MikeTheC
Nov 25, 10:46 PM
All this talk about Palm needing to modernize their OS, or it is outdated, or needing to re-write is absolutely hilarious.
On a phone, I want to use its features quickly and easily. When I have to schedule an appointment, I want to enter that appointment as easily as possible. When I want to add something to my to-do list, I want to do it easily and quickly. And first and foremost, I want to be able to look up a contact and dial it as quickly as possible.
A phone is not a personal computer. I couldn't care less about multitasking, rewriting, "modern" OSes (whatever "modern" means). "Modern" features and look is just eye candy and/or toys. A mobile phone is a gadget of convenience, and it should be convenient to use. Even PalmOS 1.0 was convenient. It was just as easy to use its contact and calendar features as any so-called "modern" OS is today.
I would really like to know how "modernizing" the OS on my phone would help me look up contacts, dial contacts, enter to-do list entries, and entering calendar entries any better that I could today.
Again, I repeat: a phone is not a personal computer. There's no point in treating it as such.
The same point could largely be made about cars, but I don't think either of us would want to be driving a Model T or Model A Ford these days, would we?
The term "Modern" as applied to operating systems has little to do with the interface per se. It primarily concerns the underpinnings of the OS and how forward-looking and/or open-ended it is. Older operating systems, if you want to look at it in this way, were very geared to the hardware of their times, and every time you added a new hardware feature or some new kind of technology came out, you wound up making this big patchwork of an OS, in which you had either an out-dated or obsolete "core" around which was stuck, somewhat unglamorously, lots of crap to allow it to do stuff it wasn't really designed for. Then, you wound up having to write patches for the patches, etc., ad infinitum.
Apple tried to go the internal development route, but that didn't work because their departmental infrastructure was eating them from the inside out at the time and basically poisoned all of their new projects. They considered BeOS because it was an incredibly modern OS at the time that was very capable, unbelievably good at multitasking, memory protection, multimedia tasks, etc. However, that company was so shaky that when Apple decided not to go with them, they collapsed. One of the products which was introduced and sold and almost immediately recalled that used a version of BeOS was Sony's eVilla (you just have to love that name -- try pronouncing it out loud to get the full effect).
Ultimately, they went with NeXT's BSD- and Mach-Kernel-based NeXTStep (which after a bunch of time and effort and -- since lots of it is based on Open Source software, there were a healthy amount of community contributions to) and hence we now have Mac OS X.
I'll leave it to actual developers and/or coders here to better explain and refine (and/or correct) what I've said here, should you wish greater detail beyond what I am able to -- and therefore have -- provided above.
The whole point of going with a modern OS implemented for an imbedded market (i.e. "Mac OS X Mobile") is it gives you much more direct (and probably better implemented and/or better-grounded) access to modern technologies. Everything from basic I/O tasks that reside in the Kernel to audio processing to doing H.264 decoding to having access to IPv4 or IPv6, are all examples of things which a modern OS could do a better job of providing and/or backing.
From what I understand, PalmOS is something that was designed to first and foremost give you basic notepad and daily organizer functionality. When they wrote, as you say, PalmOS 1.0, they happened to implement a way for third parties to write software that could run on it. This has been both a benefit and a bane of PalmOS's existence. First off, they now have the same issues of backwards-compatibility and storage space and memory use/abuse that a regular computer OS has. I said it was both a benefit and a bane; but there's actually two parts to the "bane" side. The first I've already mentioned, but the second is the fact that since apps have been written which can do darn near any conceivable task, people keep wanting more and more and more. And this then goes back to the "patchwork" I described earlier in talking about "older" computer OSs.
Then people want multimedia, and color screens, and apps to take advantage of it, and they want Palm to incorporate DSPs so they can play music, and of course that brings along with it all of the extra patching to then allow for the existence of, and permit the use of, an on-board DSP. And now you want WiFi? Well, shoot, now we gotta have IPv4 as well, and support for TCP/IP, none of which was ever a part of the original concept of PalmOS.
And even if you don't want or need any of those features in your own PDA, I'm sorry but that's really just too bad. Go live in a cave if you like, but if you buy a new PDA, guess what: you're gonna get all that stuff.
And at some point, all of this stretches an "older" OS just a bit too far, or it becomes a bit absurd with all the hoops and turns and wiggling that PalmOne's coders have to go through, so then they say, "Aw **** it, let's just re-write the thing."
Apple comes to this without any of *that* sort of legacy. Doubtless there will be no Newton code on this thing anywhere, but what Apple's got is Mac OS X, which means they also have the power (albeit somewhat indirectly) of an Open Source OS -- Linux. And in case you weren't aware, there are already numerous "imbedded" implementations of Linux -- phones, PDAs, game systems, kiosks, etc. -- all of which are data points and collective experience opportunities which ALREADY EXIST that Apple can exploit.
So no, having a "modern" OS is not a bad thing. It's actually a supremely awesome thing. What you're concerned about is having something that is intuitive AND efficient AND appropriate to the world of telephone interfaces for the user interface on the device you'd go and buy yourself.
All I can say, based on past performance, is give Apple a chance.
Now, here's a larger picture thought to ponder...
If Apple goes to market with the iPhone, then this is going to open up (to some extent) the viability of a F/OSS community cell phone. And this is a really good thing as well because it represents a non-commercial, enthusiast entrance into what up until now has been a totally proprietary, locked-down OS-based product world. It has the potential to do to cell phones what Linux has inspired in Mac OS X.
On a phone, I want to use its features quickly and easily. When I have to schedule an appointment, I want to enter that appointment as easily as possible. When I want to add something to my to-do list, I want to do it easily and quickly. And first and foremost, I want to be able to look up a contact and dial it as quickly as possible.
A phone is not a personal computer. I couldn't care less about multitasking, rewriting, "modern" OSes (whatever "modern" means). "Modern" features and look is just eye candy and/or toys. A mobile phone is a gadget of convenience, and it should be convenient to use. Even PalmOS 1.0 was convenient. It was just as easy to use its contact and calendar features as any so-called "modern" OS is today.
I would really like to know how "modernizing" the OS on my phone would help me look up contacts, dial contacts, enter to-do list entries, and entering calendar entries any better that I could today.
Again, I repeat: a phone is not a personal computer. There's no point in treating it as such.
The same point could largely be made about cars, but I don't think either of us would want to be driving a Model T or Model A Ford these days, would we?
The term "Modern" as applied to operating systems has little to do with the interface per se. It primarily concerns the underpinnings of the OS and how forward-looking and/or open-ended it is. Older operating systems, if you want to look at it in this way, were very geared to the hardware of their times, and every time you added a new hardware feature or some new kind of technology came out, you wound up making this big patchwork of an OS, in which you had either an out-dated or obsolete "core" around which was stuck, somewhat unglamorously, lots of crap to allow it to do stuff it wasn't really designed for. Then, you wound up having to write patches for the patches, etc., ad infinitum.
Apple tried to go the internal development route, but that didn't work because their departmental infrastructure was eating them from the inside out at the time and basically poisoned all of their new projects. They considered BeOS because it was an incredibly modern OS at the time that was very capable, unbelievably good at multitasking, memory protection, multimedia tasks, etc. However, that company was so shaky that when Apple decided not to go with them, they collapsed. One of the products which was introduced and sold and almost immediately recalled that used a version of BeOS was Sony's eVilla (you just have to love that name -- try pronouncing it out loud to get the full effect).
Ultimately, they went with NeXT's BSD- and Mach-Kernel-based NeXTStep (which after a bunch of time and effort and -- since lots of it is based on Open Source software, there were a healthy amount of community contributions to) and hence we now have Mac OS X.
I'll leave it to actual developers and/or coders here to better explain and refine (and/or correct) what I've said here, should you wish greater detail beyond what I am able to -- and therefore have -- provided above.
The whole point of going with a modern OS implemented for an imbedded market (i.e. "Mac OS X Mobile") is it gives you much more direct (and probably better implemented and/or better-grounded) access to modern technologies. Everything from basic I/O tasks that reside in the Kernel to audio processing to doing H.264 decoding to having access to IPv4 or IPv6, are all examples of things which a modern OS could do a better job of providing and/or backing.
From what I understand, PalmOS is something that was designed to first and foremost give you basic notepad and daily organizer functionality. When they wrote, as you say, PalmOS 1.0, they happened to implement a way for third parties to write software that could run on it. This has been both a benefit and a bane of PalmOS's existence. First off, they now have the same issues of backwards-compatibility and storage space and memory use/abuse that a regular computer OS has. I said it was both a benefit and a bane; but there's actually two parts to the "bane" side. The first I've already mentioned, but the second is the fact that since apps have been written which can do darn near any conceivable task, people keep wanting more and more and more. And this then goes back to the "patchwork" I described earlier in talking about "older" computer OSs.
Then people want multimedia, and color screens, and apps to take advantage of it, and they want Palm to incorporate DSPs so they can play music, and of course that brings along with it all of the extra patching to then allow for the existence of, and permit the use of, an on-board DSP. And now you want WiFi? Well, shoot, now we gotta have IPv4 as well, and support for TCP/IP, none of which was ever a part of the original concept of PalmOS.
And even if you don't want or need any of those features in your own PDA, I'm sorry but that's really just too bad. Go live in a cave if you like, but if you buy a new PDA, guess what: you're gonna get all that stuff.
And at some point, all of this stretches an "older" OS just a bit too far, or it becomes a bit absurd with all the hoops and turns and wiggling that PalmOne's coders have to go through, so then they say, "Aw **** it, let's just re-write the thing."
Apple comes to this without any of *that* sort of legacy. Doubtless there will be no Newton code on this thing anywhere, but what Apple's got is Mac OS X, which means they also have the power (albeit somewhat indirectly) of an Open Source OS -- Linux. And in case you weren't aware, there are already numerous "imbedded" implementations of Linux -- phones, PDAs, game systems, kiosks, etc. -- all of which are data points and collective experience opportunities which ALREADY EXIST that Apple can exploit.
So no, having a "modern" OS is not a bad thing. It's actually a supremely awesome thing. What you're concerned about is having something that is intuitive AND efficient AND appropriate to the world of telephone interfaces for the user interface on the device you'd go and buy yourself.
All I can say, based on past performance, is give Apple a chance.
Now, here's a larger picture thought to ponder...
If Apple goes to market with the iPhone, then this is going to open up (to some extent) the viability of a F/OSS community cell phone. And this is a really good thing as well because it represents a non-commercial, enthusiast entrance into what up until now has been a totally proprietary, locked-down OS-based product world. It has the potential to do to cell phones what Linux has inspired in Mac OS X.
easy4lif
May 4, 02:44 PM
i intend to get mine on a disc rather then a download.
ImNoSuperMan
Sep 11, 02:21 PM
What we will get:
Movie service with 320x240 movies, Airport Express AV with compostie and s-video only.
:(
Extremely unlikely. Or i`d say it`s impossible. We`ll definitely get DVD quality(atleast as an option). But my guesses are 720p will also be offered to those with a really really FAT internet pipe. Fat enough to fill a human body I guess:D .
I really think Apple will offer atleast 3 resolutions ie QVGA, DVD and(crossing fingers) HD 720p(may be at an extra cost and limited in number of available titles). Apple needs to do something which will set them apart from Amazon. I`ll be really disappointed if all we get is the same as Amazon.
Movie service with 320x240 movies, Airport Express AV with compostie and s-video only.
:(
Extremely unlikely. Or i`d say it`s impossible. We`ll definitely get DVD quality(atleast as an option). But my guesses are 720p will also be offered to those with a really really FAT internet pipe. Fat enough to fill a human body I guess:D .
I really think Apple will offer atleast 3 resolutions ie QVGA, DVD and(crossing fingers) HD 720p(may be at an extra cost and limited in number of available titles). Apple needs to do something which will set them apart from Amazon. I`ll be really disappointed if all we get is the same as Amazon.
Chundles
Sep 11, 01:00 AM
Common mate, the Gong isn't a city ;)
I get ~8000kbps so Movie downloads works for me - if the price and quality and DRM are right.
I totally agree - the Gong isn't a city, it's just a big ex-steel town with no redeeming features other than some nice beaches. I'm serious.
Trust me, if I could get 24mbps ADSL2+ I'd be screaming from the highest peak in the land (actually, Kosci's not that high, let's go "highest peak in Australian sovereign territory" - leave out Antarctica because not everyone recognises our claims there - and go with Mt. Mawson on Heard Island.) for Apple to bring movies and iPhoto photobooks and TV shows and all the whizz-bang stuff to the wide brown land.
For now however, I'll simply rise and give a "standing meh."
For those of you who don't know what a "standing meh" is, it's like a standing ovation only expressing total disinterest.
EDIT - And don't say "Common" when you mean "Come on."
I get ~8000kbps so Movie downloads works for me - if the price and quality and DRM are right.
I totally agree - the Gong isn't a city, it's just a big ex-steel town with no redeeming features other than some nice beaches. I'm serious.
Trust me, if I could get 24mbps ADSL2+ I'd be screaming from the highest peak in the land (actually, Kosci's not that high, let's go "highest peak in Australian sovereign territory" - leave out Antarctica because not everyone recognises our claims there - and go with Mt. Mawson on Heard Island.) for Apple to bring movies and iPhoto photobooks and TV shows and all the whizz-bang stuff to the wide brown land.
For now however, I'll simply rise and give a "standing meh."
For those of you who don't know what a "standing meh" is, it's like a standing ovation only expressing total disinterest.
EDIT - And don't say "Common" when you mean "Come on."
2IS
Apr 7, 11:39 AM
Ha ha! Way to go Apple!!!! Kill the competition any way you can!!
Apple is doing everyone a favor saving them from the mistake of getting a RIM tablet.
I'm sure Apple appreciates your enthusiasm to kill the competition. I have no doubt they will repay your gratitude by allowing you to pay more for their products.
Apple is doing everyone a favor saving them from the mistake of getting a RIM tablet.
I'm sure Apple appreciates your enthusiasm to kill the competition. I have no doubt they will repay your gratitude by allowing you to pay more for their products.
Don't panic
May 3, 12:09 PM
so, counting plutonius, mscriv and aggie we are 8!
gugy
Jul 30, 01:06 AM
Bring it on Apple!
My Verizon contract expires in February. I'll be glad to dump then in favor to the iphone.
My Verizon contract expires in February. I'll be glad to dump then in favor to the iphone.
nuckinfutz
May 7, 11:44 AM
As amazing as free MobileMe sounds, I find this HIGHLY unlikely.
Why not? The Pros outweigh the cons.
Pros:
Ends developer confusion on the app store about whether to support MobileMe, Wifi or roll their own Cloud sync.
Benefits mainly Mac users (nice iLife tie in) but also benefits those running Windows and Outlook with Windows MobileMe Control Panel
Will clearly sell more iPhone/iPod Touch/iPads because consumers know their data will be in sync across the devices.
Cons:
Cost - free means a LOT more users which means a need to beef up infrastructure. Apple does have a new large data center being built.
Current members - do I get a refund or does Apple announce a free version of MobileMe and boosts the features of the paid account creating a Free/Paid tier?
There are certainly plusses and minuses about the strategy but make not bones about it people want Mobileme they just don't want to pay for it. A free "lite" version satiates those people.
Let's face it the popularity of Google stems from the fact that their tools are free to the end user.
Why not? The Pros outweigh the cons.
Pros:
Ends developer confusion on the app store about whether to support MobileMe, Wifi or roll their own Cloud sync.
Benefits mainly Mac users (nice iLife tie in) but also benefits those running Windows and Outlook with Windows MobileMe Control Panel
Will clearly sell more iPhone/iPod Touch/iPads because consumers know their data will be in sync across the devices.
Cons:
Cost - free means a LOT more users which means a need to beef up infrastructure. Apple does have a new large data center being built.
Current members - do I get a refund or does Apple announce a free version of MobileMe and boosts the features of the paid account creating a Free/Paid tier?
There are certainly plusses and minuses about the strategy but make not bones about it people want Mobileme they just don't want to pay for it. A free "lite" version satiates those people.
Let's face it the popularity of Google stems from the fact that their tools are free to the end user.
Number 41
Mar 28, 12:03 PM
My 3GS is working just fine -- I'm more than content to wait for a real refresh to the iPhone (not some garbage update that keeps the same flawed form factor re: antenna and use of a shattering glass back).
Most people claiming they'll switch won't -- rebuying your Apps for the Android marketplace represents a non-insubstantial hidden cost to switching for many people.
Most people claiming they'll switch won't -- rebuying your Apps for the Android marketplace represents a non-insubstantial hidden cost to switching for many people.
AppleKrate
Sep 16, 01:04 PM
[ Josias] you seem to imply in your previous post that res independence is a feature of Leopard. If so, how do you know this? Link please?
http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/index.cfm?home&NewsID=15531
http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/index.cfm?home&NewsID=15531
ArtOfWarfare
Mar 26, 10:59 PM
You do realize you don't have to renew the contract right? AT&T will be more than happy to keep taking your money until such time as you feel ready to sign a new one.
How about something more along the lines of "New iPhone 5 when it's released if you agree to pay our fees for another two years"?
I guess I'm not exactly in any position to negotiate like that...
So they'll keep charging the same rates after the contract ends? And I can keep my unlimited 3G for $30 a month?
How about something more along the lines of "New iPhone 5 when it's released if you agree to pay our fees for another two years"?
I guess I'm not exactly in any position to negotiate like that...
So they'll keep charging the same rates after the contract ends? And I can keep my unlimited 3G for $30 a month?
miles01110
May 7, 10:06 AM
Mobileme is certainly worth more than free. Apple doesn't scrape your emails and other data to target adds at you a la Google.
It's naive to assume that Apple won't use MobileMe data in the future to serve you ads.
Then roll out Mobileme Pro
Make iDisk more like Drop Box.
Enhance the sync
Online Backup
Cloud Music (Lala style)
iWork.com Pro (adds collaborative editing)
Whatever other cool stuff they can deliver
Given the [lack of acceptable] performance of the current service, all of these things are just going to be painful to use. If they can devote some more bandwidth to them, I could see it being a hit.
It's naive to assume that Apple won't use MobileMe data in the future to serve you ads.
Then roll out Mobileme Pro
Make iDisk more like Drop Box.
Enhance the sync
Online Backup
Cloud Music (Lala style)
iWork.com Pro (adds collaborative editing)
Whatever other cool stuff they can deliver
Given the [lack of acceptable] performance of the current service, all of these things are just going to be painful to use. If they can devote some more bandwidth to them, I could see it being a hit.
snberk103
May 5, 10:34 AM
About as meaningful as the need to figure out one third of 13/16.
How about a quarter of 3" 13/16? Which I regularly need to do when cutting photo matts? Yes - I would round the 13/16 down to 12/16, no wait that's really 3/4. Except that for my equipment it's better to round up. And rounding it to 14/16 is not really better. And 16/16 introduces too big an error. Now I suggest to photographers they buy European made matt cutters - for the measurement scale.
Keystroke for keystroke, just the way you did it, except substitute the fraction symbol for the apostrophe and quote symbols you used for feet and inches. I own several calculators, and they'll all do this.
So you'd enter " 3/ 7 13/16// " Seriously, I'm not trying to be funny here.
We own a couple of basic calculators, and of course there's Google's search bar calculator. Google is actually pretty good, but I think I would need to decimalize the fraction first....
Now I am trying to be funny. When I typed "(3ft 7in)/3" into Google to see what happens, I got "(3 ft 7 in) / 3 = 36.4066667 centimeters". Even Google is metric! I tried it with the fractional inch too, but Google wouldn't calculate that. Apparently Google also doesn't like fractions of an inch.
How about a quarter of 3" 13/16? Which I regularly need to do when cutting photo matts? Yes - I would round the 13/16 down to 12/16, no wait that's really 3/4. Except that for my equipment it's better to round up. And rounding it to 14/16 is not really better. And 16/16 introduces too big an error. Now I suggest to photographers they buy European made matt cutters - for the measurement scale.
Keystroke for keystroke, just the way you did it, except substitute the fraction symbol for the apostrophe and quote symbols you used for feet and inches. I own several calculators, and they'll all do this.
So you'd enter " 3/ 7 13/16// " Seriously, I'm not trying to be funny here.
We own a couple of basic calculators, and of course there's Google's search bar calculator. Google is actually pretty good, but I think I would need to decimalize the fraction first....
Now I am trying to be funny. When I typed "(3ft 7in)/3" into Google to see what happens, I got "(3 ft 7 in) / 3 = 36.4066667 centimeters". Even Google is metric! I tried it with the fractional inch too, but Google wouldn't calculate that. Apparently Google also doesn't like fractions of an inch.
Piggie
Apr 23, 06:29 PM
What was the point in bringing retina display to the iPhone? :)
Same thing I guess...
For one I want it, it is very kind on the eyes...
Yes, because the iPhone was low res for a device you hold up to your nose and a typical consumer, which is what Apple design for, could easily see the pixels.
I am wondering how many typical consumers, when viewing at the distance you would view, say a 24" monitor, can make out individual pixels.
I do know Apple's font smoothing is a little, ummmm, shall we say, different to what Microsoft do, so perhaps typefaces do look more jaggy on a Mac than they do on a PC ?
Same thing I guess...
For one I want it, it is very kind on the eyes...
Yes, because the iPhone was low res for a device you hold up to your nose and a typical consumer, which is what Apple design for, could easily see the pixels.
I am wondering how many typical consumers, when viewing at the distance you would view, say a 24" monitor, can make out individual pixels.
I do know Apple's font smoothing is a little, ummmm, shall we say, different to what Microsoft do, so perhaps typefaces do look more jaggy on a Mac than they do on a PC ?
Chip NoVaMac
Nov 27, 12:57 AM
There will NOT be a tablet - there is ZERO market for it.
A device already exists that does the work of a tablet PC - its called an iBook.
IF you want a really cheap tablet - try pen and paper.
There maybe "ZERO" interest in a Tablet PC for the M$ implementation of it.
There were MP3 players before the iPod, but Apple made it easy and cool to have one.
The original Toshiba Libretto had a decent following in its day.
The iBook is a close also ran IMHO. Given the comments here there is a desire for something the size of the 10" Sony sub-notebook that would give users the option of a touch screen and keyboard. In particular, if it were very near or under the $1000 price point.
A device already exists that does the work of a tablet PC - its called an iBook.
IF you want a really cheap tablet - try pen and paper.
There maybe "ZERO" interest in a Tablet PC for the M$ implementation of it.
There were MP3 players before the iPod, but Apple made it easy and cool to have one.
The original Toshiba Libretto had a decent following in its day.
The iBook is a close also ran IMHO. Given the comments here there is a desire for something the size of the 10" Sony sub-notebook that would give users the option of a touch screen and keyboard. In particular, if it were very near or under the $1000 price point.
![new york yankees logo 2011. [Read more] middot; Derek Jeter](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_slVpqHfnlWX69lBe1tTAvTZRY10fwT0527GXHcbxkMqoHNmUCs3xEI7OYBPjwVABQ13DE3CydMUEuz3Fz0tteTavITkOefyDIB-WEdBx5a8WW_X46NXkE4O_k=s0-d "[Read more] middot; Derek Jeter")
jhall527
Mar 29, 09:58 AM
Okay, nice, guys. This is MacRumors, not AmazonRumors. Who gives a crap about Amazon? Move along now.
Of course it's not AmazonRumors.com but just because this article isn't specifically related to Apple does not mean it has no place on an Apple rumor site. There is a lot you can take away from this article in regard to what Apple has in store for the future based on their competition.
It drives me crazy when people dimiss articles on here just because they don't have Apple written all over them. That doesn't mean they are irrelevant in regard to apple rumors.
Of course it's not AmazonRumors.com but just because this article isn't specifically related to Apple does not mean it has no place on an Apple rumor site. There is a lot you can take away from this article in regard to what Apple has in store for the future based on their competition.
It drives me crazy when people dimiss articles on here just because they don't have Apple written all over them. That doesn't mean they are irrelevant in regard to apple rumors.
fxtech
Mar 29, 05:28 PM
Why couldn�t you let it slide? Assuming you don�t like people �imposing� their beliefs on you, why would you impose yours on others? I think there�s a word for that.
Well considering less than 15% of Japanese are religious at all, you have to wonder who benefits from the prayers. Just the 15% who believe in that stuff? All of them? The person doing the praying? Things that make you go "hmmmm".
Well considering less than 15% of Japanese are religious at all, you have to wonder who benefits from the prayers. Just the 15% who believe in that stuff? All of them? The person doing the praying? Things that make you go "hmmmm".
ElGringo
Aug 7, 04:01 PM
You know, I bought a dual core 2.0 G5 PowerMac a bit back for the ability to expand as needed. Since then I have added a second hard drive and NOT ONE PCIe card. Why? Because NO ONE out there makes a PCIe USB expansion card that is compatible with Deep Sleep Mode.
Maybe the new Mac Pro's will usher in some better options in this area. I don't want hubs and the subsequent extra wall warts that go with it. I want more USB prots, not more wall warts.
How long has PCIe been around in the PowerMac's and now Mac Pro's and there still isn't a solution for this????
Anyway, a bit of a sidetrack, but the new Mac Pro's do look sweet!!
Maybe the new Mac Pro's will usher in some better options in this area. I don't want hubs and the subsequent extra wall warts that go with it. I want more USB prots, not more wall warts.
How long has PCIe been around in the PowerMac's and now Mac Pro's and there still isn't a solution for this????
Anyway, a bit of a sidetrack, but the new Mac Pro's do look sweet!!
citizenzen
Apr 18, 07:52 PM
I'm not against tax increases as long as the country is using it as a last resort.
What constitutes being a "last resort"?
It makes more sense to me to put in clauses that reverse tax increases once a goal has been reached.
Use all the tools in the tool chest to solve the problem.
What constitutes being a "last resort"?
It makes more sense to me to put in clauses that reverse tax increases once a goal has been reached.
Use all the tools in the tool chest to solve the problem.
Porscheboy16
Aug 3, 11:09 PM
Hopefully prior to Sept 16th so I can get the IPOD deal too.
BRLawyer
Nov 27, 12:10 PM
ps. No point abusing others' ideas.
No point in what? I am stating my OWN ideas.
No point in what? I am stating my OWN ideas.
islanders
Jul 23, 02:50 PM
I lost my post up above. So, I�ll try and rephrase.
I don�t think we will see any portables with Merom for MWDC.
Don�t expect Apple to announce early then be up to 6 weeks behind demand on delivery. This could attract negative publicity, negative image.
Historically, Apple has been reluctant to upgrade portable lines, especially ibook, that had strong sales.
Anyone waiting for MBP Merom should be prepared to wait until November/December.
Apple is advertising stability, user friendly, integration with digital cameras�
As far as the transition into Intel, it must be going as well as could be expected. Apple may want to keep their powder dry and update when there is a falter in sales, or just before.
They may wait to update everything at once, November/December, which will give smooth sailing into next year when 3rd party apps will be fully developed.
I also don�t think we will see another 12� MBP.
I don�t think we will see any portables with Merom for MWDC.
Don�t expect Apple to announce early then be up to 6 weeks behind demand on delivery. This could attract negative publicity, negative image.
Historically, Apple has been reluctant to upgrade portable lines, especially ibook, that had strong sales.
Anyone waiting for MBP Merom should be prepared to wait until November/December.
Apple is advertising stability, user friendly, integration with digital cameras�
As far as the transition into Intel, it must be going as well as could be expected. Apple may want to keep their powder dry and update when there is a falter in sales, or just before.
They may wait to update everything at once, November/December, which will give smooth sailing into next year when 3rd party apps will be fully developed.
I also don�t think we will see another 12� MBP.
lilo777
Apr 18, 03:41 PM
That's because Microsoft copied Apple (or NeXT really.) The NeXT dock predates the taskbar in Windows, and at the time a lot of people felt that's where Microsoft got the taskbar from.
If you go back to Windows 3.1, no taskbar. And then suddenly Windows 95 which shipped after NeXTStep, there is a taskbar.
Yes, and Apple tried to sue Microsoft for this and failed. Now they want to fail again. Sore losers.
If you go back to Windows 3.1, no taskbar. And then suddenly Windows 95 which shipped after NeXTStep, there is a taskbar.
Yes, and Apple tried to sue Microsoft for this and failed. Now they want to fail again. Sore losers.
mulze22
Jul 30, 12:55 PM
Great. Now I have to wait and see if that phone comes out or get a Nokia 6682. We'll see I guess.
No comments:
Post a Comment