BaldiMac
Mar 22, 02:11 PM
The screen is not 50% smaller. Nice way of making yourself look stupid.
Actually it is less than 50% the screen area of an iPad. Maybe you should check your math before calling someone stupid.
iPad display is about 45 square inches
Playbook display is about 21.5 square inches
Actually it is less than 50% the screen area of an iPad. Maybe you should check your math before calling someone stupid.
iPad display is about 45 square inches
Playbook display is about 21.5 square inches
Chundles
Aug 11, 10:33 AM
Two stories so far on the front page and we have:
"chineese"
"upcomming"
Looks like arn's keyboard is stickiiing. :D
iPhone = bad idea and difficult to implement beyond the USA.
"chineese"
"upcomming"
Looks like arn's keyboard is stickiiing. :D
iPhone = bad idea and difficult to implement beyond the USA.
basesloaded190
Apr 6, 11:12 AM
I still don't think this means new MacBook Airs in June. Can anyone really see Apple releasing new hardware before Lion is released?
Why not?
Why not?
Bilbo63
Apr 19, 06:40 PM
Proof that Samsung ripped off Apple's rip off of Delicious Library?
Apple hired the young fellow that did the UI for delicious library... sadly his name escapes me at the moment. But yeah, the kid brought is book shelves with him.;)
Apple hired the young fellow that did the UI for delicious library... sadly his name escapes me at the moment. But yeah, the kid brought is book shelves with him.;)
skunk
Apr 28, 01:16 PM
I ask you whether Rockwell Blake would be a competent President of the United States. You reply, "I have no idea. Who's Rockwell Blake?" You don't believe that he would be a competent President of the United States. You don't doubt that he would do that. You haven't formed any opinion about whether he would be a competent one.However, in your case, as opposed to your fictional version, you have formed an opinion.
dustinsc
Mar 22, 12:52 PM
Blackberry playbook = The IPad 2 killer - you heard it here first.
Look at the specs, their greater or equal to the iPad 2 with the exception of battery life.
Well, minus the screen size too. Equal to isn't going to cut it against an Apple product. Just look at how the Zune fared.
Look at the specs, their greater or equal to the iPad 2 with the exception of battery life.
Well, minus the screen size too. Equal to isn't going to cut it against an Apple product. Just look at how the Zune fared.
xxavier
Aug 5, 09:31 PM
With the iSight and IR sensor rumored to be integrated into the new line of Cinema Displays, i guess apple's gonna adopt HDMI as the IO interface, making Apple one of the first corps to do so. Plus with a HDMI enabled Mac Pro and Leopard fully support it. Why? HDMI is just like ADC, plus its an industry standard port. U need only one cable to have all the communications (FW+USB+Sound+...) going, without having to clutter yr desktop with multiple cables. I see it coming!
whooleytoo
Sep 13, 07:22 AM
Man, I don't know why people keep saying this. On OS X, *all software utilizes the extra cores*. The only way it wouldn't is if you have less than 8 processes running, which I guarantee you that you don't. (System alone requires 20-30 processes to run.)
Actually, it's even less than 8 - as a process can have several threads each of which can be moved to idle processors. Safari alone on my Mac currently has 23 threads at the moment, my system overall 277.
Actually, it's even less than 8 - as a process can have several threads each of which can be moved to idle processors. Safari alone on my Mac currently has 23 threads at the moment, my system overall 277.
AidenShaw
Mar 26, 11:23 PM
As an amateur OS X developer, I really hate this attitude because it will end up slowing Lion adoption. That really sucks, because there are a ton of awesome changes in 10.6 that I (and many, many other developers) would love to take advantage of to make their software even greater, but it's not going to be viable to go Lion-only for said features until Lion is installed on the majority of Macs out there.
Yes, we've heard of this - it's the "XP syndrome" all over again.
Yes, we've heard of this - it's the "XP syndrome" all over again.
twoodcc
Aug 12, 09:04 PM
I don't really care if you count the Prologues as full releases or not. The fact remains...
GT1 + GT2 + GT3 + GT4 = 46M
...not 57M like you originally, and incorrectly, said.
but you do care. you are pointing out that you care by what you just typed. if you count the prologues, you get over 57M sold.
You brought up sales, not me. And last I checked, objectively, 100 is more than 57, regardless of how you subjectively look at it.
i disagree. let's bring math into the equation, since you seem to have missed it.
100,000,000/15 = 6,666,667.
57,000,000/8 = 7,125,000.
so GT has sold more copies per game.
No, the only thing that adds to is a stat point on the back of the box. I mean, hooray, someone's 87 CRX is in a racing game. YAY!! :rolleyes:
That is the problem with GT these days. Too much fluff, and lacking in the racing. I mean, whatever, they can make whatever kind of game they want. If they want to fill the game with 1000 cars, 800 of which most people never touch, they can do that. To me, though, they are losing what made the series great years ago.
well again this is your opinion. we all have one. i personally think that if someone is into cars, they will care about their car. not everyone can afford the cars in the game, but it might be nice to see that car that you can afford and have in real life in the game. i mean, the game is meant for people into cars.
NO WAY!!! I never knew that. :rolleyes:
just pointing out the facts. are you doing any different?
Sure, but a "Guinness Record" for it? Again, to much fluff.
they have records for everything. like how much cheese you can eat, or whatever. that's what Guinness Records are
No, it is a concept car that Citro�n paraded around at car shows. Lots of concept cars get built with the fake intention of going into production. But you know what? Almost none of them do. This Citro�n is no different.
but the intention of the car was for the game. how do you not see that? specifically for the game. in fact, it's named GT after the game
My point is, he was trying to use GT's high sales as a quantifier of the series greatness. Then, when I showed 2 examples of other racing game series with higher sales, he said they were different types of racing games, and that they don't count. Which is understandable, because they are not the same type of game. But then, ultimately, as I said before, if you don't count those other types of racing games, you're really only comparing GT to Forza, since that is the only other similar game.
But what does that prove? A game series that has been out for almost 13 years has sold more than a similar type of game series that has only been out for a little over 5 years. Big shock there. I'll be the first to admit that Forza isn't even remotely close to as big of a sales hit as the GT series. But, like I've said before, liking a game is a subjective thing, and everyone is entitled to their own choices. But sales are an objective thing, that has no relevance to somethings greatness.
how does sales have no relevance if something is great? so iPhone sales show nothing to how good it is? or iPod sales mean nothing to how well it is? of course it does. you make games to sell. if they don't sell, you stop making games. and then there wouldn't be this thread, b/c there would be no GT5.
GT1 + GT2 + GT3 + GT4 = 46M
...not 57M like you originally, and incorrectly, said.
but you do care. you are pointing out that you care by what you just typed. if you count the prologues, you get over 57M sold.
You brought up sales, not me. And last I checked, objectively, 100 is more than 57, regardless of how you subjectively look at it.
i disagree. let's bring math into the equation, since you seem to have missed it.
100,000,000/15 = 6,666,667.
57,000,000/8 = 7,125,000.
so GT has sold more copies per game.
No, the only thing that adds to is a stat point on the back of the box. I mean, hooray, someone's 87 CRX is in a racing game. YAY!! :rolleyes:
That is the problem with GT these days. Too much fluff, and lacking in the racing. I mean, whatever, they can make whatever kind of game they want. If they want to fill the game with 1000 cars, 800 of which most people never touch, they can do that. To me, though, they are losing what made the series great years ago.
well again this is your opinion. we all have one. i personally think that if someone is into cars, they will care about their car. not everyone can afford the cars in the game, but it might be nice to see that car that you can afford and have in real life in the game. i mean, the game is meant for people into cars.
NO WAY!!! I never knew that. :rolleyes:
just pointing out the facts. are you doing any different?
Sure, but a "Guinness Record" for it? Again, to much fluff.
they have records for everything. like how much cheese you can eat, or whatever. that's what Guinness Records are
No, it is a concept car that Citro�n paraded around at car shows. Lots of concept cars get built with the fake intention of going into production. But you know what? Almost none of them do. This Citro�n is no different.
but the intention of the car was for the game. how do you not see that? specifically for the game. in fact, it's named GT after the game
My point is, he was trying to use GT's high sales as a quantifier of the series greatness. Then, when I showed 2 examples of other racing game series with higher sales, he said they were different types of racing games, and that they don't count. Which is understandable, because they are not the same type of game. But then, ultimately, as I said before, if you don't count those other types of racing games, you're really only comparing GT to Forza, since that is the only other similar game.
But what does that prove? A game series that has been out for almost 13 years has sold more than a similar type of game series that has only been out for a little over 5 years. Big shock there. I'll be the first to admit that Forza isn't even remotely close to as big of a sales hit as the GT series. But, like I've said before, liking a game is a subjective thing, and everyone is entitled to their own choices. But sales are an objective thing, that has no relevance to somethings greatness.
how does sales have no relevance if something is great? so iPhone sales show nothing to how good it is? or iPod sales mean nothing to how well it is? of course it does. you make games to sell. if they don't sell, you stop making games. and then there wouldn't be this thread, b/c there would be no GT5.
yentrog31
Jun 13, 04:30 PM
Hello Guys!!
I posted my 3gs 32GB White IPhone on CRAIGSLIST and sold it to the 1st guy that called me
for $425 ...why are people settling for the Price that Radio Shack is offering ?????
I had over 10 calls in about 15 mins on my way to sell the phone...I am in Miami FL.... G O O D L U C K all !!
BTW ...I feel naked :eek: now w/o my IPhone and cant wait for FeDex to knock on my door on the 24th :D !
congrats..but why would anyone pay 425$ for a 3GS/32 when most can get the iPhone discount for a 4G for 74$ more?..I have 3GS/32 black and Im going to keep mine for a back-up phone/iPod/maybe sell it later/ and I'm getting the $499 discount since I'm not eligible for an upgrade til 3/11...glta
I posted my 3gs 32GB White IPhone on CRAIGSLIST and sold it to the 1st guy that called me
for $425 ...why are people settling for the Price that Radio Shack is offering ?????
I had over 10 calls in about 15 mins on my way to sell the phone...I am in Miami FL.... G O O D L U C K all !!
BTW ...I feel naked :eek: now w/o my IPhone and cant wait for FeDex to knock on my door on the 24th :D !
congrats..but why would anyone pay 425$ for a 3GS/32 when most can get the iPhone discount for a 4G for 74$ more?..I have 3GS/32 black and Im going to keep mine for a back-up phone/iPod/maybe sell it later/ and I'm getting the $499 discount since I'm not eligible for an upgrade til 3/11...glta
MacinDoc
Aug 26, 12:45 AM
Yep. My serial falls into the range and the website still won't accept it. I guess I will have to sit on hold Monday morning.
According to some people who have spoken with Apple customer service reps, some batteries within the listed ranges were not manufactured by Sony, which is why they don't qualify for replacement. Apparently, there is no easy way for the consumer to identify whether his/her battery is a Sony or not.
I suspect that because of all of the confusion, Apple will end up replacing all of the batteries in the listed ranges, whether they are Sony-manufactured or not, to avoid the wrath of customers who believe they are being ripped off if their batteries don't qualify. In the past, Apple has gone beyond what was required to correct situations that just looked bad.
Maybe this whole thing would have been easier if the serial numbers on the batteries somehow indicated their manufacturer (of course, that's just hindsight, but I hope Apple remembers this in the future).
According to some people who have spoken with Apple customer service reps, some batteries within the listed ranges were not manufactured by Sony, which is why they don't qualify for replacement. Apparently, there is no easy way for the consumer to identify whether his/her battery is a Sony or not.
I suspect that because of all of the confusion, Apple will end up replacing all of the batteries in the listed ranges, whether they are Sony-manufactured or not, to avoid the wrath of customers who believe they are being ripped off if their batteries don't qualify. In the past, Apple has gone beyond what was required to correct situations that just looked bad.
Maybe this whole thing would have been easier if the serial numbers on the batteries somehow indicated their manufacturer (of course, that's just hindsight, but I hope Apple remembers this in the future).
ricgnzlzcr
Aug 15, 12:30 PM
Wow, I'm really surprised by those photoshop tests. When those go universal I'm sure my jaw will drop
cmaier
Apr 20, 01:49 PM
So all that is left is to discuss the actual merit of the trade dress claim, of course, something that will in the end be up to the judge.
We can use pictures all we want, something tells me Samsung is just going to bring in devices into the courtroom. Pictures can be misleading as certain angles/shots might make ressemblances show up that aren't quite there.
Also, it remains to be seen how much the judge will accept generic things like "rounded corner", since I don't think I've ever had a phone without rounded corners and how much in the end, he decides that the devices to ressemble or not each other.
Do you know of someone that looked up the icon trademarks on the USPTO site ? Did Apple even register them (I know you don't have to, unless you want punitive damages) ?
No such thing as punitive damages here. In any event, they did register them. I posted on this earlier. They registered three trade dresses too.
We can use pictures all we want, something tells me Samsung is just going to bring in devices into the courtroom. Pictures can be misleading as certain angles/shots might make ressemblances show up that aren't quite there.
Also, it remains to be seen how much the judge will accept generic things like "rounded corner", since I don't think I've ever had a phone without rounded corners and how much in the end, he decides that the devices to ressemble or not each other.
Do you know of someone that looked up the icon trademarks on the USPTO site ? Did Apple even register them (I know you don't have to, unless you want punitive damages) ?
No such thing as punitive damages here. In any event, they did register them. I posted on this earlier. They registered three trade dresses too.
alfonsog
Apr 27, 09:11 AM
If anyone wants complete privacy they shouldn't use a cell phone anyway. Or internet, or credit cards, or electricity, or work, or pay taxes. I would think Droid phones would be worse since their creator was Google which is all about tracking you to sell ads. No difference than junk mail, they know your home address and what stores are in your proximity.
Also to Apple logging might mean using the data to track you, which they aren't.
Also to Apple logging might mean using the data to track you, which they aren't.
Half Glass
Aug 18, 11:29 PM
"Quad Core Ready" - that would make a nice bullet on a software package wouldn't it?
Better yet: "MultiCore Ready".
So the webpages at Apple.com suggest the improvement of Xeon vs Quad G5 in FCP of 1.3- 1.4 times as fast as the Quad G5.
However, notice that it is footnoted that these results were obtained using a Beta version of FCP:
Royal Wedding Cupcakes
Royal Wedding Cupcake Ideas
wedding cupcakes in two
Better yet: "MultiCore Ready".
So the webpages at Apple.com suggest the improvement of Xeon vs Quad G5 in FCP of 1.3- 1.4 times as fast as the Quad G5.
However, notice that it is footnoted that these results were obtained using a Beta version of FCP:
jmsait19
Aug 26, 05:39 PM
This is interesting, BUT, from what I know, Intel announced the desktop (Conroe) Core 2 Duo proccessor on July 27, and as far as I know, no Conroe systems are shipping right now, almost a month later.
Dell has announced some Conroe systems that you can order, but as far as I know they aren't readily shipping yet.
that's because conroe wouldn't have been an upgrade compared to what apple already had out (maybe the imac, but merom waiting for merom would keep it cooler inside). The only thing left to change at that point was the PowerMac and they put Woodcrest in it and that one IS shipping.
Dell has announced some Conroe systems that you can order, but as far as I know they aren't readily shipping yet.
that's because conroe wouldn't have been an upgrade compared to what apple already had out (maybe the imac, but merom waiting for merom would keep it cooler inside). The only thing left to change at that point was the PowerMac and they put Woodcrest in it and that one IS shipping.
Silentwave
Jul 14, 09:34 PM
Either way, between the case redesign rumor and the Conroe vs. Woodcrest rumor, looks like WWDC will really boost the credibility of one rumors site and smash the other's credibility to pieces (unless they're both wrong).
No, I don't think its possible to either make ThinkSecret's credibility either better or worse without disrupting the balance of the space/time continuum. Unless of course there are powerbook G5s on Tuesday August 8th during WWDC. In that case, the universe will vanish instantly and be replaced with something even more inexplicable.
No, I don't think its possible to either make ThinkSecret's credibility either better or worse without disrupting the balance of the space/time continuum. Unless of course there are powerbook G5s on Tuesday August 8th during WWDC. In that case, the universe will vanish instantly and be replaced with something even more inexplicable.
arkitect
Mar 3, 04:52 AM
I believe that every "gay" person should be celibate.
Why?
I also think opposite-sex monogamous marriage is the only appropriate context for sex
Why?
Yes, I know you "explain", but I just never get it.
I'm heterosexual. I still feel opposite-sex attraction, but my sex drive has been weak for years. I'm grateful for that weakness, too, because I don't see others as mere objects.
Last year I (male) married my partner (male) — we've been together 11 years. (As an aside, that 11 year relationship has outlasted all — and I mean all my straight cousins's marriages and relationships).
Now, you may not like to hear this, but when we have sex we make love. I do not see him as just an object. I fell in love with him because he is a wonderful man. He makes me happy and content.
No different from other couples straight or gay.
So why should we suddenly live together in a platonic relationship — because you have issues with sex?
We're pretty middle class (Shock *gasp* horror). We look out for our neighbours, our friends come around for dinner and sometimes they bring their little kids along. Listen to music and nod off in front of the TV. We have sex, sorry to freak you out, but we do.
In all respects we are normal adults contributing to society, paying taxes, recycling our (maybe too many) wine bottles etc.
Look I am sorry life apparently dealt you a few nasty cards, but perhaps you should consider a religious retreat — life in a monastery can be I hear very fulfilling for men and women like you.
But please leave the rest of us to deal with 21st century issues.
And as for your two gay friends… well… I don't know if I wouldn't file them under I for imaginary. That is just my gut instinct. (Unless the couple you refer to are Catholic priests, in which case… I guess.)
Why?
I also think opposite-sex monogamous marriage is the only appropriate context for sex
Why?
Yes, I know you "explain", but I just never get it.
I'm heterosexual. I still feel opposite-sex attraction, but my sex drive has been weak for years. I'm grateful for that weakness, too, because I don't see others as mere objects.
Last year I (male) married my partner (male) — we've been together 11 years. (As an aside, that 11 year relationship has outlasted all — and I mean all my straight cousins's marriages and relationships).
Now, you may not like to hear this, but when we have sex we make love. I do not see him as just an object. I fell in love with him because he is a wonderful man. He makes me happy and content.
No different from other couples straight or gay.
So why should we suddenly live together in a platonic relationship — because you have issues with sex?
We're pretty middle class (Shock *gasp* horror). We look out for our neighbours, our friends come around for dinner and sometimes they bring their little kids along. Listen to music and nod off in front of the TV. We have sex, sorry to freak you out, but we do.
In all respects we are normal adults contributing to society, paying taxes, recycling our (maybe too many) wine bottles etc.
Look I am sorry life apparently dealt you a few nasty cards, but perhaps you should consider a religious retreat — life in a monastery can be I hear very fulfilling for men and women like you.
But please leave the rest of us to deal with 21st century issues.
And as for your two gay friends… well… I don't know if I wouldn't file them under I for imaginary. That is just my gut instinct. (Unless the couple you refer to are Catholic priests, in which case… I guess.)
Multimedia
Jul 21, 01:39 PM
Hey Multimedia, just curious, I wonder what's your current (something you want to use for the next 1-2 years) idea of the ultimate machine wrt number of Cores, Memory, Storage, etc. And, how much are you willing to pay for it?Under $4k whatever state of the offerings are. I am not writing about wanting to pay for expensive servers etc. I am only referring to Mac Pro top of the lines. So I am looking foward to the 8 core starter kit this Winter. :D
Mine is not RAM intensive work. I have 6GB of ram now and it is more than enough. I also have several Terabytes of HDs already. 400GB HDs are down to $100 now so Storage is pretty cheap with each Terabyte down to $250 or 25� a GB.
Mine is not RAM intensive work. I have 6GB of ram now and it is more than enough. I also have several Terabytes of HDs already. 400GB HDs are down to $100 now so Storage is pretty cheap with each Terabyte down to $250 or 25� a GB.
thunderclap
Apr 8, 06:55 AM
Isn't this hypocritical since Apple has been known to do this in their retail stores too?
swingerofbirch
Nov 28, 07:22 PM
This would be like Ford paying Exxon a fee because some car drivers syphon gas....pretty weird!
Eraserhead
Mar 23, 01:50 AM
These things don't travel very fast.
I was having a look on Google and a container ship only takes 20 days or so to get from China to Europe, and a military ship would be faster - so you don't need that much time to get ships into place.
And China to Europe by ship is a long way (http://www.gcmap.com/mapui?P=hkg-sin-trv-dxb-cai-gib-sou&MS=wls&DU=km).
I was having a look on Google and a container ship only takes 20 days or so to get from China to Europe, and a military ship would be faster - so you don't need that much time to get ships into place.
And China to Europe by ship is a long way (http://www.gcmap.com/mapui?P=hkg-sin-trv-dxb-cai-gib-sou&MS=wls&DU=km).
k995
Apr 20, 01:39 PM
Seriously the iPhone looks like Prada? I'd got to be blind to not notice that.
The google nexus s looks like an iphone? I'd got to be blind to not notice that.
yet the same criteria apple uses can be used on the prada.
But glad to see you find those arguments rubbish.
The only similarity is the rounded corners and even the rounded corners look very different.
What exactly is similar if I may know?
Rows of icons?
Dock at the bottom of screen?
Capacitive screen (prada was the first btw)
Button at the bottom, speaker above camera at the same place ,...
Enough simularities as the current charges of apple against samsung/htc and google .
The google nexus s looks like an iphone? I'd got to be blind to not notice that.
yet the same criteria apple uses can be used on the prada.
But glad to see you find those arguments rubbish.
The only similarity is the rounded corners and even the rounded corners look very different.
What exactly is similar if I may know?
Rows of icons?
Dock at the bottom of screen?
Capacitive screen (prada was the first btw)
Button at the bottom, speaker above camera at the same place ,...
Enough simularities as the current charges of apple against samsung/htc and google .
No comments:
Post a Comment