Hi-Tech Tattoo

does anyone else thing launchpad is the worst idea yet?
Maybe not the worst, but definitely the most useless.

Spotlight does a so much better job.

Are you saying 99% of Europeans use cell phones or that 99% of Europe is cell-ready? If the former, then there must be a ton of kids yapping it up on the wireless. ;)

I'm saying that every one and their dog has a cell phone in Europe. Really. Quite literally. http://www.environmental-studies.de/products/Dog-Tracking/dog-tracking.html ;)

As soon as the kids goes to school they will get a phone and many people have several and machines utilizing mobile phones are getting more common, so in many countries the penetration number is now more than 100%.

I suspected it was a copy, I've never trusted the president, and I probably never will.

Why? What has he done to make you not trust him? IMO, he's done a decent job so far, and actually gotten quite a bit of good things done.

But hey, haven't you heard, Honeycomb is a real tablet OS. (Whatever the heck that means.)

Google must have used that line in a PowerPoint somewhere because I see it regurgitated verbatim on every single iPad vs. Honeycomb thread.

The Google brainwashing continues. ;)

Real tablet OS, Full internet, True multitasking - the list's expanding fast :D

The functions inside FCP do not need the OS support. Apple can install private frameworks, and they do it already, for their own applications. So i think they will support SL.

AV Foundation brings back QT7-features to QTX. Apple uses AV Foundation in the new QTX-player of Lion.

And AV Foundation is what allows iOS devices like the iPhone and iPad, with their significantly slower processors and reduced RAM, to view and edit h264 media.

AV Foundation sidesteps ALL the problems of QTKit. It's a fresh start.

Here's a great article from Philip Hodgett's site:

http://www.philiphodgetts.com/2011/02/a-new-64-bit-final-cut-pro/

Perfect day for this news....

I have a new 13" MBA sitting here at my desk unopened...just dropped off from FedEx today. I'm debating whether or not to just return it and wait for the refresh or be happy with what I got.

I'm a very light user..web, email, iTunes, sync iPhone and iPad. Do I really need the Sandy Bridge power..probably not but I dont want to have the "old not so shiny ball" come June (as the rumors suggest).

Any help from the MR community is greatly appreciated!

Don't get your hopes up, as any rumour is just a speculation. Apple may or may not release any updated version of the MBA very soon, but it can all depend. If you really want power, you could sell your Air for a MBP, which came out only couple months ago.

Sure clock speed isn't everything. But you better go read up some more on Tue Intel HD3000 IGP. You're using facts from the STD voltage SB IGP and applying them to the ULV SB IGP. Go read about the graphics on the Samsung Series 9 laptops. The 13" model uses this very chip cited. It shows greater than a 50% drop in graphics performance from the 320m to ULV IGP used in SB.

This has been the problem all along with everyone. They're attributing facts that are actually fallacies to this Intel IGP.

Are you comparing it to a MBA with 320M or a 13" MBP with 320M? The latter is unfair because it is not analogous to the CPU and GPU speed in an ultra-portable like the series 9 or MBP.

Are you smoking something? Sure the IGP used in SB 13" MBP might get some fudged numbers by those who report for Apple, but you think the ULV SB IGP is going to even compare to the 320m on any level??? Huh? You are far smarter than that.

A lot of people using the 13" MBP in comparison when there are almost no similaries.

I don't believe a ULV CPU gets used in the 13" MBA. I don't believe this CPU in the story gets used in the 13" MBA. I don't believe Apple is dumb enough to ruin the MBA brand AGAIN with Intel's IGP at this time. I don't believe that what Apple does in the 13" MBP has any correlation with the MBA because the IGP is different. I believe when Apple and Nvidia said Apple will use the Nvidia chipset and GPU for a long time they were specifically citing the MBA, as it make no sense for the MBA to be so challenged as to get such an inferior design leading to tragic real world results.

In 2012 the MBA will get an update when it actually makes sense. People waiting for a ULV SB chip in the 13" MBA will be waiting a long time. People waiting or expecting SB IGP to even compare in ULV variants will be waiting forever as they cannot match the Nvidia offering with the underclocked IGP.

This story is ridiculous as written.

Just exactly what end use do you imagine being crippled in the MBA by going from a 320M to a HD3000 IGP? Surely you don't suggest that the number of people gaming on the MBA and who demand that performance is sufficient enough to determine the fate of the product line or even approach appreciable numbers in sales.

I don't think it is evil. It is crazy for people to pretend like Google makes Android to be benevolent and help the world. They have financial motives, and they have to protect their interests. Removing Google as search is probably going to be a huge no-no. It is kind of dumb that anyone has even tried to do that... That is part of the problem. Some of the carriers/manufacturers are stupid.

They have disrespected what Google has done for them and forced Google to clamp down. When someone gives you something for free and does a lot of work for you, you can at least respect their position and understand when you do things that might be stepping on their toes.

That is the real problem with the android commodity market though. It is not google, it is all the second rate manufacturers who sucked at making smartphones before Apple and Google, and continue to do dumb things to this day.

You mix a more general usage based OS with a hardware marketplace filled with knuckleheads, and you end up with the mess that is the Android hardware market and ecosystem.

That was a hoot changing the search to Bing. Only thing gutsier would be to somehow replace every admob ad to a competitor.

I wouldn't leave Google completely blameless here. They knew who they were dealing with. They need eyeballs to sell (ad business) so they made their bed. Same reason why the software marketplace on android sucks, they designed it for their bottom line (eyeballs). They aren't making a product for people to use, they're making a channel to deliver a product (eyeballs) to their customers (advertisers).

A cancelled Digital RISC CPU.

Although, some of the ideas for the cancelled CPU ended up in the Alpha chips.

NT was originally designed for the i860, which was codenamed the N-10 (hence NT).

Anything for Digital would have been while Cutler was at Digital, I imagine, rather than after he joined Microsoft.

maybe this was the real reason that MS made the Zune.. just so they could set the standard for future Universal deals. I don't see it doing anything else, other than squirting...

I don't think Universal realizes how many people don't pirate music. On the other hand, I don't think they understand how ridiculously easy it would be for everyone who actually pays for music to go download it illegally and then some. They will end up losing far more than they gain with this one if it's implicated.

You know the best version of Windows 7 costs nearly 10x the price of the best version of OS X. ~$300 compared to $29. Thats a big difference.

Yeah but an 800 eur notebook that kicks macbook pros costing 1500eur in the but (only performance wise). Anyway it's cheaper to get a new pc than buying windows.

Samsung can say all they want about their products. There are the following glaring issues:

1. Has anyone realize how much less Samsung's profit margins will be on the Galaxy Tab versus the iPad2? (ie. Apple retains a high profitability based on inhouse product development rather than contracting to third parties like other hardware developers)

2. Given what I perceive to be an extremely small profit margin, I find it difficult from an investor standpoint to endorse Samsung's business model.

3. It is next to impossible from a longterm business perspective that Samsung can price match Apple in this respect. It's an unsustainable business practice.

I should have become a lawyer.

Easy money at this point.

The only reason I see Apple going all Woodcrest is to justify their high markups , while insulting you Mac Loyalist on price they also offer you less performance for your money.

Look here at the current woody pricing at Newegg

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.asp?Submit=ENE&N=50001157+2010340343+1050922423&Subcategory=343&description=&srchInDesc=&minPrice=&maxPrice=

So apple is going to charge you guys $1799 for a Desktop with a 2.0ghz CPU , when everyone else will charge $1199 for a Conroe E6600 2.4ghz based desktop.

This is not looking good apple.
There's a good point here, but it's not the one you're pointing at. If Apple continues as they have with the PowerMac pricing, the Mac Pro will not be an insult if you compare it to Dells, HP and other vendors' pro offerings. Historically they have all been at very comparable price levels for comparable products. There are other differences between the lines than GHz. Quality standards for the pro/expensive lines are higher than for the consumer line, for one thing.

The point is that Apple doesn't have an option for potential buyers that want a high performance, customisable and upgradable consumer level product (not all-in-one). There are no Apple product to compare those $1199 Conroe PCs to. The closest thing is the iMac.

Dr Simon Hornblower, the author of several books about ancient Greece and editor of the Oxford Classical Dictionary, a friend of mine, agrees with me that there is no way your teacher could know any such thing, and that homosexuality was not common only among aristocrats. The Greeks, and Romans for that matter, made little distinction between sexes or orifices when it came to getting their rocks off.
Knowing is one thing. Having strong evidence is something else. Even if Dr. Gould doesn't know that the Ancient Greeks thought sodomy was repugnant, he probably knew a lot about the history of Ancient Greece. To accurately interpret Plato's writings, he needed to know about Ancient Greek Society and Ancient Greek culture.

By the way, I've read Plato's Early Socratic Dialogues, including the Charmides an the Lysis. In the Charmides, Socrates lusts after Charmides, a young man in his teens or in his 20's, when the philosopher see what's under Charmides's cloak. Socrates then talks about self-control because that's the dialogue's topic.

When the Lysis begins, a boy of about 13 is stands outside the Lyceum, telling everyone about the boy he's in love with. But the dialogue was about friendship, not about homosexuality.

You are skating around the issue of user permission. If you use this app to track your location - its YOUR CHOICE. However, the issue here is that Apple is collecting the data without the option of user choice. Even turning off location services does not stop the collection and submittal to Apple of this information.

That is what is the hearty of the matter - do we, as users, have the right to opt to to the collection and submittal of location data to Apple ? With your example, you do, as you can turn off the app at will.


Please, link me any evidence this is submitted to Apple.

Emphasis on the important bit for those who didn't bother to actually read the article. If you want to wait a bit, you can get the code and do whatever you want. Well that's my reading of it anyway, but please, don't let get in the way of giving the new enemy number one a good kicking.

Except Google have made it very clear with Honeycomb that they're not willing to release the source code for the foreseeable future so 'a bit' could be a lot longer than you'd think. More to the point that does manufacturers very little good. If, f'instance, Google decide to only release a version of Android as open source when they release the next version any manufacturer wanting to use it is going to have to grab the open version, make whatever tweaks they want, get it on a device, get it built in bulk and launch it into the relevant sales channel(s). By the time they do that Google is likely to have released another version of Android and they'll be hopelessly out of date.

Make no mistake about this, Google tightening up on the Android T&C's like this makes it almost impossible for anyone outside of Google's control to launch a device that really competes with the manufacturers who are on the inside track, at least from an OS point of view.

Does it even MATTER if Apple keeps up? Do we actually WANT Apple to release a new computer every month when Intel bumps up their chips a few megahertz?

See, it's easy to get lost in the specs war. The Mac Pros came out and I was salivating, even though I have a dual 2.0GHz G5 sitting at home. And then one day, as I was editing some HD footage, it occurred ot me that my G5 here - my now outdated G5 - was editing 1080p high-def footage without so much as a flinch. It was SO fast it was not even necessary at all.

So I really have to ask - does Apple really need to get into that stupid-ass PC specs war? Is it really hurting you guys that Apple has been slow to update? Are you really doing tasks that the current computer lineup cannot do?

Hm, well my Powerbook runs barely 4 instances of Sculpture on some of my works. MacBook Pros can run about 15-17, but I've been holding off on the Rev. A because of all the heat issues. Hopefully those get cleared up.

Anyways -- yes, I think we should expect Apple to update along with everybody else on the PC front. Maybe not every small speed bump, but whenever a newly designed chip comes out.

is it just me or does the quality of the 'Standard' cars also vary quite a bit ? i've got some which look really great (nissan fairlady '78, alfa romeo '63) and some which look barely 'acceptable' (a 90ties 'skyline')

-my biggest gripe so far: b-spec modus 'reward cars' seem to be always better than the a-spec ones ...really ? that is their way of telling us to play b-spec more ?

-also just like in gt4 the rewards in some races seem to be either:
a.) a car worse than the one you had to buy to win the race (lupo race
b.) a car which after the race has really little use since ... well the only race you can use it on is the race you just finished

I'll just say what I said here (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=3036851#post3036851) again:

“It’s a major change for the industry,” David Geffen told N.Y. Times reporter Jeff Leeds, who broke the story. “Each of these devices is used to store unpaid-for material. This way, on top of the material people do pay for, the record companies are getting paid on the devices storing the copied music.”

"This agreement with Microsoft around Zune is a significant milestone for our company and our artists," said Morris in a statement. “This move demonstrates there can be a win-win situation where consumers have a great experience while labels and artists are also fairly compensated. We applaud Microsoft for its innovative and consumer-friendly Zune store and device."

Microsoft Corporate VP of Entertainment & Devices Bryan Lee chimed in: "This is an industry in transition, and we at Zune feel that artists should be paid fairly. The agreement we are announcing today is one of many innovations we plan on introducing to the entertainment industry with our partners and highlights our commitment to growing the digital music space. We believe that the music consumer will appreciate knowing that when they buy a Zune device, they are helping their favorite artists get paid."


It sounds to me like they are saying anyone that buys a digital music player is a thief. They are broadly accusing each of us of stealing from artists. I don't appreciate that, and I think we should all voice our disapproval.

Universal Music Group:
USA (212) 841 8000
France +33 1 44 41 91 91
UK +44 0 20 77 47 4000

feedback_fr@vivendi.com

Phone calls are more effective than email, but feel free to do either.

Do we really want the music labels getting a cut of our hardware purchases?!?

But they are treated equal, any gay man can marry a woman and any lesbian woman can marry a man just as any heterosexual man can marry a woman and any heterosexual woman can marry a man

And yet, not. :rolleyes:

Not being able to marry the human being you are attracted to, love, and want to spend the rest of your life with? Doesn't sound too equal to me.

Glad most of the other civil rights issues are taken care of - you would be the one claiming "But people in a wheelchair are treated equally! They have every right to use the same stairs as ambulatory people!" Good grief.

To be fair, every smartphone on the market is an iPhone clone and every tablet an iPad clone, so it is all related to Apple in that way.

a lot of the iphone engineers are former palm employees

Interesting question, but I don't think any of us here will have the answers.

PCs don't use EFI. I don't know if a generic AGP/PCIe card can be initialized by EFI, or if the card will need some EFI code to be on-board.EFI can emulate BIOS though. It's basically what Boot Camp and the original Windows hack did.

As for OS X, I think we can be fairly certain that Apple will only bundle drivers for cards that Apple sells. If you install a third-party card, they will probably tell you that you'll need a driver from the card's manufacturer - that's what they've historically told customers.I've rarely noticed third party hardware that requires drivers. Most of them simply say "Requires OS 8.x, 9.x., 10.x". Of course newer things like 802.11g and USB 2.0 are going to need a version of OS X.



Now, assuming that the Mac firmware (including whatever EFI drivers they include in it) is capable of initializing a generic video card, then there should be no need for more than a device driver, which the card vendors can probably provide, if they are so inclined. If the cards will require special ROM code for EFI, however, then we're back to the same problem that plagued the PPC systems.You don't need a special ROM code for the auxiliary hardware. The video BIOS doesn't change when you boot between OS X and Windows.

As a recent switcher to Mac, I have had a lot of experience with M$'s System Restore function. It is NOT a "go back and find that data I deleted" application. It IS a "can we please go back to a time when this computer wasn't totally ********* up" application.