Riemann Zeta
Mar 27, 11:40 AM
Yay let us all surrender our privacy to the cloud... Sometimes I feel like the only one that understands the long term implications cloud based computer has when we allow our content and log files on others' servers. Thankfully I know I'm not the only one though.
Nope, not the only one. Boo to the cloud and everything related to it. I'd rather not have all of my data on a massive public server, available to Apple, advertisers and any government agency at all times. Those claiming that "it's encrypted" are not fully appreciating the security implications of not having control over the implementation of said encryption. For example, SSL/HTTPS is "encrypted" as well, but since Certificate Authorities give signed master-key certificates to all government intelligence and law enforcement agencies, it isn't technically 100% secure (despite mathematically unbreakable encryption).
Taking off the tin-foil hat and simply thinking about economics: I still don't understand how cloud computing is actually going to become a dominant market force. There are now only 3 wireless providers in the US, forming a tight oligopoly, and all of them are incredibly stingy with data caps and limitations. Moreover, there are only a handful of unique internet providers in the US and all are cutting client bandwidth, raising prices and instituting throttling or monthly data caps. So it would seem that big software companies like Apple, Microsoft and Google are pushing the idea of streaming everything; but internet providers only want to supply bandwidth for their own cable TV services. Something just doesn't add up. How is one supposed to have no local storage and just stream music and video when their wireless connection only allows for 2GB/month and their home ISP throttles everything other than its own cable TV service?
Nope, not the only one. Boo to the cloud and everything related to it. I'd rather not have all of my data on a massive public server, available to Apple, advertisers and any government agency at all times. Those claiming that "it's encrypted" are not fully appreciating the security implications of not having control over the implementation of said encryption. For example, SSL/HTTPS is "encrypted" as well, but since Certificate Authorities give signed master-key certificates to all government intelligence and law enforcement agencies, it isn't technically 100% secure (despite mathematically unbreakable encryption).
Taking off the tin-foil hat and simply thinking about economics: I still don't understand how cloud computing is actually going to become a dominant market force. There are now only 3 wireless providers in the US, forming a tight oligopoly, and all of them are incredibly stingy with data caps and limitations. Moreover, there are only a handful of unique internet providers in the US and all are cutting client bandwidth, raising prices and instituting throttling or monthly data caps. So it would seem that big software companies like Apple, Microsoft and Google are pushing the idea of streaming everything; but internet providers only want to supply bandwidth for their own cable TV services. Something just doesn't add up. How is one supposed to have no local storage and just stream music and video when their wireless connection only allows for 2GB/month and their home ISP throttles everything other than its own cable TV service?
SmileyBlast!
May 4, 03:09 PM
This sounds high risk to me.
Better to go with optical media.
I wonder if this could leave a number of Macs crippled if their current OS is unstable or otherwise impaired?
Still they test this stuff right? In multiple scenarios. Will antivirus software and the like let these OS changes occur?
Better to go with optical media.
I wonder if this could leave a number of Macs crippled if their current OS is unstable or otherwise impaired?
Still they test this stuff right? In multiple scenarios. Will antivirus software and the like let these OS changes occur?
dernhelm
Nov 26, 05:51 PM
Do they have more or less credibility if they spell Mac like MAC?
Superdrive
Nov 26, 10:27 AM
This looks to be a half-baked computer designed to run specific apps that control/present instead of being able to manipulate data.
Apple should give it full capabilities, about a 12" enclosure, and a durable case and we have ourselves a new toy and I've got my 12" PB replacement!
Apple should give it full capabilities, about a 12" enclosure, and a durable case and we have ourselves a new toy and I've got my 12" PB replacement!
Lesser Evets
Apr 23, 04:47 PM
My hopes were for smaller iMacs with retina displays. I own a 30" screen and while it isn't a burden, I really don't mind a 20" screen with high res.
The iMac should remain a kind of ultra-compact, semi-portable type computer. 20" should be the biggest, just up to retina. Will they do it this year?
Howabout 800x600? :eek:
I was just thinking of my old iBook with that res. Sheesh. These newer computers are making 1999 look like 1926.
The iMac should remain a kind of ultra-compact, semi-portable type computer. 20" should be the biggest, just up to retina. Will they do it this year?
Howabout 800x600? :eek:
I was just thinking of my old iBook with that res. Sheesh. These newer computers are making 1999 look like 1926.
maclaptop
Apr 26, 02:12 PM
Who cares? I thought this was macrumors not android news...
Android scares the hell out of Apple :eek:
Android scares the hell out of Apple :eek:
Chundles
Aug 3, 12:36 AM
You gonna call them liars?
Yeah, why not. They're liars.
And the Core 2 processor is a bad processor, it's got "2" in the name and sequels always suck.
To be honest MM, time you took a chill pill and had a nice lie-down.
Yeah, why not. They're liars.
And the Core 2 processor is a bad processor, it's got "2" in the name and sequels always suck.
To be honest MM, time you took a chill pill and had a nice lie-down.
MacQuest
Nov 22, 03:24 PM
Wasn't it exactly the same story with the iPod?
Exactly. :rolleyes:
How are Rio, Creative, and all the other "iPod Killer" product manufacturers like Sony doing nowadays in the digital music player market? :p
Rio's out of business and Creative is now part of the "Made For iPod" accessory community? :eek: Walkman? what the H*LL is that?! :confused:
Take notes Palm. History repeats itself. :cool:
Exactly. :rolleyes:
How are Rio, Creative, and all the other "iPod Killer" product manufacturers like Sony doing nowadays in the digital music player market? :p
Rio's out of business and Creative is now part of the "Made For iPod" accessory community? :eek: Walkman? what the H*LL is that?! :confused:
Take notes Palm. History repeats itself. :cool:
NATO
Apr 18, 04:43 PM
Then they should sue google for making android so similar to iOS, not Samsung. And im not sure if the "look" of icons on a screen can be patented anyway.
That's the thing, stock Android isn't really anything like iOS, it's Samsung's proprietary UI which is added on top which makes it more iOS-like (in the same way that HTC has their own proprietary 'Sense UI' to differentiate their products from the competition)
That's the thing, stock Android isn't really anything like iOS, it's Samsung's proprietary UI which is added on top which makes it more iOS-like (in the same way that HTC has their own proprietary 'Sense UI' to differentiate their products from the competition)
LxHunter
Nov 14, 01:50 PM
Thanks, will stay with Sophos
BaldiMac
Apr 25, 10:19 AM
http://paidcontent.org/article/419-androids-secret-sauce-googles-little-known-advertising-rev-share-deals-/
They only make money when you SEARCH on your android handset.
I'm pretty sure they also make money through Admob. :rolleyes:
They only make money when you SEARCH on your android handset.
I'm pretty sure they also make money through Admob. :rolleyes:
iansilv
Mar 29, 12:44 PM
Great move by amazon to bring out a service that competes legitimates with Apple in this space. In fact, on paper at least it destroys it.
Really, really stupid move to not let iOS devices connect. that is an idiot move.
Really, really stupid move to not let iOS devices connect. that is an idiot move.
Piggie
Apr 24, 05:57 AM
That issue could have been largely solved if they had just faced a standard high end GPU with the intake facing towards the back and the exhaust on the side. But Apple is too vain to put a vent on the rear of the iMac to accomodate the intake of a high quality GPU, let alone a slim exhaust vent on the side.
If they had simply used a standard GPU like that it would have opened up quality gaming on the Mac and made it simple to upgrade to newer cards so that people didn't have to chuck the entire computer every time they wanted a new video card.
I'm sure you are right.
Given a bit of good design work on Apples part, when I say good design I mean, technically good as opposed to artistically good.
And in conjunction with Nvidea/ATI (personally I still like Nvidea as they seem more on the ball with Tessalation and Cuda programming for offloading CPU work onto the GPU)
A "Spread out" design, given the large rear metal surface are of an iMac and a few very neat vents to pull in cool air using a slow well designed fan, from the side or bottom and exhausting the warm air on the other side/top could be well within technical possibilities. And would address the weak spot Apple have had for a decade or two.
But, as has been said, Apple seem to fear this market as they seem to think they can't compete, and if you know you can't compete it's best not to enter the race. They want to go for poorer quality graphics, or we can use the term that sounds better than that.
The casual gamer.
Quite why this Apple created concept to cover their weak point should be happy with less quality/detail is unsure to me.
It's like saying people what watch films all the time and enjoy them should have the best picture quality we can deliver.
However, those who just watch the occasional movie should be happier with a lower quality image.
Kind of a strange concept when you think about it. and really we should all accept it's just a created excuse to excuse away a weak area as I said.
But, as you quite rightly said. Apple are too vein to spoil, in their mind the cosmetic look of an iMac by adding in cooling slits to allow for higher end graphics cards.
A shame really as if they had taken graphics a lot more seriously 15 or 20 years ago, they could be kings of this sector now.
If they had simply used a standard GPU like that it would have opened up quality gaming on the Mac and made it simple to upgrade to newer cards so that people didn't have to chuck the entire computer every time they wanted a new video card.
I'm sure you are right.
Given a bit of good design work on Apples part, when I say good design I mean, technically good as opposed to artistically good.
And in conjunction with Nvidea/ATI (personally I still like Nvidea as they seem more on the ball with Tessalation and Cuda programming for offloading CPU work onto the GPU)
A "Spread out" design, given the large rear metal surface are of an iMac and a few very neat vents to pull in cool air using a slow well designed fan, from the side or bottom and exhausting the warm air on the other side/top could be well within technical possibilities. And would address the weak spot Apple have had for a decade or two.
But, as has been said, Apple seem to fear this market as they seem to think they can't compete, and if you know you can't compete it's best not to enter the race. They want to go for poorer quality graphics, or we can use the term that sounds better than that.
The casual gamer.
Quite why this Apple created concept to cover their weak point should be happy with less quality/detail is unsure to me.
It's like saying people what watch films all the time and enjoy them should have the best picture quality we can deliver.
However, those who just watch the occasional movie should be happier with a lower quality image.
Kind of a strange concept when you think about it. and really we should all accept it's just a created excuse to excuse away a weak area as I said.
But, as you quite rightly said. Apple are too vein to spoil, in their mind the cosmetic look of an iMac by adding in cooling slits to allow for higher end graphics cards.
A shame really as if they had taken graphics a lot more seriously 15 or 20 years ago, they could be kings of this sector now.
thisisahughes
Mar 27, 07:46 AM
I think this rumor can be readily discredited.
Apple has been trying for a few years now to streamline product updates so that they happen like clockwork once per year.
The past few macbook pro updates have been in the spring/late winter, macbooks are seemingly being updated prior to the Back to School deal, iPods are updated in September towards the end of the student sale, iPhones have launched in June every year, iPad and iPad 2 both began selling in the spring, and while iMacs haven't had a clear pattern emerge yet, it appears to be coalescing around 1 year and I think it's safe to say that as time goes on, a yearly cycle will become dominant.
Despite the news of Lion being almost ready (or ready) for Golden Master, I think it's more probable that Lion is put on hold until iOS 5 is ready to launch as happened with Leopard and to a much lesser extent, Snow Leopard. Apple makes far more money and gets far more worldwide press from the iOS family than it does the OS X lineup. At this point, not launching an iPhone and a new OS for it in June would go against 4 years of pattern and practice, and would cause too much negative publicity, especially in the face of a constantly evolving market where a few months of lag time can cost a company vital market share and mindshare.
wow. perfect.
Apple has been trying for a few years now to streamline product updates so that they happen like clockwork once per year.
The past few macbook pro updates have been in the spring/late winter, macbooks are seemingly being updated prior to the Back to School deal, iPods are updated in September towards the end of the student sale, iPhones have launched in June every year, iPad and iPad 2 both began selling in the spring, and while iMacs haven't had a clear pattern emerge yet, it appears to be coalescing around 1 year and I think it's safe to say that as time goes on, a yearly cycle will become dominant.
Despite the news of Lion being almost ready (or ready) for Golden Master, I think it's more probable that Lion is put on hold until iOS 5 is ready to launch as happened with Leopard and to a much lesser extent, Snow Leopard. Apple makes far more money and gets far more worldwide press from the iOS family than it does the OS X lineup. At this point, not launching an iPhone and a new OS for it in June would go against 4 years of pattern and practice, and would cause too much negative publicity, especially in the face of a constantly evolving market where a few months of lag time can cost a company vital market share and mindshare.
wow. perfect.
kobyh15
Mar 28, 11:50 AM
If the wait ends with aluminum enclosure, 4" screen, and LTE I will be psyched. Wait well worth it I would think.
KingYaba
Apr 14, 10:19 AM
US Treasury not Federal Reserve. https://www.pay.gov/paygov/forms/formInstance.html?agencyFormId=23779454
B
Holy crap I didn't know they had a website for that. :eek:
B
Holy crap I didn't know they had a website for that. :eek:
KCMichaelB
Nov 11, 09:14 AM
How wrong you are.
This software actually protects for more than just viruses, it also removes trojans which HAVE been written for Mac. It also removes Windows viruses that you as a user can still pass on to other people. It removed 3 trojans from my machine, yes they were Windows trojans, BUT I will now not pass them on in emails, etc.
Be ignorant if you like, but one day soon we will all be caught out.
It found 7 trojans (6 for Windows and 1 for OS X) on my Mac.
Btw, how does one know if their computer is virus/malware/adware free if they never scan for it?
This software actually protects for more than just viruses, it also removes trojans which HAVE been written for Mac. It also removes Windows viruses that you as a user can still pass on to other people. It removed 3 trojans from my machine, yes they were Windows trojans, BUT I will now not pass them on in emails, etc.
Be ignorant if you like, but one day soon we will all be caught out.
It found 7 trojans (6 for Windows and 1 for OS X) on my Mac.
Btw, how does one know if their computer is virus/malware/adware free if they never scan for it?
Reach
Sep 16, 07:59 AM
Now THAT's what I would like:
"Since the release of the 15 inch MacBook Pro in January, speculation on the forthcoming Apple laptops is spreading throughout the net. Meanwhile, MacosXrumors has received a very unexpected report, providing information about one of the forthcoming MacBook Pros.
The sources that can be qualified as �very reliable� (yes you read it well), are claiming that Apple plans to keep similar display size for its entry level Mac Book Pro by releasing what sources called an �ultra-thin 12 inch Mac Book Pro�."
Source: www.macosxrumors.com
I would buy one on the same day.
Thats some optimistic reading mister. Not VERY reliable, just reliable. And the report is not connected to the newest rumor, it's something they heard about earlier this year and they're unable to confirm that it applies to the 25th. Oh well, maybe you read another article than me?
"Since the release of the 15 inch MacBook Pro in January, speculation on the forthcoming Apple laptops is spreading throughout the net. Meanwhile, MacosXrumors has received a very unexpected report, providing information about one of the forthcoming MacBook Pros.
The sources that can be qualified as �very reliable� (yes you read it well), are claiming that Apple plans to keep similar display size for its entry level Mac Book Pro by releasing what sources called an �ultra-thin 12 inch Mac Book Pro�."
Source: www.macosxrumors.com
I would buy one on the same day.
Thats some optimistic reading mister. Not VERY reliable, just reliable. And the report is not connected to the newest rumor, it's something they heard about earlier this year and they're unable to confirm that it applies to the 25th. Oh well, maybe you read another article than me?
LagunaSol
Apr 18, 03:34 PM
I'm surprised it's taken this long, to be honest: I've thought for a long time that Samsung's phones in particular are pretty much a blatant rip-off of Apple's industrial design and user interface.
Indeed, the haters will scream and rant about this lawsuit, but Samsung has a special knack for making their devices look exactly like Apple's equivalents.
Indeed, the haters will scream and rant about this lawsuit, but Samsung has a special knack for making their devices look exactly like Apple's equivalents.
ayasin
Apr 18, 03:31 PM
Apple is devoid of morals and innovation? Are you kidding me? Do you have any idea of Apple's philanthropy? Also, Apple INVENTED the whole concept of touch UI for iPhone and iPad
Yep you're right. Apple invented the touch UI. Before Apple, Palm used a keyboard and mouse to dial numbers in the Palm OS phones. Also what philanthropy are you talking about?
Yep you're right. Apple invented the touch UI. Before Apple, Palm used a keyboard and mouse to dial numbers in the Palm OS phones. Also what philanthropy are you talking about?
bedifferent
Apr 23, 04:38 PM
sorry just a correction the resolution isnt 3200x3200 its 3200x2000 i just checked
Where are the icons located?
Where are the icons located?
iJohnHenry
Apr 9, 06:23 PM
The official Mac answer is:
That's great lol
Mac knows, that in the absence of a sign, the (9+3) is to-the-power-of. :p
That's great lol
Mac knows, that in the absence of a sign, the (9+3) is to-the-power-of. :p
Chris Bangle
Sep 11, 01:12 PM
Am I the only one hoping that Apple adds Firewire use to the iPods again?
I want firewire aswell usb 1 is far toooo slow. How my sposed to transfer films with USB, It will take all day.
I want firewire aswell usb 1 is far toooo slow. How my sposed to transfer films with USB, It will take all day.
MikeTheC
Nov 25, 08:34 PM
i am sure apple is finding the world of phone carriers complex and difficult.
The biggest hangup of theirs is probably the sale of media and ringtones. They simply probably do NOT want Apple to provide the solution. Even if Apple's storefront is better, they will not want money going elsewhere.
that said, Apple's best option here is to simply launch the product themselves. Offer a GSM phone that is unlocked. The phone companies will get a clue later on when people want the product
I 150% agree! Cell communications need to open up. Contracts and locked phones will keep the phone industry from growing and maturing in the same way computers did.
What Apple has to rely on is the eventual tendency of companies' adversarial and predatory tendencies to overcome their collective complacency. This could take quite a while.
Consider this. Let's say Apple does something along the lines we're predicting, and sells their phones. Before we plunk down our money, we go around to the various cell carriers and inquire if they'll let us bring our phone to their network. They say either "NO!" or "Not at this time."
Do you still spend your money on Apple's product? I mean, what good's a cell phone (especially if it's more than just a few dollars) if you can't even talk to anybody on it? So, the cell phone companies basically keep Apple from going anywhere, and since they would do this from the start, they could ultimately report back to their bosses (and then onto their shareholders) that, "Oh no, we didn't really screw ourselves out of a lucrative market." on the premise that it isn't lucrative until tons of people are in that market (none of whom would be, since this is basically a giant "chicken-n-egg" scenario with the onus and the expense all stuck squarely on the shoulders of the general public.)
What would make absolutely more sense is for Apple to simply start up their own network. They've already acquired some assets in this area, haven't they? So why not bide their time until they can really roll the thing out? And since it is relatively common practice for cell towers to have more than one (sometimes several) carriers' equipment mounted on them, Apple could buy into who's-ever network they needed to get one of the "lesser third party" broadcast equipment sets that's already out there among the masses.
It could operate something like how Claris used to work, being a division (but a spun-off one) of Apple. It would be an interesting back-door type of approach to the whole equation.
The biggest hangup of theirs is probably the sale of media and ringtones. They simply probably do NOT want Apple to provide the solution. Even if Apple's storefront is better, they will not want money going elsewhere.
that said, Apple's best option here is to simply launch the product themselves. Offer a GSM phone that is unlocked. The phone companies will get a clue later on when people want the product
I 150% agree! Cell communications need to open up. Contracts and locked phones will keep the phone industry from growing and maturing in the same way computers did.
What Apple has to rely on is the eventual tendency of companies' adversarial and predatory tendencies to overcome their collective complacency. This could take quite a while.
Consider this. Let's say Apple does something along the lines we're predicting, and sells their phones. Before we plunk down our money, we go around to the various cell carriers and inquire if they'll let us bring our phone to their network. They say either "NO!" or "Not at this time."
Do you still spend your money on Apple's product? I mean, what good's a cell phone (especially if it's more than just a few dollars) if you can't even talk to anybody on it? So, the cell phone companies basically keep Apple from going anywhere, and since they would do this from the start, they could ultimately report back to their bosses (and then onto their shareholders) that, "Oh no, we didn't really screw ourselves out of a lucrative market." on the premise that it isn't lucrative until tons of people are in that market (none of whom would be, since this is basically a giant "chicken-n-egg" scenario with the onus and the expense all stuck squarely on the shoulders of the general public.)
What would make absolutely more sense is for Apple to simply start up their own network. They've already acquired some assets in this area, haven't they? So why not bide their time until they can really roll the thing out? And since it is relatively common practice for cell towers to have more than one (sometimes several) carriers' equipment mounted on them, Apple could buy into who's-ever network they needed to get one of the "lesser third party" broadcast equipment sets that's already out there among the masses.
It could operate something like how Claris used to work, being a division (but a spun-off one) of Apple. It would be an interesting back-door type of approach to the whole equation.