MacinDoc
Sep 2, 11:30 PM
lol, please be honest, in next 5 years, you will need only update windows once (XP->Vista), and you will need to update OSX at least 3 times. Apple is ripping people off on this, there is no question about it, all these ".1" incremental update should not have a price more than $60 at all.
Or you could just update from OS X 10.1 to 10.5, for $129. That would be equivalent to updating from XP to Vista, because you would have gone 5 years without a significant upgrade. If you don't think the incremental features of a .1 update are worth the price, then don't buy it...
And if you really want a bargain, buy a family pack to use on up to 5 Macs in your home. Only $199. Try that with Vista!
And those who say that this is just an upgrade price are incorrect. This is the full retail price for a complete boxed install set.
Or you could just update from OS X 10.1 to 10.5, for $129. That would be equivalent to updating from XP to Vista, because you would have gone 5 years without a significant upgrade. If you don't think the incremental features of a .1 update are worth the price, then don't buy it...
And if you really want a bargain, buy a family pack to use on up to 5 Macs in your home. Only $199. Try that with Vista!
And those who say that this is just an upgrade price are incorrect. This is the full retail price for a complete boxed install set.
spicyapple
Sep 12, 01:48 PM
24 hours battery life!! WOW. I want one, in addition to the shuffle! I bought my 4GB nano last month, but should have waited....
~Shard~ my jaw dropped when iLounge first reported the nano was 52% smaller in volume. Too bad it wasn't true, because then I would have had to get one!
~Shard~ my jaw dropped when iLounge first reported the nano was 52% smaller in volume. Too bad it wasn't true, because then I would have had to get one!
MacNut
Sep 12, 01:23 PM
Im waiting for it in software update.
PowerGamerX
Oct 10, 02:46 PM
No more PowerBook. Love the new Mac Mini, I would put in an SSD, but they're still too expensive, and I really don't need one. Its extremely quiet anyway.
Stock Mac Mini 2.4ghz + 4gb of RAM (Crucial off Newegg)
20" Cinema Display (I'm going to mount that powerbrick behind the desk, I hate looking at it)
Bose Companion 2 speakers
64gb iPad WiFi
160gb iPod Classic
http://i51.tinypic.com/2cct6xz.jpg
Stock Mac Mini 2.4ghz + 4gb of RAM (Crucial off Newegg)
20" Cinema Display (I'm going to mount that powerbrick behind the desk, I hate looking at it)
Bose Companion 2 speakers
64gb iPad WiFi
160gb iPod Classic
http://i51.tinypic.com/2cct6xz.jpg
Macopotamus
Mar 28, 12:08 PM
Great, another store that carries iPad 2 but won't ever have any in stock. LOL.
Unfortunately I think 80% of iPad 2 supply is going to scalpers and resellers, the moment Apple stores get them in stock they sell out and craigslist is then flooded with heavily marked up iPads. It's kind of ridiculous.
On a related note, isn't it a bit weird Apple hasn't announced any sales figures yet? They're usually quick to brag when devices hit a million sales in a short amount of time.
Unfortunately I think 80% of iPad 2 supply is going to scalpers and resellers, the moment Apple stores get them in stock they sell out and craigslist is then flooded with heavily marked up iPads. It's kind of ridiculous.
On a related note, isn't it a bit weird Apple hasn't announced any sales figures yet? They're usually quick to brag when devices hit a million sales in a short amount of time.
Demoman
Aug 29, 08:57 AM
According to the Wikipedia article, a Home Basic upgrade is only $99.95, which is cheaper than the standard $129 for OS X releases. Then again, education customers can often get Mac OS for around $70 in some cases, if I'm not mistaken. I don't know if there will be education discounts for Vista or how much they will be. With so many versions and price points for Vista and an unknown price tag for Leopard, it's very complicated to make comparisons...
Now one of the big questions is, who can get a Home Basic upgrade and how much are Home Basic users missing out on if they get that as opposed to Aero, etc.? No one knows for sure all the details at this point and we won't know for sure until official announcements are made. Although I would take OS X over Windows any day, we have to be cautious I think before saying Mac's upgrades are cheaper than Windows'. It looks like in many cases they will be, but not necessarily in all cases.
You are mixing apples and oranges here sport. Vista BASIC does not have any comparison in the Apple world. You have to compare the Premium version of Vista.
Now one of the big questions is, who can get a Home Basic upgrade and how much are Home Basic users missing out on if they get that as opposed to Aero, etc.? No one knows for sure all the details at this point and we won't know for sure until official announcements are made. Although I would take OS X over Windows any day, we have to be cautious I think before saying Mac's upgrades are cheaper than Windows'. It looks like in many cases they will be, but not necessarily in all cases.
You are mixing apples and oranges here sport. Vista BASIC does not have any comparison in the Apple world. You have to compare the Premium version of Vista.
macsrockmysocks
Jul 22, 11:39 PM
I would really rather have a paperback or hard cover book to read than look at a bright light to read. I can see maybe lyrics for songs, but books-no.
heron88
Mar 13, 08:49 PM
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5099/5524889174_12225eb67a_b.jpg
---f/22---5"---ISO100---20mm---
---f/22---5"---ISO100---20mm---
Saturn007
Mar 21, 05:18 PM
Probably the real story is that somebody at Apple thought it would make a great story IF it happened. And, like the proverbial telephone game, it snowballed into people hearing it as if it happened, including the source "close to Apple".
Still, a heart-warming tale. The funniest comment, though, was this by Iceman
"My Wife Said: YES, But Apple Said: NO
She said Yes since day one, but every time I call Apple asking if they have any, they reply: NO!
Insane, isn't it??"
Now, that's the real story!
Still, a heart-warming tale. The funniest comment, though, was this by Iceman
"My Wife Said: YES, But Apple Said: NO
She said Yes since day one, but every time I call Apple asking if they have any, they reply: NO!
Insane, isn't it??"
Now, that's the real story!
macUser2007
Nov 4, 02:25 PM
...
Did you not notice in those numbers that FLASH doesn't work well on ALL MACS ON ALL BROWSERS ??? And FLASH is the reason for crashes on both POWERPC and INTEL Macs, even brand new Macs, from what I'm reading in other threads here on MacRumors.
....
Please people, think before you put your feet in your mouths.
Uhm, you are a bit confused.
First, Flash works just fine on most modern Macs. The only noticeable issue I see is, that on a Mac Mini C2D 2.0GHz and a Mac Book C2D 2.0GHz the fans go crazy when viewing Flash.
The problem is, that Flash in OS X requires much higher CPU exertion, than Flash in Windows. But also, in my experience, running Flash in Safari pushes the CPU significantly harder, than running Flash in Firefox, Camino or even Chrome (which is also a Webkit browser.) See this post (http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=8739278&postcount=427) for exact numbers.
Which tells me, that Apple has done a poor job of getting Safari to work well with Flash.
In addition, even if Adobe is lazy, obtuse, incompetent, or whatever you want to believe they are, during all these years, Apple could have dedicated a competent employee, to guide Adobe and help make Flash work better on OS X. Any normal business would have made this effort, if they thought it was a problem worth investing in. But I bet, that Apple figures that most users don't even realize that there is a high CPU load, and of the once who do, at least some will be dumb enough to just blame Flash for everything.
BTW, Safari has major issues with Java stuff as well, and most Safari crashes I had in OS 10.5.x, were due to that, not Flash.
As to the iPhone, the issue is most likely Apple's reluctance to open the door to Flash apps competition to its own Applications Store. I am certain, that Apple will have Flash on the iPhone, once it starts losing sales to the new crop of Androids coming up.
Did you not notice in those numbers that FLASH doesn't work well on ALL MACS ON ALL BROWSERS ??? And FLASH is the reason for crashes on both POWERPC and INTEL Macs, even brand new Macs, from what I'm reading in other threads here on MacRumors.
....
Please people, think before you put your feet in your mouths.
Uhm, you are a bit confused.
First, Flash works just fine on most modern Macs. The only noticeable issue I see is, that on a Mac Mini C2D 2.0GHz and a Mac Book C2D 2.0GHz the fans go crazy when viewing Flash.
The problem is, that Flash in OS X requires much higher CPU exertion, than Flash in Windows. But also, in my experience, running Flash in Safari pushes the CPU significantly harder, than running Flash in Firefox, Camino or even Chrome (which is also a Webkit browser.) See this post (http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=8739278&postcount=427) for exact numbers.
Which tells me, that Apple has done a poor job of getting Safari to work well with Flash.
In addition, even if Adobe is lazy, obtuse, incompetent, or whatever you want to believe they are, during all these years, Apple could have dedicated a competent employee, to guide Adobe and help make Flash work better on OS X. Any normal business would have made this effort, if they thought it was a problem worth investing in. But I bet, that Apple figures that most users don't even realize that there is a high CPU load, and of the once who do, at least some will be dumb enough to just blame Flash for everything.
BTW, Safari has major issues with Java stuff as well, and most Safari crashes I had in OS 10.5.x, were due to that, not Flash.
As to the iPhone, the issue is most likely Apple's reluctance to open the door to Flash apps competition to its own Applications Store. I am certain, that Apple will have Flash on the iPhone, once it starts losing sales to the new crop of Androids coming up.
TVsac.com
Aug 4, 01:59 AM
Ah yes, thank you for telling me =)
Eidorian
Nov 8, 09:15 AM
*sigh* No dedicated graphics. I know most of us would kill for a Geforce 7300/7400 Go build to order option.
Hopefully Intel and Apple can get some performance out of the GMA X3000.
Hopefully Intel and Apple can get some performance out of the GMA X3000.
Porco
Oct 16, 02:55 AM
Personally the Zune is looking fairly attrective right now. Ever since the 5th Gen iPod came out everyone has complained that it needed to be widescreen and have a bigger screen. I don't care for the WiFi sharing really but you have to admit the interface looks pretty nice.
The Zune is no more widescreen than the iPod is. And the resolution is exactly the same (320x240), it's just physically bigger on the Zune, and has been rotated 90 degrees compared to an iPod's screen.
The Zune is no more widescreen than the iPod is. And the resolution is exactly the same (320x240), it's just physically bigger on the Zune, and has been rotated 90 degrees compared to an iPod's screen.
mlblacy
Apr 12, 07:33 AM
God, I hope so. I have been looking for a Dreamweaver replacement, not found anything yet. I have been using Pages to make epub books, like it for that more than I do InDesign. All of Adobe software is bloated, the new versions barely bring anything I need to the table, case in point...
I hated Dreamweaver every single second I used it, and made the switch to RapidWeaver instead. A lot cheaper, a lot easier to pick up, and will grow with you as your knowledge deepens. There is a huge community of third party developers that make themes, plug-ins & extensions, and the community of users & developers are pretty open-source about sharing information and providing trouble shooting when things go awry. You can download a working demo for free...
I hated Dreamweaver every single second I used it, and made the switch to RapidWeaver instead. A lot cheaper, a lot easier to pick up, and will grow with you as your knowledge deepens. There is a huge community of third party developers that make themes, plug-ins & extensions, and the community of users & developers are pretty open-source about sharing information and providing trouble shooting when things go awry. You can download a working demo for free...
AtHomeBoy_2000
Sep 7, 10:07 AM
What does this mean?
http://www.macnn.com/blogs/?p=97
On August 22, the European Office of Harmonization published Apple�s latest trademark/service mark application number 005269221 for �IMOVIE.� The European filing was prepared by Field Fisher Waterhouse LLP of London which notes no priority filing. However, the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office officially lists Apple�s iMovie as a registered trademark under application number 2,723, 051 dating back to July 2003 in addition application number 75/782,838 officially registered in China dating back to August 1999. So what�s changed?
The difference in this new filing in contrast to Apple�s original filing is that the original filing only listed International Class 9 covering computer hardware and software whereas the new European filing lists additional International Classes 38, 41 and 42 which cover the following: communications and telecommunications services, entertainment and education services; provision of electronic publications (not downloadable); providing on-line electronic publications and computer hardware and software consulting services; rental of computer hardware and software apparatus and equipment.
http://www.macnn.com/blogs/?p=97
On August 22, the European Office of Harmonization published Apple�s latest trademark/service mark application number 005269221 for �IMOVIE.� The European filing was prepared by Field Fisher Waterhouse LLP of London which notes no priority filing. However, the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office officially lists Apple�s iMovie as a registered trademark under application number 2,723, 051 dating back to July 2003 in addition application number 75/782,838 officially registered in China dating back to August 1999. So what�s changed?
The difference in this new filing in contrast to Apple�s original filing is that the original filing only listed International Class 9 covering computer hardware and software whereas the new European filing lists additional International Classes 38, 41 and 42 which cover the following: communications and telecommunications services, entertainment and education services; provision of electronic publications (not downloadable); providing on-line electronic publications and computer hardware and software consulting services; rental of computer hardware and software apparatus and equipment.
SuperCachetes
Mar 10, 11:05 PM
No it will not as I do not support cutting back on the Military ...
You're in Canada? And you don't support the United States cutting back? Would you like anything else? May I bring you a comfy pillow to prop your feet upon, and a little something from Tim Horton's?
My point was, how 'bout if the USA reduces its military spending to $1 less than the Canadian military budget? Then the Canucks are the badasses, and we Yanks fall in line with the rest of the world. Everybody's happy.
You're in Canada? And you don't support the United States cutting back? Would you like anything else? May I bring you a comfy pillow to prop your feet upon, and a little something from Tim Horton's?
My point was, how 'bout if the USA reduces its military spending to $1 less than the Canadian military budget? Then the Canucks are the badasses, and we Yanks fall in line with the rest of the world. Everybody's happy.
wxmike
Mar 22, 01:28 PM
Un-real. This guy got ahead of all those online orders that are shipping on April 25, and ahead of all those long lines ????
libertyforall
Nov 3, 10:58 AM
Who cares, Flash sucks! Click2Flash works great on Mac to limit Flash's CPU takeover...
MacRumors
Apr 12, 11:40 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/12/foxconn-to-invest-12-billion-in-brazil-with-ipad-production-to-begin-by-november/)
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/12/123902-ipad_2_brazil.jpg
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/12/123902-ipad_2_brazil.jpg
Play Ultimate
Sep 12, 02:16 PM
Almost time to use that $50 iPod Claims Store Credit. :)
�algiris
May 5, 12:58 AM
what are you talking about?
once you sync your iDevice to one itunes account, you can't plug it into a different computer and transfer their photos, apps, music, etc. to your device without completely restoring it to that itunes account. This has nothing to do with never charging your phone.
So you think because it's wireless it will allow you do that? That's a big assumption. Charging was about the fact that wireless syncing at least for me only makes sense if you can charge at the same time (induction charging) otherwise it will be slow and battery draining. I sync my iPhone at least once a weak and i put 10-12 GB of music and videos on it everytime. For such amounts wireless sync is pointless. Of course people sync different amounts of data and at different frequencies, but they sync.
once you sync your iDevice to one itunes account, you can't plug it into a different computer and transfer their photos, apps, music, etc. to your device without completely restoring it to that itunes account. This has nothing to do with never charging your phone.
So you think because it's wireless it will allow you do that? That's a big assumption. Charging was about the fact that wireless syncing at least for me only makes sense if you can charge at the same time (induction charging) otherwise it will be slow and battery draining. I sync my iPhone at least once a weak and i put 10-12 GB of music and videos on it everytime. For such amounts wireless sync is pointless. Of course people sync different amounts of data and at different frequencies, but they sync.
shannonbrooke
May 5, 03:45 AM
I don't really think it's a big deal to have to connect your iDevice to your computer to update firmware every so often. You're going to have to connect it to sync anyways. However, I'll probably use this feature. That is, if it'll be available for AT&T customers?
Consultant
May 4, 09:43 PM
Worst rumor ever. Sure let's view web pages in 3D (hint: ads will be jumping around).
GGJstudios
Nov 23, 07:03 PM
The Beatles: Four guys who needed each other, because individually they were musical infants.
Musical infants? Someone's not very knowledgeable:
McCartney is the most successful songwriter in the history of popular music, according to Guinness World Records. McCartney is listed in Guinness World Records as the "most successful musician and composer in popular music history", with 60 gold discs and sales of 100 million singles in the UK.
John Lennon, ... with Paul McCartney, formed one of the most successful songwriting partnerships of the 20th century. As of Lennon's solo album sales in the United States exceed 14 million units, and as writer, co-writer or performer, he is responsible for 27 number one singles on the US Hot 100 chart.
Rolling Stone ranked him the fifth greatest singer of all time.
Whether you like them or not, claiming that they're musical infants is a brilliant display of your ignorance.
sorry...but her stuff is light years ahead of that old outdated sound.
Who???
Musical infants? Someone's not very knowledgeable:
McCartney is the most successful songwriter in the history of popular music, according to Guinness World Records. McCartney is listed in Guinness World Records as the "most successful musician and composer in popular music history", with 60 gold discs and sales of 100 million singles in the UK.
John Lennon, ... with Paul McCartney, formed one of the most successful songwriting partnerships of the 20th century. As of Lennon's solo album sales in the United States exceed 14 million units, and as writer, co-writer or performer, he is responsible for 27 number one singles on the US Hot 100 chart.
Rolling Stone ranked him the fifth greatest singer of all time.
Whether you like them or not, claiming that they're musical infants is a brilliant display of your ignorance.
sorry...but her stuff is light years ahead of that old outdated sound.
Who???
