiles. The French sent the first planes in and as far as I know are the only nation to have engaged Libyan planes.
Like I said, about 50% of the planes involved are US. Which makes sense as the US has a bigger airforce than France/UK (and the rest of the coalition) which is what you would expect from a country with many more people!
Perhaps it us you that doesnt like the fact that the US isn't the only real player here? The US, France or UK could do this whole thing alone- it isn't that big an operation! Or perhaps, as firestarter points out, you don't like the idea of US working as NATO currently headed by a Canadian?
This is a true coalition with all sorts of countires involved, and we should be happy about that.
All I'm saying is that behind the scenes when you look at the facts, there's a different story and you can't take everything at face value...and you should know that about politicians too. I think some of you are "glad" that it's finally not purely lead by the US and this is like some "dream team" thing. But I'm just afraid that you are just in denial. :cool:
jonharris200
Jan 1, 07:15 PM
Thanks arn for the (early?!) round-up.
One thing's for sure. Apple will save their PR gunpowder. Even if all the rumoured products are ready for release, you can guarantee they'll keep a few things up their sleeve for later in the year. (This will disappoint those who fail to appreciate that MWSF never contains a complete roadmap for the following 3 months, let alone the next year.)
I reckon:
- Updates to iLife and iWork
- New Video iPod and iTV released
- Leopard previewed with more cheeky digs at our Redmond friends, Vista etc, but not due for launch until March
- No word on an iPhone whatsoever, which will freak some people out
One thing that would be fantastic would be a complete overhaul to .Mac. What are the chances I wonder? :confused:
What's exciting though is that the rumours are so far so unreliable. :D
One thing's for sure. Apple will save their PR gunpowder. Even if all the rumoured products are ready for release, you can guarantee they'll keep a few things up their sleeve for later in the year. (This will disappoint those who fail to appreciate that MWSF never contains a complete roadmap for the following 3 months, let alone the next year.)
I reckon:
- Updates to iLife and iWork
- New Video iPod and iTV released
- Leopard previewed with more cheeky digs at our Redmond friends, Vista etc, but not due for launch until March
- No word on an iPhone whatsoever, which will freak some people out
One thing that would be fantastic would be a complete overhaul to .Mac. What are the chances I wonder? :confused:
What's exciting though is that the rumours are so far so unreliable. :D
charlesdjones1
Apr 12, 06:36 PM
After owning every iPod out there, I can honestly say Apple's next approach to the Classic lineup could be something familiar yet adding updated features to take advantage of the newest tech, but no major changes to an otherwise timeless layout. I still use my 80gb model, and wouldn't change anything personally. I've used the Touch, the Nano, and the Classic, to me, for pure music enjoyment the Classic is all I will ever need or use. I have spliced together a possible direction Apple could/ would go in, and I believe it makes the perfect iPod Classic. Basically, anyone familiar with the older Nano style Touch Wheel is going to be right at home, as the the wheel is smaller by about 25% compared to the Classice, but still being more than accessable. At the same time adding a larger, higher def screen makes viewing song selection, videos, podcasts, and coverflow much easier and appealing to the eyes now, yet using todays AMOLED screen which is lighter, brighter and easier on the battery life. A standard 320 gb hard drive keeps you up to date on all the latest hi def content that is released over iTunes, but keeping a smaller overall form factor makes it lighter in the pocket. These are my ideas which I feel would be popular for newer users and older ones as well. Just for an added bonus, you could implement a streamlined touch interface using the classic style menu, adding nice features such as the App Store and even some touch based games.
toddybody
Mar 24, 01:39 PM
Well, that's because all of Apple's other products are constrained by power and/or space requirements.
Meh, yes and no. For their integrated desktops (iMac)...pws and space are certainly an issue (especially since it doesn't have an accessibly PCI E slot for heavens sake). Now for MP's on the other hand...I dont think it would be an issue: accessible PCI E slots + ample chassis space + stock PWS capable of handling an HD 5870 or Crossfired 5770's. A 6970 shouldnt be a problem.
anyways(no snarkiness implied)...who said crossfire wasnt supported? The MacPro CAN be configured with 2x5770's.
Meh, yes and no. For their integrated desktops (iMac)...pws and space are certainly an issue (especially since it doesn't have an accessibly PCI E slot for heavens sake). Now for MP's on the other hand...I dont think it would be an issue: accessible PCI E slots + ample chassis space + stock PWS capable of handling an HD 5870 or Crossfired 5770's. A 6970 shouldnt be a problem.
anyways(no snarkiness implied)...who said crossfire wasnt supported? The MacPro CAN be configured with 2x5770's.
razzmatazz
Aug 6, 09:49 PM
They did at WWDC '04 (when Tiger was introduced) with slogans like "Redmond, Start Your Photocopiers" and the word "Longhorn" in the Spotlight search field. ;)
Yea I remember watching that one. I thought that was pretty funny!:D
Yea I remember watching that one. I thought that was pretty funny!:D
detoxguy
Sep 15, 02:10 AM
This story gets buried in the blog and a story of ninja stars makes page one? No Apple bias here. :rolleyes:
possibly the dumbest statement of the day (saying alot). Of course there's an Apple bias...it's called MAC rumors....
CR blah blah blah is supposed to be news?
possibly the dumbest statement of the day (saying alot). Of course there's an Apple bias...it's called MAC rumors....
CR blah blah blah is supposed to be news?
lorductape
Jan 12, 10:20 AM
Take a look at this:
http://flickr.com/photos/peteryan/2187596838/
Personaly i think it's fake, because of the non-capital letter on the begining of the second sentence... but who knows it could be true the disposition of the this so called macbook air is quite original and not in the tradicional way laptop upside down opened a little...
they got the font wrong.
http://flickr.com/photos/peteryan/2187596838/
Personaly i think it's fake, because of the non-capital letter on the begining of the second sentence... but who knows it could be true the disposition of the this so called macbook air is quite original and not in the tradicional way laptop upside down opened a little...
they got the font wrong.
RebootD
Apr 12, 09:04 PM
Ugh wish there was a live feed.. I'm following @fcpsupermeet but it's just text
Rt&Dzine
Mar 22, 12:49 PM
No, no one is forced to do anything. Apple is more extreme with what they will and will not allow. Others follow suit b/c they know Apple changes the world. Android market allows practically everything.
So Apple should have the choice what they allow and don't allow?
So Apple should have the choice what they allow and don't allow?
d70
Jan 12, 10:51 AM
The name Air will collide with Adobe AIR ... couldn't they have chosen a better name like nano and ****? damn it. now every time I search for Adobe AIR I'll get Macbook in the search results.
lordonuthin
Nov 18, 07:57 PM
^yeah almost seems unfair to ppl that want to compete but dont have access to high end hardware. i guess if you look at it from an aggregate standpoint then low point crunchers make a bit of a diff.
the amount of power sucked from the wall per unit would be WAY less i would imagine. from an environmental standpoint it wouldnt make sense
That's why I dropped the G5 after I saw how little it was doing against the Mac Pro and even the low end amd's, it just wasn't worth it in terms of the electric bill.
And speaking of electric bills... I'm just kind of guessing here but I think folding is costing me about $50 a month :eek:
the amount of power sucked from the wall per unit would be WAY less i would imagine. from an environmental standpoint it wouldnt make sense
That's why I dropped the G5 after I saw how little it was doing against the Mac Pro and even the low end amd's, it just wasn't worth it in terms of the electric bill.
And speaking of electric bills... I'm just kind of guessing here but I think folding is costing me about $50 a month :eek:
brepublican
Sep 6, 09:40 AM
yes we can! let me show you_:
were's my macbook core 2 duo :mad:
were's the new ipod/iphone :(
no new apple displays? apple what are you doing!?! :confused:
how about a new macbook pro? :confused:
how about a new newton! :mad:
were is my sub 500$ macmini? :confused:
no new cases ? bah!
its this easy
I dont think its that simple. This makes the mini wayyy more appealing to alot of people. Its a close call if you're deciding to get a mini or an iMac.
And aren't there more new announcements next week on the 12th? I dread to think of what new killer products/updates they are reserving that for!
were's my macbook core 2 duo :mad:
were's the new ipod/iphone :(
no new apple displays? apple what are you doing!?! :confused:
how about a new macbook pro? :confused:
how about a new newton! :mad:
were is my sub 500$ macmini? :confused:
no new cases ? bah!
its this easy
I dont think its that simple. This makes the mini wayyy more appealing to alot of people. Its a close call if you're deciding to get a mini or an iMac.
And aren't there more new announcements next week on the 12th? I dread to think of what new killer products/updates they are reserving that for!
Austin M.
Nov 23, 02:08 PM
The SwitchEasy TRIM case (lime color) for iPhone 4.
PaperQueen
Sep 20, 08:08 PM
The first is the dermaSHOT (http://www.myincipio.com/product/IPOD_TOUCH_IP-900/iPod-touch-4G-dermaSHOT-Silicone-Case---Black.html). I am worried, however, that I will have the same problem with lint-magnet, because it is also made of silicone. Any ideas there?
That�s the case I have (see my notes in post #44 of this thread). It�s not �sticky� so no problems grabbing dust or lint...at least I haven�t had any problems that way.
My only concern is that it�s not as snug top to bottom as it should be. Not so loose it�s going to slip out, but feels like there�s a little play in it when you push the power button off and on.
That�s the case I have (see my notes in post #44 of this thread). It�s not �sticky� so no problems grabbing dust or lint...at least I haven�t had any problems that way.
My only concern is that it�s not as snug top to bottom as it should be. Not so loose it�s going to slip out, but feels like there�s a little play in it when you push the power button off and on.
InuNacho
Apr 19, 03:17 PM
My early 08 Macbook makes for a crummy desktop and I have been wanting a new TV for a while now. If Apple's having that free ipod with Mac purchase this summer I'm sold.
tablo13
Sep 17, 08:08 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/532.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Mobile/8B117 Safari/6531.22.7)
Do you suggest any cheap good quality silicon cases on eBay other than the one above?
Do you suggest any cheap good quality silicon cases on eBay other than the one above?
isgoed
Nov 27, 01:35 PM
20" is the new 17", duh. :cool:<= So right.
And 17" widescreen?? :confused: That is just small. That is about the samy height as my 1996 performa's 14" screen.
No, but no thanks.
And apple just can't compete with other vendors when you consider the general price-point of these things.
And 17" widescreen?? :confused: That is just small. That is about the samy height as my 1996 performa's 14" screen.
No, but no thanks.
And apple just can't compete with other vendors when you consider the general price-point of these things.
appleguru1
Sep 14, 10:05 AM
...my iPhone 4 still gets the best reception of any phone I've ever owned, regardless of how I hold it or whether or not it has a case on it...
aznguyen316
Sep 12, 08:39 PM
I got Night Sky (very dark blue).
do you have a picture? I assumed it would be dark blue but the pictures look like violet.
do you have a picture? I assumed it would be dark blue but the pictures look like violet.
