Chris.L
Nov 6, 12:01 PM
Blah blah blah. Lack of AV software makes Macs very unattractive to business settings.
One of the barriers to integrating Macs into corporate and business environments is the lack of anti-virus tools. Yeah, you can dismiss this as FUD (and maybe there's some truth to that) but the fact remains--someday, one way or another, there will be a Mac OS X virus. I defy you to find one IT dept. in the country that wants to be caught off-guard by that. If you're going to have Macs in a business environment, the IT staff needs to know that they're protected in the event of an OS X virus outbreak. Whether any OS X viruses exist now or not and whether AV companies are trying to sell products with FUD is irrelevant in that context.
Those of you who want to see wider adoption of Macs in business environments ought to be happy to see this kind of thing showing up, regardless of whether you personally need it or not.
Agree completely.
And not just any old AV solution either something with a respected name and centrally managed. Something that will be a requirement for any half decent IT Dept/Corporate. How if I could just get a VMware client for OS X I could ditch my work HP. Oh, and a docking station...
I have had this installed since release day, and I can honestly say it hasn't slowed my MBP at all. I would actually forget it was there at all except for the little icon at the top.
One of the barriers to integrating Macs into corporate and business environments is the lack of anti-virus tools. Yeah, you can dismiss this as FUD (and maybe there's some truth to that) but the fact remains--someday, one way or another, there will be a Mac OS X virus. I defy you to find one IT dept. in the country that wants to be caught off-guard by that. If you're going to have Macs in a business environment, the IT staff needs to know that they're protected in the event of an OS X virus outbreak. Whether any OS X viruses exist now or not and whether AV companies are trying to sell products with FUD is irrelevant in that context.
Those of you who want to see wider adoption of Macs in business environments ought to be happy to see this kind of thing showing up, regardless of whether you personally need it or not.
Agree completely.
And not just any old AV solution either something with a respected name and centrally managed. Something that will be a requirement for any half decent IT Dept/Corporate. How if I could just get a VMware client for OS X I could ditch my work HP. Oh, and a docking station...
I have had this installed since release day, and I can honestly say it hasn't slowed my MBP at all. I would actually forget it was there at all except for the little icon at the top.
fastlane1588
Jul 21, 11:04 PM
so what exactly is rumored to be changed on the mbp, the new chip, a new case and a new graphics card? if so im really glad i decided to wait it out, i was getting kind of worried bout college coming up!
chugg
Apr 18, 03:23 PM
Yay go Apple. From the little guy everyone cheered for to the ... big guy that sues everyone and still has everyone cheering for.
Porco
Apr 23, 06:53 PM
All very nice and I'm fully supportive of more high resolution graphics as soon as possible. It's a shame they don't believe in supporting the millions of Blu-ray discs being sold though, and trying to convince people that 720p iTunes content is good enough for TVs that are bigger than any of the displays they've ever sold, whilst planning for smaller but higher resolution screens that they must apparently believe makes a difference.
Bonte
Jul 30, 12:23 PM
But then the acronym would iPP :D
Or iPod iPhone - iPiP :)
www.iphone.org (http://www.iphone.org)
Or iPod iPhone - iPiP :)
www.iphone.org (http://www.iphone.org)
bushido
Mar 29, 01:47 PM
Highly debatable. More than likely working conditions would be far superior to what they are in China or Japan, and everyone knows happy employees are good employees.
and with our working hours and attitude we'll have 5 finished iPods by the end of the day instead of 493840384038403840 :P
and with our working hours and attitude we'll have 5 finished iPods by the end of the day instead of 493840384038403840 :P
whooleytoo
Aug 3, 11:01 AM
Other than Boot Camp, the only other 'pseudo-guaranteed' Leopard feature is garbage collection in Cocoa. That won't mean much to the average user, but should be huge news for developers, assuming it's true.
osxtasy
Apr 5, 01:38 PM
"Toyota had agreed to do so to "maintain their good relationship with Apple," "
Toyota has a relationship with Apple, good or bad? Why? I don't see the connection.
Well, to be honest, BOTH of there "Quality Assurance" (or rather lack thereof) has gone severly downhill in the last couple years. Oh yea, I say this as an owner of BOTH companies products....sadly:(:(
Now "HOW YA LIKE THEM APPLES STEVE JOBS??"
Toyota has a relationship with Apple, good or bad? Why? I don't see the connection.
Well, to be honest, BOTH of there "Quality Assurance" (or rather lack thereof) has gone severly downhill in the last couple years. Oh yea, I say this as an owner of BOTH companies products....sadly:(:(
Now "HOW YA LIKE THEM APPLES STEVE JOBS??"
Michaelgtrusa
Apr 18, 03:19 PM
And they are an Apple supplier.
NY Guitarist
Apr 21, 03:58 PM
Nothing wrong with a good ol' bit of Ikea furniture...as long as you stick with the higher quality (I.E non particle board) stuff they are decent...minus the assembly instructions...they should be burnt!
Those are instructions!? ;)
Those are instructions!? ;)
Hastings101
Apr 7, 01:00 PM
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.
Not really, this tablet looks very interesting, compared to the larger iPod Touch, oops, I mean iPad.
Apple is doing everyone a favor saving them from the mistake of getting a RIM tablet.
Not really, this tablet looks very interesting, compared to the larger iPod Touch, oops, I mean iPad.
Northgrove
Mar 31, 05:13 AM
Dear Apple
PLEASE can we have a UI update, even if it's a minor one (for instance, iTunes 10 scrollbars rather than the blue aqua ones). Just some extra polish really.
Signed
iFanboy
If you're looking for minor UI updates, that's exactly what Lion is getting?
The scroll bars are changed to be more iOS-like, windows are resizable from any corner, the buttons (and checkboxes AFAIK) are changed to no longer be Aqua styled. Small changes, but the sum of them is pretty substantial: All remaining traces of Aqua should now be gone.
PLEASE can we have a UI update, even if it's a minor one (for instance, iTunes 10 scrollbars rather than the blue aqua ones). Just some extra polish really.
Signed
iFanboy
If you're looking for minor UI updates, that's exactly what Lion is getting?
The scroll bars are changed to be more iOS-like, windows are resizable from any corner, the buttons (and checkboxes AFAIK) are changed to no longer be Aqua styled. Small changes, but the sum of them is pretty substantial: All remaining traces of Aqua should now be gone.
mrkramer
Apr 16, 11:46 AM
All this talk about income taxes is all the MORE reason why we need unprecedented tax reform here in the USA.
In my humble opinion, we should right now go to a flat income tax using the Steve Forbes flat tax plan, and start a process that four years from now ends all income taxation in favor of a consumption tax on new-production goods and services (the FairTax proposal, H.R. 25/S. 13). I cite the following advantages of this change:
Flat taxes are always very regressive, basically the reason why this is a bad idea, is that the people it effects are mostly the ones who can't afford it. and the rich will just sit on their money and not spend a lot and not benefit the economy.
And for the poorer people it would create more reliance on social security and medicare, because now what little money they used to have to save has been taken in the massive tax hike they would just get.
I'm not saying that we don't need reform of our tax system, but a flat tax isn't the way to do it.
In my humble opinion, we should right now go to a flat income tax using the Steve Forbes flat tax plan, and start a process that four years from now ends all income taxation in favor of a consumption tax on new-production goods and services (the FairTax proposal, H.R. 25/S. 13). I cite the following advantages of this change:
Flat taxes are always very regressive, basically the reason why this is a bad idea, is that the people it effects are mostly the ones who can't afford it. and the rich will just sit on their money and not spend a lot and not benefit the economy.
And for the poorer people it would create more reliance on social security and medicare, because now what little money they used to have to save has been taken in the massive tax hike they would just get.
I'm not saying that we don't need reform of our tax system, but a flat tax isn't the way to do it.
kerryb
Apr 18, 03:45 PM
The OS, sure. Samsung made that look VERY close to iOS.
The product design at Apple, however is just reinterpreted stuff from Dieter Rams. Products that function well start to look similar for a reason, though. If it ain't broke....
http://www.errortype.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/01/rams.jpg
you forgot how much that green Android looks like the old Mac OS trash can.
The product design at Apple, however is just reinterpreted stuff from Dieter Rams. Products that function well start to look similar for a reason, though. If it ain't broke....
http://www.errortype.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/01/rams.jpg
you forgot how much that green Android looks like the old Mac OS trash can.
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.
mikeapple
Apr 25, 10:03 AM
Hilarious that the email sender said a DROID won't track him...hahahah so funny... as if a "GOOGLE" phone doesn't track their Android user's every move... This isn't really a iPhone matter, its a matter of all smartphones, with maybe a little exception for blackberry's. It's really nothing new... Google even has a stored database for random screen-caps it takes on all its Android users at any time.
Moyank24
May 5, 01:57 PM
'Twould 'splain me predicament well, as I was certain 'tweren't me grace, charm, good looks, manners, nor bedchamber prowess 'twere lacking.
Oy vey. Me thinks I'm going ta be ill.
Oy vey. Me thinks I'm going ta be ill.
samh004
May 7, 11:08 AM
I get the feeling they are not really making any money on it, so it would make sense to give it away as a benefit of "using a mac."
I can�t remember where it was mentioned, but I recall (dreamed?) that Apple had 1 million paid-up MobileMe members at one stage. If you even multiply that by the lowest amount you can purchase it for, that�s what, $69 million a year. Can�t be losing that much money.
Maybe an apple giftcard for the difference? Like apple did for the early adopters of iPhone 2G when there was a price drop :cool:
At least that�d make me buy a product I�ve had my eye on but haven�t had incentive to take the plunge ;)
The best option is to cover both ends.
I like this idea� but not the following one�
Free MobileMe as an iAd platform? That sounds about right. Paid MobileMe without the iAds? I think we're getting somewhere now...
I�d still pay in this case, but the price better not increase :(
I can�t remember where it was mentioned, but I recall (dreamed?) that Apple had 1 million paid-up MobileMe members at one stage. If you even multiply that by the lowest amount you can purchase it for, that�s what, $69 million a year. Can�t be losing that much money.
Maybe an apple giftcard for the difference? Like apple did for the early adopters of iPhone 2G when there was a price drop :cool:
At least that�d make me buy a product I�ve had my eye on but haven�t had incentive to take the plunge ;)
The best option is to cover both ends.
I like this idea� but not the following one�
Free MobileMe as an iAd platform? That sounds about right. Paid MobileMe without the iAds? I think we're getting somewhere now...
I�d still pay in this case, but the price better not increase :(
Sedrick
Mar 27, 10:42 AM
There is just so many things wrong with storing all your own music in 'the cloud' that it boggles me there's still fools who think it's a great idea.
Enjoy paying larger data fees to access your own damn music while drinking that Kool-aid. Everyone involved in this scam (but you) will be laughing all the way to the bank.
This is clearly an answer to a question no one asked.
Enjoy paying larger data fees to access your own damn music while drinking that Kool-aid. Everyone involved in this scam (but you) will be laughing all the way to the bank.
This is clearly an answer to a question no one asked.
supasubu
Mar 27, 04:51 PM
My thoughts exactly. Our school district (ISD 482) just bought 1,465 iPads for its students, and I can see us getting really mad if Apple were to release a new iPad 6 mos. later.
...the same way Apple will probably release the iphone 5 a few months after the Verizon iphone 4? :)
...the same way Apple will probably release the iphone 5 a few months after the Verizon iphone 4? :)
AppleAmerican
Mar 29, 04:49 PM
The cost for final assembly is minor.
For example, the cost to make an iPhone may be 200 dollars. It probably costs $1 for the final assembly (or by your calculation, $7 if the assembly is done in US). However, if you manufacture all the parts in US, it will cost $1400.
A major portion of these components were American made. In 2000, American EXPORTED more high tech components than it imported. Here is the .gov source (http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/balance/c0007.html#2000). How did you come up with $1400, my figures are fact based. Assembly is certainly more than $1 per unit. Typically assembly is a large portion of manufacturing costs. We competed and still can today.
For example, the cost to make an iPhone may be 200 dollars. It probably costs $1 for the final assembly (or by your calculation, $7 if the assembly is done in US). However, if you manufacture all the parts in US, it will cost $1400.
A major portion of these components were American made. In 2000, American EXPORTED more high tech components than it imported. Here is the .gov source (http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/balance/c0007.html#2000). How did you come up with $1400, my figures are fact based. Assembly is certainly more than $1 per unit. Typically assembly is a large portion of manufacturing costs. We competed and still can today.
MythicFrost
Apr 24, 08:07 AM
This would be awesome. It'd drastically reduce the need for AA and allow for much more detailed textures :D
Would need some horse power though... even a GTX 580 would struggle at that resolution on max with Metro 2033 :p
Would need some horse power though... even a GTX 580 would struggle at that resolution on max with Metro 2033 :p
Mac'nCheese
Apr 9, 09:22 PM
BS. The only lesson to be learned here is that teachers devise lame pneumonic devices to confuse kids. If you're so damn smart, why wouldn't you properly write the correct equation with proper groupings in the first place?
Look at the poll, the groups divided about 50/50. Great job you and your teaching pals did. So much for "perfectly noted." This example is a classic glass half full/empty exercise.
Tastes great. (who's with me):p
I explained why it might be written the way it is, you choose to ignore that like you ignored all the other facts here. The group is divided because some people just don't learn, we have posted exactly why pemdas gives the correct answer when used properly but stubborn people here still say things like well... It's half full/half empty. No, it's not. It's black and white and if you can't see that by now, you never will. Some people just can never admit to mistakes and will never learn anything. Don't blame the teachers...
Look at the poll, the groups divided about 50/50. Great job you and your teaching pals did. So much for "perfectly noted." This example is a classic glass half full/empty exercise.
Tastes great. (who's with me):p
I explained why it might be written the way it is, you choose to ignore that like you ignored all the other facts here. The group is divided because some people just don't learn, we have posted exactly why pemdas gives the correct answer when used properly but stubborn people here still say things like well... It's half full/half empty. No, it's not. It's black and white and if you can't see that by now, you never will. Some people just can never admit to mistakes and will never learn anything. Don't blame the teachers...
AidenShaw
Mar 29, 03:08 PM
Prayers for our Japanese friends!!
No, "best wishes" for our Japanese friends.
"Prayers" to the flying spaghetti monster are a waste of time - put the people of Japan into your thoughts, don't involve some ficticious deity.
No, "best wishes" for our Japanese friends.
"Prayers" to the flying spaghetti monster are a waste of time - put the people of Japan into your thoughts, don't involve some ficticious deity.