KevanDual2.5
Sep 6, 08:56 AM
Maybe i am alone on this one....
I think the 24" iMac G5 is the beginning of the end of the G5 iMac. We all watched as the outstanding G4 iMac grew from a 15" to a 17" and finally to 20". While the stunning design remained the same, the 20" just didn't look as good as the 2 previous models. The proportions were wrong and it looked top-heavy.
I am sitting in front of an original 23" Apple Display (plastic rather than aluminium). The new iMac cannot be much smaller than it. I firmly believe that the 24" will be, and should be, as big as it gets. I just hope that heat doesn't become a problem with the Core 2 Duo chips else the G5 iMac may have to evolve into a new enclosure.
Anyone else have thoughts similar?
I think the 24" iMac G5 is the beginning of the end of the G5 iMac. We all watched as the outstanding G4 iMac grew from a 15" to a 17" and finally to 20". While the stunning design remained the same, the 20" just didn't look as good as the 2 previous models. The proportions were wrong and it looked top-heavy.
I am sitting in front of an original 23" Apple Display (plastic rather than aluminium). The new iMac cannot be much smaller than it. I firmly believe that the 24" will be, and should be, as big as it gets. I just hope that heat doesn't become a problem with the Core 2 Duo chips else the G5 iMac may have to evolve into a new enclosure.
Anyone else have thoughts similar?
Love
Jan 8, 12:42 PM
http://www.avenuecalgary.com/files/u4433/300px-Calgary_Transit_6009.jpg
I need a driver's licence.
I need a driver's licence.
HecubusPro
Aug 24, 05:57 PM
man i'd love for them to include "old" yonah based chips and release a mini for $300-$400. i just want the cheapest intel rig i can buy right now as i'm "mid-cycle".
I thought Yonah and Merom are basically the same cost-wise. That's why everyone thinks including merom in new systems won't raise the price of those systems. I could be wrong.
I thought Yonah and Merom are basically the same cost-wise. That's why everyone thinks including merom in new systems won't raise the price of those systems. I could be wrong.
rezenclowd3
Jan 8, 07:17 PM
I was finally able to take my own pics of my just acquired '88 BMW 325is with M50B25TU engine swap. Darn this car is quick and handles so very well.
Don't mind my nerdy self, It's who I am and I have come to accept it over a decade ago:D
http://oomsgfx.com/misc/Posts%20on%20Forums/E30%20pics/DSC_4945.jpg
http://oomsgfx.com/misc/Posts%20on%20Forums/E30%20pics/DSC_4961.jpg
http://oomsgfx.com/misc/Posts%20on%20Forums/E30%20pics/DSC_4998.jpg
http://oomsgfx.com/misc/Posts%20on%20Forums/E30%20pics/DSC_5027.jpg
Don't mind my nerdy self, It's who I am and I have come to accept it over a decade ago:D
http://oomsgfx.com/misc/Posts%20on%20Forums/E30%20pics/DSC_4945.jpg
http://oomsgfx.com/misc/Posts%20on%20Forums/E30%20pics/DSC_4961.jpg
http://oomsgfx.com/misc/Posts%20on%20Forums/E30%20pics/DSC_4998.jpg
http://oomsgfx.com/misc/Posts%20on%20Forums/E30%20pics/DSC_5027.jpg
Dr.Gargoyle
Aug 29, 10:59 AM
Maybe FrontRow 2 (I believe/assume comes with Leopard) is where this will play in. Maybe instead of making a single device and labeling it a media center Apple will allow for any Mac (any new Mac...) to be used as a media center via FrontRow 2.
I really hope you are correct about FR2 in Leopard. However...
I do think you need a TV-card in the computer too. Given Apples philosophy about simplicity, I doubt they will have a stand alone TV-reciever. Furthermore, I just can't see Apple selling MP with a TV-card. So my guess is that they will make a dedicated computer. Still I am most likely wrong... as always...:p
I really hope you are correct about FR2 in Leopard. However...
I do think you need a TV-card in the computer too. Given Apples philosophy about simplicity, I doubt they will have a stand alone TV-reciever. Furthermore, I just can't see Apple selling MP with a TV-card. So my guess is that they will make a dedicated computer. Still I am most likely wrong... as always...:p
freebooter
Sep 6, 12:45 PM
I agree that the lower end 17" iMac is a better deal than the mini.
Synchromesh
Apr 20, 10:50 AM
The hondas I've driven from 02-06 (including mine) have all have very good engaging transmissions.
I beg to differ. Aside from S2000 whose transmission really is orgasmic, everything else from 2002 on I've driven by Honda was average at best. I drove an '07 Civic Si which was ok but nothing spectacular as well as '06 Accord V6 with manual. That one had a vague shifter that looked like an afterthought. Didn't like it. My daily driver is another Honda (Integra GS-R) and that car has an excellent shifter. But it was designed back in early 90s.
Another crappy shifter award: Subaru. Most Imprezas/WRXs I testdrove recently sucked with a passion. Only exception was one with the short shifter kit.
I beg to differ. Aside from S2000 whose transmission really is orgasmic, everything else from 2002 on I've driven by Honda was average at best. I drove an '07 Civic Si which was ok but nothing spectacular as well as '06 Accord V6 with manual. That one had a vague shifter that looked like an afterthought. Didn't like it. My daily driver is another Honda (Integra GS-R) and that car has an excellent shifter. But it was designed back in early 90s.
Another crappy shifter award: Subaru. Most Imprezas/WRXs I testdrove recently sucked with a passion. Only exception was one with the short shifter kit.
richardsim7
Mar 22, 04:40 PM
Yeah but are they going to improve the quality? The DAC on the iPod Classic is bloody terrible! It makes me sad :(
rasmasyean
Apr 8, 06:48 PM
So why not Mexico? Mexico is experiencing way more violence than most of these Middle East countries yet their request for U.N. aid in 2009 was denied. They are on our doorstep and we are ignoring it for the most part even though we are partly to blame for the violence. The U.N. actually told Mexico just the other day to withdraw their own Military forces from the fight against the cartels.
Prolly has something to do with leaving the country messed up so we can draw modern day slaves from the wreckage to fuel parts of our economy. Whatever "charity" we do, there's often an alterior motive. If there isn't a potential gain, we usually ignore it....especially if ignoring it actually has a potential gain in itself. Just like ignoring the columbian drug trades or whatever WITHIN our country so that their drug war may go on to achieve political objectives.
Prolly has something to do with leaving the country messed up so we can draw modern day slaves from the wreckage to fuel parts of our economy. Whatever "charity" we do, there's often an alterior motive. If there isn't a potential gain, we usually ignore it....especially if ignoring it actually has a potential gain in itself. Just like ignoring the columbian drug trades or whatever WITHIN our country so that their drug war may go on to achieve political objectives.
sisyphus
Sep 6, 06:15 PM
I know they want to sell and that it is probably easier to manage, but I would rather rent than buy. I have bought a total of 4 DVDs. So few movies are worth owning. Some are actually worth renting.
CalBoy
Mar 21, 12:32 AM
There are homeopathic apps in the AppStore. Those won't work any better than this 'pray the gay away' app, but they still are allowed in the store.
Then I think Apple might be exposed to the same potential liabilities for homeopathic remedies too. Mind you I don't think (or know definitely) anyone has successfully maintained that companies that knowingly permit the propagation of dangerous materials should be held liable. I do, however, think that it would be a fair standard to apply if the company is going to trumpet it's own "protective" prowess.
Apple is being inconsistent with its policies on the App Store. Either any offensive or potentially dangerous app should be barred, or none of them should be. By trying to play the part of the micromanager, Apple is revealing its own limitations.
No-one could possibly be offended by homeopathy.
I disagree. The level of offense might be lower than this gay-be-gone app, but I'm sure many physicians, nurses, and skeptics are not too fond of junk science being spread.
Moreover, it isn't just about what offends; that is merely a measuring stick to figure out what Apple's priorities are. I'm sure there is an app to offend everyone in the app store (does the Auduban Society approve of Angry Birds?). The question is which of these apps represents a real problem for users? As much as I disagree with Jobs about porn in the app store, there is at least some minimal possibility of utility in leaving porn out of the app store in that parents will be better able to decide what their kids download (not that there aren't other means of doing so, or that the kids haven't already seen porn). Sure it isn't a fantastic reason, but at least there's plausibility.
I think something similar can be said for this gay-be-gone app or a homeopathic app. In these situations the dangers from app use are not only higher, but they also run contrary to what medical professionals the world over recommend. If Apple is so willing to ban something for its plausible dangers, why not ban something for its very real dangers?
I think that should be a more important metric over offense. An app that is offensive but which doesn't hurt anyone either directly on indirectly should be scrutinized much less than one that does. In this light, it becomes more clear that what Apple really wanted to do all along was keep porn out of the App Store. Not because it's offensive or dangerous, but because it would make their devices easier to sell even in the most conservative of markets.
Then I think Apple might be exposed to the same potential liabilities for homeopathic remedies too. Mind you I don't think (or know definitely) anyone has successfully maintained that companies that knowingly permit the propagation of dangerous materials should be held liable. I do, however, think that it would be a fair standard to apply if the company is going to trumpet it's own "protective" prowess.
Apple is being inconsistent with its policies on the App Store. Either any offensive or potentially dangerous app should be barred, or none of them should be. By trying to play the part of the micromanager, Apple is revealing its own limitations.
No-one could possibly be offended by homeopathy.
I disagree. The level of offense might be lower than this gay-be-gone app, but I'm sure many physicians, nurses, and skeptics are not too fond of junk science being spread.
Moreover, it isn't just about what offends; that is merely a measuring stick to figure out what Apple's priorities are. I'm sure there is an app to offend everyone in the app store (does the Auduban Society approve of Angry Birds?). The question is which of these apps represents a real problem for users? As much as I disagree with Jobs about porn in the app store, there is at least some minimal possibility of utility in leaving porn out of the app store in that parents will be better able to decide what their kids download (not that there aren't other means of doing so, or that the kids haven't already seen porn). Sure it isn't a fantastic reason, but at least there's plausibility.
I think something similar can be said for this gay-be-gone app or a homeopathic app. In these situations the dangers from app use are not only higher, but they also run contrary to what medical professionals the world over recommend. If Apple is so willing to ban something for its plausible dangers, why not ban something for its very real dangers?
I think that should be a more important metric over offense. An app that is offensive but which doesn't hurt anyone either directly on indirectly should be scrutinized much less than one that does. In this light, it becomes more clear that what Apple really wanted to do all along was keep porn out of the App Store. Not because it's offensive or dangerous, but because it would make their devices easier to sell even in the most conservative of markets.
/user/me
Mar 23, 01:38 PM
No, no one is forced to do anything. Apple is more extreme with what they will and will not allow. Others follow suit b/c they know Apple changes the world. Android market allows practically everything.
As far as I know there's three rules that have to be followed when designing an iOS app.
1. No porn
2. no flash
3. it has to be approved.
I really dont' think that's too much to ask.... especially since Apple has complete ownership of the app store. Nbody's forcing you to get their procuts... If you dont' like it, buy an Android phone.
As far as I know there's three rules that have to be followed when designing an iOS app.
1. No porn
2. no flash
3. it has to be approved.
I really dont' think that's too much to ask.... especially since Apple has complete ownership of the app store. Nbody's forcing you to get their procuts... If you dont' like it, buy an Android phone.
appleguy123
Mar 22, 11:37 PM
I do think some people genuinely believe it's a choice. It's hard for some people to imagine that not everyone's minds work the same as theirs, and not just related to homosexuality. Chances are, someone who considers homosexuality a choice likely has issues with other groups of people as well.
I think that people who blelieve homosexuality is a choice have some degree of homosexual attraction andchoose not to act on it.
I think that people who blelieve homosexuality is a choice have some degree of homosexual attraction andchoose not to act on it.
fswmacguy
Sep 8, 08:44 PM
I've always been a sucker for the SwitchEasy products.
http://www.switcheasy.com/
But they do not have any iPod touch 4G cases yet. :C
http://www.switcheasy.com/
But they do not have any iPod touch 4G cases yet. :C
QuarterSwede
Apr 9, 11:51 PM
I've never owned an automatic. I'm addicted to driving a sports car with a manual gearbox.
After owning several I simply cannot imagine anything else. I enjoy driving too much to drive an automatic sedan.
You probably aren't carting around kids.
After owning several I simply cannot imagine anything else. I enjoy driving too much to drive an automatic sedan.
You probably aren't carting around kids.
csHokie
May 3, 11:38 PM
Uh, this comment is entirely wrong. With iOS, you can download something and move to another app and it will continue downloading in the background. The multitasking APIs have all the obvious backgrounding tasks covered and will likely include more if needed. Basically the goal is to allow background tasks when needed and when not needed let the app suspend and release resources to the apps you actually need. This method in iOS has proven to work far better than traditional operating systems like Mac OS X and Windows. That's why they are bringing it "Back to the Mac OS". The best parts of what they developed in iOS are being added in Lion.
I think most people's problem is that they mistakenly viewed iOS as inferior in every way to Mac OS X but in many ways it is cutting edge and far better than OS X and Windows have ever been. The way iOS multitasking works is the reason very powerful and memory hungry apps like iMove and GarageBand for iPad work so surprisingly well on such a limited memory device. The apps get to use a much larger percentage of the CPU, GPU, and RAM than they do on traditional OSes under normal usage where you have multiple apps open.
Yeah, it would work great for quick loading, full screen or minimized applications. I'm afraid it would fall apart most everywhere else... and they would have to have more background options than in iOS (can I listen on a socket for incoming connections in a daemon?). Anyway, I don't think they will get rid of the traditional <blank>top multitasking.
Right now I have a bunch of tabs open in Safari on my Mac and it's consuming a little over 1GB of RAM and lots of CPU. If I switch to Photoshop, Safari is still going to be using up all that RAM and CPU I really need for Photoshop when I don't plan on using Safari again until later today. And I don't want to shut it down because I have a bunch things in these tabs that I want to get back to later today including partially typed forum replies, halfway read articles, etc. On the iPad, Safari would suspend and release the RAM and CPU to my currently used RAM/CPU hungry app. That's what they need to bring to Lion.
Use Firefox and save tabs on exit...
I think most people's problem is that they mistakenly viewed iOS as inferior in every way to Mac OS X but in many ways it is cutting edge and far better than OS X and Windows have ever been. The way iOS multitasking works is the reason very powerful and memory hungry apps like iMove and GarageBand for iPad work so surprisingly well on such a limited memory device. The apps get to use a much larger percentage of the CPU, GPU, and RAM than they do on traditional OSes under normal usage where you have multiple apps open.
Yeah, it would work great for quick loading, full screen or minimized applications. I'm afraid it would fall apart most everywhere else... and they would have to have more background options than in iOS (can I listen on a socket for incoming connections in a daemon?). Anyway, I don't think they will get rid of the traditional <blank>top multitasking.
Right now I have a bunch of tabs open in Safari on my Mac and it's consuming a little over 1GB of RAM and lots of CPU. If I switch to Photoshop, Safari is still going to be using up all that RAM and CPU I really need for Photoshop when I don't plan on using Safari again until later today. And I don't want to shut it down because I have a bunch things in these tabs that I want to get back to later today including partially typed forum replies, halfway read articles, etc. On the iPad, Safari would suspend and release the RAM and CPU to my currently used RAM/CPU hungry app. That's what they need to bring to Lion.
Use Firefox and save tabs on exit...
Mike84
Apr 26, 02:15 PM
Your point is that you cannot find such a trademark as "app store" in the standard character format because "app store" is too general right? The other person posted that "pet store" would be a ridiculous example of this.
Ok fair enough. Pet store was registered in the stylized or design format.
But your basic argument against Apple is that they cannot use app store as a trademark in the broader text format because it is too general. But this is not the only example of such a thing.
If this is the case then Apple Store will be thrown out too. It is the same type of trademark. Two words, not one and not preceded by "the".
App Store
Apple Store
The other argument is that "app" is too generic and that the term was around prior to the trademark. I do not believe this is valid either as "app" may have existed but was not widely used. The argument would have been used agains the prior trademark of "appstore" in that case.
One thing is for sure. Our opinions will have no bearing on the final outcome.
You define the lexicon of the overall society?
I think you are missing the point:
"What are some other reasons for refusing registration?
Registration may be refused if the mark is:
• Descriptive for the goods/services;
• A geographic term;
• A surname;
• Ornamental as applied to the goods"
Source: http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/basics/BasicFacts_with_correct_links.pdf
App Store is descriptive of what it does. In other words, it sells apps or applications. Therefore, it cannot be trademarked. Apple can use it if they want, but so can anyone else doing the same thing.
This is pretty much saying that Microsoft is going to trademark Operating System. Both Microsoft and Apple make operating systems. What Windows is is a type of operating system. Windows does not describe the product.
Example:
Shop that sells windows cannot trademark "Window Seller" because it describes precisely what the shop does. It is generic + descriptive = no trademark.
Ok fair enough. Pet store was registered in the stylized or design format.
But your basic argument against Apple is that they cannot use app store as a trademark in the broader text format because it is too general. But this is not the only example of such a thing.
If this is the case then Apple Store will be thrown out too. It is the same type of trademark. Two words, not one and not preceded by "the".
App Store
Apple Store
The other argument is that "app" is too generic and that the term was around prior to the trademark. I do not believe this is valid either as "app" may have existed but was not widely used. The argument would have been used agains the prior trademark of "appstore" in that case.
One thing is for sure. Our opinions will have no bearing on the final outcome.
You define the lexicon of the overall society?
I think you are missing the point:
"What are some other reasons for refusing registration?
Registration may be refused if the mark is:
• Descriptive for the goods/services;
• A geographic term;
• A surname;
• Ornamental as applied to the goods"
Source: http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/basics/BasicFacts_with_correct_links.pdf
App Store is descriptive of what it does. In other words, it sells apps or applications. Therefore, it cannot be trademarked. Apple can use it if they want, but so can anyone else doing the same thing.
This is pretty much saying that Microsoft is going to trademark Operating System. Both Microsoft and Apple make operating systems. What Windows is is a type of operating system. Windows does not describe the product.
Example:
Shop that sells windows cannot trademark "Window Seller" because it describes precisely what the shop does. It is generic + descriptive = no trademark.
1984
Aug 29, 10:35 AM
Since they are pin compatible why not use a Core Duo in the entry-level model to get the price down to $499 and use Core 2 Duo in the remaining models? Let's keep in mind this is being reported by ThinkSecret which is about as reliable as MacOSRumors or O'Grady's PowerPage these days. When Appleinsider reports on it I'll start to worry.
DavidLeblond
Apr 21, 01:59 PM
To those laughing at this and pointing out that Android phones don't have a file recording your movements:
https://github.com/packetlss/android-locdump
(NOTE: I did not write this)
https://github.com/packetlss/android-locdump
(NOTE: I did not write this)
Surreal
May 2, 06:00 PM
This will be interesting. The issue that I see concerns ancillary data. I really dislike how the iphone handles application data, but it is--at the very least--consistent. You delete the app, you delete the data.
I haven't had the occasion to see how MAS works with deleting, but I can't imagine it doing anything similar, and that creates a rift, in my opinion.
I haven't had the occasion to see how MAS works with deleting, but I can't imagine it doing anything similar, and that creates a rift, in my opinion.
thejazzman10
Mar 19, 07:20 PM
im not really a big fan of that kind of TV-box stuff, seems kinda pointless :rolleyes:
Balaamsdonkey
Apr 22, 01:43 AM
I could be wrong but I think the GPS recording has more to do with GPS locating for photography than anything else. Isn't that how GPS enabled cameras work? They check the GPS signal every few seconds and record it? I could be wrong.
It would make more sense to just record the GPS info when a photo is taken though.
It would make more sense to just record the GPS info when a photo is taken though.
ipedro
Apr 12, 10:20 PM
Who thinks that they'll eliminate Final Cut Express and lower the price of Final Cut Pro? iMovie seems to serve the "express crowd" while FCP would be within reach of the semi-pro demographic if the price were around $300.
Well, looks like I was right on the mouche. :D
Well, looks like I was right on the mouche. :D
OhEsTen
Nov 15, 10:50 AM
How can this get negative votes? In fact, how do a lot of perfectly benign threads get negative votes? Are there just members out there who vote negative on everything?
Actually, it's a little known fact that Steve Ballmer frequents this site.... So I attribute all the negative votes to him clicking the "negative" button until he gets tired.... as you can see he doesn't have very much endurance....
Actually, it's a little known fact that Steve Ballmer frequents this site.... So I attribute all the negative votes to him clicking the "negative" button until he gets tired.... as you can see he doesn't have very much endurance....