iEvolution
Apr 22, 05:08 PM
Ugh I wish they'd keep the iPod Touch and iPhone different in appearance.
jav6454
Apr 25, 06:46 PM
Plutonius
During the massive PM telling everyone the game started, he and I were the only ones in the group. (remember it's 5 pms at a time). Hence I vote for you out of spite of me not being the only one PMd.
During the massive PM telling everyone the game started, he and I were the only ones in the group. (remember it's 5 pms at a time). Hence I vote for you out of spite of me not being the only one PMd.
mduser63
Jul 11, 02:27 PM
Well obviously none of us here are going to be terribly interested if it's not Mac-compatible. That said, Apple has a lot to lose, so I hope they adapt and compete well.
WiiDSmoker
Nov 10, 03:30 PM
I wonder what battery life will be like.
Also, how many people downloaded it just so they could watch porn?
Battery life would show no change what so ever. The iPad is seeing it as HTML5.
Also, how many people downloaded it just so they could watch porn?
Battery life would show no change what so ever. The iPad is seeing it as HTML5.
more...
jmor
Sep 12, 07:50 PM
Those look really slick, how do you like them so far?
MacinDoc
Apr 13, 08:02 PM
I would pay cash money to know how this sold relative to gender.
Well, with a sample size of 2, my wife bought a white iP3G and I bought a black one...
Well, with a sample size of 2, my wife bought a white iP3G and I bought a black one...
more...
Eduardo1971
Apr 14, 12:46 PM
http://i.imgur.com/FWQIv.png
666MB for AT&T iPhone 4.
Of course it would be 666mb for AT&T...
;)
666MB for AT&T iPhone 4.
Of course it would be 666mb for AT&T...
;)
unobtainium
Apr 15, 02:54 PM
I can't wait for Lion. Like a lot of people, I was first brought into the Apple world by iPhone/iOS, so bringing successful elements of iOS over to the Mac sounds like a great idea to me.
iCal doesn't even look that bad, IMO (not the most "professional" look, maybe). I'm really curious to see whether Apple will change it given the bad feedback it seems to be receiving (here, at least).
iCal doesn't even look that bad, IMO (not the most "professional" look, maybe). I'm really curious to see whether Apple will change it given the bad feedback it seems to be receiving (here, at least).
more...
Trius
Apr 22, 04:23 PM
Really hope this is true...
archer75
Apr 25, 02:46 PM
I really don't think that the 6870 will be in the 27 inch version. The current card (5750) has a power draw of 86 watts. The 6870 has a draw of 151 watts. Too much heat.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-hd-5770,2446-15.html
http://www.techspot.com/review/325-amd-radeon-6870/page10.html
You're looking at the desktop cards. Imacs use laptop GPU's.
The 5750 in the current imac is actually a 5850m. A 6850m is actually slower than that. They will need a 6950m or 6970m to be an upgrade.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-hd-5770,2446-15.html
http://www.techspot.com/review/325-amd-radeon-6870/page10.html
You're looking at the desktop cards. Imacs use laptop GPU's.
The 5750 in the current imac is actually a 5850m. A 6850m is actually slower than that. They will need a 6950m or 6970m to be an upgrade.
more...
MagnusVonMagnum
Nov 20, 10:40 AM
If you don't address those very good reasons, your argument won't be very convincing. We do not want the CPU suck, the identity leaking, the UI inconsistencies, and the very real risk of "zero day" Adobe bugs.
Whom am I trying to convince? Illogical and irrational people who worship Steve Jobs and hate what he hates? Such people will not care or listen to any form of reason. That's why the word fanatic is in fanboy. No, I talk about an option to turn Flash on or off at will and you find it offensive to even offer an option. That is irrational at best.
Everything you fear would be avoided if someone just turned Flash OFF (or it could default to off and have to be turned on). I've said since the first post the word OPTION. You don't seem to comprehend that word or understand why those of us that would want the choice of having Flash are not asking you to give up anything in the process. You could always turn it off if it were present. We cannot turn it on if it's not present.
In other words, you are not competent to carry on a rational discussion. You're just here to vent.
No, I just don't see any point in trying to carry on a logical, rational discussion with someone whose "argument" is based purely on emotion. If it weren't, you wouldn't object to an option for those of us that don't agree with Steve Jobs point of view because an option satisfies all your arguments against having Flash because you can always just leave it OFF. It cannot do harm if it's off no matter how paranoid you may become about having it on your device.
Many millions of people have Flash installed on their Macs (let alone those using Windows and Linux) and they could remove it. They know that if they do, some web sites will cease to function properly and thus they leave it on. The security concerns you mentioned will be addressed as all security bugs are in both OSX and Windows.
Users of those 120M+ devices don't have to hope. They are already free of Flash!
Free of Flash? You say that in a tone that sounds like they're free of slavery or something. No, what they're free of is the ability to access millions of web sites that require Flash to view them or much of their content and I do not see that as a good thing. But my point of view doesn't require you to see it. I said from the first post I wanted an option to use Flash. You could still choose to turn it off if it were there. I cannot turn on what is not present nor should I have to buy some absurd 3rd party converter that requires their web site to be running to use it.
The analogy makes no sense. Nobody is forcing you to use any Apple product.
And so that makes it OK for him to behave as he does? A lot of us like Apple products, but we would like them a lot better if Steve would just stick to making the products unfettered instead of trying to force his opinions and world view on people in the process. He doesn't like Flash so he decides for everyone they should not use Flash. What if Steve decided iOS shall no longer support MP3 files, only AAC? I suppose you would accept that as OK too? Update iOS and your MP3s no longer function. Yes, that would be just wonderful if they did that. After all, AAC is superior to MP3, so why should Apple support a legacy inferior heavily pirated format? By your logic, they should not.
If you really want the "full web experience" of zero-day Adobe bugs, get an Android phone. Note: Android phones were vulnerable to the last zero-day Adobe bug. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt)
I don't want a phone period guy. I only want and use an iPod Touch. Is there an Android iPod Touch? Android didn't exist when Apple made the claims of accessing the full Internet either and it doesn't make that any less a lie.
The fact that I can't catch zero-day Adobe attacks on my iPhone is a great reason to praise Apple's decision.
You act as if Apple has no vulnerabilities to attack. That is extremely naive to the point of emotionalism once again. In fact it's just the opposite. Apple's security is rated as bad compared to Windows and only the fact that there are so few Mac users compared to Windows has saved it thus far. As the popularity of iOS devices has exploded, it's inevitable that it will start attracting malware. It's only a matter of time. Will you wish you never bought an iPhone on that day or will you recognize that companies simply have to find and patch vulnerabilities. Apple has patched numerous security flaws in OSX over the years. Should we plug our ears and say there is no such thing?
Do tell: what exact sites are you talking about? What exact legacy flash applications are running on those sites to which you can find no substitute?
A quick search (you do know how to do that don't you?) reveals offhand a few example sites that don't use HTML5 video (which could and may in the future, but that doesn't help someone today):
Gametrailers
GiantBomb
Vimeo
Playstation Blog
Stiq of Joy
Engadget
Try some of these effects on this site this with HTML5:
http://superior-web-solutions.com/
Maybe read this article on Flash. Most HTML5 is just a video player. Flash isn't just a video player and it didn't even start as one.
http://www.andrewgreig.com/2010/06/html5-is-not-a-flash-replacement-and-shouldnt-be-seen-that-way/
Perhaps you want an open standard? So when does Apple stop requiring Quicktime on their web sites? :rolleyes:
Nobody is holding a gun to your head. Nobody is holding you hostage.
If you don't like the choices that Apple made, then ditch your iOS device and get an Android. Simple.
No, they're just boring me to death with emotional arguments why everyone should either worship Steve Jobs or leave the platform and get an Android instead similar to the "love OSX or leave it" arguments the fanboys regularly produce.
This is the first little lie in your rant. The iOS users don't find it inconvenient. If Flash were so damn important to them, they would have bought some device that could run Flash.
The fact that you think my statement is a "lie" based on a subjective opinion tells me you cannot even tell fact from fiction let alone lies from opinions. Trying to see someone else's point of view is completely foreign to you. You view the world through tinted lenses. What you say is akin to if you don't like something about OSX, go buy a Windows machine, as if there aren't any compromises along the way on that platform either (not to mention having to replace possibly thousands and thousands of dollars worth of software for a given platform to do so). Not liking something about a given platform and wanting to change it doesn't mean another platform is more viable in ALL areas or that a person may wish to spend a lot of money to make that change just because of that one issue. Perhaps you'd like to send me a free Android phone to replace my aging 1st Gen iPod Touch that I bought before Android even existed? I'd happily consider such an offer. Of course I'll need replacement apps as well.
The people who bought those 120M+ devices disagree with you.
You seem to forge that I and others that actually want Flash are part of those people dude. Get over yourself. Just because you don't like Flash doesn't mean the rest of us have hatred for it. Some of us simply don't like our iPhones, iPads and iPod Touches crippled for no reason. Besides, how you try to turn my initial argument that I'd prefer to see an option to use Flash for those of us that want it rather than no option into this flipping crusade against all things Apple and Flash alike is beyond me. You are making mountains out of mole hills and lies out of opinions. For what? I can't make you see things the way I see them. I never wanted to try. That's why I said OPTION. But you would deny everyone who wants that option to have it just like Steve Jobs. Steve does it because he's a control freak (he was once ousted from Apple for this very reason). I imagine you do it because you love Apple. Sadly, I actually prefer Steve's reason.
This is the second little lie. Apple did provide a choice: they approved the SkyFire App. They didn't have to do that.
Didn't they? It doesn't violate their rules for an app so how could they not approve it without being outright liars? Oh wait. They have done that before so I can see your point. ;)
Apple has also announced they will approve Flash Apps using Adobe's cross-compiler for iOS. If there actually are crucial Flash apps -- you haven't named a single specific one so far -- the owners of those apps should be able to easily cross-compile their apps for the iOS App Store.
Apple formerly announced they would NOT support it. Why did they change their minds? Could it have something to do with the Justice Department starting an investigation into anti-trust behaviors by Apple policies? Noooo....it couldn't be that. Apple is allowed to single out companies it doesn't like and compete with to just willy-nilly throw specifically into their license agreements.
And that is the third little lie. Flash is a proprietary and legacy platform. It's on the way down now.
I say if you don't have Flash you don't have the full Internet and you call that a "lie" based on the above quote? What freaking UNIVERSE do you live in??????? ROTFLMAO. You cannot tell a statement of fact from an idea in your head that somehow says that the "full internet" doesn't include sites that use "propriety" formats. Come on man. That position not only ignore reality it even invalidiates Apple's own web site as being part of the "full Internet" !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You need to try harder. Calling someone a liar when they are obviously stating facts and/or opinions just makes you look immature.
because accusing someone of lying when it's obvious
Even Adobe has acknowledged that a Flash-only choice is a bankrupt strategy (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999). After websites start offering their content with an open standard, you've gotta ask: what exactly is the value in continuing to prop up Flash?
First of all, you are the one that is calling it a "bankrupt strategy". I see nothing in that thread by Adobe that even addresses the matter. Adobe is simply trying to sell products and if they can easily sell more products to Apple users by providing an easy way to convert their hard work Flash sites into HTML5, they are going to do so and laugh all the way to the bank. That in NO WAY invalidates the fact that there are still plenty of Flash only sites out there and plenty of flash uses (e.g. Flash games) that HTML5 is no simple substitute for regardless. Until the Internet is Flash free, there is going to be a need and a will by people to have the option to view Flash.
The mere fact that this Skyfire app has raked in over $1 MILLION in sales already shows just how big that will is. Yet you reject the desire to be able to use Flash web sites as meaningless and unnecessary while the thread title alone proves you wrong.
Extreme Couponing S01E07 720p
more...
Is Extreme Couponing Reality
Extreme Couponing: How Much is
more...
Extreme Couponing earlier,
Extreme Couponing on TLC.
more...
going to start a new hobby
Extreme.Couponing.
TLC#39;s Extreme Couponing
Whom am I trying to convince? Illogical and irrational people who worship Steve Jobs and hate what he hates? Such people will not care or listen to any form of reason. That's why the word fanatic is in fanboy. No, I talk about an option to turn Flash on or off at will and you find it offensive to even offer an option. That is irrational at best.
Everything you fear would be avoided if someone just turned Flash OFF (or it could default to off and have to be turned on). I've said since the first post the word OPTION. You don't seem to comprehend that word or understand why those of us that would want the choice of having Flash are not asking you to give up anything in the process. You could always turn it off if it were present. We cannot turn it on if it's not present.
In other words, you are not competent to carry on a rational discussion. You're just here to vent.
No, I just don't see any point in trying to carry on a logical, rational discussion with someone whose "argument" is based purely on emotion. If it weren't, you wouldn't object to an option for those of us that don't agree with Steve Jobs point of view because an option satisfies all your arguments against having Flash because you can always just leave it OFF. It cannot do harm if it's off no matter how paranoid you may become about having it on your device.
Many millions of people have Flash installed on their Macs (let alone those using Windows and Linux) and they could remove it. They know that if they do, some web sites will cease to function properly and thus they leave it on. The security concerns you mentioned will be addressed as all security bugs are in both OSX and Windows.
Users of those 120M+ devices don't have to hope. They are already free of Flash!
Free of Flash? You say that in a tone that sounds like they're free of slavery or something. No, what they're free of is the ability to access millions of web sites that require Flash to view them or much of their content and I do not see that as a good thing. But my point of view doesn't require you to see it. I said from the first post I wanted an option to use Flash. You could still choose to turn it off if it were there. I cannot turn on what is not present nor should I have to buy some absurd 3rd party converter that requires their web site to be running to use it.
The analogy makes no sense. Nobody is forcing you to use any Apple product.
And so that makes it OK for him to behave as he does? A lot of us like Apple products, but we would like them a lot better if Steve would just stick to making the products unfettered instead of trying to force his opinions and world view on people in the process. He doesn't like Flash so he decides for everyone they should not use Flash. What if Steve decided iOS shall no longer support MP3 files, only AAC? I suppose you would accept that as OK too? Update iOS and your MP3s no longer function. Yes, that would be just wonderful if they did that. After all, AAC is superior to MP3, so why should Apple support a legacy inferior heavily pirated format? By your logic, they should not.
If you really want the "full web experience" of zero-day Adobe bugs, get an Android phone. Note: Android phones were vulnerable to the last zero-day Adobe bug. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt)
I don't want a phone period guy. I only want and use an iPod Touch. Is there an Android iPod Touch? Android didn't exist when Apple made the claims of accessing the full Internet either and it doesn't make that any less a lie.
The fact that I can't catch zero-day Adobe attacks on my iPhone is a great reason to praise Apple's decision.
You act as if Apple has no vulnerabilities to attack. That is extremely naive to the point of emotionalism once again. In fact it's just the opposite. Apple's security is rated as bad compared to Windows and only the fact that there are so few Mac users compared to Windows has saved it thus far. As the popularity of iOS devices has exploded, it's inevitable that it will start attracting malware. It's only a matter of time. Will you wish you never bought an iPhone on that day or will you recognize that companies simply have to find and patch vulnerabilities. Apple has patched numerous security flaws in OSX over the years. Should we plug our ears and say there is no such thing?
Do tell: what exact sites are you talking about? What exact legacy flash applications are running on those sites to which you can find no substitute?
A quick search (you do know how to do that don't you?) reveals offhand a few example sites that don't use HTML5 video (which could and may in the future, but that doesn't help someone today):
Gametrailers
GiantBomb
Vimeo
Playstation Blog
Stiq of Joy
Engadget
Try some of these effects on this site this with HTML5:
http://superior-web-solutions.com/
Maybe read this article on Flash. Most HTML5 is just a video player. Flash isn't just a video player and it didn't even start as one.
http://www.andrewgreig.com/2010/06/html5-is-not-a-flash-replacement-and-shouldnt-be-seen-that-way/
Perhaps you want an open standard? So when does Apple stop requiring Quicktime on their web sites? :rolleyes:
Nobody is holding a gun to your head. Nobody is holding you hostage.
If you don't like the choices that Apple made, then ditch your iOS device and get an Android. Simple.
No, they're just boring me to death with emotional arguments why everyone should either worship Steve Jobs or leave the platform and get an Android instead similar to the "love OSX or leave it" arguments the fanboys regularly produce.
This is the first little lie in your rant. The iOS users don't find it inconvenient. If Flash were so damn important to them, they would have bought some device that could run Flash.
The fact that you think my statement is a "lie" based on a subjective opinion tells me you cannot even tell fact from fiction let alone lies from opinions. Trying to see someone else's point of view is completely foreign to you. You view the world through tinted lenses. What you say is akin to if you don't like something about OSX, go buy a Windows machine, as if there aren't any compromises along the way on that platform either (not to mention having to replace possibly thousands and thousands of dollars worth of software for a given platform to do so). Not liking something about a given platform and wanting to change it doesn't mean another platform is more viable in ALL areas or that a person may wish to spend a lot of money to make that change just because of that one issue. Perhaps you'd like to send me a free Android phone to replace my aging 1st Gen iPod Touch that I bought before Android even existed? I'd happily consider such an offer. Of course I'll need replacement apps as well.
The people who bought those 120M+ devices disagree with you.
You seem to forge that I and others that actually want Flash are part of those people dude. Get over yourself. Just because you don't like Flash doesn't mean the rest of us have hatred for it. Some of us simply don't like our iPhones, iPads and iPod Touches crippled for no reason. Besides, how you try to turn my initial argument that I'd prefer to see an option to use Flash for those of us that want it rather than no option into this flipping crusade against all things Apple and Flash alike is beyond me. You are making mountains out of mole hills and lies out of opinions. For what? I can't make you see things the way I see them. I never wanted to try. That's why I said OPTION. But you would deny everyone who wants that option to have it just like Steve Jobs. Steve does it because he's a control freak (he was once ousted from Apple for this very reason). I imagine you do it because you love Apple. Sadly, I actually prefer Steve's reason.
This is the second little lie. Apple did provide a choice: they approved the SkyFire App. They didn't have to do that.
Didn't they? It doesn't violate their rules for an app so how could they not approve it without being outright liars? Oh wait. They have done that before so I can see your point. ;)
Apple has also announced they will approve Flash Apps using Adobe's cross-compiler for iOS. If there actually are crucial Flash apps -- you haven't named a single specific one so far -- the owners of those apps should be able to easily cross-compile their apps for the iOS App Store.
Apple formerly announced they would NOT support it. Why did they change their minds? Could it have something to do with the Justice Department starting an investigation into anti-trust behaviors by Apple policies? Noooo....it couldn't be that. Apple is allowed to single out companies it doesn't like and compete with to just willy-nilly throw specifically into their license agreements.
And that is the third little lie. Flash is a proprietary and legacy platform. It's on the way down now.
I say if you don't have Flash you don't have the full Internet and you call that a "lie" based on the above quote? What freaking UNIVERSE do you live in??????? ROTFLMAO. You cannot tell a statement of fact from an idea in your head that somehow says that the "full internet" doesn't include sites that use "propriety" formats. Come on man. That position not only ignore reality it even invalidiates Apple's own web site as being part of the "full Internet" !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You need to try harder. Calling someone a liar when they are obviously stating facts and/or opinions just makes you look immature.
because accusing someone of lying when it's obvious
Even Adobe has acknowledged that a Flash-only choice is a bankrupt strategy (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999). After websites start offering their content with an open standard, you've gotta ask: what exactly is the value in continuing to prop up Flash?
First of all, you are the one that is calling it a "bankrupt strategy". I see nothing in that thread by Adobe that even addresses the matter. Adobe is simply trying to sell products and if they can easily sell more products to Apple users by providing an easy way to convert their hard work Flash sites into HTML5, they are going to do so and laugh all the way to the bank. That in NO WAY invalidates the fact that there are still plenty of Flash only sites out there and plenty of flash uses (e.g. Flash games) that HTML5 is no simple substitute for regardless. Until the Internet is Flash free, there is going to be a need and a will by people to have the option to view Flash.
The mere fact that this Skyfire app has raked in over $1 MILLION in sales already shows just how big that will is. Yet you reject the desire to be able to use Flash web sites as meaningless and unnecessary while the thread title alone proves you wrong.
tristangage
Apr 15, 03:36 AM
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5101/5616761418_877ed9e2f4.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/tristangage/5616761418/)
recording dials 2 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/tristangage/5616761418/) by tristangage (http://www.flickr.com/people/tristangage/), on Flickr
Camera Canon EOS 500D
Exposure 0.017 sec (1/60)
Aperture f/5.6
Focal Length 55 mm
ISO Speed 1250
recording dials 2 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/tristangage/5616761418/) by tristangage (http://www.flickr.com/people/tristangage/), on Flickr
Camera Canon EOS 500D
Exposure 0.017 sec (1/60)
Aperture f/5.6
Focal Length 55 mm
ISO Speed 1250
more...
pcharles
Apr 15, 03:25 PM
Apple is just stupid right? News flash for you - if they wanted to do patching instead of replacing files they would be doing it.
Don't forget that Google's OS is little more than a web page.
Don't forget that Google's OS is little more than a web page.
turbobass
Apr 27, 04:28 PM
Tuesday was yesterday. QUICK! Create a new thread saying that the new iMacs will be here NEXT TUESDAY!
I'm shaking so hard from excitement after convincing myself this was true, I CAN'T TYPE!!
I'm shaking so hard from excitement after convincing myself this was true, I CAN'T TYPE!!
more...
DeathChill
Apr 23, 12:11 PM
I have nothing against Apple shareholders (both shorts and longs :D). It's just this is not a forum for them. This is their forum: http://messages.finance.yahoo.com/mb/AAPL
This is my new favorite post. You, the guy who owns no Apple products (save for a battery charger) and quite clearly dislikes Apple, telling someone they are on the wrong forum.
This is my new favorite post. You, the guy who owns no Apple products (save for a battery charger) and quite clearly dislikes Apple, telling someone they are on the wrong forum.
PopCulture
Mar 4, 10:04 AM
I finally saw the interview. What is up with this guy? He really needs to find some help.
more...
0815
Apr 14, 07:42 AM
It's the Verizon iPhone ... oh no, wait .... it's the white iPhone !
trainguy77
Oct 20, 11:06 PM
I spent most of the night last night trying to get gpu2 running in wine on the i7 machine but ran into a problem and gave up. But I have found that the issue may not be with my set up, it may be the wu are bad so I will work on that again tonight to see what happens if I can get a different wu. Here is some info. (http://forums.techpowerup.com/showthread.php?t=82110)
I would love to add the points from my 2 gtx 960's especially since that is why I got them :D
here is a how too: http://moderngeek.com/node/81
This might help too: http://gpu2.twomurs.com/index.php?title=Main_Page
I would love to add the points from my 2 gtx 960's especially since that is why I got them :D
here is a how too: http://moderngeek.com/node/81
This might help too: http://gpu2.twomurs.com/index.php?title=Main_Page
gkhaldi
Oct 24, 09:27 AM
Hmmm....it is Tuesday isn't it? :)
Cool my long wait is over. Nice with the bump in ram and FW800 (yes!). :)
Bummer that theres no 7200rpm HD on 15" and gosh darn it getting hit again with the lame video cards.:mad:
Oh, well you never get everything...I'll be ordering a 15" soon. Hopefully it wont be a lap burner.
Am very happy with the RAM but OMG, is it expensive (590� in Belgium) :eek: :eek: :eek:
Bought it anyways. Would like to find out if I swap that second dimm out for a 2GB, would it run at 4GB of RAM? Any takers?
Cool my long wait is over. Nice with the bump in ram and FW800 (yes!). :)
Bummer that theres no 7200rpm HD on 15" and gosh darn it getting hit again with the lame video cards.:mad:
Oh, well you never get everything...I'll be ordering a 15" soon. Hopefully it wont be a lap burner.
Am very happy with the RAM but OMG, is it expensive (590� in Belgium) :eek: :eek: :eek:
Bought it anyways. Would like to find out if I swap that second dimm out for a 2GB, would it run at 4GB of RAM? Any takers?
ucfgrad93
Dec 29, 11:40 AM
"Wants to be the worlds fattest woman"....enjoy your heart attack :rolleyes:
Agreed. This woman is just sad.
Agreed. This woman is just sad.
daneoni
Apr 22, 10:15 AM
Give us a 4.3" screen so the phone would have to be somewhat bigger - big enough to support two chips for 3G and 4G.
Tony
No thanks.
4.0 max whilst retaining current size. It's a phone not a tablet.
Tony
No thanks.
4.0 max whilst retaining current size. It's a phone not a tablet.
bankshot
Nov 3, 07:10 PM
Parallels takes way too long to launch, and the GUI sucks.
Mine pops up instantly. 2.0 GHz Macbook. What's wrong with the GUI? Is it just that it's not Cocoa, the holy grail, or is there something tangible that isn't good? I've found it easy to use and unobtrusive.
Plus, do you really think a Qt C++ wrapper around Carbon is faster than direct Cocoa calls? :rolleyes:
Wouldn't surprise me a bit if it were. Many of the things that make Cocoa such a joy for programmers also slow it down at runtime. That's just a design decision that Apple made, and with faster computers always coming out, it becomes less of a drawback at runtime.
I just want a nice documented-based Cocoa app that behaves like a Mac app, with a fast virtualization at its core :)
Err, why should a virtual machine be document-based? That doesn't make any sense to me.
The whole thing that drew my attention to your original post was that comment about Cocoa. Why do you, as an end-user, care about that? Cocoa is great, but there seems to be a mentality here that anything else is inferior or a second-class citizen. I kind of understand why that mentality came to be - Cocoa came with OS X, Carbon is a bridge to the past in OS 9. Thus people automatically assumed that Cocoa = good and Carbon = bad. But Carbon is every bit as capable as Cocoa, and thus why an end-user would care one bit about either is beyond me.
Granted, Parallels is done with Qt, which looks a little bit "off" sitting next to a Carbon or Cocoa app, but does that really matter? It looks damn close, and frankly, looks mean nothing to me if the interface works intuitively. And that it does.
I'm not picking on you, just trying to understand your reasoning. ;)
Mine pops up instantly. 2.0 GHz Macbook. What's wrong with the GUI? Is it just that it's not Cocoa, the holy grail, or is there something tangible that isn't good? I've found it easy to use and unobtrusive.
Plus, do you really think a Qt C++ wrapper around Carbon is faster than direct Cocoa calls? :rolleyes:
Wouldn't surprise me a bit if it were. Many of the things that make Cocoa such a joy for programmers also slow it down at runtime. That's just a design decision that Apple made, and with faster computers always coming out, it becomes less of a drawback at runtime.
I just want a nice documented-based Cocoa app that behaves like a Mac app, with a fast virtualization at its core :)
Err, why should a virtual machine be document-based? That doesn't make any sense to me.
The whole thing that drew my attention to your original post was that comment about Cocoa. Why do you, as an end-user, care about that? Cocoa is great, but there seems to be a mentality here that anything else is inferior or a second-class citizen. I kind of understand why that mentality came to be - Cocoa came with OS X, Carbon is a bridge to the past in OS 9. Thus people automatically assumed that Cocoa = good and Carbon = bad. But Carbon is every bit as capable as Cocoa, and thus why an end-user would care one bit about either is beyond me.
Granted, Parallels is done with Qt, which looks a little bit "off" sitting next to a Carbon or Cocoa app, but does that really matter? It looks damn close, and frankly, looks mean nothing to me if the interface works intuitively. And that it does.
I'm not picking on you, just trying to understand your reasoning. ;)
NativeOSXboy
Apr 22, 10:31 AM
It's only BS to you, I don't obsess over appearances, I buy functionality. My self image is not tied to a phone.
Yet it's Apples brilliance, that realizes the average persons low self esteem and need to be seen with cool toys.
They know that great styling causes the consumer to ignore many faults or shortcomings in the product.
That said I'm noticing an interesting trend, it's the feminization of the iPhone.
With its diminutive size and proliferation of jeweled cases, I see more women with iPhones.
Next, with Verizons excellent Droid campaign, its become the mans phone of choice.
Larger, masculine, great new apps for men, not fart apps for juveniles, the rise in Droid X phones is remarkable and highly visible here in Los Angeles and Orange County.
I know at 6'2" the larger phone is far more comfortable to hold, especially for longer calls and such.
I'm enjoying my Android phones immensely.
My Antennagate 4, not so much.
So Apple ties it's image to low self-esteem women, while Android does the same for low self-esteem men? Thats how I interpreted this argument, though, I might have completely missed the point. Mind clarifying? Basically you make it sound like you bought the Android because of how it portrays what a man's phone should be (all about image). Hey then again who doesn't buy a product based on look, feel, or functionality right?
Yet it's Apples brilliance, that realizes the average persons low self esteem and need to be seen with cool toys.
They know that great styling causes the consumer to ignore many faults or shortcomings in the product.
That said I'm noticing an interesting trend, it's the feminization of the iPhone.
With its diminutive size and proliferation of jeweled cases, I see more women with iPhones.
Next, with Verizons excellent Droid campaign, its become the mans phone of choice.
Larger, masculine, great new apps for men, not fart apps for juveniles, the rise in Droid X phones is remarkable and highly visible here in Los Angeles and Orange County.
I know at 6'2" the larger phone is far more comfortable to hold, especially for longer calls and such.
I'm enjoying my Android phones immensely.
My Antennagate 4, not so much.
So Apple ties it's image to low self-esteem women, while Android does the same for low self-esteem men? Thats how I interpreted this argument, though, I might have completely missed the point. Mind clarifying? Basically you make it sound like you bought the Android because of how it portrays what a man's phone should be (all about image). Hey then again who doesn't buy a product based on look, feel, or functionality right?
*LTD*
Apr 22, 05:02 PM
And by "copied Palm" of course you mean "patented themselves back before Feb. 2010."
http://www.tuaw.com/2010/02/03/apple-granted-patent-for-touch-sensitive-bezel/
http://www.patentlyapple.com/patently-apple/2010/02/apples-ipad-may-gain-an-intelligent-bezel-in-the-future.html
SSssshhhh!!
Let them troll. Apple news has been too good the past few years. Too many amazing products.
At least let them have *something*, even if it's completely inaccurate. :D
http://www.tuaw.com/2010/02/03/apple-granted-patent-for-touch-sensitive-bezel/
http://www.patentlyapple.com/patently-apple/2010/02/apples-ipad-may-gain-an-intelligent-bezel-in-the-future.html
SSssshhhh!!
Let them troll. Apple news has been too good the past few years. Too many amazing products.
At least let them have *something*, even if it's completely inaccurate. :D
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий