EDH667
Dec 13, 09:39 AM
That makes sense ... thanks for sharing!
If Magellan handles bluetooth a bit more logical, and Magellan supports all Apple devices (iPhone & iPod Touch) and Magellan can handle covers/skins ... it's worth the $10 more ... too bad they (or Apples approval process) missed the Xmas rush ... TomTom may see some exchanges in early Jan for Magellan.
I agree! I'm on my second TomTom car kit and continue to have problems with the Bluetooth speaker phone cutting in and out so you cannot hear the other person's conversation. I raised the issue with TomTom support and their reply was;
"I have forwarded the information that you provided to our product development team for review. We often use customer feedback as initiative to add or change the features of our products. Thank you for your feedback relating to this issue. We hope to have this issue resolved with a future update to the TomTom application."
I have a Magellan Premium car kit on order and will take my second TomTom car kit back to Apple for a refund!
If Magellan handles bluetooth a bit more logical, and Magellan supports all Apple devices (iPhone & iPod Touch) and Magellan can handle covers/skins ... it's worth the $10 more ... too bad they (or Apples approval process) missed the Xmas rush ... TomTom may see some exchanges in early Jan for Magellan.
I agree! I'm on my second TomTom car kit and continue to have problems with the Bluetooth speaker phone cutting in and out so you cannot hear the other person's conversation. I raised the issue with TomTom support and their reply was;
"I have forwarded the information that you provided to our product development team for review. We often use customer feedback as initiative to add or change the features of our products. Thank you for your feedback relating to this issue. We hope to have this issue resolved with a future update to the TomTom application."
I have a Magellan Premium car kit on order and will take my second TomTom car kit back to Apple for a refund!
GregA
Nov 27, 03:44 PM
No point in what? I am stating my OWN ideas.Yes, but you're stating your OWN ideas while telling others their ideas are stupid. If you can't see how even after re-reading, then ..... c'est la vie I guess.
leman
May 6, 01:58 AM
If ARM is indeed able to make high-performance CPUs, then a move like this would be one of the most significant ones in the computing history. Let's face it: the x86 architecture is a dead end. Its needlessly complicated and builds on obsolete tech. Internally, the modern x86 CPUs aren't even x86 anymore - they decompose, recompile and reorder the machine code as they execute it. The ARM assembly is more suited for modern computing as it is more efficient as the x86 code and allows better CPU pipeline utilization.
The real question is whether ARM is able to create a CPU which is powerful enough to compete with Intel's offerings. The x86 may be inefficient but the sophisticated design of Intel CPUs results in great performance. ARM must really step on it to attain these levels.
P.S. If something like this should happen, I am sure that ARM will include hardware emulation layer for x86 instructions, for compatibility with older software. Any anyway, what does it cost to recompile an application? Indeed: nothing (if the application is competently written, that is).
The real question is whether ARM is able to create a CPU which is powerful enough to compete with Intel's offerings. The x86 may be inefficient but the sophisticated design of Intel CPUs results in great performance. ARM must really step on it to attain these levels.
P.S. If something like this should happen, I am sure that ARM will include hardware emulation layer for x86 instructions, for compatibility with older software. Any anyway, what does it cost to recompile an application? Indeed: nothing (if the application is competently written, that is).
smulji
Mar 30, 10:53 PM
WOW. In my years of OS X development and beta releases, this is the first time I believe Apple has released a developer preview with little to no beta releases, and pushed right into a half arsed possible GM build without the numerous beta's for 10.X refinements. For developers and companies who have been accustomed to Apple pushing bi-weekly beta's as the GM release approaches. This may not bold well for developers and companies transitioning their products/applications in time and with little "bumps" in the road.
This also makes me believe Apple has certainly, finally, officially drawn a line with regard to their main focus: iOS. It truly is about mobile devices for Cupertino, with iPhones and iPads and numerous iOS beta releases that have pushed OS X off center stage since Leopard. Gone are the excellent days of a dedicated LCD display line with three size variants, gone are the days when desktop PowerPC towers were affordable, and soon the professionals who spent thousands of dollars and hours investing in Mac products for their work will be pushed out the door for the general mass consumer. This is a sad sign for us, for those that supported a struggling yet profitable Apple dedicated to professionals, consumers, quality products and improved operating systems.
That could be what Steve Jobs was alluding to when during the iPad 1 release in 2010 he said that Apple was the world's largest mobile devices company. Then later that same year during one of the financial conference calls Tim Cooke said people should refer to Apple as a mobile company. Just a theory.
This also makes me believe Apple has certainly, finally, officially drawn a line with regard to their main focus: iOS. It truly is about mobile devices for Cupertino, with iPhones and iPads and numerous iOS beta releases that have pushed OS X off center stage since Leopard. Gone are the excellent days of a dedicated LCD display line with three size variants, gone are the days when desktop PowerPC towers were affordable, and soon the professionals who spent thousands of dollars and hours investing in Mac products for their work will be pushed out the door for the general mass consumer. This is a sad sign for us, for those that supported a struggling yet profitable Apple dedicated to professionals, consumers, quality products and improved operating systems.
That could be what Steve Jobs was alluding to when during the iPad 1 release in 2010 he said that Apple was the world's largest mobile devices company. Then later that same year during one of the financial conference calls Tim Cooke said people should refer to Apple as a mobile company. Just a theory.
mikeapple
Mar 26, 11:21 PM
I truly believe who EVER said there will be a 3rd iPad in the fall actually pulled it out of their a**.... like kids, just can't wait and be patient. Now that person has got everyone thinking their will be an iPad 3 in the fall
ckurt25
Apr 18, 03:07 PM
Looking at the TouchWiz UI, I see your point.
But, at what point does an interface become too generic? For example, the concept of pages of icons in a grid isn't really new or innovative. The concept of swiping across screens is simple and intuitive and should be standardized
(e.g. copied) for that exact reason. Should other phone makers put the icons in a circle, "just because" they need to be different? Should they force you to do something differently just because the best and most intuitive way was "already taken"?
Everyone loves car analogies, so: what if Ford decided to sue other carmakers because they copied their steering wheel design? Would other companies have been forced to adopt other types of controls -- joysticks or dials or foot pedals, perhaps -- "just because"? And would that have been good for the auto industry?
That's for the patent lawyers and the legal system to decide.
Now if it was a fight to the death it would be a lot more interesting.
But, at what point does an interface become too generic? For example, the concept of pages of icons in a grid isn't really new or innovative. The concept of swiping across screens is simple and intuitive and should be standardized
(e.g. copied) for that exact reason. Should other phone makers put the icons in a circle, "just because" they need to be different? Should they force you to do something differently just because the best and most intuitive way was "already taken"?
Everyone loves car analogies, so: what if Ford decided to sue other carmakers because they copied their steering wheel design? Would other companies have been forced to adopt other types of controls -- joysticks or dials or foot pedals, perhaps -- "just because"? And would that have been good for the auto industry?
That's for the patent lawyers and the legal system to decide.
Now if it was a fight to the death it would be a lot more interesting.
fishmoose
Apr 23, 04:59 PM
Good article on the subject: "Consider The Retina Display" (http://theelaborated.net/blog/2011/4/13/consider-the-retina-display.html)
MatthewAMEL
May 6, 12:46 AM
This is about the dumbest thing I have ever seen on MacRumors.
It's not April Fools, right?
It's not April Fools, right?
Eduardo1971
Apr 18, 02:47 PM
Has Apple targeted other 'tablet' makers?
Wonder how long until they serve HP with a similar suit?
Wonder how long until they serve HP with a similar suit?
andiwm2003
Jul 21, 02:52 PM
I do agree that the new Pro towers need a much more proper launch while the other lines can just get a shiny new Core 2 Duo logo on their site and an update to Apple's Intel page.
Your copy pasta didn't work completely.
http://download.intel.com/intel/finance/earnings/IntelQ22006earningsfoils.pdf
wow, most importantly on slide 3 they say that they launched the 965 chipset. that means they can switch to the 965 integrated GPU across the board for consumer macs. that would certainly help the heat issues, make the macs cheaper and less complicated to design for apple. standard parts and boards allow for even faster updates. good news.
Your copy pasta didn't work completely.
http://download.intel.com/intel/finance/earnings/IntelQ22006earningsfoils.pdf
wow, most importantly on slide 3 they say that they launched the 965 chipset. that means they can switch to the 965 integrated GPU across the board for consumer macs. that would certainly help the heat issues, make the macs cheaper and less complicated to design for apple. standard parts and boards allow for even faster updates. good news.
QuarterSwede
Apr 10, 06:30 PM
Just gave the problem to my 12 year old brother. Yup, its 288. To all you people who still believe it's 2, I hope you don't deal with math a lot in your careers. It might also be a good idea for you to hire somebody else to do your taxes ;)
It's not surprising that we lose basic math skills that most people really don't need to use on a day to day basis.
It's not surprising that we lose basic math skills that most people really don't need to use on a day to day basis.
Squire
Nov 26, 04:43 PM
The likelihood of an Apple tablet increases with time because the technology gets better. Here are some of my rumblings from some similar threads started in 2005.
I think the tablet idea is plausible. Here's why:
-Many people wouldn't think twice about buying a new iPod. One problem is everyone already has one. Another problem is that you can't do any "computing" with an iPod.
Enter the tablet. It has a pod-ish name to keep people interested. It plays video, if that's your thing. It's cross-platform compatible (files and stuff) and the bundled software is amazing. Non-Mac users weren't afraid of buying an iPod. Non-Mac-using iPod owners will not be afraid to buy this. It will give them a little taste of what OS X is all about.
I think Apple needs a product like this, especially with Palm's new LifeDrive out (a PDA with a 4GB hard drive).
...And...
hmmm....maybe it's some sort of glorified remote control with a touch-screen interface to manage all your media via wi-fi and/or BT between yor mac, airport, stereo & tv?
Some random thoughts:
Good point. I seem to recall reports of Steve just grinning when asked about the problem of getting up and walking to your computer to change tracks (Walt Mossberg referring to the AirPort Express).
The thought of a video iPod doubling as an AE remote, although initially interesting, seems a bit out of whack. I wouldn't want a remote control any larger (width-wise, anyway) than a normal iPod. And I wouldn't want an iPod video any smaller than the current iPod.
Ever notice how Steve gives a reason for almost everything they do, especially if they were originally against doing it?
* entering the mp3 market: The devices had a limited capacity and/or terrible UI.
* iPod photo: Finally there was some content to display (while there was no content providers for portable video players) [Now, of course, there are music videos.]
* Flash-based mp3 players: They have crappy little screens and cumbersome controls. Solution= ditch the screen and make simple controls.
* Tablets: Who knows? They'll refine them or give us a good enough reason to want one. Same goes for video iPod, I guess.
Squire
I think the tablet idea is plausible. Here's why:
-Many people wouldn't think twice about buying a new iPod. One problem is everyone already has one. Another problem is that you can't do any "computing" with an iPod.
Enter the tablet. It has a pod-ish name to keep people interested. It plays video, if that's your thing. It's cross-platform compatible (files and stuff) and the bundled software is amazing. Non-Mac users weren't afraid of buying an iPod. Non-Mac-using iPod owners will not be afraid to buy this. It will give them a little taste of what OS X is all about.
I think Apple needs a product like this, especially with Palm's new LifeDrive out (a PDA with a 4GB hard drive).
...And...
hmmm....maybe it's some sort of glorified remote control with a touch-screen interface to manage all your media via wi-fi and/or BT between yor mac, airport, stereo & tv?
Some random thoughts:
Good point. I seem to recall reports of Steve just grinning when asked about the problem of getting up and walking to your computer to change tracks (Walt Mossberg referring to the AirPort Express).
The thought of a video iPod doubling as an AE remote, although initially interesting, seems a bit out of whack. I wouldn't want a remote control any larger (width-wise, anyway) than a normal iPod. And I wouldn't want an iPod video any smaller than the current iPod.
Ever notice how Steve gives a reason for almost everything they do, especially if they were originally against doing it?
* entering the mp3 market: The devices had a limited capacity and/or terrible UI.
* iPod photo: Finally there was some content to display (while there was no content providers for portable video players) [Now, of course, there are music videos.]
* Flash-based mp3 players: They have crappy little screens and cumbersome controls. Solution= ditch the screen and make simple controls.
* Tablets: Who knows? They'll refine them or give us a good enough reason to want one. Same goes for video iPod, I guess.
Squire
Piggie
Apr 23, 06:29 PM
What was the point in bringing retina display to the iPhone? :)
Same thing I guess...
For one I want it, it is very kind on the eyes...
Yes, because the iPhone was low res for a device you hold up to your nose and a typical consumer, which is what Apple design for, could easily see the pixels.
I am wondering how many typical consumers, when viewing at the distance you would view, say a 24" monitor, can make out individual pixels.
I do know Apple's font smoothing is a little, ummmm, shall we say, different to what Microsoft do, so perhaps typefaces do look more jaggy on a Mac than they do on a PC ?
Same thing I guess...
For one I want it, it is very kind on the eyes...
Yes, because the iPhone was low res for a device you hold up to your nose and a typical consumer, which is what Apple design for, could easily see the pixels.
I am wondering how many typical consumers, when viewing at the distance you would view, say a 24" monitor, can make out individual pixels.
I do know Apple's font smoothing is a little, ummmm, shall we say, different to what Microsoft do, so perhaps typefaces do look more jaggy on a Mac than they do on a PC ?
sisyphus
Sep 10, 11:42 PM
Ignore, double post...
cube
May 6, 06:18 AM
Because SPARC is current x86 technology. ;)
That has nothing to do. Some people are talking about dual processor laptops as if it were science fiction here.
That has nothing to do. Some people are talking about dual processor laptops as if it were science fiction here.
appleguy123
May 4, 08:38 PM
It's all good, I guess. I don't think I would have ever understood the mechanics of this game anyway.
If we keep playing this format, I don't think it should go under the WW moniker because I don't see any similarities at all, and would like to play WW games while (and if) this format goes on in the future.
If we keep playing this format, I don't think it should go under the WW moniker because I don't see any similarities at all, and would like to play WW games while (and if) this format goes on in the future.
spazzcat
Mar 29, 09:03 AM
At least it works on the market leading platform. ;)
donald trump house.
Donald Trump didn#39;t seem like
tazinlwfl
Apr 25, 10:14 AM
Wow, I just realised I've been on this forum for quite a while.
I've been reading MacRumors since about 02 (Highschool for me)... :p
I've been reading MacRumors since about 02 (Highschool for me)... :p
Steven in VA
May 8, 11:19 PM
Didn't somebody already point out the family account bargain?
$149 for 5 accounts; only 30 bucks per account per year seems like a good deal for us. Even though our kids are grown they still like having it. And the 10GB storage on the sub-accounts is still big enough to be useful.
But I just got the email notice that mine/ours is just about to renew, too. To have it become free for new users in a week, or a month, even, would be somewhat of a bite . . .
$149 for 5 accounts; only 30 bucks per account per year seems like a good deal for us. Even though our kids are grown they still like having it. And the 10GB storage on the sub-accounts is still big enough to be useful.
But I just got the email notice that mine/ours is just about to renew, too. To have it become free for new users in a week, or a month, even, would be somewhat of a bite . . .
citizenzen
Apr 16, 12:41 PM
I doubt you can even explain what it is I'm doing.
To some extent I can because I looked it up last night. Now I'm an expert. ;)
The simplified version ...
You're buying and selling options which have a set value and an expiration date. If the set value doesn't meet the market value by the expiration date then those options are worthless. Options that have more time before their expiration date have more value than options near that date because there is more time for the market to go up and reach that value. The value of these options decay as they approach their expiration date, with the greatest rate of decay occurring in the few weeks before that date arrives.
So now that I have a bit of an understanding about what you do, here are a few thoughts ...
"Siphoning" was a poor choice of words. And for that I apologize. "Wagering" would more accurately describe what is happening here. The option has been given a value and if the market reaches that value then the option is worth something, if not, it is worthless. Value can also be achieved by selling the option to someone before the expiration date. So you are betting on, buying and/or selling a financial product.
Anyway, the principle (there's that word again) point that I'd like to express is that your chosen way of making an income effects your perspective on the issue of capital gains. The money you make in these transactions is considered a capital gain, so it's no wonder that you would be against a capital gains tax and cast it in a negative light.
I'm really not trying to get personal here. I don't know you. You might be the nicest person in the world. But when it comes to the issue of taxing capital gains you have a huge vested interest that is bound to color your views and leave me to question your objectivity on this matter.
To some extent I can because I looked it up last night. Now I'm an expert. ;)
The simplified version ...
You're buying and selling options which have a set value and an expiration date. If the set value doesn't meet the market value by the expiration date then those options are worthless. Options that have more time before their expiration date have more value than options near that date because there is more time for the market to go up and reach that value. The value of these options decay as they approach their expiration date, with the greatest rate of decay occurring in the few weeks before that date arrives.
So now that I have a bit of an understanding about what you do, here are a few thoughts ...
"Siphoning" was a poor choice of words. And for that I apologize. "Wagering" would more accurately describe what is happening here. The option has been given a value and if the market reaches that value then the option is worth something, if not, it is worthless. Value can also be achieved by selling the option to someone before the expiration date. So you are betting on, buying and/or selling a financial product.
Anyway, the principle (there's that word again) point that I'd like to express is that your chosen way of making an income effects your perspective on the issue of capital gains. The money you make in these transactions is considered a capital gain, so it's no wonder that you would be against a capital gains tax and cast it in a negative light.
I'm really not trying to get personal here. I don't know you. You might be the nicest person in the world. But when it comes to the issue of taxing capital gains you have a huge vested interest that is bound to color your views and leave me to question your objectivity on this matter.
marcosscriven
May 6, 02:37 AM
Moving to a different architecture doesn't mean the death of Mac OS - all they need to do is compile it to the new target. Obviously not *quite* that simple, but ARM Mac != iOS Mac
What I'm interested in though is how well any proposed ARM chip could emulate the Core i3/5/7s of today?
If a future MacBook had an 8-core 64-bit ARM chip in that was twice as fast as Intel's offerings, and used half the power (say), but was the same price, the only thing that would stop me buying is if x86 emulation was poor.
Basically, I don't care what processor is used, if older programs can be run *reasonably* well, for a year or so, before they are compiled for the new arch, or superseded by others. I'd be prepared to take a 20 - 30% hit on x86 apps in any interim changeover period.
What I'm interested in though is how well any proposed ARM chip could emulate the Core i3/5/7s of today?
If a future MacBook had an 8-core 64-bit ARM chip in that was twice as fast as Intel's offerings, and used half the power (say), but was the same price, the only thing that would stop me buying is if x86 emulation was poor.
Basically, I don't care what processor is used, if older programs can be run *reasonably* well, for a year or so, before they are compiled for the new arch, or superseded by others. I'd be prepared to take a 20 - 30% hit on x86 apps in any interim changeover period.
Piggie
Apr 23, 05:45 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_6 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8E200 Safari/6533.18.5)
Yeah a 1024 x 1024 icon is amazing considering I would bet a significant amount of 1024 x 768 monitors are still being used. Imagine not being able to view an icon in its entirety on a five-year-old monitor!
Indeed they are, and still being sold today.
They are called iPad's ;)
Yeah a 1024 x 1024 icon is amazing considering I would bet a significant amount of 1024 x 768 monitors are still being used. Imagine not being able to view an icon in its entirety on a five-year-old monitor!
Indeed they are, and still being sold today.
They are called iPad's ;)
tstreete
Nov 14, 08:37 AM
My concern with A windshield mount is all the wires hanging down. Two if using power cord and speaker cord.
Thoughts or comments?
These are full sized, so you might want to download them.
http://www.uvm.edu/~tstreete/temp/landscape.JPG
http://www.uvm.edu/~tstreete/temp/portrait.JPG
http://www.uvm.edu/~tstreete/temp/rear.JPG
Thoughts or comments?
These are full sized, so you might want to download them.
http://www.uvm.edu/~tstreete/temp/landscape.JPG
http://www.uvm.edu/~tstreete/temp/portrait.JPG
http://www.uvm.edu/~tstreete/temp/rear.JPG
GregA
Nov 27, 04:01 PM
Besides, most mock-ups here show a rather enhanced iPod, than a REAL tablet...so this means most people want/need only a grown-up PDA, instead of a tablet as such...and I couldn't agree more.
How do you define a REAL tablet?
How do you define a REAL tablet?
