kalsta
May 6, 11:54 AM
The only preference I still have for imperial is food based. Can i have 500 grams of sliced ham? It just sounds wrong.
So, ask for 'half a kilo'. Problem solved. :)
So, ask for 'half a kilo'. Problem solved. :)
gnasher729
Aug 7, 02:01 PM
Suppose it'd be a bit heretic to buy one of these solely for Windows, right?
I'd not get a quad Xeon Woodcrest anywhere else for less, and my Athlon 64 just doesn't cut it...
If that is what you want, Apple won't mind at all if you buy a Macintosh to run Windows.
I'd not get a quad Xeon Woodcrest anywhere else for less, and my Athlon 64 just doesn't cut it...
If that is what you want, Apple won't mind at all if you buy a Macintosh to run Windows.
jericho878
Sep 11, 06:22 AM
Probably nothing significant but I noticed that all but the standard configuration of the MacBook Pro now ships within 5-7 business days. Last night (Sunday), the same configuration shipped within 3-5 business days.
MacFly123
May 7, 07:15 PM
Mobileme is certainly worth more than free. Apple doesn't scrape your emails and other data to target adds at you a la Google.
I could see Apple making some features of Mobileme free. I don't think they're just going kill a revenue stream but they could offer a basic free Mobileme account which gives you.
A me.com email address with 5 aliases.
Sync features
"Find my damn iDevice"
Calendar, Contacts, Bookmark sync
Web page
Gallery
iWork.com
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
Good thinking! I think that is very possible. Imagine though if MobileMe & iWork.com were free with non-intrusive iAds built in and cool new functionality with HTML5 and Gianduia (Apple's Flash killer). Throw into that the Lala iTunes cloud features and WOW we are talking lots of value here!
It may sound a little crazy, but if you think of the competition (Google & Microsoft) and what they are up to, it really starts to make sense moving these things to the cloud and getting iAd in there!
Interesting.........VERY INTERESTING! :eek::D
I could see Apple making some features of Mobileme free. I don't think they're just going kill a revenue stream but they could offer a basic free Mobileme account which gives you.
A me.com email address with 5 aliases.
Sync features
"Find my damn iDevice"
Calendar, Contacts, Bookmark sync
Web page
Gallery
iWork.com
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
Good thinking! I think that is very possible. Imagine though if MobileMe & iWork.com were free with non-intrusive iAds built in and cool new functionality with HTML5 and Gianduia (Apple's Flash killer). Throw into that the Lala iTunes cloud features and WOW we are talking lots of value here!
It may sound a little crazy, but if you think of the competition (Google & Microsoft) and what they are up to, it really starts to make sense moving these things to the cloud and getting iAd in there!
Interesting.........VERY INTERESTING! :eek::D
silentnite
Apr 25, 11:44 AM
Good answer, that's the same thing my attorney said to do. Deny everything.:D
sonictonic
Aug 11, 02:47 PM
Everyone waiting on the Core 2 Duo MacBook needs to get a clue.
It's the same folks who were falling over waiting to WWDC to come so they could order their Core 2 Duo MacBooks after the keynote!
Apple IS NOT going to move the MacBook to a Core 2 Duo until they've updated:
1) MacBook Pro
2) iMac
3) Maybe even Mac Mini, since it's been out forever!
The MacBook is barely three months old. It may get a speed bump and/or price cut soon, but won't get a new chip.
All of you saying Apple has to upgrade it to a Core 2 Duo to complete with Dell, HP, etc - why? Why do they HAVE to? Will they explode if they don't? Will the sun stop shining? Will all the world's puppies die?
Of course they'll upgrade it eventually. That doesn't mean it needs to be upgraded as soon as the chips are available. If you look at other PC maker's sites, most of their machines don't even have the Core Duo chips yet; there's no rush.
You can't claim Apple will inevitable act a certain way now that they're on Intel chips; you don't know that. They have no history of using Intel chips. Just because your bright minds think it would be a good idea to move the MB line to the latest and greatest chip whenever a new one is released by Intel because "that's what the other guys are doing," it doesn't mean Apple agrees with you.
What we DO know for a fact is Apple like to differentiate between consumer and pro lines, and Apple has never been one to put the latest chips into the iMac or Mac Mini level machines - and I don't see either of that changing.
Well said! :)
It's the same folks who were falling over waiting to WWDC to come so they could order their Core 2 Duo MacBooks after the keynote!
Apple IS NOT going to move the MacBook to a Core 2 Duo until they've updated:
1) MacBook Pro
2) iMac
3) Maybe even Mac Mini, since it's been out forever!
The MacBook is barely three months old. It may get a speed bump and/or price cut soon, but won't get a new chip.
All of you saying Apple has to upgrade it to a Core 2 Duo to complete with Dell, HP, etc - why? Why do they HAVE to? Will they explode if they don't? Will the sun stop shining? Will all the world's puppies die?
Of course they'll upgrade it eventually. That doesn't mean it needs to be upgraded as soon as the chips are available. If you look at other PC maker's sites, most of their machines don't even have the Core Duo chips yet; there's no rush.
You can't claim Apple will inevitable act a certain way now that they're on Intel chips; you don't know that. They have no history of using Intel chips. Just because your bright minds think it would be a good idea to move the MB line to the latest and greatest chip whenever a new one is released by Intel because "that's what the other guys are doing," it doesn't mean Apple agrees with you.
What we DO know for a fact is Apple like to differentiate between consumer and pro lines, and Apple has never been one to put the latest chips into the iMac or Mac Mini level machines - and I don't see either of that changing.
Well said! :)
notjustjay
Apr 18, 02:56 PM
Have you looked at the TouchWiz UI? It's almost identical to iOS - dock at the bottom, pages of icons in a grid and you even remove applications in the same way as you do on the iPhone. I've nothing at all against competition for iOS, but they shouldn't just rip the design off
Looking at the TouchWiz UI, I see your point.
But, at what point does an interface become too generic? For example, the concept of pages of icons in a grid isn't really new or innovative. The concept of swiping across screens is simple and intuitive and should be standardized
(e.g. copied) for that exact reason. Should other phone makers put the icons in a circle, "just because" they need to be different? Should they force you to do something differently just because the best and most intuitive way was "already taken"?
Everyone loves car analogies, so: what if Ford decided to sue other carmakers because they copied their steering wheel design? Would other companies have been forced to adopt other types of controls -- joysticks or dials or foot pedals, perhaps -- "just because"? And would that have been good for the auto industry?
Looking at the TouchWiz UI, I see your point.
But, at what point does an interface become too generic? For example, the concept of pages of icons in a grid isn't really new or innovative. The concept of swiping across screens is simple and intuitive and should be standardized
(e.g. copied) for that exact reason. Should other phone makers put the icons in a circle, "just because" they need to be different? Should they force you to do something differently just because the best and most intuitive way was "already taken"?
Everyone loves car analogies, so: what if Ford decided to sue other carmakers because they copied their steering wheel design? Would other companies have been forced to adopt other types of controls -- joysticks or dials or foot pedals, perhaps -- "just because"? And would that have been good for the auto industry?
lilo777
Apr 26, 04:32 PM
This is obvious because iOS is from one company...selling iOS devices. Android is o. Every other device that really isn't any competition if u ask me...every HTC, motorola , are now stocking android that they just got lazy. "oh we just made a quad core with 7 cameras...let's add android...perfect..exactly like an evo"....boring...some say "oh iOS isn't exciting" in earlier posts are wrong...not that I'm a fanboy to iOS..I'm a fanboy to the best I see..and android for a fact isn't...every damn android device has nothing different then just cameras...evo..shift..thunderbolt...droid...it's just stupid...what happened to when cell phones competed for hardware and software?
You are mocking the wrong companies. Quad Core Android phones? Tell us more about it. There are dual core phones and guess what - Apple will follow suit (with usual delay). Same goes with the cameras. Apple is lagging there too. Android phones and tablets get good stuff first (including cameras, and no, there are no Android phones with 7 cameras).
While Android phones may not be that different from each other (although physical keyboard, screen size, LTE etc. are not so small differentiators) it's still much better than iPhone situation: one model (and then a white one a year later).
You are mocking the wrong companies. Quad Core Android phones? Tell us more about it. There are dual core phones and guess what - Apple will follow suit (with usual delay). Same goes with the cameras. Apple is lagging there too. Android phones and tablets get good stuff first (including cameras, and no, there are no Android phones with 7 cameras).
While Android phones may not be that different from each other (although physical keyboard, screen size, LTE etc. are not so small differentiators) it's still much better than iPhone situation: one model (and then a white one a year later).
rhsgolfer33
Apr 14, 04:12 PM
I'll bet he moved on to forums where his ideas were more warmly accepted.
On the issues of taxes ... tax me more!
Sure, tax the rich more too.
But every American should be chipping in to solve the issues that we're facing.
We're in the lifeboat, and the water's rising. Everybody pick up a pail and start bailing.
I never thought I'd see the day, but I agree with you. Everyone has to see a tax increase in order to solve the budget problems.
The non-tax accountant part of me (the tax accountant part of me wants the tax code as complicated as humanly possible) would love it if the corporate tax code was simplified and the tax rates reduced so that corporations actually paid taxes in line with other nations - we'd still probably see more revenue even with the decreased rates because the base would be broadened and corporations would actually pay. We should probably broaden the tax base for individuals by eliminating deductions and then eliminate the Bush tax cuts for everyone (which will increase tax rates across the board, more so at the upper two brackets). I'm not opposed to adding a VAT with a low rate either.
I'd like to see plenty of spending cuts too - stop the three wasteful and pointless wars we are fighting would be a great start, then cut defense spending. Like it or not, I think we need to acknowledge that social security needs changes - a decrease in benefits and removing the limit on payroll taxes for social security would be a good start.
But then again, I'm a moderate (though I am generally fiscally libertarian) and I understand the urgency with which we need to eliminate our deficit and decrease our national debt. I don't have much hope for any of this happening, since neither side can seem to acknowledge that we need a combo of what they both propose.
One thing I don't hear in the raising taxes discussion is what we should do with capital gains. That's the reason billionaires pay a paltry 15%. Almost all of their income comes from the selling of assets rather than a salary. Their money works for them, rather than the rest of us who have to work for our money. And for that, we reward them with a super low tax rate. :rolleyes:
It's time to raise the capital gains rate and make it progressively tied to income taxes.
I tend to agree - I have no problem giving someone who actually makes their money via salary or wages a capital gains break (it encourages investing and most of the time those gains will be from investments for retirement), but it is kind of silly that someone who derives most of their income from capital gains gets to pay at the same low rate. Possibly it could be linked to amount of income and percentage of gross income that comes from capital gains - for instance, if you are in the top income bracket and more than 50% of your gross income is from capital gains, you must include all income at the standard ordinary income rates. Of course it would have to be refined (too easy to get around right now), but it would insure that higher income individuals that make most of their money via capital gains pay appropriate taxes, while keeping most retirees and lower/middle/upper middle income people from being hit with ordinary income rates on capital gains when the a lower rate is more appropriate.
Natural Plant Fibre Wallpaper
Wallpaper,Natural Wallpaper
NATURAL WALLPAPER
desktop-wallpaper-calendar-
Wallpaper
Free Natural Greens Wallpapers
Wallpaper Natural
Natural wallpaper
Wallpaper,Natural Wallpaper
Desktop Wallpaper
On the issues of taxes ... tax me more!
Sure, tax the rich more too.
But every American should be chipping in to solve the issues that we're facing.
We're in the lifeboat, and the water's rising. Everybody pick up a pail and start bailing.
I never thought I'd see the day, but I agree with you. Everyone has to see a tax increase in order to solve the budget problems.
The non-tax accountant part of me (the tax accountant part of me wants the tax code as complicated as humanly possible) would love it if the corporate tax code was simplified and the tax rates reduced so that corporations actually paid taxes in line with other nations - we'd still probably see more revenue even with the decreased rates because the base would be broadened and corporations would actually pay. We should probably broaden the tax base for individuals by eliminating deductions and then eliminate the Bush tax cuts for everyone (which will increase tax rates across the board, more so at the upper two brackets). I'm not opposed to adding a VAT with a low rate either.
I'd like to see plenty of spending cuts too - stop the three wasteful and pointless wars we are fighting would be a great start, then cut defense spending. Like it or not, I think we need to acknowledge that social security needs changes - a decrease in benefits and removing the limit on payroll taxes for social security would be a good start.
But then again, I'm a moderate (though I am generally fiscally libertarian) and I understand the urgency with which we need to eliminate our deficit and decrease our national debt. I don't have much hope for any of this happening, since neither side can seem to acknowledge that we need a combo of what they both propose.
One thing I don't hear in the raising taxes discussion is what we should do with capital gains. That's the reason billionaires pay a paltry 15%. Almost all of their income comes from the selling of assets rather than a salary. Their money works for them, rather than the rest of us who have to work for our money. And for that, we reward them with a super low tax rate. :rolleyes:
It's time to raise the capital gains rate and make it progressively tied to income taxes.
I tend to agree - I have no problem giving someone who actually makes their money via salary or wages a capital gains break (it encourages investing and most of the time those gains will be from investments for retirement), but it is kind of silly that someone who derives most of their income from capital gains gets to pay at the same low rate. Possibly it could be linked to amount of income and percentage of gross income that comes from capital gains - for instance, if you are in the top income bracket and more than 50% of your gross income is from capital gains, you must include all income at the standard ordinary income rates. Of course it would have to be refined (too easy to get around right now), but it would insure that higher income individuals that make most of their money via capital gains pay appropriate taxes, while keeping most retirees and lower/middle/upper middle income people from being hit with ordinary income rates on capital gains when the a lower rate is more appropriate.
Adidas Addict
Apr 20, 04:42 AM
�499 for a white iPhone 5 and you can count me in, again. I've just sold my iPhone 4.
Now to carry on avoiding all the Verizon/AT&T nonsense on here. :rolleyes:
Word
Now to carry on avoiding all the Verizon/AT&T nonsense on here. :rolleyes:
Word
mackiwi
Jul 31, 06:36 AM
true. the photographer thing is a bit whiffy.
I think its basically going to be similar to a nano, with a unique original keypad design and larger screen. maybe throw in an isight or 2 for good measure.
I think its basically going to be similar to a nano, with a unique original keypad design and larger screen. maybe throw in an isight or 2 for good measure.
marksman
Mar 29, 05:43 PM
God hates us listening to music.
appleguy123
May 3, 05:53 PM
I second exploring, because I'm too confused to have any alternate ideas. I'm sure it'll get better as time goes on.
Truffy
Jan 12, 09:45 AM
There is no reason to put anti-virus software on your Mac!
It will not protect you from anything that is out there.
Sophos may be a reputable company or it may not be but you do not need this and it can only harm your system and promote a business that feeds on fear.
We (the Mac community) should not let the security industry get a toe hold in OSX.
This is quite ignorant on a number of levels:
1. Trojans do exist for OSX, although unless you're logged in as admin (and who routinely operates their Mac like that? :rolleyes:) the request to install should alert you to something wrong.
2. Security through obscurity is no security at all, especially as OSX and iOS become more mainstream.
3. If you send files to friends, relations, or business colleagues with a less fortunate computing experience it would be playing nice not to pass on nasties to them.
Even Apple seems to think so, or is ClamXav no longer installed by default on OSX (server)?
It will not protect you from anything that is out there.
Sophos may be a reputable company or it may not be but you do not need this and it can only harm your system and promote a business that feeds on fear.
We (the Mac community) should not let the security industry get a toe hold in OSX.
This is quite ignorant on a number of levels:
1. Trojans do exist for OSX, although unless you're logged in as admin (and who routinely operates their Mac like that? :rolleyes:) the request to install should alert you to something wrong.
2. Security through obscurity is no security at all, especially as OSX and iOS become more mainstream.
3. If you send files to friends, relations, or business colleagues with a less fortunate computing experience it would be playing nice not to pass on nasties to them.
Even Apple seems to think so, or is ClamXav no longer installed by default on OSX (server)?
Dagless
Apr 10, 11:19 AM
Brackets; 12.
48/2; 24.
*12.
=288.
Lots of votes for 2! Am I wrong?
48/2; 24.
*12.
=288.
Lots of votes for 2! Am I wrong?
ten-oak-druid
Apr 6, 07:14 AM
Just because you know how to design a computer user interface doesn't mean that you also know how to design a car. Cars are much more complex than computers -- all cars have computers built in, but no computer has a car built in.
Also, most of Apple's products look better than they are user friendly or work well. Their keyboards and mice are horrible, for example - every Microsoft or Logitech keyboard or mice blows the Apple competition out of the water when it comes to ergonomics. And ergonomics is something that's VERY important in a car. Apple very obviously sucks at that.
If you want a car that looks and feels like something that could have been designed by Apple, buy a Smart (Diesel). They're great and affordable city and short distance cars, I love them. The only difference is that if Apple would have designed the Smart, it would cost as much as BMW.
Well I don't quite agree that Apple, if tasked with designing a car, couldn't add to the industry. You say a car has a computer in it but that does not mean Toyota knows how to make a good looking GUI for an OS. They tried and it looks horrible. But they didn't have to create the OS to try. Same thing for Apple in this hypothetical. I'm not talking about Apple designing brake systems etc. I'm talking about what it would be like if Apple had the chance to take control of the design elements with feedback from engineers in the field of course.
Apple brought design elements to desktops and delivered us from the tan box tower. That has been the appeal of Apple for a while now. So what would the people at Apple do if tasked with modifying car design? A better job that toyota did with iOS I''m sure.
Also, most of Apple's products look better than they are user friendly or work well. Their keyboards and mice are horrible, for example - every Microsoft or Logitech keyboard or mice blows the Apple competition out of the water when it comes to ergonomics. And ergonomics is something that's VERY important in a car. Apple very obviously sucks at that.
If you want a car that looks and feels like something that could have been designed by Apple, buy a Smart (Diesel). They're great and affordable city and short distance cars, I love them. The only difference is that if Apple would have designed the Smart, it would cost as much as BMW.
Well I don't quite agree that Apple, if tasked with designing a car, couldn't add to the industry. You say a car has a computer in it but that does not mean Toyota knows how to make a good looking GUI for an OS. They tried and it looks horrible. But they didn't have to create the OS to try. Same thing for Apple in this hypothetical. I'm not talking about Apple designing brake systems etc. I'm talking about what it would be like if Apple had the chance to take control of the design elements with feedback from engineers in the field of course.
Apple brought design elements to desktops and delivered us from the tan box tower. That has been the appeal of Apple for a while now. So what would the people at Apple do if tasked with modifying car design? A better job that toyota did with iOS I''m sure.
kainjow
Nov 2, 12:27 PM
It will be interesting to see if this makes it to the OS X App Store.
It installs various components into your system, so no, not until Apple modifies their guidelines.
Seeing how many things it does install and the size of the download, I wouldn't install this on any computer. Looks like FUDware to me.
It installs various components into your system, so no, not until Apple modifies their guidelines.
Seeing how many things it does install and the size of the download, I wouldn't install this on any computer. Looks like FUDware to me.
roland.g
Aug 11, 02:16 PM
True, but 64-bit in a 32-bit envrionment is still going to run only at 32-bit or not at all. But mlrproducts is right, they do have a while.
it doesn't matter if you have a 64-bit processor and OS, you have to have 4Gb of RAM to run in 64-bit.
it doesn't matter if you have a 64-bit processor and OS, you have to have 4Gb of RAM to run in 64-bit.
H&Kie
Nov 2, 02:46 PM
As I said in other email, I stopped using it only because I lost my free "employees" license when I left the company that I had bought it for and couldn't justify the �100 + to buy a home license. I'm afraid I found everything else I tried (Norton, McAfee etc) to be very poor alternatives. Eventually settling on ESET NOD32, which while still taking more resources than Sophos, and only having daily updates rather than the minute by minute updates from Sophos, it was still the best of the ones I tried.
I'm still running Sophos AV using an employees license at this moment. Although it never detected any Mac malware, it does find Windows malware from time to time. And it's nice to have this malware removed before I send files to friends, collegues or customers.
It runs smooth on the background and does a decent job. It might not be to crucial on a Mac, but still it's a nice idea my files are protected.
I'm still running Sophos AV using an employees license at this moment. Although it never detected any Mac malware, it does find Windows malware from time to time. And it's nice to have this malware removed before I send files to friends, collegues or customers.
It runs smooth on the background and does a decent job. It might not be to crucial on a Mac, but still it's a nice idea my files are protected.
bboucher790
Apr 26, 03:22 PM
Android phones don't blend.
!� V �!
Apr 23, 09:29 PM
Doesn't OS X already support displays up to 2560x1600? Afaik that was the resolution of Apple's own (now discontinued) 30" display and the resolution of most, if not all, 30" displays available at the moment. 3200x2000 is nothing but the next rung on the ladder. This is just Apple future-proofing their OS a bit. If they release anything in the short term it will most likely be a big-ass iMac or a bigger Apple Display, NOT a laptop running that resolution. Just saying...
I believe your comment is on the money. Considering they have discontinued the 30" ACD for the 27" model.
Hopefully this brings in 32.5" ACD, and DisplayPort can handle the increase in resolution.
I believe your comment is on the money. Considering they have discontinued the 30" ACD for the 27" model.
Hopefully this brings in 32.5" ACD, and DisplayPort can handle the increase in resolution.
greenstork
Aug 4, 01:02 AM
Never buy an apple product!!!
As soon as you do something new and better comes out!!!
AAAHHHHHH
I am typing this away on my new Macbook, Core 1 Duo; which i bought under the self-brainwashed reasoning that the MBP alone would see 2x2. Why you ask? Cuz I figured hey, the MB JUST came out, why refresh it every 2 months! The MBP has been out like 8 months, that makes sense.
I can only PRAY I am right.
No that my Macbook will be instant crap... I just COULD have waited until september.
Damn you apple...
What doesn't your Macbook do fast enough?
As soon as you do something new and better comes out!!!
AAAHHHHHH
I am typing this away on my new Macbook, Core 1 Duo; which i bought under the self-brainwashed reasoning that the MBP alone would see 2x2. Why you ask? Cuz I figured hey, the MB JUST came out, why refresh it every 2 months! The MBP has been out like 8 months, that makes sense.
I can only PRAY I am right.
No that my Macbook will be instant crap... I just COULD have waited until september.
Damn you apple...
What doesn't your Macbook do fast enough?
thisisahughes
Apr 25, 11:27 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
�If you have something that you don�t want anyone to know maybe you shouldn�t be doing it in the first place.� - Eric Schmidt
�If you have something that you don�t want anyone to know maybe you shouldn�t be doing it in the first place.� - Eric Schmidt
rubberduck007
Nov 23, 08:56 AM
The industry will change. MS will release the "Pune" in 3 years to kill iPhone. In brown.
Should that not be PRUNE?
:p
Should that not be PRUNE?
:p