Chundles
Sep 2, 04:19 AM
EDIT: And btw., as some other users noted, the $129 for Mac OS X is the price for an update..
Well, yes and no. I can do a full install on a Mac with a boxed copy of OSX because the license is in the hardware. You can't do a blank-HDD install of an update version of Windows.
Well, yes and no. I can do a full install on a Mac with a boxed copy of OSX because the license is in the hardware. You can't do a blank-HDD install of an update version of Windows.
ReanimationLP
Aug 3, 09:15 PM
Heh, I'm willing to bet that the Leopard discs will be up on a BT site within a weeks time. :rolleyes:
fivepoint
Mar 10, 06:22 PM
While Democrats and Republicans bicker back and forth about whether to 'cut' 6 billion or 60 billion, there are a few lone voices in the legislature that actually realize the problem, and are actually willing to talk about it. Rand Paul is one of these voices and he gave a great speech yesterday which I think addresses the problems far more clearly than you'll get from any Elephant or Donkey on the hill. Take a moment and read it through. Many of you don't realize just how bad the problem is, but it's not necessarily your fault. There aren't many leaders out there that are willing to be so blunt and honest about the situation and to openly admit that neither side is trying hard enough to fix it.
Listen Democrats, listen Republicans... It's NOT Enough! 6 billion isn't enough, 60 billion isn't enough, heck, even 600 billion isn't enough. We've got to cut entitlements, we've got to cut military, nothing is sacred. We must work harder, we must cut more, we must reconsider the scope of government and put ourselves back on a path towards fiscal sanity.
Watch It:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nMqcLQzD-aA
Read It:
We are discussing and debating two different alternatives, one from the other side of the aisle and one from our side, about what we should do about the budget deficit.
We have projected a $1.65 trillion deficit in the next year.
I think both alternatives are inadequate and do not significantly alter or change our course. On the Democrat side, we have a proposal to cut about $5 billion to $6 billion for the rest of the year. To put that in perspective, we borrow $4 billion a day.
So the other side is offering up cuts equal to one day’s borrowing.
I think it’s insignificant and it will not alter the coming and looming debt crisis that we face.
Now, on our side of the aisle, I think we have done more, the cuts are more significant, but they also pale in comparison to the problem.
If we were to adopt the president’s approach, we would have $1.65 trillion deficit in one year. If we were to adopt our approach, we’re going to have a $1.55 trillion deficit in one year. I think both approaches do not significantly alter or delay the crisis that’s coming.
Now, it’s interesting when we talk about cuts, everybody seems to be giddy around here, saying this is the first time we have talked about cuts.
Well, it is better and it sounds good, but guess what? We’re not even really cutting spending. What we’re talking about is cutting the rate of increase of spending. The base line of spending is going to go up 7.3 % according to the CBO.
We’re talking about reducing that increase to 6.7% increase. We’re talking about cutting the rate of increase of government. The problem is it’s not enough.
Our deficit is growing by leaps and bounds. Our national debt is $14 trillion. Our national debt is now equal to our entire economy. Our gross domestic product equals our national debt.
The president, I think, is tone deaf on this.
We had an election, and in the election, the people said we’re concerned about out-of-control spending, we’re concerned about massive deficits, we’re concerned about passing this debt on to our kids and our grandkids.
The president recently proposed a 10-year budget, a 10-year plan for spending. He proposes that we spend $46 trillion. That means they aren’t getting it.
You have – in Washington, official Washington is not getting what the people are saying, and they’re not getting how profound the problems are.
Spending $46 trillion?
The president’s plan will add $13 trillion to the debt, and the Republicans say ‘oh, well ours is a lot better.’ Theirs will add $12 trillion to the debt.
I think it’s out of control, and neither plan will do anything to significantly alter things.
We’re spending $10 billion a day.
In order to reform things, in order to change things around here, we will have to come to grips with the idea of what should government be doing, what are the constitutional functions of government, what were the enumerated powers of the Constitution, what powers did the Constitution give to the federal government, and then examine what we’re actually doing. What are we spending money on that’s not constitutional or shouldn’t be done here or should be left to the states and the people respectively?
Once upon a time, our side believed that education was a function of the states and the localities. It’s not mentioned in the Constitution that the federal government should have anything to do with education.
Does that mean we’re opposed to education? No, we just think it should be done at a state and a local level.
Ronald Reagan was a champion of eliminating the Department of Education. It was part of the Republican Party platform for 20 years. But then we got in charge after the year 2000, and we doubled the size of the Department of Education.
If you are serious about balancing the budget, if you are serious about the debt, you have to look at taking departments like the Department of Education and sending it back to the states and the localities.
You have to look at programs that are growing by leaps and bounds like Medicaid and food stamps, cap them, block-grant them and send them back to the states. The states can manage these things better. The more close they are to the people, the better managed they will be.
The other compromise that needs to occur – and this is something our side needs to compromise on.
Our side has blindly said that the military should get anything it wants, and it’s a blank check.
What do you want? Here it is. We have increased military spending by 120% since 2001. We have doubled military spending.
Now, I’m for a strong national defense. I believe that it is a constitutional function of the federal government to provide for our national defense. I think it is the pre-eminent power, the pre-eminent enumerated power, the thing we should be doing here. But even that being said, we cannot every eight years double the Defense Department, double the military spending.
It’s also ultimately the compromise.
Within the space after few years, everyone here will come to an agreement, not because we want to but because we’re forced to by the events and by the drama of the debt crisis. It will come. It’s come to other nations.
When it comes to us, the compromise that both sides of the aisle will have to work out is, the other side of the aisle will have to admit we cannot have enormous domestic spending, and our side of the aisle will have to admit that we can’t give a blank check to the military.
We will also have to look at entitlements. Everyone’s afraid to say how we reform entitlements, but there are two inescapable facts with entitlements: We’re living longer, and there is a lot of people that were born after World War II that are getting ready to retire. These are inescapable demographic facts. We have to address them. If we simply do nothing, if we do not address the entitlements, within a decade, entitlements will account for the entire budget and interest. There will be no money left for anything.
So right now, the argument is about all these other programs. There will be no money left for any of these programs if we do nothing.
It’s going to take both sides of the aisle grappling with this and admitting that the rules and eligibility will have to change for Social Security, and likely for Medicare.
If you do it now, you can do it gradually. If you start now, you can gradually let the age rise for Medicare and Social Security for those 55 and under. If you do it gradually. I think young people have already acknowledged this is going to happen.
You ask young people anywhere across America, ‘do you think you’re going to have Social Security when you retire? Do you think you’re going to get it at 67?’
Most young people acknowledge that it’s broken, it’s broken so badly that the only way we fix it and the only way it can continue is we have to look at the eligibility.
But so many people have said ‘oh, we can’t talk about entitlement. You will be unelected, you will be unelectable if you talk about entitlement reform.’
The president still makes this mistake. He will not lead us. He will not talk and give a leadership role to entitlement reform. Someone must do it. We must stand up and be bold because the longer these problems fester, the longer we allow them to accumulate, the bigger the problems become. The more dramatic the answers must be.
If you look at Greece and these other nations that have faced debt crises, their problem came to a head all of a sudden and they changed the age on Social Security like that.
If we want to do it gradually and let people plan for their future, you need to start now before we enter into a crisis. My problem with the discussion and the debate at this point is that I don’t think either side recognizes the enormity of the problem or the imminence of the problem.
Even people who would be considered to be those of the mainstream – the former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan says 50% of chance that there will be some kind of monetary problems, significant monetary problems, even to the point of crisis in the next few years.
Many people have said Japan is locked in crisis, that crisis is coming because of the debt that they’ve accumulated.
When that comes to America, do we want to have government by crisis?
Already we can’t even pass a budget. We can’t pass appropriations bills. Our bills do not even go to the committees anymore. They just come to the floor and we put a patchwork quilt on them and there’s a chance this ends up being two more weeks. It is not the way you should run government.
If you want to have a significant plan for changing things, send things through the committee. If you want to have a realistic way of running government, have appropriations bills.
If you want to be someone who believes in good, responsible government, for goodness sakes, pass a budget. We didn’t pass a budget last year.
This chart shows how big the problem is. I wish I had a magnifying glass because that’s the only way you could see the other side’s proposal: $6 billion in cuts. It’s one day’s borrowing. It’s not even one day’s spending that they’re talking about. It’s insignificant, it’s inconsequential, and it will do nothing to delay or alter the looming debt crisis.
Look at the other proposal from our side.
It’s bigger – you can actually see it without a magnifying glass – but look how it is dwarfed by one year’s problem.
I recently proposed $500 billion in cuts and when I went home and spoke to the people of my state, spoke to those from the Tea Party, they said, $500 billion is not enough and they’re right.
$500 billion is a third of one year’s problem.
Up here that’s way too bold, but it’s not even enough.
But we have to counterbalance and understand the alternatives here.
If we do nothing, all of the programs that people are so fond of, extolling and saying will be gone.
So I implore the American public and those here to look at this problem and say to Congress, we’re not doing enough; you must cut more.
Listen Democrats, listen Republicans... It's NOT Enough! 6 billion isn't enough, 60 billion isn't enough, heck, even 600 billion isn't enough. We've got to cut entitlements, we've got to cut military, nothing is sacred. We must work harder, we must cut more, we must reconsider the scope of government and put ourselves back on a path towards fiscal sanity.
Watch It:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nMqcLQzD-aA
Read It:
We are discussing and debating two different alternatives, one from the other side of the aisle and one from our side, about what we should do about the budget deficit.
We have projected a $1.65 trillion deficit in the next year.
I think both alternatives are inadequate and do not significantly alter or change our course. On the Democrat side, we have a proposal to cut about $5 billion to $6 billion for the rest of the year. To put that in perspective, we borrow $4 billion a day.
So the other side is offering up cuts equal to one day’s borrowing.
I think it’s insignificant and it will not alter the coming and looming debt crisis that we face.
Now, on our side of the aisle, I think we have done more, the cuts are more significant, but they also pale in comparison to the problem.
If we were to adopt the president’s approach, we would have $1.65 trillion deficit in one year. If we were to adopt our approach, we’re going to have a $1.55 trillion deficit in one year. I think both approaches do not significantly alter or delay the crisis that’s coming.
Now, it’s interesting when we talk about cuts, everybody seems to be giddy around here, saying this is the first time we have talked about cuts.
Well, it is better and it sounds good, but guess what? We’re not even really cutting spending. What we’re talking about is cutting the rate of increase of spending. The base line of spending is going to go up 7.3 % according to the CBO.
We’re talking about reducing that increase to 6.7% increase. We’re talking about cutting the rate of increase of government. The problem is it’s not enough.
Our deficit is growing by leaps and bounds. Our national debt is $14 trillion. Our national debt is now equal to our entire economy. Our gross domestic product equals our national debt.
The president, I think, is tone deaf on this.
We had an election, and in the election, the people said we’re concerned about out-of-control spending, we’re concerned about massive deficits, we’re concerned about passing this debt on to our kids and our grandkids.
The president recently proposed a 10-year budget, a 10-year plan for spending. He proposes that we spend $46 trillion. That means they aren’t getting it.
You have – in Washington, official Washington is not getting what the people are saying, and they’re not getting how profound the problems are.
Spending $46 trillion?
The president’s plan will add $13 trillion to the debt, and the Republicans say ‘oh, well ours is a lot better.’ Theirs will add $12 trillion to the debt.
I think it’s out of control, and neither plan will do anything to significantly alter things.
We’re spending $10 billion a day.
In order to reform things, in order to change things around here, we will have to come to grips with the idea of what should government be doing, what are the constitutional functions of government, what were the enumerated powers of the Constitution, what powers did the Constitution give to the federal government, and then examine what we’re actually doing. What are we spending money on that’s not constitutional or shouldn’t be done here or should be left to the states and the people respectively?
Once upon a time, our side believed that education was a function of the states and the localities. It’s not mentioned in the Constitution that the federal government should have anything to do with education.
Does that mean we’re opposed to education? No, we just think it should be done at a state and a local level.
Ronald Reagan was a champion of eliminating the Department of Education. It was part of the Republican Party platform for 20 years. But then we got in charge after the year 2000, and we doubled the size of the Department of Education.
If you are serious about balancing the budget, if you are serious about the debt, you have to look at taking departments like the Department of Education and sending it back to the states and the localities.
You have to look at programs that are growing by leaps and bounds like Medicaid and food stamps, cap them, block-grant them and send them back to the states. The states can manage these things better. The more close they are to the people, the better managed they will be.
The other compromise that needs to occur – and this is something our side needs to compromise on.
Our side has blindly said that the military should get anything it wants, and it’s a blank check.
What do you want? Here it is. We have increased military spending by 120% since 2001. We have doubled military spending.
Now, I’m for a strong national defense. I believe that it is a constitutional function of the federal government to provide for our national defense. I think it is the pre-eminent power, the pre-eminent enumerated power, the thing we should be doing here. But even that being said, we cannot every eight years double the Defense Department, double the military spending.
It’s also ultimately the compromise.
Within the space after few years, everyone here will come to an agreement, not because we want to but because we’re forced to by the events and by the drama of the debt crisis. It will come. It’s come to other nations.
When it comes to us, the compromise that both sides of the aisle will have to work out is, the other side of the aisle will have to admit we cannot have enormous domestic spending, and our side of the aisle will have to admit that we can’t give a blank check to the military.
We will also have to look at entitlements. Everyone’s afraid to say how we reform entitlements, but there are two inescapable facts with entitlements: We’re living longer, and there is a lot of people that were born after World War II that are getting ready to retire. These are inescapable demographic facts. We have to address them. If we simply do nothing, if we do not address the entitlements, within a decade, entitlements will account for the entire budget and interest. There will be no money left for anything.
So right now, the argument is about all these other programs. There will be no money left for any of these programs if we do nothing.
It’s going to take both sides of the aisle grappling with this and admitting that the rules and eligibility will have to change for Social Security, and likely for Medicare.
If you do it now, you can do it gradually. If you start now, you can gradually let the age rise for Medicare and Social Security for those 55 and under. If you do it gradually. I think young people have already acknowledged this is going to happen.
You ask young people anywhere across America, ‘do you think you’re going to have Social Security when you retire? Do you think you’re going to get it at 67?’
Most young people acknowledge that it’s broken, it’s broken so badly that the only way we fix it and the only way it can continue is we have to look at the eligibility.
But so many people have said ‘oh, we can’t talk about entitlement. You will be unelected, you will be unelectable if you talk about entitlement reform.’
The president still makes this mistake. He will not lead us. He will not talk and give a leadership role to entitlement reform. Someone must do it. We must stand up and be bold because the longer these problems fester, the longer we allow them to accumulate, the bigger the problems become. The more dramatic the answers must be.
If you look at Greece and these other nations that have faced debt crises, their problem came to a head all of a sudden and they changed the age on Social Security like that.
If we want to do it gradually and let people plan for their future, you need to start now before we enter into a crisis. My problem with the discussion and the debate at this point is that I don’t think either side recognizes the enormity of the problem or the imminence of the problem.
Even people who would be considered to be those of the mainstream – the former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan says 50% of chance that there will be some kind of monetary problems, significant monetary problems, even to the point of crisis in the next few years.
Many people have said Japan is locked in crisis, that crisis is coming because of the debt that they’ve accumulated.
When that comes to America, do we want to have government by crisis?
Already we can’t even pass a budget. We can’t pass appropriations bills. Our bills do not even go to the committees anymore. They just come to the floor and we put a patchwork quilt on them and there’s a chance this ends up being two more weeks. It is not the way you should run government.
If you want to have a significant plan for changing things, send things through the committee. If you want to have a realistic way of running government, have appropriations bills.
If you want to be someone who believes in good, responsible government, for goodness sakes, pass a budget. We didn’t pass a budget last year.
This chart shows how big the problem is. I wish I had a magnifying glass because that’s the only way you could see the other side’s proposal: $6 billion in cuts. It’s one day’s borrowing. It’s not even one day’s spending that they’re talking about. It’s insignificant, it’s inconsequential, and it will do nothing to delay or alter the looming debt crisis.
Look at the other proposal from our side.
It’s bigger – you can actually see it without a magnifying glass – but look how it is dwarfed by one year’s problem.
I recently proposed $500 billion in cuts and when I went home and spoke to the people of my state, spoke to those from the Tea Party, they said, $500 billion is not enough and they’re right.
$500 billion is a third of one year’s problem.
Up here that’s way too bold, but it’s not even enough.
But we have to counterbalance and understand the alternatives here.
If we do nothing, all of the programs that people are so fond of, extolling and saying will be gone.
So I implore the American public and those here to look at this problem and say to Congress, we’re not doing enough; you must cut more.
bpaluzzi
Apr 11, 06:15 AM
Pirates are douchebags.
NT1440
Mar 10, 10:53 PM
No it will not as I do not support cutting back on the Military ... we could use less freakin politicians and their waste than less Military personal
This shows you clearly don't understand how the military funds are used.
The troops cost $152.4 Billion....out of the $685.1 Billion 2010 military budget (which I don't think accounts for the massive CIA and so called "black budget).
Cutting military funding doesn't mean eliminating troops.
This shows you clearly don't understand how the military funds are used.
The troops cost $152.4 Billion....out of the $685.1 Billion 2010 military budget (which I don't think accounts for the massive CIA and so called "black budget).
Cutting military funding doesn't mean eliminating troops.
HecubusPro
Sep 6, 08:35 AM
Is there any Winblows fanboy still out there to justify the purchase of a damn PC? I don't think so... :rolleyes:
Sure, if you don't like macs.
Sure, if you don't like macs.
draghelm
Sep 6, 09:20 AM
No one else noticed that the 17" "strippers" are shipping within 24 hours, with the rest within 1-2 days. That puts Apple only day or two behind the PC manufacturers shipping Meroms?
CavemanUK
Aug 8, 04:05 AM
No, It doesn't.
this is funny, this one subject is really bringing out the mac and windows hardcores!
I fall into both categories so I like to think im neutral. What I see in Time Machine is System Restore:The Next Generation
System restore did allow you to step back in time thru save points to a point where everything was ok.
Apple have taken it even further by allowing you to do this firstly on the fly, and have also given you the ability to pick out a single file or files to restore. By allowing it to backup to other media they also allow you to recover from a dead hd... all in all a nice feature... shame the space design looks a little naff. personally i would have prefered if they had just gone with there normal shiny black (like frontrow).
this is funny, this one subject is really bringing out the mac and windows hardcores!
I fall into both categories so I like to think im neutral. What I see in Time Machine is System Restore:The Next Generation
System restore did allow you to step back in time thru save points to a point where everything was ok.
Apple have taken it even further by allowing you to do this firstly on the fly, and have also given you the ability to pick out a single file or files to restore. By allowing it to backup to other media they also allow you to recover from a dead hd... all in all a nice feature... shame the space design looks a little naff. personally i would have prefered if they had just gone with there normal shiny black (like frontrow).
X5-452
Mar 18, 01:49 PM
Wirelessly posted (iPhone 3GS: 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)
Reception to the original iPod launch was mixed. Our own forum responses are interesting to look back on, 10 years later.
At least we're all pretty consistent with our critiques of Apple product launches, hahaha.
Reception to the original iPod launch was mixed. Our own forum responses are interesting to look back on, 10 years later.
At least we're all pretty consistent with our critiques of Apple product launches, hahaha.
zap2
Apr 4, 05:36 PM
A child does not naturally grow up to be socially responsible or kind. They naturally grow up to be self-centered and violent unless a parent or authority teaches them otherwise.
As negative as I think religion can be, it has set a code of conduct for people that enables cooperation and empathy for others. Although we don't need religion to teach people morals, we need some agreed upon code of conduct.
You might say that the laws of a country serve that purpose, but they don't. They are simply rules everyone must follow and any despotic ruler can set awful laws that can hurt people. Therefore, the code of conduct has to be separate from the law.
If atheism has any future, its needs some type of unified, agreed upon code.
The idea that religion is the only thing that keeps kids from growing up into terrible people is a bit outdated, there are large countries in the Western World were religion has almost no influence and these places are not a pool of hate.
As negative as I think religion can be, it has set a code of conduct for people that enables cooperation and empathy for others. Although we don't need religion to teach people morals, we need some agreed upon code of conduct.
You might say that the laws of a country serve that purpose, but they don't. They are simply rules everyone must follow and any despotic ruler can set awful laws that can hurt people. Therefore, the code of conduct has to be separate from the law.
If atheism has any future, its needs some type of unified, agreed upon code.
The idea that religion is the only thing that keeps kids from growing up into terrible people is a bit outdated, there are large countries in the Western World were religion has almost no influence and these places are not a pool of hate.
steadysignal
Apr 14, 09:56 AM
"switchers" ... plain and simple :D
Buyer satisfaction with other Apple products is clearly filtering down into Mac sales. This trend will only continue to strengthen.
let's hope so.
more money may yield greater innovation.
Buyer satisfaction with other Apple products is clearly filtering down into Mac sales. This trend will only continue to strengthen.
let's hope so.
more money may yield greater innovation.
yellow
Aug 3, 12:16 PM
So...
The statements by the "Mac"
"I'll be fine" &
"PCs, not Macs"
Constitutes a "challenge to the hacker community"??!
:rolleyes:
Whatever.
The statements by the "Mac"
"I'll be fine" &
"PCs, not Macs"
Constitutes a "challenge to the hacker community"??!
:rolleyes:
Whatever.
Drodr28
Aug 4, 02:02 PM
These are some poor quality pictures captured by my camera on my Razor around 11:00 am today. Nothing too special, except the large apple logos plastered on the South and East side of the Moscone Center West. I acutally stood and watched them trying to get the 8+ story Apple decal straight. It was pretty funny. Security was lax (an old man asleep on a chair) but I didnt have the time to risk entry. You can actually look right into the conference area which I found odd, but I doubt there would be much to reveal as it is still only Friday. Well enjoy!
http://www.t-mobilepictures.com/photo/photo02/13/ab/5b989be57174.jpg?tw=305&th=228&_rh=bm871nh33dbgw8ntyai9dd6hhttp://www.t-mobilepictures.com/photo/photo06/9a/01/e765f2deb04a.jpg?tw=305&th=228&_rh=1pttcv7ak9mdceg6zlqsuwq22
http://www.t-mobilepictures.com/photo/photo09/ec/d3/a3692870c48a.jpg?tw=305&th=228&_rh=b36nt8g3tb0rj6h4dsz9zgt7y
http://www.t-mobilepictures.com/photo/photo10/4d/58/6c918bc7c26d.jpg?tw=305&th=228&_rh=b0u438r7tp1njvasgv7x5gpa6
http://www.t-mobilepictures.com/photo/photo02/13/ab/5b989be57174.jpg?tw=305&th=228&_rh=bm871nh33dbgw8ntyai9dd6hhttp://www.t-mobilepictures.com/photo/photo06/9a/01/e765f2deb04a.jpg?tw=305&th=228&_rh=1pttcv7ak9mdceg6zlqsuwq22
http://www.t-mobilepictures.com/photo/photo09/ec/d3/a3692870c48a.jpg?tw=305&th=228&_rh=b36nt8g3tb0rj6h4dsz9zgt7y
http://www.t-mobilepictures.com/photo/photo10/4d/58/6c918bc7c26d.jpg?tw=305&th=228&_rh=b0u438r7tp1njvasgv7x5gpa6
dontmatter
Jul 24, 12:33 AM
No. Please god no. I don't know how many of you have done e-books but e-books on anything smaller then a 4" screen sucks. HARD.
What Apple needs to do is come out with a dedicated device. Integration seems the only way they can push into another market at this point. (Shades of MS Windows with [insert anything here.] integration.)
What Apple needs to do is form an alliance with E-Reader / Peanut Press and having it integrate with iTMS. Then come out with an e book reader that uses digital ink. This is the tech that can paint a screen then cut power to the screen yet still have the image remain. In cases such as this we are talking WEEKS of battery life. Use digital ink + Apple's standard design flare + iTMS and I can guarantee people will eat it up.
Does anyone know how big this would be? It would be huge. No beyond huge. Literature is as universally accepted as music. It's used everywhere from text books in schools, to training manuals, to maintenance manuals, to entertainment in the home, to entertainment while you are sitting waiting for the dentist. Imagine subscribing to a magazine and having it downloaded off of iTMS like a podcast.
In short I would sell my first, second, third born sons, and cut off a pinky toe for Apple to release an e-book reader. This is Sony's attempt:
http://dynamism.com/images/extra/DSCN0862.jpg
No one in the market has done the design right yet. There is this huge market waiting for someone to step up to the plate and get it done right, easy, and elegant. Sound familiar?
But above all please PLEASE PLEASE don�t integrate it into the iPod. It would be doing major disservice to the emerging industry.
On second thought, silicon addict, you just might be right. big enough to read on just might be too big for the ipod. hrm.
What Apple needs to do is come out with a dedicated device. Integration seems the only way they can push into another market at this point. (Shades of MS Windows with [insert anything here.] integration.)
What Apple needs to do is form an alliance with E-Reader / Peanut Press and having it integrate with iTMS. Then come out with an e book reader that uses digital ink. This is the tech that can paint a screen then cut power to the screen yet still have the image remain. In cases such as this we are talking WEEKS of battery life. Use digital ink + Apple's standard design flare + iTMS and I can guarantee people will eat it up.
Does anyone know how big this would be? It would be huge. No beyond huge. Literature is as universally accepted as music. It's used everywhere from text books in schools, to training manuals, to maintenance manuals, to entertainment in the home, to entertainment while you are sitting waiting for the dentist. Imagine subscribing to a magazine and having it downloaded off of iTMS like a podcast.
In short I would sell my first, second, third born sons, and cut off a pinky toe for Apple to release an e-book reader. This is Sony's attempt:
http://dynamism.com/images/extra/DSCN0862.jpg
No one in the market has done the design right yet. There is this huge market waiting for someone to step up to the plate and get it done right, easy, and elegant. Sound familiar?
But above all please PLEASE PLEASE don�t integrate it into the iPod. It would be doing major disservice to the emerging industry.
On second thought, silicon addict, you just might be right. big enough to read on just might be too big for the ipod. hrm.
xriderx11
Apr 2, 12:14 AM
WOW!!!! 8 megapixe?!!!!!!! i remember like 5 years ago when i bought a 200$ camera and it was 6 megapixels and it was considered amazing and here is the iphone with a 8!!! ITS CRAZZZYYY:confused:
jamesryanbell
Apr 17, 06:12 AM
Remember folks: It's only paradise if it's a limited access paradise.
(Kidding. Chill out. )
(Kidding. Chill out. )
Laird Knox
Mar 20, 09:06 PM
I am picturing you steering right to go down a list, left to go up and honking each time you want to middle button. :)
Now that would be fun. :D On the back of the steering wheeling in my Jeep there are buttons for volume +/-, station +/-, seek and input select. The adapter I bought plugs into the factory radio's wiring harness and makes the stereo think it has a CD changer pulgged in. The seek button cycles through play lists while the station +/- lets you change tracks. It is pretty nifty.
My HD based iPods that failed from too much time on the back of a motorcycle didn't show signs of failing. They just farted out and unhappy faced me out of the blue.
The first time mine did that it took me about a week of fiddling with it before I was able to get the drive reformated.
You know, it's like the headphones with remote and mic w/ volume controls never happened to half you folk. After a very short and easy learning curve, it's even easier to interact for basic functions than the wheel. One of the projects that's on my list of to-dos before my South American ride is to rig a control scheme.
True, but I already had the iPod Video with real buttons and the BT adapter I was using was only a transmitter. Sure I could make the transition to the touch. I was just pointing out that buttons weren't useless. ;)
As for your trip, you don't need to rig anythig up. I have a Belkin SportCommand (http://www.ilounge.com/index.php/reviews/entry/belkin-sportcommand-fabric-remote-for-ipod/) that works great on the bike. I just strap it to my left thigh and have full control over the iPod stuffed in a bag. Just drop your hand down to the control and you don't even have to take your eyes off the road.
Unfortunately I was just looking and they may not make it any longer. There are other, similar, solutions out there.
South American ride? I want to go!
Now that would be fun. :D On the back of the steering wheeling in my Jeep there are buttons for volume +/-, station +/-, seek and input select. The adapter I bought plugs into the factory radio's wiring harness and makes the stereo think it has a CD changer pulgged in. The seek button cycles through play lists while the station +/- lets you change tracks. It is pretty nifty.
My HD based iPods that failed from too much time on the back of a motorcycle didn't show signs of failing. They just farted out and unhappy faced me out of the blue.
The first time mine did that it took me about a week of fiddling with it before I was able to get the drive reformated.
You know, it's like the headphones with remote and mic w/ volume controls never happened to half you folk. After a very short and easy learning curve, it's even easier to interact for basic functions than the wheel. One of the projects that's on my list of to-dos before my South American ride is to rig a control scheme.
True, but I already had the iPod Video with real buttons and the BT adapter I was using was only a transmitter. Sure I could make the transition to the touch. I was just pointing out that buttons weren't useless. ;)
As for your trip, you don't need to rig anythig up. I have a Belkin SportCommand (http://www.ilounge.com/index.php/reviews/entry/belkin-sportcommand-fabric-remote-for-ipod/) that works great on the bike. I just strap it to my left thigh and have full control over the iPod stuffed in a bag. Just drop your hand down to the control and you don't even have to take your eyes off the road.
Unfortunately I was just looking and they may not make it any longer. There are other, similar, solutions out there.
South American ride? I want to go!
FF_productions
Sep 12, 03:29 PM
Very Cool!
iTunes is an App that my life depends, I love the UI change!
iTunes is an App that my life depends, I love the UI change!
peapody
Oct 25, 06:53 PM
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1414/5108858842_80b9fec111.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/heyjuliette/5108858842/)
Alright yall... figured out the brand of this case for the many you who have asked me/pm'd me.
Brand is Avenues USA, and it is a black zip folio. Bought it at Staples for $15.99. I just brought in my mba to test on all the folios and this one was perfect. I might be selling mine if I sell my MBA for the new 11.6" haha. Might go for something smaller since I would be able to!
Alright yall... figured out the brand of this case for the many you who have asked me/pm'd me.
Brand is Avenues USA, and it is a black zip folio. Bought it at Staples for $15.99. I just brought in my mba to test on all the folios and this one was perfect. I might be selling mine if I sell my MBA for the new 11.6" haha. Might go for something smaller since I would be able to!
kntgsp
Apr 2, 10:54 AM
Bigger screen is not an improved spec.
If it's done within the same unit dimensions or slightly (a few millimeters) larger, then yes it is an improved spec.
In a 3.5" screen is somewhat of a drawback for high end devices that are expected to do everything. Power draw on screens and chips is reduced, the technology exists to keep thin form factors and battery life while scaling up to 3.7 and 4" screens. Just swapping between a Nexus One's 3.7" and Nexus S' 4.0" makes a noticeable difference. Scaling 960x640 up to 4" isn't going to ruin the "zomg retina" that every apple fanatic screams about. It'll still put it ahead of all the competition's 800x480 4" screens.
When the interface on a device is handled solely through touch input on the screen itself, 4" screens have a significant advantage over 3.5" screens. After using a Nexus S, Galaxy S, HTC HD2, etc. I think the sweet spot is 4". 4.3" and the unit dimensions start getting too big. But 4" provides just enough extra screen real estate to make typing more comfortable and information display easier to read. Not to mention with Apple pushing gaming on its IOS devices, onscreen joysticks would be made quite a bit easier with a little added space.
And the point is that the current Iphone dimensions don't need to change to accommodate a larger screen. Just lessen the bezel width and you can put a larger screen in the current sized handset without issue. Or scale the dimensions up a few millimeters. Either way it's win-win.
If it's done within the same unit dimensions or slightly (a few millimeters) larger, then yes it is an improved spec.
In a 3.5" screen is somewhat of a drawback for high end devices that are expected to do everything. Power draw on screens and chips is reduced, the technology exists to keep thin form factors and battery life while scaling up to 3.7 and 4" screens. Just swapping between a Nexus One's 3.7" and Nexus S' 4.0" makes a noticeable difference. Scaling 960x640 up to 4" isn't going to ruin the "zomg retina" that every apple fanatic screams about. It'll still put it ahead of all the competition's 800x480 4" screens.
When the interface on a device is handled solely through touch input on the screen itself, 4" screens have a significant advantage over 3.5" screens. After using a Nexus S, Galaxy S, HTC HD2, etc. I think the sweet spot is 4". 4.3" and the unit dimensions start getting too big. But 4" provides just enough extra screen real estate to make typing more comfortable and information display easier to read. Not to mention with Apple pushing gaming on its IOS devices, onscreen joysticks would be made quite a bit easier with a little added space.
And the point is that the current Iphone dimensions don't need to change to accommodate a larger screen. Just lessen the bezel width and you can put a larger screen in the current sized handset without issue. Or scale the dimensions up a few millimeters. Either way it's win-win.
ezekielrage_99
Aug 29, 11:22 PM
I really do think many consumers are really going to be confused with Vista's pricing system and suckered into buying a more expensive product.
Jackie.Cane
Sep 12, 05:27 PM
I like CoverFlow and the free album art but...
Good god this thing is an ugly beast! From the side navigation panel to the scrollbars and buttons, to the Store itself - this has got to be the least asthetically appealing consumer app from Apple in a very long time. Windows XP style FTW!
Good god this thing is an ugly beast! From the side navigation panel to the scrollbars and buttons, to the Store itself - this has got to be the least asthetically appealing consumer app from Apple in a very long time. Windows XP style FTW!
fishmoose
Mar 21, 02:49 PM
That's exactly why I don't have a wife. Yet! :D
You don't want a free iPad? :D
You don't want a free iPad? :D
bboucher790
Mar 18, 06:26 PM
"All that hype for an MP3 player? Break-thru digital device? The Reality Distiortion Field� is starting to warp Steve's mind if he thinks for one second that this thing is gonna take off. "
Haha.....Macrumors readers were SO wrong in that thread. It's quite hilarious, actually. Not only was it a breakthrough device, it completely changed the entire music industry! So much so, Bon Jovi was recently quoted "Steve Jobs killed the music business".
Haha.....Macrumors readers were SO wrong in that thread. It's quite hilarious, actually. Not only was it a breakthrough device, it completely changed the entire music industry! So much so, Bon Jovi was recently quoted "Steve Jobs killed the music business".