cole.markham
Mar 22, 11:57 AM
I'll wager that Apple didn't use Comic Sans :eek: in their reply note.
greenstork
Aug 3, 05:26 PM
BTW, even if I believed that Apple was going to come out with an Apple cellphone (and I don't (http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=2674706&postcount=359), I've never seen so many people absolutely convinced of the existance of an unlikely product.), WWDC would unquestionably be a bad place to announce it. If you believe such a thing exists, wait for an appropriate consumer-oriented show or a special event.
An Apple phone that runs on some sort of mobile OS X should be released at a developer's conference. Presumably, developers will write applications for a new mobile platform.
An Apple phone that runs on some sort of mobile OS X should be released at a developer's conference. Presumably, developers will write applications for a new mobile platform.
JackieTreehorn
Nov 23, 03:16 PM
In 40 years let's see how Justin Beiber and Lady Bla Bla are selling. Rock on Beatles!
The Beatles: Four guys who needed each other, because individually they were musical infants.
No, thanks.
The Beatles: Four guys who needed each other, because individually they were musical infants.
No, thanks.
Queso
Sep 12, 02:42 PM
I've got a 3-hour train journey both Saturday and Sunday, so could do with a new iPod. Did the keynote mention whether these are in the Apple retail stores immediately?
eawmp1
Mar 28, 12:02 PM
Man, Apple keeps getting lower and lower. First Walmart, now this?
Uh, they've sold the iPhone 4. Who care WHERE you get it, it's still an iPad.
Uh, they've sold the iPhone 4. Who care WHERE you get it, it's still an iPad.
DocNo
Apr 14, 11:25 PM
In other words, what we saw tonight was nowhere near the final form of the application.
This statement has me a bit puzzled. FCP is supposed to be out in around 2 months. Are they going to rush the rest into FCP in this amount of time, or get the basics in there, then drag onto multiple updates?
I think it's simpler than that - Apple wasn't ready to tip their full hand, just whet everyone's appetite.
Hence us seeing an older, less complete build while the final version is still being polished.
And I have no doubt their will be some quick post-release updates - that's the way of life for complicated applications and it has been for quite a while now. The applications are complex, the underlying operating systems are complex, and how they interact with other applications and utilities installed on the system are also incredibly complex. If you have a low tolerance for stability, wait a least a year before switching to it for production work. That's not a symptom of Apple being sloppy, it's a matter of pragmatic risk management.
For those who are expressing outrage that perfect and bug-free applications aren't being delivered - you couldn't afford them. While it can be done, it can't be done for consumer (or even "Pro") level pricing.
This statement has me a bit puzzled. FCP is supposed to be out in around 2 months. Are they going to rush the rest into FCP in this amount of time, or get the basics in there, then drag onto multiple updates?
I think it's simpler than that - Apple wasn't ready to tip their full hand, just whet everyone's appetite.
Hence us seeing an older, less complete build while the final version is still being polished.
And I have no doubt their will be some quick post-release updates - that's the way of life for complicated applications and it has been for quite a while now. The applications are complex, the underlying operating systems are complex, and how they interact with other applications and utilities installed on the system are also incredibly complex. If you have a low tolerance for stability, wait a least a year before switching to it for production work. That's not a symptom of Apple being sloppy, it's a matter of pragmatic risk management.
For those who are expressing outrage that perfect and bug-free applications aren't being delivered - you couldn't afford them. While it can be done, it can't be done for consumer (or even "Pro") level pricing.
Hastings101
May 5, 09:16 AM
Why so many negatives, I love 3D stuff when it's done correctly. Lots of fun in my opinion. Though I really doubt Apple would put a 3D screen on the iPad.
rlreif
Nov 27, 07:17 PM
I feel so sorry that the Beatles will never get your moey and that their greed made you a thief.:cool:
i have not pirated any music except for the beattles since itunes came out... if you dont give consumers what they want, they will find a way to get it... their own greed bit them in the ass and i dont feel the least bit sorry for them... now they have realized that they missed the boat, and they are crawling back to try to make money... sorry Yoko... you f$#%ed up!!!
i have not pirated any music except for the beattles since itunes came out... if you dont give consumers what they want, they will find a way to get it... their own greed bit them in the ass and i dont feel the least bit sorry for them... now they have realized that they missed the boat, and they are crawling back to try to make money... sorry Yoko... you f$#%ed up!!!
thesheep
Nov 8, 03:03 AM
Flash can be very good in websites, or it can be badly misused. Just like most other tools. It exists as a powerful option for adding animation, video and various other effects and functionality.
It is a big shame that Flash is a closed standard, as it gives one company (Adobe) too much power in the web, which should be all about openness. So this sort of gives some credibility to Apple's decision not to support it. But not really. Afterall, Apple is happy for Flash to run in desktop versions of Safari.
Apple needs to be pragmatic and provide the best user experience they can. My guess is that there were originally significant technical hurdles to making Flash work well in the iPhone. But that was only 1 reason. They also wanted to push their own solutions (quicktime) and so maybe they haven't tried particularly hard to make Flash work. It hasn't been a top priority. It obviously is a bit of a problem now and they need to do something about it.
The best thing of all, however, is if Adobe would make Flash an open standard. So they can also stop whining here.
It is a big shame that Flash is a closed standard, as it gives one company (Adobe) too much power in the web, which should be all about openness. So this sort of gives some credibility to Apple's decision not to support it. But not really. Afterall, Apple is happy for Flash to run in desktop versions of Safari.
Apple needs to be pragmatic and provide the best user experience they can. My guess is that there were originally significant technical hurdles to making Flash work well in the iPhone. But that was only 1 reason. They also wanted to push their own solutions (quicktime) and so maybe they haven't tried particularly hard to make Flash work. It hasn't been a top priority. It obviously is a bit of a problem now and they need to do something about it.
The best thing of all, however, is if Adobe would make Flash an open standard. So they can also stop whining here.
Derekasaurus
Aug 2, 04:58 PM
Figures they'd try to go after something that isn't written into the OS since we all know how hard that is.
Do you know what a computer without drivers is? A paperweight. The OS is not a single monolithic thing; it's made up of many components. The notion of what is "written into the OS" is more complicated than you seem to think, and it's childish to dismiss a vulnerability because it's in a driver.
They simply chose a Mac to be a cock. How's that for smugness?
Actually it's the smug attitude of so many Mac owners that makes them such satisfying targets. You reap what you sow. I've been using Macs since 1984 (and PCs about as long) and Mac users get on my nerves sometimes.
Do you know what a computer without drivers is? A paperweight. The OS is not a single monolithic thing; it's made up of many components. The notion of what is "written into the OS" is more complicated than you seem to think, and it's childish to dismiss a vulnerability because it's in a driver.
They simply chose a Mac to be a cock. How's that for smugness?
Actually it's the smug attitude of so many Mac owners that makes them such satisfying targets. You reap what you sow. I've been using Macs since 1984 (and PCs about as long) and Mac users get on my nerves sometimes.
2nyRiggz
Sep 6, 09:58 AM
Apples whole line-up is impressive....All carrying high performance processers and add ons...I'm not in a hurry for the MBP,MB bumps beacause they are already powerful...now the imac and minis get a little bit more....good time to be interested in OSX.
Bless
Bless
thisisahughes
Mar 28, 09:40 PM
wow. that's unfortunate.
Hastings101
May 5, 09:16 AM
Why so many negatives, I love 3D stuff when it's done correctly. Lots of fun in my opinion. Though I really doubt Apple would put a 3D screen on the iPad.
Digital Skunk
Apr 14, 11:19 AM
Agreed, at this price point, I can't see that there would be any market for FCE.
I honestly think that's the point. Apple had iMovie, FCE and FCP (within Studio suite) so I think Apple is going to sell the standalone, fully unlocked version of their software for dirt cheap and discount it for students.
FCE was just missing a few minor features from the pro version, a UI tweak here to adjust for those missing features, and that was about it. Now, they can sell FCPX stand alone for $299 and bundled with the rest of the UBER UPDATED SUITE APPS :D for $999 maybe.
I honestly think that's the point. Apple had iMovie, FCE and FCP (within Studio suite) so I think Apple is going to sell the standalone, fully unlocked version of their software for dirt cheap and discount it for students.
FCE was just missing a few minor features from the pro version, a UI tweak here to adjust for those missing features, and that was about it. Now, they can sell FCPX stand alone for $299 and bundled with the rest of the UBER UPDATED SUITE APPS :D for $999 maybe.
iGary
Sep 6, 10:00 AM
me too. Credit Card firmly in wallet until MB update comes around.
I'm pretty much thinking MB's won't get a bump until January, but that's me. ;) they are next to last in the revision cycle as it currently has been unfolding.
I'm pretty much thinking MB's won't get a bump until January, but that's me. ;) they are next to last in the revision cycle as it currently has been unfolding.
likemyorbs
Apr 26, 01:55 PM
Why is that? I would see both options as equally lousy.
They are both lousy, but trailer parks are safer. People may get into domestic disputes in their own trailers and call the police, but you don't see white gangs terrorizing the streets and having to worry about getting shot walking outside your front door after dark.
They are both lousy, but trailer parks are safer. People may get into domestic disputes in their own trailers and call the police, but you don't see white gangs terrorizing the streets and having to worry about getting shot walking outside your front door after dark.
Detlev
Nov 12, 02:06 PM
Paraphrasing: I don't like being told what I can and can't do. :rolleyes:
LarryC
Apr 2, 10:20 PM
MP is really a myth. The single biggest factor for the image quality of a sensor is the sensor size. Assuming image processing and sensor technology are roughly of the same generation, a large 4 megapixel sensor will beat the crap out of a phone camera with 8 megapixel sensor except resolution testing under good lighting. And most people just don't need that much resolution.
The Nokia N8 was an exception because they went for a huge(relatively speaking) sensor that was as large as the top of the line P&S like the Canon G series cameras. However with the physics involved you have to pay the price through the added thickness. I highly doubt anyone other than Nokia will take a gamble like that.
Thank you for explaining that. I might have to e-mail you when I decide to buy a camera. I really thought that MP was probably the biggest thing to look for when buying a digital camera.
The Nokia N8 was an exception because they went for a huge(relatively speaking) sensor that was as large as the top of the line P&S like the Canon G series cameras. However with the physics involved you have to pay the price through the added thickness. I highly doubt anyone other than Nokia will take a gamble like that.
Thank you for explaining that. I might have to e-mail you when I decide to buy a camera. I really thought that MP was probably the biggest thing to look for when buying a digital camera.
Takeo
Jul 23, 08:25 AM
Fake. Apple "ordered" a company to send all its manuscripts to it?
That's not what the article says. I interpreted it to mean that someone or some department within some publishing company was told... by someone else at the publishing company... to get all of their manuscripts archived and sent over to Apple.
That's not what the article says. I interpreted it to mean that someone or some department within some publishing company was told... by someone else at the publishing company... to get all of their manuscripts archived and sent over to Apple.
gavd
Oct 26, 05:24 PM
A friend of mine has just received his MacBook back from Apple where they replaced the heatsink because of the issue. Hopefully this will solve it for others though!
spicyapple
Oct 15, 03:05 PM
Screw this "beaming it over" nonsense.
Yes, that is a very nerdy/geeky thing to do. "Zune"-ing music wirelessly is only something geeks can come up with, whereas Steve's suggestion of sharing earbuds is so much cooler and, dare I say it, sexually suggestive! ;)
Yes, that is a very nerdy/geeky thing to do. "Zune"-ing music wirelessly is only something geeks can come up with, whereas Steve's suggestion of sharing earbuds is so much cooler and, dare I say it, sexually suggestive! ;)
DavidLeblond
Sep 4, 05:51 PM
Has anyone considered that apple might not be realeasing the wide screen super secret video ipod because it dosn't exist?
lets all think for a second...
1) touch screens are weak, soft, and matte, not iPod at all
2) they get printy and scratched very easily
3) they would go through oodles of batter power
4) Apple would not make the thing bigger just to hold the extra battery
5) battery life would STINK
6) touch screen starts to complicate the interface, goes against apple's easy as pie rule
7) the thing would have to cost a fortune
You're SO right about 1-5 and 7. I mean if touch screens were hard, shiny, battery efficient, and inexpensive then I'm sure game makers like Nintendo would have used them in handheld game systems like two years ago! And they would have priced it at like $150. But we know THAT will never happen. :rolleyes:
Oh, wait... (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nintendo_ds)
lets all think for a second...
1) touch screens are weak, soft, and matte, not iPod at all
2) they get printy and scratched very easily
3) they would go through oodles of batter power
4) Apple would not make the thing bigger just to hold the extra battery
5) battery life would STINK
6) touch screen starts to complicate the interface, goes against apple's easy as pie rule
7) the thing would have to cost a fortune
You're SO right about 1-5 and 7. I mean if touch screens were hard, shiny, battery efficient, and inexpensive then I'm sure game makers like Nintendo would have used them in handheld game systems like two years ago! And they would have priced it at like $150. But we know THAT will never happen. :rolleyes:
Oh, wait... (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nintendo_ds)
thestaton
Aug 3, 03:13 AM
any idea who the 3rd party vendor was? perhaps the hate mail should start flying there way!
RichardI
Nov 24, 10:54 AM
I'm curious. Anybody know where all that money goes? How much does Apple (the computer company) get vs. music companies vs. the two remaining Beatles? I heard that Michael Jackson owned the rights to a lot of Beatles songs - and now he's gone too. Any place this can be looked at?
Rich :cool:
Rich :cool:
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar