Thex1138
Jun 15, 11:59 PM
In Australia the iPhone is spruiked by ALL carriers... and is not locked in to a contract... this has helped propel the hand set to a 400+ percent increase in market share and sell over 2 million hand sets...
The new Apple mantra appears to be propagating to other markets... no contracts, multiple carriers!
:D
The new Apple mantra appears to be propagating to other markets... no contracts, multiple carriers!
:D
puckhead193
Apr 5, 10:48 AM
looks fake, you would think if they did get their paws on the new touch they would have you know at least focused the camera... just a thought :rolleyes:
Dreadnought
May 30, 03:33 PM
Redeye, I don't know what happend, but I have a missing picture in the folding widget. I did drop a place this week.
alm99
Mar 24, 03:32 PM
None of the stores around me (10+ stores) have the 16gb in stock. Any of you considering the 32GB for $399?
Thinking about it, but its $50 more than I can get my wife to spend over the $349 refurb 16gig from Apple.com
Thinking about it, but its $50 more than I can get my wife to spend over the $349 refurb 16gig from Apple.com
more...
paddy
Dec 18, 10:42 AM
Have the song already but just bought it on iTunes. ********** hate XFactor.
dicklacara
Mar 24, 10:32 AM
I'm all for more agencies adopting Macs! Heck, one day we might be able to classify them as switchers :D
Nah... based on military policy we wouldn't even hear of them...
...you know... Switch But Don't Tell!
:eek:
Nah... based on military policy we wouldn't even hear of them...
...you know... Switch But Don't Tell!
:eek:
more...
bullrat
Sep 14, 09:16 AM
I'm a potential "switcher" that wants to buy an iMac now but I keep reading all the posts on the various Mac boards about how even the latest 17 inch iMac looks "choppy" or "jerky" when resizing or moving windows and how much slower browsing the Web is than bad old MS on Wintel.
I'm so bored reading all the MHz doesn't matter blather. It does matter. When a brand new $2000 computer looks choppy using a brand new OS, then something is not right. It should be blazing on all basic functions. Flame away if you like, I see a lot of that on the Mac boards whenever someone happens to disagree with the party line but I'd wager I speak for a lot of potential switchers.
I guess what really blows me away is that Apple appears to be *purposely* cripppling their systems. From what I understand it's possible for Apple to upgrade the processor, bus, memory and other components without any technical difficulties.
Okay, you can flame away now -- but all I'm saying is there are a lot of potential switchers waiting to plunk down their hard earned cash if Apple would get it together. I see more and more Apple folks waking up, no longer satisfied to let Apple off the hook for getting further and further behind the rest of the computer world.
The best OS deserves the best hardware or at least a lot better hardware than being currently used. You want premium prices? Then give us premium hardware. Geez, drop Motorola if they can't deliver the goods and go with IBM (don't go with Intel or AMD to keep that Apple distinction). But pul-leeze do it soon. I want to buy!
-bullrat
I'm so bored reading all the MHz doesn't matter blather. It does matter. When a brand new $2000 computer looks choppy using a brand new OS, then something is not right. It should be blazing on all basic functions. Flame away if you like, I see a lot of that on the Mac boards whenever someone happens to disagree with the party line but I'd wager I speak for a lot of potential switchers.
I guess what really blows me away is that Apple appears to be *purposely* cripppling their systems. From what I understand it's possible for Apple to upgrade the processor, bus, memory and other components without any technical difficulties.
Okay, you can flame away now -- but all I'm saying is there are a lot of potential switchers waiting to plunk down their hard earned cash if Apple would get it together. I see more and more Apple folks waking up, no longer satisfied to let Apple off the hook for getting further and further behind the rest of the computer world.
The best OS deserves the best hardware or at least a lot better hardware than being currently used. You want premium prices? Then give us premium hardware. Geez, drop Motorola if they can't deliver the goods and go with IBM (don't go with Intel or AMD to keep that Apple distinction). But pul-leeze do it soon. I want to buy!
-bullrat
GeekLawyer
Apr 21, 01:28 PM
4S. I like the name, and it makes sense to keep continuity with the previous naming scheme (3GS). I guess we'll see a true iPhone 5 next summer.But then they would have to call it the iPhone 6.
more...
Micjose
Apr 5, 04:46 PM
128GB FINALLY!! I'll buy one asap if its true...
Mac-Addict
Oct 26, 08:59 AM
Anybody there now? Any crowds?
I am here right now the place is packed no queue yet. Will keep you guys updated, OMG Leopard rules
EDIT: Time machine is ddisabled on all machines sorry for spelling mistakes I really am to busy to worry xD And this MBPs keyboard kinda sucks
I am here right now the place is packed no queue yet. Will keep you guys updated, OMG Leopard rules
EDIT: Time machine is ddisabled on all machines sorry for spelling mistakes I really am to busy to worry xD And this MBPs keyboard kinda sucks
more...
henrikrox
May 6, 01:35 PM
So im wondering while i wait for my new imac what your idle/load temps are
Would be super if you wrote which imac you have aswell.
Wondering how much the 95w cpu does to the temp in the imac.
Would love to hear idle/load gpu temps aswell :)
Would be super if you wrote which imac you have aswell.
Wondering how much the 95w cpu does to the temp in the imac.
Would love to hear idle/load gpu temps aswell :)
jap1198
Mar 10, 09:00 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
We're going to be at the Knox location, hopefully there isn't that many people.
We're going to be at the Knox location, hopefully there isn't that many people.
more...
weldon
Apr 2, 07:15 PM
Word is far...because Pages just isn't a word processor... Publisher was a horrible app and Pages is merely an Apple (much better) version albeit still kind of redundant.
The first week Pages was out a lot of people were crowing about a new "Word-killer" and I really felt that was offbase because the better comparison really is to Microsoft Publisher. It reminds me of a light version of Pagemaker from 10 years ago.
Still, I think that Publisher is an important program. It's a lot easier to create a newsletter with photos, columns, fancy headers, etc. in Publisher than it is in Word. I think Apple should not try and compete with Word on the Mac, but should try to create an equivalent to Publisher, only better.
When I need to create a flyer or a newsletter thing, I fire up Publisher on my Windows box because it works. I'm a teacher and sometimes that free-form page layout is the perfect thing. For handouts with pictures, I just use Word, but I'm always annoyed that I have to format the picture so that text will flow around it and I can place it anywhere on the page by drag and drop. I'd rather do stuff like that in a page layout app, but I don't need to spend the $$$$$ for Pagemaker.
Word, is a great app. I know people complain about it being bloated, but I can get everything I need done pretty quickly. I don't find that Word is slow or that it gets in my way. Of course, I've been using Word since it first came out on the Mac and Windows. I'm used to its quirks and can do things pretty easily. Today, I created a short document that has three columns of terms in the middle. I know that I have to insert a section break (continuous) and then format:columns to switch to three column, and then insert another section break (continuous) to go back to one column. Not intuitive, but easy for me.
The one thing I would like to see in Word is a reference database and auto-format for citations so I can switch to APA or MLA style as needed. My grad school professors each have their own ideas about proper style.
Again, Pages shouldn't grow into a competitor for Word. It should be Pagemaker for the rest of us.
The first week Pages was out a lot of people were crowing about a new "Word-killer" and I really felt that was offbase because the better comparison really is to Microsoft Publisher. It reminds me of a light version of Pagemaker from 10 years ago.
Still, I think that Publisher is an important program. It's a lot easier to create a newsletter with photos, columns, fancy headers, etc. in Publisher than it is in Word. I think Apple should not try and compete with Word on the Mac, but should try to create an equivalent to Publisher, only better.
When I need to create a flyer or a newsletter thing, I fire up Publisher on my Windows box because it works. I'm a teacher and sometimes that free-form page layout is the perfect thing. For handouts with pictures, I just use Word, but I'm always annoyed that I have to format the picture so that text will flow around it and I can place it anywhere on the page by drag and drop. I'd rather do stuff like that in a page layout app, but I don't need to spend the $$$$$ for Pagemaker.
Word, is a great app. I know people complain about it being bloated, but I can get everything I need done pretty quickly. I don't find that Word is slow or that it gets in my way. Of course, I've been using Word since it first came out on the Mac and Windows. I'm used to its quirks and can do things pretty easily. Today, I created a short document that has three columns of terms in the middle. I know that I have to insert a section break (continuous) and then format:columns to switch to three column, and then insert another section break (continuous) to go back to one column. Not intuitive, but easy for me.
The one thing I would like to see in Word is a reference database and auto-format for citations so I can switch to APA or MLA style as needed. My grad school professors each have their own ideas about proper style.
Again, Pages shouldn't grow into a competitor for Word. It should be Pagemaker for the rest of us.
citizenzen
Apr 9, 11:43 PM
I call fake photo.
It's always interesting to be exposed to a slice of history that had been up to now unknown to me. Margaret Sanger did in fact give a speech to the wives of the KKK in 1926. Here is her account (http://www.thefreshfacts.com/margaret-sangers-account-of-her-lecture-to-the-ku-klux-klan-educational-video-film-2/) of that evening from her autobiography ...
more...
Coolest Princess and the Frog
princess and the frog cake
more...
princess and the frog cake
princess and the frog cake
princess and the frog cake
It's always interesting to be exposed to a slice of history that had been up to now unknown to me. Margaret Sanger did in fact give a speech to the wives of the KKK in 1926. Here is her account (http://www.thefreshfacts.com/margaret-sangers-account-of-her-lecture-to-the-ku-klux-klan-educational-video-film-2/) of that evening from her autobiography ...
more...
Brometheus
Apr 16, 05:56 PM
I can't defend Apple's rejection of this app, because it doesn't make sense to me. However, I can see how Apple's approval policy can lead to unintended consequences. If we view Apple as evil, then of course we will see nothing but malevolent intent. However, if we think about how the process actually works, we should realize that some of these things are predictable. I don't work for Apple, but I expect that like any organization that employs human beings, there will be variation in judgement based on the fact people are different, and the reality that it's impossible to account for every scenario. The idea that Apple can make every prohibited type of app crystal clear does not make sense to me. There are always situations that can't be covered 100%. There are trade-offs as in all of life. Lack of flexibility always comes at a price, so you do the best you can. The reviewers at Apple are like everyone else in society. Some are mature (not necessarily meaning older) people with good insight and can make good judgements when they interpret the rules. Others try to make decisions based on an interpretation of the rules that is not based on what most of us would consider good judgment.
There are situations, such as Apple's attitude regarding Flash on the iPhone OS, when we know where the entire company stands. Sometimes we can't be sure that a decision reflects the entire company. So when people claim that "Apple" is doing something to screw someone over, sometimes it's a specific individual at Apple; someone who may not share the same perspective as the senior leaders at Apple, or even another Apple employee 10 feet away from them.
There are situations, such as Apple's attitude regarding Flash on the iPhone OS, when we know where the entire company stands. Sometimes we can't be sure that a decision reflects the entire company. So when people claim that "Apple" is doing something to screw someone over, sometimes it's a specific individual at Apple; someone who may not share the same perspective as the senior leaders at Apple, or even another Apple employee 10 feet away from them.
Thanatoast
Oct 16, 10:45 PM
Am I the only one who plugs my phone in at night? All this worry over the battery life seems kind of silly. As long as it lasts the day...
more...
SeattleMoose
Apr 19, 09:53 AM
My post is "coming soon"......IN PURPLE TEXT!!!!;)
Mustafa
Sep 25, 11:03 AM
Looks like goodbye to iView Media Pro.
firestarter
May 4, 12:55 AM
How do you know that that Sony prototype didn't come about as a result from work at UDC (funded by DARPA)?
I don't know. Does the US military usually sell its tech to the Japanese?
Seems to me that it's a technology lots of people are working on in parallel.
Consumer forces made flight widespread. Military forces make flight feasible. Hitler's minions didn't invent the jet engine and solid booster to deliver packages and orbit weather sensors.
Nice example. Frank Whittle (http://inventors.about.com/library/inventors/bljetengine.htm) received the first jet engine patent in 1930. He had been in the Air Force, but they wouldn't sponsor his research - so the development was privately funded and finally demonstrated in 1937.
Intercontental flight was made widespread after we decided to work on carring warheads across the ocean vs ppl. In 1940's who woulda funded a massive manhatten project to see if we can make it heat up some water...theoretically.
I think you're confusing fission and fusion.
The need for computer networks to survive a nuclear war now enable's us to read eachother's posts and take advantage of the consumerism on top of this web page.
Darpanet, indeed. But the web itself was developed in peacetime by a man researching at a (non military) Swiss research establishment (http://public.web.cern.ch/public/en/about/web-en.html).
Many technological advancements are so costly and far-fetched that no reasonable "business" would risk investing a lot of money in it. That's when paranoid governments pick up the tab. I don't think you understand that it's real easy to spend $499 on an iPod with tons of "Apps" on it and say...oh yah, this is like real easy to make because Chinese ppl take 50 cents worth of material and put it together. But before all this was possible, some of the smallest components in that iPhone and the most basic of all "Apps" took a "visionary" with a massivly risky budget to make one blink on some $5 million vaccuum box for the first time in history!
The first commercial transistors were developed for telecoms by AT&T / Texas instruments (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transistor).
The integrated circuit was invented in peace time, and it's mass production was spurred as much by the Apollo program (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integrated_circuit) as for defence.
Interestingly, defence and space are very conservative in their use of technology and CPUs. The increase in CPU power over time has clearly been motivated by commercial market forces (non military).
Yes, I don't deny that defence money does finance innovation. But that's not the same as implying that innovation wouldn't take place if it wasn't for War. That's clearly nonsense - there's plenty of civil and commercial market forces that also spur development, and the examples you've cited demonstrate a few. War is not an essential for human or technological development, although it may speed it along a little from time to time.
I don't know. Does the US military usually sell its tech to the Japanese?
Seems to me that it's a technology lots of people are working on in parallel.
Consumer forces made flight widespread. Military forces make flight feasible. Hitler's minions didn't invent the jet engine and solid booster to deliver packages and orbit weather sensors.
Nice example. Frank Whittle (http://inventors.about.com/library/inventors/bljetengine.htm) received the first jet engine patent in 1930. He had been in the Air Force, but they wouldn't sponsor his research - so the development was privately funded and finally demonstrated in 1937.
Intercontental flight was made widespread after we decided to work on carring warheads across the ocean vs ppl. In 1940's who woulda funded a massive manhatten project to see if we can make it heat up some water...theoretically.
I think you're confusing fission and fusion.
The need for computer networks to survive a nuclear war now enable's us to read eachother's posts and take advantage of the consumerism on top of this web page.
Darpanet, indeed. But the web itself was developed in peacetime by a man researching at a (non military) Swiss research establishment (http://public.web.cern.ch/public/en/about/web-en.html).
Many technological advancements are so costly and far-fetched that no reasonable "business" would risk investing a lot of money in it. That's when paranoid governments pick up the tab. I don't think you understand that it's real easy to spend $499 on an iPod with tons of "Apps" on it and say...oh yah, this is like real easy to make because Chinese ppl take 50 cents worth of material and put it together. But before all this was possible, some of the smallest components in that iPhone and the most basic of all "Apps" took a "visionary" with a massivly risky budget to make one blink on some $5 million vaccuum box for the first time in history!
The first commercial transistors were developed for telecoms by AT&T / Texas instruments (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transistor).
The integrated circuit was invented in peace time, and it's mass production was spurred as much by the Apollo program (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integrated_circuit) as for defence.
Interestingly, defence and space are very conservative in their use of technology and CPUs. The increase in CPU power over time has clearly been motivated by commercial market forces (non military).
Yes, I don't deny that defence money does finance innovation. But that's not the same as implying that innovation wouldn't take place if it wasn't for War. That's clearly nonsense - there's plenty of civil and commercial market forces that also spur development, and the examples you've cited demonstrate a few. War is not an essential for human or technological development, although it may speed it along a little from time to time.
shadowfax0
Sep 15, 04:00 PM
I have a dual 450, and I play WCIII all the time, if anything, it's faster than my friends Athlon 2100+. I notice no choppiness and my computer is 3 years old. I have 2x AGP and PC100 RAM, and my computer is still fast, not fastest, but I have a fast computer, no doubt about it. And one other thing, yeah my friend might be able to say, crunch more SETI blocks, but as for actual usefullness, I do week-long calculations in Mathematica for my patent (when I can give up WCIII :) But they're a week long, because they're a week long, not because the computer is slow, it would still take a fast computer 4 days to do) and can still USE my computer while it's calculating. So as it doing that I can still check my mail or come here once in a while, without having to worry about jeopordizing my calculation.
sebastianlewis
May 28, 06:34 PM
Only sysops can delete pages. If you want to create a test category I can delete it when you're done with it.
Alright, thanks for the offer, however it looks like Eraserhead already confirmed what I was thinking so I don't think there's a need to create a test one anymore to confirm myself.
Sebastian
Alright, thanks for the offer, however it looks like Eraserhead already confirmed what I was thinking so I don't think there's a need to create a test one anymore to confirm myself.
Sebastian
Analog Kid
Nov 22, 03:28 AM
As a mechanical engineer, I'm not exactly cynical about this application of Eneco's technology, but I remain very, very skeptical. With such a relatively small temperature difference, I would say it is very unlikely that such a device would be economically feasible. A quick visit to Eneco's site shows me that they don't even have lab data for temperature differences of less than 100 deg C!
They obfuscate the issue of efficiency by referring to the Carnot efficiency to inflate the numbers to the uninitiated. Sadi Carnot showed that an ideal heat engine that operated between two infinite reservoirs at temperatures, T(hot) and T(cold) would have an efficiency of ( T(hot)-T(cold) ) / T(hot), and the temperatures have to be on an absolute scale like Kelvin or Rankine. The "Carnot efficiency" compares the performance of the system in question to this ideal heat engine.
Suppose you ran your chip at a very warm 90 deg C (363 K) and could dump the heat to your 25 deg C (298 K) room, your perfect efficiency would be about 18%! This means that for every 5W of heat you dissipate from the chip, you get a little less that 1 W of electric power. Something with an impressive-sounding 50% Carnot efficiency would really have a measly 9% real efficiency.
Unless Eneco sells these things very cheaply and makes them very small, I can't see Apple going through the trouble and expense of adding them to their portables for such a small benefit in recycled power. I remain skeptical, yet open-minded.
Finding efficiency data for temperatures below 100C would be important since the max junction temperature for most processors is below that. Power supply devices max out at about 150C. You just can't get hotter than that and expect silicon to function as a semiconductor.
If the Intel chips burn 100W, then 9% conversion efficiency would generate 9W of electricity. In absolute terms, that's not too bad. You can do a lot with 9W. If you have a 5 hour battery life now, and can use these on all the major power sinks, you'd get 5.5 hours of battery life.
(Those are big "if"s, but putting them in bold seemed a bit too cynical...)
Interesting, but not earth shattering yet... If this became widespread though and we could cut world energy consumption by 10%-- that would be a big deal. Personally, I think there's more to be gained in cars (hotter and less efficient to begin with) than computers, but who knows.
They obfuscate the issue of efficiency by referring to the Carnot efficiency to inflate the numbers to the uninitiated. Sadi Carnot showed that an ideal heat engine that operated between two infinite reservoirs at temperatures, T(hot) and T(cold) would have an efficiency of ( T(hot)-T(cold) ) / T(hot), and the temperatures have to be on an absolute scale like Kelvin or Rankine. The "Carnot efficiency" compares the performance of the system in question to this ideal heat engine.
Suppose you ran your chip at a very warm 90 deg C (363 K) and could dump the heat to your 25 deg C (298 K) room, your perfect efficiency would be about 18%! This means that for every 5W of heat you dissipate from the chip, you get a little less that 1 W of electric power. Something with an impressive-sounding 50% Carnot efficiency would really have a measly 9% real efficiency.
Unless Eneco sells these things very cheaply and makes them very small, I can't see Apple going through the trouble and expense of adding them to their portables for such a small benefit in recycled power. I remain skeptical, yet open-minded.
Finding efficiency data for temperatures below 100C would be important since the max junction temperature for most processors is below that. Power supply devices max out at about 150C. You just can't get hotter than that and expect silicon to function as a semiconductor.
If the Intel chips burn 100W, then 9% conversion efficiency would generate 9W of electricity. In absolute terms, that's not too bad. You can do a lot with 9W. If you have a 5 hour battery life now, and can use these on all the major power sinks, you'd get 5.5 hours of battery life.
(Those are big "if"s, but putting them in bold seemed a bit too cynical...)
Interesting, but not earth shattering yet... If this became widespread though and we could cut world energy consumption by 10%-- that would be a big deal. Personally, I think there's more to be gained in cars (hotter and less efficient to begin with) than computers, but who knows.
rcm3
Oct 26, 08:11 PM
Can somebody explain to me why anybody would want to pay $100/year for an email account with only 1 GB of storage?
Diamons
Nov 27, 11:51 PM
LMAO, is this a joke?? Has to be the dumbest thing I've read this month by a supposed adult.
1) If he is an adult, as you claim, the least you could do is watch your tone and be respectful.
2) I understand it perfectly fine. Just because you're not intellectually capable of understanding his point doesn't mean it's dumb. Quit being ignorant.
1) If he is an adult, as you claim, the least you could do is watch your tone and be respectful.
2) I understand it perfectly fine. Just because you're not intellectually capable of understanding his point doesn't mean it's dumb. Quit being ignorant.
