illa romza

I feel justified that this is the main reason we never heard ANY thing about Mac OS X at the keynote AND the WWDC (as far as I know), and each new update seems to be just fixes and security updates. So, I think apple is working on iOS X, or what ever the touch screen Mac OS is.


This is my take on Apple: (semi-off-topic warning)
The way I see it, is that Apple is the technology company of the future. I mean, look at all these other smart phone makers; (exceptions being Google and HTC) they're still "stuck" in the 20th century. With our rapid advancement of technology, Apple's current technology should have been out 3 to 5 years ago. IMO, Apple is just playing "catch up" on a human scale, aka the iPhone 4 is the technology that should have been releasing 3 to 5 years ago.

Their phones are absolutely phenomenal for the 20th century!

To those laughing at this and pointing out that Android phones don't have a file recording your movements..


and

http://thenextweb.com/google/2011/04/21/its-not-just-the-iphone-android-stores-your-location-data-too/

Octo-core please + 16GB ram for �999 : ) *joke*... or is it?

We won't see octo-core until Ivy Bridge. IIRC, for desktop processors, Ivy Bridge will be the first CPU where quad-cores are the bottom rung. And the iMac has been using desktop CPUs for a while (though still SO-DIMMs and mobile GPUs).

That's what I'm waiting for. Not so much the hyperthreaded octo-cores, but for SSD$/GB to continue their downward trend. 27", 8-core, top-tier GPU, 16GB of memory to start, with the 512GB SSD / largest 3.5" HDD they offer. Then hooking up my 27" LED Cinema Display to that for 5120x1440 goodness.

Finally ordered a programmer for my truck!

http://images.bizrate.com/resize?sq=250&uid=1880993794

I also hate to hear people moan about how inconvenient a standard transmission is during stop and go traffic; I mean it's not that bad

For most passenger cars in the U.S., an automatic transmission is standard - indeed, a manual transmission isn't even available for many (if not most) cars here.

As for being "not that bad," you might not think so; for many of us, there's a noticeable difference, one we can appreciate.

People are just too willing to sacrifice the fun of driving for convenience.

I used to think driving was fun, but that was many years ago. I absolutely loathe driving now. Whenever I go somewhere with my wife, she drives.

To me, driving is a necessary evil; if I'm at point A and I need to get to point B, and nobody else is going my way, then I'll drive; otherwise, I won't. I positively hate it, and I gain no joy whatsoever from it.

Please let this bring something. I'm getting sick of the constantly repetitive threads.

I don't know of anyone having a problem with the new iphone! I know that it is possible to make the reception problem happen, but I could also "make" reception problems happen on every cell phone I've ever owned.

Does Consumer Reports stop recommending automobile purchases? Because you know if there is an issue with a car, the manufacturer will issue a recall. If you are affected, you have to take it into a dealer where it will be fixed. The onus is on the owner of the car, for crying out loud! The auto manufacturers should go house to house providing the fix for free to all cars, whether their owners report a problem or not!

Wait, you mean Consumer Reports does not hold the auto manufacturers to the same artificial standard they hold Apple to? How amazing...

I really don't think Apple will come out with external optical drives... That is just too... complicated.

First time I've seen USB called complicated :).

I see what you mean from a design standpoint though, inelegant might be a better word. But it just makes too much sense not to do it. I hardly EVER use my optical drive. Why am I carrying it everywhere I go?

Yes, but probably not as good as one who drives them on a daily basic.

This is the lowest end machine Apple makes. Let's be realistic. This is a reasonable update for the base model. And it's probably being done in advance of a Core 2 Duo update to the iMac.

Cheaper Blu-ray next month: "BenQ to launch Blu-ray Disc writer in August"

http://www.macworld.com/news/2006/07/05/benq/index.php

Blu-ray is awesome for backups as well as HDTV and HD movies in general. You can also have much more content on a Blu-ray than on a HD-DVD disk.

So, should Blu-ray drop prices more to match HD-DVD as seems the trend, the election is clear: Blu-ray for ever!

Apple: go for it with the option ot two-drive BTO Macs. We need them.

Blah, it should read "Mac OS X Leopard, introducing Panter 2.0"

Panther?

Let me steer this off topic real quick. I have read before that Apple has two OS teams so "in theory" Leopard would, in fact, be Panther 2.0 and 10.7 would be Tiger 2.0. Again, in theory… Can someone clear that up?

On topic: Hooray Leopard!

Wow. For someone who seems to have all the answers, you're not reading the rest of this thread very well.

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327

In short, Apple's monitors are for higher-end users. Anyone can go out and get a Dell. Most people do. If you want cheap and easy, you get a Dell monitor.

I noticed that you didn't mention any of the 20" NEC Displays that run much, MUCH higher in price than even Apple's. Now why are they so much more expensive? Are they too high-priced? Vastly overpriced?

There are differences. You'd know that if you took the time to look.

Yes, you are indeed correct. Those are "real" numbers. Numbers that are comparing two different types of monitors.

Next time you wish to present facts, try and present them all instead of just the ones that support your case.


Well, you just made my point better than me. Of the millions of Macs sold, how many are to customers needing correct color and really care about the finer details of the monitor's specs? If you're buying a $2400 + Mac Pro the choice is obvious and you could justify the higher price, but what about the low end?

I have both the Dell and the Apple cinema display 20". The Apple monitor is extremely dim, so much so I'm not buying the superior color argument with that model, it's very noticable; the iMac however is very bright and the colors look much richer. If you want to argue that the Apple monitor is sooo much better with color reproduction and the numbers don't lie, than OK, I'll give you that. But who cares? A very small percentage of Apple's market cares or could even tell the difference.

If Apple has been all about getting "switchers" and trying to persuade Windows users that Apple and OS X is better, than why is Apple ignoring that market with their monitor offering? You said so yourself, these are "PRO" monitors. Because they want you to buy iMacs. That's an extremely limited choice if you ask me. Oh, I can hear the fan boys now, screw you if you don't care about color seperation and the finer details of image quality. Go buy your $hi+ dell and get off of this board.

Apple sells a consumer mini, but not a consumer monitor? Why not? You all are hammering away at the professional quality of this monitor. But I have both the Dell and the Apple and they look about the same to me. Actually, before Apple updated their monitors the 20" looked terrible next to the Dell. (I have both generations) And are the "Pros" who need that color perfection buying 20" monitors? Probably not. 23" and 30" would be my guess. So why have a high priced 20" display?

So all this hupla about color correction is making my point. Apple wants you to buy an iMac and they keep their monitors price high and limit their computer offerings to give you the incentive to buy one. Since that's all they sell they are making a good profit off of them. Don't get me wrong, they are nice computers, beautiful even, but what if I wan't something more flexable? Maybe a little more expandible. My choice is a $600 mini (not too flexable or expandable) or a $2400 Mac Pro. Big Difference. Oh, that $1499 price spot fits nicely with an iMac however. See my point?

If they lower the price of the 20" any more it will cut into their sales of 20" iMacs. And that is why it's hovering close to $700 and not $200 or $300 cheaper. Apple won't make as much money off of a mini/cinema combo as they will off of a 20" iMac; especially if the profit margin on the monitor is razor thin.

So, comfort yourself all you want that you have a "pro" quality monitor. If that makes you feel better parting with $300 then go for it. I doubt you could tell the differnce with both monitors sitting side by side. I have both and I can't realy see a $200 - $300 price justification, at least at the low end. Oh, I'm just a poor consumer, not a "pro", so I should go buy my crappy Dell and be happy. Right? But if Apple really want's to get people to switch in larger numbers they need to offer a little more choice at a competitive price. A nice quality 20" monitor competitvly priced to go with that mini or a mid-range tower. I'm asking Apple to drop their price on their monitors $200 and offer a $1200 - $1500 tower. Is that asking too much?

Thanx!

Never thought I'd ever get to this point when I started folding (almost) 4 years ago

;)

yeah i never thought i'd even get to 1 million. much less 5. keep it up!

On a side note, I have reached #977 overall with 6.4 mio units! I didn't think it was possible before the bigadv units...

mio?

on a random note just so you know switching to diesel you need to improve your MPG by around 30% for the switch to be carbon neutral. Remember Diesel as a lot more carbon in it per unit volume than unleaded.
Because it's more crude. The carbon is sapped out through a refining process, meaning all that crap sucked out of the earth still ends up somewhere it's not supposed to be -- meaning diesel is just as carbon neutral as gasoline.

I am a current law student who has concentrated in IP, particularly trademark law.

Can you please show me the trademark that was granted to Apple for App Store by the USPTO? You won't be able to find it because their trademark has not been approved. An opposition to their application was filed, if you didn't catch that from the text.

It was my understanding that Apple filed in 2008 and got some level of approval in early 2011. I imagine it is analogous to a "patent pending".

I imagine this case will then bear on the final full approval of the trademark.

Apple should file for "The App Store" in the interim as well as "appstore". The latter is used by amazon.

For all those saying about SSD - don't forget that after approx. 2 years of regular use, the drive is pretty much useless. read/write speeds drop off considerably as they age. As unbelievable as it may seem, SSD still has a long way to go before it can replace the hard disk drive.
Curious to see some statistics on this.

A thread on the new mac mini where everybody is bitching about the MacBook and the new iMac G5. :confused: :rolleyes:

As a side note, I think I'll buy a new mini now...
LOL, you're right, we did sort of stray off topic there. :)

They could do alot more.......That's all I'm going to say cause Im going to work...

Please sign the petition

P.S The point i'm trying to make is that Apple will always be a small company who thinks they affect the PC industry. The same thing happens every time, Apple makes something cool - The PC world makes the profit

My advice to you is to let this petition die. It's obvious that the most of the people don't agree with your ideas on the petition. How do you expect to convince apple if you have to convince people to sign your petition? You're interest in the well-being of apple is commendable, but this petition isn't going to work.

Totally legal, unfortunately. And no, not Jewish, at all.:)