charlesdjones1
Apr 12, 07:08 PM
after flipping through some more pages on this forum, i came across someone's incredible mockup that shares similar features as what i was hoping for, mainly the larger screen. otherwise, his wasn't a simple 5 minute cut and paste like mine, but overall i think this is the direction apple should go in.
Coolestdude
Mar 22, 04:43 PM
I would really like to see WIFI sync. Pull my car in the garage, download my new songs in iTunes, and it syncs. I use a USA Spec iPod adapter in my car, and keep the iPod hidden in the glovebox.
yac_moda
Jul 21, 06:16 PM
IMO the President has very little direct effect. Since the President barely affects the economy, there really isn't much he can do to the stock market. Anything he might do in the form of stimulus packages... tax cuts, credits, etc. take years to work it's way into the economy. That said, there can definitely be a long term effect from a president's actions.
Your summation is a leap of faith, check your market history what I said has STRONG historical backing yours does NOT.
The USA President has a HUGE effect day to day ON THE WORLD scene and that effects the value of the dollar and thus everything else especially foreign investment which is THE BIGGEST money flow.
And Jimmy Carter is the BEST EXAMPLE of a disaster of foreign confidence.
However, the Fed does not care about the stock market per se.
I YOU believe THIS then you believe everything else he says and you are not paying any attention to WHAT HE DOES :eek:
The Fed is interested in controlling inflation and the economy, avoiding overheating and softening downturns. Essentially, the Fed tries to "tune" the economy.
Duuu !!
The President can not restrict money supply. What you've seen over the past 25 years was basically 3 administrations (Reagan/Bush, Clinton, Bush Jr.) that essentially transitioned during downturns in the business cycle. Coincidence.
Without any doubt the President can and does, by WHO he appoints to the position of Fed Chairman.
Presidents that have a clue also have HUGE control over the money supply by how they fine tune and enforce immigration law, the demographics of entrepreneurialism is hugely effected in a relatively short time by emigration from europe since the average age of those emigrants is around 35.
The Feds money supply adjustments are diluted by this immigration which has a BIG effect on economic growth and the job market, although I don't expect you to understand this.
And I have no idea what "hyper ww competition from the internet" means.
��� I AM NOT SURPRISED !!!
You just like to argue !
Your summation is a leap of faith, check your market history what I said has STRONG historical backing yours does NOT.
The USA President has a HUGE effect day to day ON THE WORLD scene and that effects the value of the dollar and thus everything else especially foreign investment which is THE BIGGEST money flow.
And Jimmy Carter is the BEST EXAMPLE of a disaster of foreign confidence.
However, the Fed does not care about the stock market per se.
I YOU believe THIS then you believe everything else he says and you are not paying any attention to WHAT HE DOES :eek:
The Fed is interested in controlling inflation and the economy, avoiding overheating and softening downturns. Essentially, the Fed tries to "tune" the economy.
Duuu !!
The President can not restrict money supply. What you've seen over the past 25 years was basically 3 administrations (Reagan/Bush, Clinton, Bush Jr.) that essentially transitioned during downturns in the business cycle. Coincidence.
Without any doubt the President can and does, by WHO he appoints to the position of Fed Chairman.
Presidents that have a clue also have HUGE control over the money supply by how they fine tune and enforce immigration law, the demographics of entrepreneurialism is hugely effected in a relatively short time by emigration from europe since the average age of those emigrants is around 35.
The Feds money supply adjustments are diluted by this immigration which has a BIG effect on economic growth and the job market, although I don't expect you to understand this.
And I have no idea what "hyper ww competition from the internet" means.
��� I AM NOT SURPRISED !!!
You just like to argue !
prady16
Oct 23, 08:12 AM
I hope to have it order Tuesday and delivered by the end of the week?
Any chance?
I highly doubt it!
Any chance?
I highly doubt it!
BillyShears
Jan 13, 02:33 AM
GreenPeace will go Ape Shite if the MacBookAir is charged through induction. It will not be near as efficient in power transfer as a direct connection would be. (nothing transfers with 100% efficiency)
I can see GreenPeace attacking Apple now because the new notebooks will cause a 15% spike in electricity consumption, dumping 15% more carbon into the air. Death to Apple!
"There's CO2 in the air."
I can see GreenPeace attacking Apple now because the new notebooks will cause a 15% spike in electricity consumption, dumping 15% more carbon into the air. Death to Apple!
"There's CO2 in the air."
Canerican
Jan 11, 09:07 PM
Everything that Mac makes sells like hotcakes... MS should stick to their defective OS if they want to make their stakeholders happy.
eenu
Aug 16, 11:05 AM
As much as i love ipod and apple rumors it is getting stressful and frustrating that we hear these rumors every damn week and nothing comes out of them. Last week we had the iphone, the week before we had the 2nd part of the none touch stuff it just goes on and on and its peeing me off, im begining to doubt wherther there will ever be a phone or touchscreen thing.
I agree to an extent but this is a rumours site.....so as such your going to get this. If it stresses you that much just don't read the ones you think are the same.
I agree to an extent but this is a rumours site.....so as such your going to get this. If it stresses you that much just don't read the ones you think are the same.
the20pointmay
Apr 2, 08:20 PM
I wasn't sure this was an iPad commercial at first when I saw it during the Butler game; to me it seemed more serious than any other Apple ad that has been released before. But in that sense, you can feel similar emotions to the video they showed during the iPad 2 introduction that went through the year of the first iPad. That's not just selling a product, that's loving a product.
econgeek
Apr 12, 08:46 PM
I just finished reading the old thread, only to discover that there was a new story on MacRumors and a new thread... so here's my comments:
For context, I started cutting film back when I had two reels and a viewer in the middle... and I had to hand crank it to preview. Cutting involved a nice razor embedded in plastic and a splice was a fancy piece of tape with sprocket holes in it. I am a software developer and I've long lamented how early editing software has always been based on just replicating the film process electronically.
Then I started to meet the Video People. Video People are much of the industry- the editors for TV news, the editors for TV programs, the wedding photographers. Just about everbody but filmmakers, but also including a lot of the lower end film production support (eg: editing houses.) The Video People have been taught rules of thumb. They are not very technical. They know how it is "supposed" to work because that's what they learned in colllege or at their first jobs. They are all stuck in specific workflows and specific ways of doing things.
They output to tape because they cannot grasp the concept that tape became obsolete a decade ago (and the ones who can grasp it are stuck dealing with others who demand delivery and archive on tape.)
These are the same people who think that iMovie was a joke when it was reworked. I loved it. I was happy to see a tiny, little step forward in working with video. Apple thought just a smidgen different and people went crazy. Sure it had less features than the previous one-- but creativity was so unleashed that the minor hassle of working around those features not being built in was no big deal.
I think Apple is skating to where the puck is. Apple is going to release a Final Cut focused on the direction the industry is heading. If Apple does its job right, the Video People will be screaming their heads off. But the 20 year olds who don't know anything but "want to make movies" (and are more serious than those willing to limit themselves to iMovie) will take it and start cutting the next generation of indie features.
Maybe Apple will provide all the features the Video People are threatening to switch to Avid if they don't get (as if it is some sort of a hostage demand -- "I'm going to post to macrumors forums and threaten to switch to Avid! That will teach them!". I've met many people in many industries but the Video People are the most rigid, the least genuinely understanding of technology and the most fixated on rules of thumb and rigid perspectives about How Things Should Work. Seriously, computer illiterate grease monkies are more flexible and open to new technology, in my experience. The Video People think they are Pros (because hey earn a salary) and therefore, anything that causes them to stretch or adjust or re-think the processes they use is "bad". The idea that something might be more efficient or produce a better quality result seems unfathomable.
If Apple has spent the last several years working on something signficant (which is the implication of the claims Apple has "abandoned their pro products") then the Video People are going to be screaming bloody murder in a couple hours. I look forward to it.
(PS- I didn't call anyone in this thread a Video People. You can choose to take offense if you wish, but I'm talking about people I've met and had to work with in the industry, not posters to this thread whom I do not know personally.)
For context, I started cutting film back when I had two reels and a viewer in the middle... and I had to hand crank it to preview. Cutting involved a nice razor embedded in plastic and a splice was a fancy piece of tape with sprocket holes in it. I am a software developer and I've long lamented how early editing software has always been based on just replicating the film process electronically.
Then I started to meet the Video People. Video People are much of the industry- the editors for TV news, the editors for TV programs, the wedding photographers. Just about everbody but filmmakers, but also including a lot of the lower end film production support (eg: editing houses.) The Video People have been taught rules of thumb. They are not very technical. They know how it is "supposed" to work because that's what they learned in colllege or at their first jobs. They are all stuck in specific workflows and specific ways of doing things.
They output to tape because they cannot grasp the concept that tape became obsolete a decade ago (and the ones who can grasp it are stuck dealing with others who demand delivery and archive on tape.)
These are the same people who think that iMovie was a joke when it was reworked. I loved it. I was happy to see a tiny, little step forward in working with video. Apple thought just a smidgen different and people went crazy. Sure it had less features than the previous one-- but creativity was so unleashed that the minor hassle of working around those features not being built in was no big deal.
I think Apple is skating to where the puck is. Apple is going to release a Final Cut focused on the direction the industry is heading. If Apple does its job right, the Video People will be screaming their heads off. But the 20 year olds who don't know anything but "want to make movies" (and are more serious than those willing to limit themselves to iMovie) will take it and start cutting the next generation of indie features.
Maybe Apple will provide all the features the Video People are threatening to switch to Avid if they don't get (as if it is some sort of a hostage demand -- "I'm going to post to macrumors forums and threaten to switch to Avid! That will teach them!". I've met many people in many industries but the Video People are the most rigid, the least genuinely understanding of technology and the most fixated on rules of thumb and rigid perspectives about How Things Should Work. Seriously, computer illiterate grease monkies are more flexible and open to new technology, in my experience. The Video People think they are Pros (because hey earn a salary) and therefore, anything that causes them to stretch or adjust or re-think the processes they use is "bad". The idea that something might be more efficient or produce a better quality result seems unfathomable.
If Apple has spent the last several years working on something signficant (which is the implication of the claims Apple has "abandoned their pro products") then the Video People are going to be screaming bloody murder in a couple hours. I look forward to it.
(PS- I didn't call anyone in this thread a Video People. You can choose to take offense if you wish, but I'm talking about people I've met and had to work with in the industry, not posters to this thread whom I do not know personally.)
KnightWRX
Apr 26, 01:57 PM
Add
Windows,
Words
besides others !!
Guys, every trademark is made up of generic words. That's not what people mean when they say App Store is generic. What they actually mean is it is descriptive.
Let's say I open a shoe store. 2 Trademarks :
1- Shoe Box
Both very generic words, same as everyone who argues "Windows! Amazon! Word! it's all generic!" say. However, I'm not trademarking an actual box that contains shoes. I'm trademarking a name for a store. The shoes don't even have to come in boxes.
2- Shoe Store
This one is descriptive. I'm opening a shoe store, I'm deciding to call it Shoe Store. So now, Yellow can't say "Yellow, the best shoe store around!" because that infringes on my mark. That's what people take exception with here. The mark seems descriptive and thus shouldn't be trademarkable. Apple themselves often refer to it in this descriptive nature in their financials and keynotes.
Windows,
Words
besides others !!
Guys, every trademark is made up of generic words. That's not what people mean when they say App Store is generic. What they actually mean is it is descriptive.
Let's say I open a shoe store. 2 Trademarks :
1- Shoe Box
Both very generic words, same as everyone who argues "Windows! Amazon! Word! it's all generic!" say. However, I'm not trademarking an actual box that contains shoes. I'm trademarking a name for a store. The shoes don't even have to come in boxes.
2- Shoe Store
This one is descriptive. I'm opening a shoe store, I'm deciding to call it Shoe Store. So now, Yellow can't say "Yellow, the best shoe store around!" because that infringes on my mark. That's what people take exception with here. The mark seems descriptive and thus shouldn't be trademarkable. Apple themselves often refer to it in this descriptive nature in their financials and keynotes.
Benguitar
Nov 25, 06:27 PM
They're just ****ing sunglasses...
Yeah, I know, They are very expensive sunglasses that I don't feel comfortable just "tossing into a gym bag or suitcase."
It feels awesome to have every god damn person here giving you crap about your last purchase.
What if I gave everyone who purchases McDonalds a "fat@$$" or anyone with a nice car a "rich snob."
Gosh, Is everyone here so desensitized towards expensive things, That if they break them they just don't care?
I bought a protective case to put something I invested a lot of money in, And IF anyone cared to read my replies to your jerky comments, I explained that I plan on putting a SECOND pair of glasses in the case, Which would cost 400-500 dollars, Which is a great amount of money to me, So I don't want to break them.
I find it repulsing that so many people on here find my latest purchase SO DISTURBING and bothering to them that they feel they need to make me feel bad about it.
Happy Thanksgiving. Jerk.
Yeah, I know, They are very expensive sunglasses that I don't feel comfortable just "tossing into a gym bag or suitcase."
It feels awesome to have every god damn person here giving you crap about your last purchase.
What if I gave everyone who purchases McDonalds a "fat@$$" or anyone with a nice car a "rich snob."
Gosh, Is everyone here so desensitized towards expensive things, That if they break them they just don't care?
I bought a protective case to put something I invested a lot of money in, And IF anyone cared to read my replies to your jerky comments, I explained that I plan on putting a SECOND pair of glasses in the case, Which would cost 400-500 dollars, Which is a great amount of money to me, So I don't want to break them.
I find it repulsing that so many people on here find my latest purchase SO DISTURBING and bothering to them that they feel they need to make me feel bad about it.
Happy Thanksgiving. Jerk.
fhall1
Feb 27, 02:02 PM
27" iMac
17" MacBook Pro
iPad 16GB
iPhone 4 16GB
Logitech Z-2300
Time Capsule 1TB
Nice setup, but you have the room....don't spoil it by setting the printer on the subwoofer under the desk
17" MacBook Pro
iPad 16GB
iPhone 4 16GB
Logitech Z-2300
Time Capsule 1TB
Nice setup, but you have the room....don't spoil it by setting the printer on the subwoofer under the desk
Lord Blackadder
Mar 22, 12:41 AM
Well, personally I would consider "loyalists" part of military assets. And I'm sure most generals do as well because that's the way they talk about killing soldiers. Thus inflicting "material" damage should include the people who operate the weapons via command.
And one would figure that since there are a huge number of "defectors", some of these loyalists must be pretty hard-core and you'll have to kill them to prevent them from picking up a simple AK and IED later on and blow up things from the shadows. This might seem harsh, but the reality of it is that if they pick a side, they accept their fate as a loser.
The UN mandate calls for a no-fly zone. Under current military doctrine that requires that the opponent's air defense network be degraded. Some military personnel will inevitably die when their air defense installations come under attack. Other than that, we don't have the authority to attack loyalists unless they are threatening the safety of civilians by bombarding rebel cities or some such, and then only if they can be clearly identified and attacked without risking civilian lives. Loyalist units that are simply surrounding a rebel strongholds are not legitimate targets at this stage.
However, in light of the situation, I would understand the need to leave some "real warriors" alive and hope they join the new administration because looking at these rebels, they are mostly a bunch of city slickers or something that found a gun, see smoke, run toward the front lines all exited...to come right back carrying their dead in a bedsheet. It's a real joke how they handle this rebelion. If this is how it is, we're going to need troops on the ground to get these guys in shape...if not during...then after the supplanting of Quadafi.
This is pretty much how any irregular force has behaved at any time in history (see the beginnings of the American and French revolutions for example) It's not something we can control. Some rebel units are made up of defected regular army units, they will undoubtedly form the core of any rebel advance and show better cohesion. By merely existing as a force in being the, the irregular units (or more correctly, loose bands) legitimize the opposition, and they've proven somewhat effective in defense.
As for troops on the ground - this is a Libyan civil war. The UN's mission is to prevent Gaddafi from murdering his own people in his attempt to maintain power. The Libyans must do the rest.
I honestly wouldn't be surprised if the end result of all this is not at all dissimilar to the goings-on in Iraq.
As long as we don't invade, this is unlikely to be as bad as Iraq. We are aiding a popular uprising against hated autocrat, not invading a foreign country with plans of occupation and prolonged rooting out of insurgents. There are still many potential pitfalls and I am not arguing that the situation is necessarily a good one, but it is certainly less risky than the 2003 Iraq invasion.
And one would figure that since there are a huge number of "defectors", some of these loyalists must be pretty hard-core and you'll have to kill them to prevent them from picking up a simple AK and IED later on and blow up things from the shadows. This might seem harsh, but the reality of it is that if they pick a side, they accept their fate as a loser.
The UN mandate calls for a no-fly zone. Under current military doctrine that requires that the opponent's air defense network be degraded. Some military personnel will inevitably die when their air defense installations come under attack. Other than that, we don't have the authority to attack loyalists unless they are threatening the safety of civilians by bombarding rebel cities or some such, and then only if they can be clearly identified and attacked without risking civilian lives. Loyalist units that are simply surrounding a rebel strongholds are not legitimate targets at this stage.
However, in light of the situation, I would understand the need to leave some "real warriors" alive and hope they join the new administration because looking at these rebels, they are mostly a bunch of city slickers or something that found a gun, see smoke, run toward the front lines all exited...to come right back carrying their dead in a bedsheet. It's a real joke how they handle this rebelion. If this is how it is, we're going to need troops on the ground to get these guys in shape...if not during...then after the supplanting of Quadafi.
This is pretty much how any irregular force has behaved at any time in history (see the beginnings of the American and French revolutions for example) It's not something we can control. Some rebel units are made up of defected regular army units, they will undoubtedly form the core of any rebel advance and show better cohesion. By merely existing as a force in being the, the irregular units (or more correctly, loose bands) legitimize the opposition, and they've proven somewhat effective in defense.
As for troops on the ground - this is a Libyan civil war. The UN's mission is to prevent Gaddafi from murdering his own people in his attempt to maintain power. The Libyans must do the rest.
I honestly wouldn't be surprised if the end result of all this is not at all dissimilar to the goings-on in Iraq.
As long as we don't invade, this is unlikely to be as bad as Iraq. We are aiding a popular uprising against hated autocrat, not invading a foreign country with plans of occupation and prolonged rooting out of insurgents. There are still many potential pitfalls and I am not arguing that the situation is necessarily a good one, but it is certainly less risky than the 2003 Iraq invasion.
durvivor
Oct 23, 01:19 PM
In my opinion, there is a VERY good possibility of the Macbook Pros being updated tomorrow. Here's Why:
If you look at the Macbook Pro's "last updated" section, you'll notice that it was April 24, 2006. Tomorrow will be October 24, exactly 6 month's difference. Coincidence? perhaps, but in my opinion if it's not tomorrow, it's not until late November.
Awesome, this means there will be further Macbook and Macbook Pro updates on April 24th (a Tuesday). I'm guessing that will be too early for Santa Rosa w/ Robsin caching technology. But, I bet there will be speed increases, graphics and hd increases.
If you look at the Macbook Pro's "last updated" section, you'll notice that it was April 24, 2006. Tomorrow will be October 24, exactly 6 month's difference. Coincidence? perhaps, but in my opinion if it's not tomorrow, it's not until late November.
Awesome, this means there will be further Macbook and Macbook Pro updates on April 24th (a Tuesday). I'm guessing that will be too early for Santa Rosa w/ Robsin caching technology. But, I bet there will be speed increases, graphics and hd increases.
Multimedia
Aug 26, 07:00 PM
A Little OT but mini TV related: Someone here made a post I can't find that said the EyeTV hybrid HDTV tuner was only relevant to less than 5% of the market. So I did a little Google and found out we are already at 20% HD penetration in USA (http://www.screendigest.com/reports/06highdeftv/readmore/view.html). So I thought I'd just let you all know the Mac mini as an HDTV + Tivo with a 24" display can be set up for about $1300. With the cheapest Dual Link DVI 15" MBP you can find would drive a 30" display for a total of about $2900 soon.
I have a 2GHz Dual Core G5 that can support a 30" Display only paid $900 for. When Dell puts the 30" up on the 20% off block it will only cost $1900 - $380 = $1520. So we are looking at Mac TVs in the 24" - 30" size for as little as $1450 - $2500. That seems pretty amazing to me.
$599 Mac mini Core 2 Duo + EyeTV hybrid $150 + 24" Dell $700 (20% off Sale Price) = $1450 new.
Used any solo or dual G5 PM with a Dual Link Video Card + 30" Dell $1520 (20% off Sale Price) = $2500 or less.
I have a 2GHz Dual Core G5 that can support a 30" Display only paid $900 for. When Dell puts the 30" up on the 20% off block it will only cost $1900 - $380 = $1520. So we are looking at Mac TVs in the 24" - 30" size for as little as $1450 - $2500. That seems pretty amazing to me.
$599 Mac mini Core 2 Duo + EyeTV hybrid $150 + 24" Dell $700 (20% off Sale Price) = $1450 new.
Used any solo or dual G5 PM with a Dual Link Video Card + 30" Dell $1520 (20% off Sale Price) = $2500 or less.
Biff...
Feb 21, 04:11 PM
Gotta stop looking at this thread, its giving me to many ideas that will cost me dearly. :eek:
Al1n
Apr 11, 07:26 AM
I never drove a manual in my life. LOL.
So, no, i can't drive a stick shift car. :)
So, no, i can't drive a stick shift car. :)
Dillenger
Apr 2, 08:45 PM
A nice change.
newdeal
Mar 25, 06:38 PM
It makes me laugh that people are saying bad things about this when the playbook did it it was the best thing ever and the software it was displaying wasn't nearly so advanced
Demon Hunter
Nov 15, 03:31 PM
I guess this is fairly boring news for gamers, if Quake is any indication...
KingYaba
Oct 23, 08:52 PM
One of these days the MBP Merom rumor will be correct. :)
eddietr
Jan 11, 09:40 PM
what if this slim macbook had a touch pad keyboard? that would be one way to make it smaller
That would be interesting.
The one thing miss about my old thinkpad is the eraser mouse thing in the middle of the keyboard.
Not that the eraser head is that great of a pointing device, it's just that not having to move your hands from typing to moving to typing to moving is really convenient.
They could achieve the same by just merging the keyboard and trackpad together.
That would be interesting.
The one thing miss about my old thinkpad is the eraser mouse thing in the middle of the keyboard.
Not that the eraser head is that great of a pointing device, it's just that not having to move your hands from typing to moving to typing to moving is really convenient.
They could achieve the same by just merging the keyboard and trackpad together.
Mexbearpig
Nov 25, 02:37 PM
Our power went out so we went out to get something to eat. I got a vent double chocolate chip frappuccino with a blueberry scone.and now our power is back on!
garybUK
Mar 10, 06:50 AM
Interesting thoughts iGav. Apparently it's up to the Indians to get creative with their Tata Nano.