iLuvMyMacToo
Jun 6, 04:00 PM
So either the kid is a moron or the parent is.
I say the parent. :rolleyes:
I say the parent. :rolleyes:
Macnoviz
Jul 27, 04:22 PM
I like your idea and I think it would work in many situations if there is indeed going to be a "transition phase" toward a new type of connection format. However, I'll stick by my prediction as it offers the maximum benefit for Apple and its third party partners while keeping the whole user interaction simpler and more elegant. The Nike situation is different in the respect that it is really the only way to make a product like that work�can't have a bunch of wires getting in the way of running. I know the iPod Hi-Fi probably isn't selling well enough for Apple to worry that a new connection format would hurt their own profit margin much, but there are a LOT of third party partners out there that have only recently given it their best because Apple has probably assured them that the dock connector will be around for quite some time, so third party R&D won't be a black hole or recurring expense in that area. It is what has helped the accessory market evolve to the point it has, which has benefitted Apple immensly-don't think Apple doesn't realize that fact! It is also what is missing from the also-ran MP3 manufacturers: not enough consistency to make it worth their investment to produce for those products.
I guess we'll just have to wait and see. Of course, it COULD have both....
how about
a 30 $ optional wireless receiver that acts as a female dock connector to plug into the existing iPod docks?
I guess we'll just have to wait and see. Of course, it COULD have both....
how about
a 30 $ optional wireless receiver that acts as a female dock connector to plug into the existing iPod docks?
ArtOfWarfare
Apr 12, 08:04 PM
Question:
Where is the new FCP?
Did Apple take the stage at this event or didn't they? I find it odd MR hasn't reported on it yet... or... IDK, when would Apple take the stage? It seems like it's an early morning company to me, not an evening-going-into-night company.
But like, if Apple never took the stage, I'd say it's newsworthy given there were a good deal of rumors saying that they would.
Where is the new FCP?
Did Apple take the stage at this event or didn't they? I find it odd MR hasn't reported on it yet... or... IDK, when would Apple take the stage? It seems like it's an early morning company to me, not an evening-going-into-night company.
But like, if Apple never took the stage, I'd say it's newsworthy given there were a good deal of rumors saying that they would.
twoodcc
Dec 2, 08:48 PM
well i'm not very worried
djkirsten
Nov 3, 10:47 AM
i have parallels and it works great for me except the whole video thing. i work a lot with video and so that is of course why i got a mac pro :D , but as a freelancer not everything is in final cut so i thought i'd install avid in parallels. well it doesn't think i have a video card and thus wont let me do anything :mad: so if vmware can do that then sign me up.
i also like the whole drag and drop idea, i dont know exactly if parallels can do that, i know you can share a folder, but i picture draging a file from my left monitor(s) to my full screen pc on my right monitor's desktop and it just popping up. that'd be neat but not enough for the switch from parallels.
this is good though because it'll make parallels step it up even more and we'll get some more features quicker.
i also like the whole drag and drop idea, i dont know exactly if parallels can do that, i know you can share a folder, but i picture draging a file from my left monitor(s) to my full screen pc on my right monitor's desktop and it just popping up. that'd be neat but not enough for the switch from parallels.
this is good though because it'll make parallels step it up even more and we'll get some more features quicker.
mac1984user
Apr 13, 07:56 PM
Yawn. What's the point? This thing will have a shelf life of 5.5 months at most and then it will be superceded by a more powerful model. Surely anyone who wanted an iPhone 4 (white or black) has bought one by now. How many holdouts can there SERIOUSLY be??
jtara
Apr 14, 11:14 AM
Interesting possibility. It would be extremely difficult to emulate a complete iOS device (custom ASICs and all). But Apple could emulate just enough ARM instructions to emulate an app that was compiled by Xcode & LLVM (which would limit the way ARM instructions were generated), and used only legal public iOS APIs (instead of emulating hardware and all the registers), which could be translated in Cocoa APIs to display on a Mac OS X machine.
There's no need to emulate ARM instructions, though. And they already do emulate all of the complete iOS devices, at least sufficiently to run iOS apps on OSX.
Apple provides developers with a complete emulation package for testing their iOS apps on OSX. Apps are cross-compiled to x86 code. They also provide the complete set of iOS SDKs, cross-compiled to X86 code.
An emulator handles the device hardware - touchscreen, display, sound system, GPS (REALLY simple emulation - it's always sunny in Mountain View...), etc. If an iPhone or iPad are attached via USB cable, the emulator can even use the accelerometer and gyroscope in the device. Obviously, this could be easily changed to use some new peripheral device.
Other than device emulation, the apps suffer no loss of speed, since they are running native x86 code. In fact, they run considerably faster (ignoring, for this discussion, device emulation) than then do on an actual iOS device.
All Apple would need to give consumers the ability to run iOS apps on their Macs would be to provide them with the emulator (or, more likely, integrate it into the OSX desktop. I think end-users would find the picture of an iPhone or iPad that the emulator draws around the "screen" cute for a couple of days, but then quickly tire of it...), and add an additional target for developers.
What we've seen certainly seems to suggest that's what this is. HOWEVER:
1. For a single app to be compatible with both ARM and x86, they would need to introduce a "fat binary" similar to what they did with the transition from PowerPC to x86. This would bloat apps that are compatible with both to double their current download size. Current Universal (iPhone/iPad) apps are NOT fat binaries. They have multiple sets of resources (images, screen layouts, etc.) and the code needs to have multiple behaviors depending on the device. i.e. the code has to check "is this an iPad? If so do this...
Currently, developers have to create separate binaries for use on the emulator or the actual device.
2. Several developers have checked-in here to say that their apps are listed this way. None have offered that they had any advance knowledge of this, or did anything to make it happen. If this is about ARM/x86 fat binaries, the developer would have had to build their app that way. And even if it didn't require a re-build, I think it's highly unlikely that Apple would start selling apps on a new platform without letting the developers know!
3. Apple is *reasonably* fair about giving all developers access to new technology at the same time. They also generally make a public announcement at the same time as making beta SDKs available to developers. (Though the public announcement may be limited in scope and vague.) There are so many developers, that despite confidentiality agreements, most of the details get out to the public pretty quickly, though perhaps in muddled form. While Apple DOES hand-pick developers for early-early access, it's typically not THAT early. A few weeks, max.
I do think that an x86 target for iOS apps is inevitable. Just not imminent.
My best guess is that this was a screw-up by the web-site developers. Perhaps they did a mockup of the app store for the marketing people, selected some apps or app categories that seemed likely candidates, and slipped-up and it went live on the real app store.
There's no need to emulate ARM instructions, though. And they already do emulate all of the complete iOS devices, at least sufficiently to run iOS apps on OSX.
Apple provides developers with a complete emulation package for testing their iOS apps on OSX. Apps are cross-compiled to x86 code. They also provide the complete set of iOS SDKs, cross-compiled to X86 code.
An emulator handles the device hardware - touchscreen, display, sound system, GPS (REALLY simple emulation - it's always sunny in Mountain View...), etc. If an iPhone or iPad are attached via USB cable, the emulator can even use the accelerometer and gyroscope in the device. Obviously, this could be easily changed to use some new peripheral device.
Other than device emulation, the apps suffer no loss of speed, since they are running native x86 code. In fact, they run considerably faster (ignoring, for this discussion, device emulation) than then do on an actual iOS device.
All Apple would need to give consumers the ability to run iOS apps on their Macs would be to provide them with the emulator (or, more likely, integrate it into the OSX desktop. I think end-users would find the picture of an iPhone or iPad that the emulator draws around the "screen" cute for a couple of days, but then quickly tire of it...), and add an additional target for developers.
What we've seen certainly seems to suggest that's what this is. HOWEVER:
1. For a single app to be compatible with both ARM and x86, they would need to introduce a "fat binary" similar to what they did with the transition from PowerPC to x86. This would bloat apps that are compatible with both to double their current download size. Current Universal (iPhone/iPad) apps are NOT fat binaries. They have multiple sets of resources (images, screen layouts, etc.) and the code needs to have multiple behaviors depending on the device. i.e. the code has to check "is this an iPad? If so do this...
Currently, developers have to create separate binaries for use on the emulator or the actual device.
2. Several developers have checked-in here to say that their apps are listed this way. None have offered that they had any advance knowledge of this, or did anything to make it happen. If this is about ARM/x86 fat binaries, the developer would have had to build their app that way. And even if it didn't require a re-build, I think it's highly unlikely that Apple would start selling apps on a new platform without letting the developers know!
3. Apple is *reasonably* fair about giving all developers access to new technology at the same time. They also generally make a public announcement at the same time as making beta SDKs available to developers. (Though the public announcement may be limited in scope and vague.) There are so many developers, that despite confidentiality agreements, most of the details get out to the public pretty quickly, though perhaps in muddled form. While Apple DOES hand-pick developers for early-early access, it's typically not THAT early. A few weeks, max.
I do think that an x86 target for iOS apps is inevitable. Just not imminent.
My best guess is that this was a screw-up by the web-site developers. Perhaps they did a mockup of the app store for the marketing people, selected some apps or app categories that seemed likely candidates, and slipped-up and it went live on the real app store.
steveh
Apr 12, 02:14 PM
Ah, so ultimately there will still be 7+ cables, just not connected to the computer itself.
If it's connections to your laptop, that's a win right there. Once you've set up the other connected devices, you won't have to mess with them whenever you go somewhere with the laptop.
If it's connections to your laptop, that's a win right there. Once you've set up the other connected devices, you won't have to mess with them whenever you go somewhere with the laptop.
likemyorbs
May 2, 12:37 AM
I think we should preserve his body and burn it at the site of ground zero this 9/11! How's that for a 10 year anniversary celebration?
sickracer2015
Apr 24, 09:27 PM
whats not to say someone just changed the carrier name? I don't own an iphone but I did search and its totally possible.
I don't see a reason apple would need to create an iPhone for T-Mobile if the AT&T plan goes through. If it's rejected than maybe thats a reason then to possibly go on T-Mobile.
I don't see a reason apple would need to create an iPhone for T-Mobile if the AT&T plan goes through. If it's rejected than maybe thats a reason then to possibly go on T-Mobile.
gkhaldi
Oct 24, 08:23 AM
MacBook Pro 15-inch Glossy Widescreen Display
2GB 667 DDR2 SDRAM - 2x1GB
2.33GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
Apple USB Modem
Backlit Keyboard/Mac OS - U.S. English
160GB Serial ATA Drive @ 5400 rpm
Accessory Kit
SuperDrive 6x (DVD+R DL/DVD�RW/CD-RW)
Soon, the little lady can use the PB12" full time.
:D
I just ordered it with 3 GB. I hope the system is not "out of balance" because of the non-even distribution of the memory banks.
2GB 667 DDR2 SDRAM - 2x1GB
2.33GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
Apple USB Modem
Backlit Keyboard/Mac OS - U.S. English
160GB Serial ATA Drive @ 5400 rpm
Accessory Kit
SuperDrive 6x (DVD+R DL/DVD�RW/CD-RW)
Soon, the little lady can use the PB12" full time.
:D
I just ordered it with 3 GB. I hope the system is not "out of balance" because of the non-even distribution of the memory banks.
iliketyla
Apr 13, 07:45 PM
Anyone actually planning on buying this? Especially with a refresh right around the corner?
iJawn108
Oct 23, 05:01 PM
****in' microsoft
im glad i have switched.
im glad i have switched.
trekkie604
Oct 25, 02:47 AM
http://link.trekcubed.com/i7pc.png
Among other things...
Among other things...
Bregalad
Apr 26, 01:07 AM
I am excited to hear that the CPUs released in January will finally be making it to a Mac in May. I totally understand the delay. It doesn't make much sense to anyone but Intel to release mid range chips months before the high end ones so Apple has little choice but to hold back the iMac lest it hurt sales of Mac Pros and MacBook Pros.
I'm not excited by the idea that the iMacs may continue to ship with 16:9 mirrors. Apple is a premium brand, the least they could do is offer true anti-reflective glass (not the fuzzy matte finish that used to adorn displays).
I'm not sure there's anything we can do about the 16:9 issue. The entire LCD industry seems determined to give us screens optimized for entertainment rather than information gathering or document production. Maybe what we really need is a display that can rotate 90� and still look good. Then I could stick a pair of 9:16's side by side.
I'm not excited by the idea that the iMacs may continue to ship with 16:9 mirrors. Apple is a premium brand, the least they could do is offer true anti-reflective glass (not the fuzzy matte finish that used to adorn displays).
I'm not sure there's anything we can do about the 16:9 issue. The entire LCD industry seems determined to give us screens optimized for entertainment rather than information gathering or document production. Maybe what we really need is a display that can rotate 90� and still look good. Then I could stick a pair of 9:16's side by side.
fireshot91
Dec 29, 05:07 PM
Jesus Christ...she basically ate a whole 8th grader in one sitting...:eek:
Ew.
I wish I could eat that much without gaining weight...lol.
Ah, I really love food <3.
Ew.
I wish I could eat that much without gaining weight...lol.
Ah, I really love food <3.
doctor-don
Apr 24, 09:19 PM
True, long term it is a good plan. Though it looks like since the announcement that new phones becoming available on t-mobile have 850/1900 as well as 1700. Looks like it part of their plan to get devices out to t-mobile users that can work on both networks to be ready for this type of change.
Anyway, regardless of the buy out or not, once exclusivity ended it was only a matter of time before Apple added more bands to the iPhone. The qualcomm chip they use now supports all these bands anyway.
myTouch 4G has Band (frequency):850 MHz;900 MHz;1800 MHz;1900 MHz;UMTS: Band IV (1700/2100)
Anyway, regardless of the buy out or not, once exclusivity ended it was only a matter of time before Apple added more bands to the iPhone. The qualcomm chip they use now supports all these bands anyway.
myTouch 4G has Band (frequency):850 MHz;900 MHz;1800 MHz;1900 MHz;UMTS: Band IV (1700/2100)
wmk461
Jan 29, 11:36 PM
Apple has great products, but we are going to be experiencing more than a recession. Donald Trump stated that what was going to happen in North America is going to make Russia look like a picnic during world war 2. The CEO of Wall-Street stated two years ago that there will be a world economic crash worse than what happened during the 1930's due to the amount of debt. The European Union Banks stated 1.5 years ago that they were preparing their banks for a world economic collapse. Unfortunately most of us are living the status quo and do not want to acknowledge that our way of life is going to drastically change. Unfortunately even a company as great as Apple will not be able to retain the level of what the stocks are worth even at todays low. My advice is pay of your debts... sell your stocks while you still have money, sell your home and then when the collapse occurs then invest.
dethmaShine
May 1, 05:55 AM
http://aroundthesphere.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/popcorn.jpg
chrmjenkins
Apr 22, 11:10 AM
Of all the things that iPhone needs soon, LTE is not one of them.
We can all wait until its widespread, and usable.
It's already available to 110 Americans. It will reach over half of the US by year's end thanks to Verizon. When you look at AT&T's 3G penetration at the time of the iPhone 3G launch, it's actually not that far off.
The real issue is having a radio that allows for decent battery life. Even if they can consolidate it into 1 chip, that doesn't mean Apple will be pleased with its battery performance enough to include it in their phones.
My understanding of the MDM9615 is that it's a powerhouse.
The next generation MDM9615 will support LTE (FDD and TDD), DC-HSPA+, EV-DO Rev-B and TD-SCDMA
Basically, that means it supports LTE, super high speed 3G HSPA+ (think T-mobile's 42 mbps) and EV-DO Rev-B (CDMA). That means it should be a worldphone chip, and it's also fabbed on the brand new 28nm process, which means it will be as low power as one could expect. That makes it an excellent candidate for the 2012 iPhone 6.
The MDM9615 and MDM8215 are designed to pair up with the WTR1605 radio frequency IC and PM8018 power management IC to provide a highly integrated chipset solution. The WTR1605 will be Qualcomm’s first Radio Transceiver in Wafer Level Package and will be a highly integrated radio transceiver with multi-mode (LTE FDD, LTE TDD, CDMA, WCDMA, TD-SCDMA, GSM) and multi-band support.
TD-SCDMA is the CDMA variant they use in China. Outside of penta-band GSM (which I don't know if this offers, and I don't see why it wouldn't since the current iPhone Gobi chip offers it), this radio can be used on every damn carrier out there in the world essentially.
source (http://www.qualcomm.com/news/releases/2011/02/14/qualcomm-introduces-28nm-mass-market-ltedc-hspa-chipsets-mobile-broadband-0)
We can all wait until its widespread, and usable.
It's already available to 110 Americans. It will reach over half of the US by year's end thanks to Verizon. When you look at AT&T's 3G penetration at the time of the iPhone 3G launch, it's actually not that far off.
The real issue is having a radio that allows for decent battery life. Even if they can consolidate it into 1 chip, that doesn't mean Apple will be pleased with its battery performance enough to include it in their phones.
My understanding of the MDM9615 is that it's a powerhouse.
The next generation MDM9615 will support LTE (FDD and TDD), DC-HSPA+, EV-DO Rev-B and TD-SCDMA
Basically, that means it supports LTE, super high speed 3G HSPA+ (think T-mobile's 42 mbps) and EV-DO Rev-B (CDMA). That means it should be a worldphone chip, and it's also fabbed on the brand new 28nm process, which means it will be as low power as one could expect. That makes it an excellent candidate for the 2012 iPhone 6.
The MDM9615 and MDM8215 are designed to pair up with the WTR1605 radio frequency IC and PM8018 power management IC to provide a highly integrated chipset solution. The WTR1605 will be Qualcomm’s first Radio Transceiver in Wafer Level Package and will be a highly integrated radio transceiver with multi-mode (LTE FDD, LTE TDD, CDMA, WCDMA, TD-SCDMA, GSM) and multi-band support.
TD-SCDMA is the CDMA variant they use in China. Outside of penta-band GSM (which I don't know if this offers, and I don't see why it wouldn't since the current iPhone Gobi chip offers it), this radio can be used on every damn carrier out there in the world essentially.
source (http://www.qualcomm.com/news/releases/2011/02/14/qualcomm-introduces-28nm-mass-market-ltedc-hspa-chipsets-mobile-broadband-0)
GekkePrutser
Apr 18, 04:06 AM
Why are you guys expecting Apple to drop a USB port for the Thunderbolt?
If Apple includes Thunderbolt it will be shared with the Mini DisplayPort. Just like on the MBP's. Which was already present on the MBA so I don't see the need to drop a USB port.
I'm not sure if it will get one though due to the footprint of the new chip on the motherboard.
If Apple includes Thunderbolt it will be shared with the Mini DisplayPort. Just like on the MBP's. Which was already present on the MBA so I don't see the need to drop a USB port.
I'm not sure if it will get one though due to the footprint of the new chip on the motherboard.
MacCheetah3
Jul 24, 08:34 PM
Hi
otherwise identical to the current model and its touch-sensitive cover
No it's not! While I to believed this based on what the Mighty Mouse product page (http://www.apple.com/mightymouse/), they are very much mechanical. I was thinking "touch senstive" = touchpad. But one must certainly press down on each side like a non-Apple multi-button mouse for it to activate.
Sorry...A little venting.
otherwise identical to the current model and its touch-sensitive cover
No it's not! While I to believed this based on what the Mighty Mouse product page (http://www.apple.com/mightymouse/), they are very much mechanical. I was thinking "touch senstive" = touchpad. But one must certainly press down on each side like a non-Apple multi-button mouse for it to activate.
Sorry...A little venting.
kbmb
Apr 12, 09:51 AM
TheRegister seems to reckon it's not due until 2012:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/04/12/iphone_delay/
There's been some debate on whether these articles are talking about Apple's fiscal year 2012 which begins in 2011....or the calendar year 2012.
Personally, I tend to think maybe these rumors are right and Apple is shifting the iPhone announcements to the fall moving forward. That would give them more time to focus on software at WWDC each year, with new hardware in the fall, in time for the holiday season.
-Kevin
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/04/12/iphone_delay/
There's been some debate on whether these articles are talking about Apple's fiscal year 2012 which begins in 2011....or the calendar year 2012.
Personally, I tend to think maybe these rumors are right and Apple is shifting the iPhone announcements to the fall moving forward. That would give them more time to focus on software at WWDC each year, with new hardware in the fall, in time for the holiday season.
-Kevin
WeegieMac
Apr 14, 03:50 PM
Okay, I just reproduced this problem. After which I rolled my eyes and said "What's the big deal?"
I mean really, this is BEYOND picky. No wonder us Apple users have a reputation for being douchebags.
I hadn't even NOTICED this until now, and now that I have, I'm not really sure why I'm supposed to care. Honestly, if it's a choice between fixing this and putting more development resources into iOS 5, I much prefer the latter.
-Z
EDIT: I wanted to add that I'd rather my app launch faster than for time to be wasted playing a silly animation. Based on how fast the app comes up, that may be what's going on here.
Calling people "douchebags"? Seriously, get some grown up patter ... honestly to God, what is this? US TV Stereotypes Vol.1?
It's not "beyond picky" based on two FACTS.
1. It wasn't present or an issue in iOS 4.0 to 4.2.
2. The stock Apple apps don't do it, so to say it's Apple making the apps launch quicker would require 0.0002 seconds of brain power to realise, "Oh wait, if they were making apps load quicker, it'd be across the ENTIRE operating system".
Think. Think some more. Then consider typing ...
I mean really, this is BEYOND picky. No wonder us Apple users have a reputation for being douchebags.
I hadn't even NOTICED this until now, and now that I have, I'm not really sure why I'm supposed to care. Honestly, if it's a choice between fixing this and putting more development resources into iOS 5, I much prefer the latter.
-Z
EDIT: I wanted to add that I'd rather my app launch faster than for time to be wasted playing a silly animation. Based on how fast the app comes up, that may be what's going on here.
Calling people "douchebags"? Seriously, get some grown up patter ... honestly to God, what is this? US TV Stereotypes Vol.1?
It's not "beyond picky" based on two FACTS.
1. It wasn't present or an issue in iOS 4.0 to 4.2.
2. The stock Apple apps don't do it, so to say it's Apple making the apps launch quicker would require 0.0002 seconds of brain power to realise, "Oh wait, if they were making apps load quicker, it'd be across the ENTIRE operating system".
Think. Think some more. Then consider typing ...
0 comments:
Post a Comment