Vulpinemac
Apr 25, 09:33 AM
I've been reading MacRumors for years - only added to the discussion a few times since 08. Not a troll, but still considered a "newbie". :D
Well, he did say "most". If their join date were, say, yesterday, then they're much more likely to be a troll, no?
Well, he did say "most". If their join date were, say, yesterday, then they're much more likely to be a troll, no?
MikeTheC
Nov 25, 10:46 PM
All this talk about Palm needing to modernize their OS, or it is outdated, or needing to re-write is absolutely hilarious.
On a phone, I want to use its features quickly and easily. When I have to schedule an appointment, I want to enter that appointment as easily as possible. When I want to add something to my to-do list, I want to do it easily and quickly. And first and foremost, I want to be able to look up a contact and dial it as quickly as possible.
A phone is not a personal computer. I couldn't care less about multitasking, rewriting, "modern" OSes (whatever "modern" means). "Modern" features and look is just eye candy and/or toys. A mobile phone is a gadget of convenience, and it should be convenient to use. Even PalmOS 1.0 was convenient. It was just as easy to use its contact and calendar features as any so-called "modern" OS is today.
I would really like to know how "modernizing" the OS on my phone would help me look up contacts, dial contacts, enter to-do list entries, and entering calendar entries any better that I could today.
Again, I repeat: a phone is not a personal computer. There's no point in treating it as such.
The same point could largely be made about cars, but I don't think either of us would want to be driving a Model T or Model A Ford these days, would we?
The term "Modern" as applied to operating systems has little to do with the interface per se. It primarily concerns the underpinnings of the OS and how forward-looking and/or open-ended it is. Older operating systems, if you want to look at it in this way, were very geared to the hardware of their times, and every time you added a new hardware feature or some new kind of technology came out, you wound up making this big patchwork of an OS, in which you had either an out-dated or obsolete "core" around which was stuck, somewhat unglamorously, lots of crap to allow it to do stuff it wasn't really designed for. Then, you wound up having to write patches for the patches, etc., ad infinitum.
Apple tried to go the internal development route, but that didn't work because their departmental infrastructure was eating them from the inside out at the time and basically poisoned all of their new projects. They considered BeOS because it was an incredibly modern OS at the time that was very capable, unbelievably good at multitasking, memory protection, multimedia tasks, etc. However, that company was so shaky that when Apple decided not to go with them, they collapsed. One of the products which was introduced and sold and almost immediately recalled that used a version of BeOS was Sony's eVilla (you just have to love that name -- try pronouncing it out loud to get the full effect).
Ultimately, they went with NeXT's BSD- and Mach-Kernel-based NeXTStep (which after a bunch of time and effort and -- since lots of it is based on Open Source software, there were a healthy amount of community contributions to) and hence we now have Mac OS X.
I'll leave it to actual developers and/or coders here to better explain and refine (and/or correct) what I've said here, should you wish greater detail beyond what I am able to -- and therefore have -- provided above.
The whole point of going with a modern OS implemented for an imbedded market (i.e. "Mac OS X Mobile") is it gives you much more direct (and probably better implemented and/or better-grounded) access to modern technologies. Everything from basic I/O tasks that reside in the Kernel to audio processing to doing H.264 decoding to having access to IPv4 or IPv6, are all examples of things which a modern OS could do a better job of providing and/or backing.
From what I understand, PalmOS is something that was designed to first and foremost give you basic notepad and daily organizer functionality. When they wrote, as you say, PalmOS 1.0, they happened to implement a way for third parties to write software that could run on it. This has been both a benefit and a bane of PalmOS's existence. First off, they now have the same issues of backwards-compatibility and storage space and memory use/abuse that a regular computer OS has. I said it was both a benefit and a bane; but there's actually two parts to the "bane" side. The first I've already mentioned, but the second is the fact that since apps have been written which can do darn near any conceivable task, people keep wanting more and more and more. And this then goes back to the "patchwork" I described earlier in talking about "older" computer OSs.
Then people want multimedia, and color screens, and apps to take advantage of it, and they want Palm to incorporate DSPs so they can play music, and of course that brings along with it all of the extra patching to then allow for the existence of, and permit the use of, an on-board DSP. And now you want WiFi? Well, shoot, now we gotta have IPv4 as well, and support for TCP/IP, none of which was ever a part of the original concept of PalmOS.
And even if you don't want or need any of those features in your own PDA, I'm sorry but that's really just too bad. Go live in a cave if you like, but if you buy a new PDA, guess what: you're gonna get all that stuff.
And at some point, all of this stretches an "older" OS just a bit too far, or it becomes a bit absurd with all the hoops and turns and wiggling that PalmOne's coders have to go through, so then they say, "Aw **** it, let's just re-write the thing."
Apple comes to this without any of *that* sort of legacy. Doubtless there will be no Newton code on this thing anywhere, but what Apple's got is Mac OS X, which means they also have the power (albeit somewhat indirectly) of an Open Source OS -- Linux. And in case you weren't aware, there are already numerous "imbedded" implementations of Linux -- phones, PDAs, game systems, kiosks, etc. -- all of which are data points and collective experience opportunities which ALREADY EXIST that Apple can exploit.
So no, having a "modern" OS is not a bad thing. It's actually a supremely awesome thing. What you're concerned about is having something that is intuitive AND efficient AND appropriate to the world of telephone interfaces for the user interface on the device you'd go and buy yourself.
All I can say, based on past performance, is give Apple a chance.
Now, here's a larger picture thought to ponder...
If Apple goes to market with the iPhone, then this is going to open up (to some extent) the viability of a F/OSS community cell phone. And this is a really good thing as well because it represents a non-commercial, enthusiast entrance into what up until now has been a totally proprietary, locked-down OS-based product world. It has the potential to do to cell phones what Linux has inspired in Mac OS X.
On a phone, I want to use its features quickly and easily. When I have to schedule an appointment, I want to enter that appointment as easily as possible. When I want to add something to my to-do list, I want to do it easily and quickly. And first and foremost, I want to be able to look up a contact and dial it as quickly as possible.
A phone is not a personal computer. I couldn't care less about multitasking, rewriting, "modern" OSes (whatever "modern" means). "Modern" features and look is just eye candy and/or toys. A mobile phone is a gadget of convenience, and it should be convenient to use. Even PalmOS 1.0 was convenient. It was just as easy to use its contact and calendar features as any so-called "modern" OS is today.
I would really like to know how "modernizing" the OS on my phone would help me look up contacts, dial contacts, enter to-do list entries, and entering calendar entries any better that I could today.
Again, I repeat: a phone is not a personal computer. There's no point in treating it as such.
The same point could largely be made about cars, but I don't think either of us would want to be driving a Model T or Model A Ford these days, would we?
The term "Modern" as applied to operating systems has little to do with the interface per se. It primarily concerns the underpinnings of the OS and how forward-looking and/or open-ended it is. Older operating systems, if you want to look at it in this way, were very geared to the hardware of their times, and every time you added a new hardware feature or some new kind of technology came out, you wound up making this big patchwork of an OS, in which you had either an out-dated or obsolete "core" around which was stuck, somewhat unglamorously, lots of crap to allow it to do stuff it wasn't really designed for. Then, you wound up having to write patches for the patches, etc., ad infinitum.
Apple tried to go the internal development route, but that didn't work because their departmental infrastructure was eating them from the inside out at the time and basically poisoned all of their new projects. They considered BeOS because it was an incredibly modern OS at the time that was very capable, unbelievably good at multitasking, memory protection, multimedia tasks, etc. However, that company was so shaky that when Apple decided not to go with them, they collapsed. One of the products which was introduced and sold and almost immediately recalled that used a version of BeOS was Sony's eVilla (you just have to love that name -- try pronouncing it out loud to get the full effect).
Ultimately, they went with NeXT's BSD- and Mach-Kernel-based NeXTStep (which after a bunch of time and effort and -- since lots of it is based on Open Source software, there were a healthy amount of community contributions to) and hence we now have Mac OS X.
I'll leave it to actual developers and/or coders here to better explain and refine (and/or correct) what I've said here, should you wish greater detail beyond what I am able to -- and therefore have -- provided above.
The whole point of going with a modern OS implemented for an imbedded market (i.e. "Mac OS X Mobile") is it gives you much more direct (and probably better implemented and/or better-grounded) access to modern technologies. Everything from basic I/O tasks that reside in the Kernel to audio processing to doing H.264 decoding to having access to IPv4 or IPv6, are all examples of things which a modern OS could do a better job of providing and/or backing.
From what I understand, PalmOS is something that was designed to first and foremost give you basic notepad and daily organizer functionality. When they wrote, as you say, PalmOS 1.0, they happened to implement a way for third parties to write software that could run on it. This has been both a benefit and a bane of PalmOS's existence. First off, they now have the same issues of backwards-compatibility and storage space and memory use/abuse that a regular computer OS has. I said it was both a benefit and a bane; but there's actually two parts to the "bane" side. The first I've already mentioned, but the second is the fact that since apps have been written which can do darn near any conceivable task, people keep wanting more and more and more. And this then goes back to the "patchwork" I described earlier in talking about "older" computer OSs.
Then people want multimedia, and color screens, and apps to take advantage of it, and they want Palm to incorporate DSPs so they can play music, and of course that brings along with it all of the extra patching to then allow for the existence of, and permit the use of, an on-board DSP. And now you want WiFi? Well, shoot, now we gotta have IPv4 as well, and support for TCP/IP, none of which was ever a part of the original concept of PalmOS.
And even if you don't want or need any of those features in your own PDA, I'm sorry but that's really just too bad. Go live in a cave if you like, but if you buy a new PDA, guess what: you're gonna get all that stuff.
And at some point, all of this stretches an "older" OS just a bit too far, or it becomes a bit absurd with all the hoops and turns and wiggling that PalmOne's coders have to go through, so then they say, "Aw **** it, let's just re-write the thing."
Apple comes to this without any of *that* sort of legacy. Doubtless there will be no Newton code on this thing anywhere, but what Apple's got is Mac OS X, which means they also have the power (albeit somewhat indirectly) of an Open Source OS -- Linux. And in case you weren't aware, there are already numerous "imbedded" implementations of Linux -- phones, PDAs, game systems, kiosks, etc. -- all of which are data points and collective experience opportunities which ALREADY EXIST that Apple can exploit.
So no, having a "modern" OS is not a bad thing. It's actually a supremely awesome thing. What you're concerned about is having something that is intuitive AND efficient AND appropriate to the world of telephone interfaces for the user interface on the device you'd go and buy yourself.
All I can say, based on past performance, is give Apple a chance.
Now, here's a larger picture thought to ponder...
If Apple goes to market with the iPhone, then this is going to open up (to some extent) the viability of a F/OSS community cell phone. And this is a really good thing as well because it represents a non-commercial, enthusiast entrance into what up until now has been a totally proprietary, locked-down OS-based product world. It has the potential to do to cell phones what Linux has inspired in Mac OS X.
karolynaz
Mar 31, 08:13 AM
Does anyone know if you can now print highlighted text like you can in Windows? Since they're adding the age old full-screen window feature, I think this feature would also be a welcome addition.
Don't forget the CUT. OS X still can't cut file and paste in another place.
Don't forget the CUT. OS X still can't cut file and paste in another place.
ChickenSwartz
Aug 2, 06:28 PM
I do not expect MacBook Pros because Intel Core 2 Duo for notebooks has not been announced yet.
It was introduced last Thursday along with the Core 2 Duo for desktop (Merom, Conroe, and Woodcrest).
http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/07/20060727103453.shtml
I believe someone quote an Intel official saying consumors should see Core 2 Duo Mobile computers by late August.
My [selfish?] logic:
Aug 7 + shipping in two weeks = late August
It was introduced last Thursday along with the Core 2 Duo for desktop (Merom, Conroe, and Woodcrest).
http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/07/20060727103453.shtml
I believe someone quote an Intel official saying consumors should see Core 2 Duo Mobile computers by late August.
My [selfish?] logic:
Aug 7 + shipping in two weeks = late August
zimtheinvader
Sep 15, 10:01 PM
I think no new enclosure, they would have done that when they went Intel! I also second the antiMB keyboard sentiment. The powerbook keyboard is nearly perfect, & one of the the major selling points for MBP over MB for journalists, scientists, intensive-keyboardists, ect, only minor improvements could me made unless there is some new technology integrated...
miles01110
May 7, 09:09 AM
Finally, they'll be charging what the service is worth!
danielbriggs
Sep 15, 04:56 PM
The MBP already feels like its about to literally melt on my desk now, and that's with the 31W Core Duo.
I think they should stick an old "Prescot" chip in and do a live webcast of a macbook pro liquidate itself!
:D Cool!
Liquid laptops! Literally! :p
I think they should stick an old "Prescot" chip in and do a live webcast of a macbook pro liquidate itself!
:D Cool!
Liquid laptops! Literally! :p
smulji
Mar 31, 01:45 AM
They sold well over 1 million desktops/workstation units last quarter and will surpass that quite handily this quarter.
People who think they know Apple's long term strategy as iOS only know nothing of Apple.
Out of curiosity then, what is the long term strategy of Apple? Educate us.
People who think they know Apple's long term strategy as iOS only know nothing of Apple.
Out of curiosity then, what is the long term strategy of Apple? Educate us.
tblrsa
Apr 25, 10:28 AM
Right, and boy is there misinformation being spread right in this thread. Apple is NOT collecting this data, your iPhone is. It goes NOWHERE.
As I said, it isn't even doing that for me as I deleted that file on my Mac. Hey, instead of running around with your hair on fire, just delete that file. Wow, that's easy!
Naah, better to pretend this is one big conspiracy from Apple and spread misinformation. Hey, I know, let me contradict Steve's explicit statements. I sure know who I trust more: anonymous snipers on the Internet over Steve Jobs.
Unfortunately it�s not THAT easy. First, to delete the file you need to apply a jailbreak to your device. If you delete it on your Mac, pretty sure it will be recreated on your next device sync. Second, I�m sure the consolidated.db is not used by Apple themselves, BUT I guess it�s used by their advertising partners. I bet certain Apps will be able to access it to show localized iAds to the user. And to top it all off, Apple hasn�t asked for my permission to collect this data.
As I said, it isn't even doing that for me as I deleted that file on my Mac. Hey, instead of running around with your hair on fire, just delete that file. Wow, that's easy!
Naah, better to pretend this is one big conspiracy from Apple and spread misinformation. Hey, I know, let me contradict Steve's explicit statements. I sure know who I trust more: anonymous snipers on the Internet over Steve Jobs.
Unfortunately it�s not THAT easy. First, to delete the file you need to apply a jailbreak to your device. If you delete it on your Mac, pretty sure it will be recreated on your next device sync. Second, I�m sure the consolidated.db is not used by Apple themselves, BUT I guess it�s used by their advertising partners. I bet certain Apps will be able to access it to show localized iAds to the user. And to top it all off, Apple hasn�t asked for my permission to collect this data.
weedy
May 6, 03:53 AM
This has to be one of the topics on macrumors with the highest ********-per-post ratio.
Seriously guys, didn't you learn anything from the PPC->Intel move?
Go learn something about ARM, the industry and Apple itself and then have an informed and imaginative opinion. ;)
Seriously guys, didn't you learn anything from the PPC->Intel move?
Go learn something about ARM, the industry and Apple itself and then have an informed and imaginative opinion. ;)
flir67
Nov 26, 12:04 PM
I think you hit it right on the head, you got the same idea that I was thinking.
flash ram is cheaper now, but the hd size is not where it needs to be.
the processor must be at least 1.2ghz to make it a winner.
harddrive and ram would probably run off the same memory.
got to remember both would be flash. :)
I don't think it would appeal to that many people, to have an Apple MP3 player. I mean, the existing ones aren't great sellers.
See the problem here? The reason the iPod took off was because it wasn't like the existing MP3 players.
Take a look at a group of current products:
1. The UMPC. Seems like a good idea, but not successful so far. Why not? Here's Gartner:
An Apple tablet would beat content bundles problem, the shell/interface problem, and the synchronization problem. Inkwell and a bluetooth keyboard option would help; and built-in WiFi will certainly help. If Apple can do something about the battery problem . . . I also think the form factor needs work.
2. The PDA. Right now the PDA market is growing, not shrinking - mostly thanks to the Blackberry and the PocketPC and at the expense of Palm. The magic combination seems to be email + cell wireless: if you can get your email anywhere you can use your cellphone, a PDA becomes a more compelling device. This ties in closely with
3. The cell phone. Everyone is in agreement that the cell phone is a target area for Apple; the question is who Apple's carrier will be. A GSM-based device that does EDGE could be used with many different networks.
4. The eBook reader, like the Sony Reader. The good side of the Sony Reader is low battery consumption and a very readable screen. The bad side is that it has to have a pretty low-consumption, low-use processor, no color, and the screen update speed is abysmal. The underlying tech of eInk isn't going to help with an Apple tablet, but the form factor might be a very good choice for a UMPC/Blackberry killer.
5. The tablet computer. The reason the tablet computer has been a failure is because the writing interface isn't very good yet, and because the damned things are the same size and weight as a notebook, so there's little point in dumping the notebook for a tablet. A smaller form factor with the same power, but one that it a little more usable and compelling than the UMPC might be very successful.
6. Video device, like the iPod with video or its competitors. A lot of folks complain that it's too small a screen, and the battery power isn't so hot. If you could have a larger screen that is not much heavier, and just a little more battery power . . .
7. Web pad / web appliance (Nokia 770, Audrey, Pepper Pad, etc.) The problems with these so far have been form factor and OS quality. Most web appliances have run either PocketPC/Windows CE or customized Linux distributions. The Linux distributions that have been used haven't had a good enough UI for a general computing, general audience environment - the needs of a web appliance are too complex to be handled the same way embedded interfaces (like TiVo's) have been handled. Windows CE isn't designed for a general computing environment, either, and makes too many compromises. I also think the Nokia 770 is too small, the PepperPad is overwhelmed by its case, and the Audrey isn't flexible enough.
A successor to the Newton that was a true OS X device, in a form factor similar to the Sony Reader, with .Mac synchronization, Airport Extreme and Bluetooth, a FireWire 400 and two USB 2 connectors, a mini-HMDI socket (with HDMI and DVI converters), a dock connector, an iSight, and an optical-capable audio plug, with some of the on-screen navigation tech we've seen in Apple patents, would be fantastic.
But I'd be surprised if the tech is there yet: the processors aren't small enough and cool enough, the flash memory (you'd want flash and not a hard disk drive) doesn't have enough capacity yet, and the batteries don't have a long enough life. I'll bet there is a prototype device like this in the Apple labs, but it might have mediocre stats: say
700 MHz processor equivalent
16 GB storage
256 MB ram
3 hours of battery life (1.5 playing an iTunes movie)
estimated cost to consumer $999.
I think a successful device would need
1.2 GHz processor equivalent
80 GB storage
1 GB RAM
8 hours of battery life (5 playing an iTunes movie)
estimated cost to consumer $699.
flash ram is cheaper now, but the hd size is not where it needs to be.
the processor must be at least 1.2ghz to make it a winner.
harddrive and ram would probably run off the same memory.
got to remember both would be flash. :)
I don't think it would appeal to that many people, to have an Apple MP3 player. I mean, the existing ones aren't great sellers.
See the problem here? The reason the iPod took off was because it wasn't like the existing MP3 players.
Take a look at a group of current products:
1. The UMPC. Seems like a good idea, but not successful so far. Why not? Here's Gartner:
An Apple tablet would beat content bundles problem, the shell/interface problem, and the synchronization problem. Inkwell and a bluetooth keyboard option would help; and built-in WiFi will certainly help. If Apple can do something about the battery problem . . . I also think the form factor needs work.
2. The PDA. Right now the PDA market is growing, not shrinking - mostly thanks to the Blackberry and the PocketPC and at the expense of Palm. The magic combination seems to be email + cell wireless: if you can get your email anywhere you can use your cellphone, a PDA becomes a more compelling device. This ties in closely with
3. The cell phone. Everyone is in agreement that the cell phone is a target area for Apple; the question is who Apple's carrier will be. A GSM-based device that does EDGE could be used with many different networks.
4. The eBook reader, like the Sony Reader. The good side of the Sony Reader is low battery consumption and a very readable screen. The bad side is that it has to have a pretty low-consumption, low-use processor, no color, and the screen update speed is abysmal. The underlying tech of eInk isn't going to help with an Apple tablet, but the form factor might be a very good choice for a UMPC/Blackberry killer.
5. The tablet computer. The reason the tablet computer has been a failure is because the writing interface isn't very good yet, and because the damned things are the same size and weight as a notebook, so there's little point in dumping the notebook for a tablet. A smaller form factor with the same power, but one that it a little more usable and compelling than the UMPC might be very successful.
6. Video device, like the iPod with video or its competitors. A lot of folks complain that it's too small a screen, and the battery power isn't so hot. If you could have a larger screen that is not much heavier, and just a little more battery power . . .
7. Web pad / web appliance (Nokia 770, Audrey, Pepper Pad, etc.) The problems with these so far have been form factor and OS quality. Most web appliances have run either PocketPC/Windows CE or customized Linux distributions. The Linux distributions that have been used haven't had a good enough UI for a general computing, general audience environment - the needs of a web appliance are too complex to be handled the same way embedded interfaces (like TiVo's) have been handled. Windows CE isn't designed for a general computing environment, either, and makes too many compromises. I also think the Nokia 770 is too small, the PepperPad is overwhelmed by its case, and the Audrey isn't flexible enough.
A successor to the Newton that was a true OS X device, in a form factor similar to the Sony Reader, with .Mac synchronization, Airport Extreme and Bluetooth, a FireWire 400 and two USB 2 connectors, a mini-HMDI socket (with HDMI and DVI converters), a dock connector, an iSight, and an optical-capable audio plug, with some of the on-screen navigation tech we've seen in Apple patents, would be fantastic.
But I'd be surprised if the tech is there yet: the processors aren't small enough and cool enough, the flash memory (you'd want flash and not a hard disk drive) doesn't have enough capacity yet, and the batteries don't have a long enough life. I'll bet there is a prototype device like this in the Apple labs, but it might have mediocre stats: say
700 MHz processor equivalent
16 GB storage
256 MB ram
3 hours of battery life (1.5 playing an iTunes movie)
estimated cost to consumer $999.
I think a successful device would need
1.2 GHz processor equivalent
80 GB storage
1 GB RAM
8 hours of battery life (5 playing an iTunes movie)
estimated cost to consumer $699.
.jpg "queen elizabeth 2nd crown.")
Meandmunch
Mar 28, 10:51 AM
You people can't wait an additional three months (July, Aug, Sept)?
Sheesh.
Sheesh.
Gottis
Apr 26, 02:13 PM
inevitable as android devices are available everywhere and in every price segment. remember, half of all American workers earn $505 or less per week.
Moyank24
May 6, 06:15 PM
Why quicker?
I don't understand how it would be quicker either.
I don't understand how it would be quicker either.
Arcus
Apr 25, 09:22 AM
Jobs is right - big difference with your phone remembering locations, as opposed to Apple actively gathering it.
I totally agree. Just give users a way to kill the database and issue is over. What I would like to know is what was the original purpose?
I totally agree. Just give users a way to kill the database and issue is over. What I would like to know is what was the original purpose?
KindredMAC
Jul 30, 02:20 PM
Blah Blah Blah..... how many times are we gonna hear about this elusive Apple iPhone???????
timbuk2
Sep 11, 03:04 AM
i present you...
the mediamac:
the mediamac:
Eidorian
Jul 22, 01:14 PM
Thanks for the link. Your right they are all in need of an update. I assumed most of them were brand new. Wow.I just spam that link and the one to my Merom guide. Someone is bound to listen.
ravenvii
May 3, 01:24 PM
is it possible for a fight to end with both monsters and heroes in the room? (this will depend on how you organize the HP/AP)
what happens next? another battle the next turn/round? can the heroes run? can the monster be re-located by the villain?
No. No. No.
can the healing treasure bring HP to be higher than the level (e.g, if i am level 3, with 1HP left, I am alone and I find the healing treasure, do i go to 3HP, to 6HP or is it like a flask that i can use in part and in part save/share later)?
No.
can the villain put traps in already explored rooms?
Yes.
would 'explore' also find secret doors if any?
Neat idea, but no. Maybe future games.
what happens next? another battle the next turn/round? can the heroes run? can the monster be re-located by the villain?
No. No. No.
can the healing treasure bring HP to be higher than the level (e.g, if i am level 3, with 1HP left, I am alone and I find the healing treasure, do i go to 3HP, to 6HP or is it like a flask that i can use in part and in part save/share later)?
No.
can the villain put traps in already explored rooms?
Yes.
would 'explore' also find secret doors if any?
Neat idea, but no. Maybe future games.
twoodcc
Aug 2, 11:47 PM
Sorry. That was not the intent of my meaning. I agree with you. But now that Core 2 are shipping, the 64-bit character of this new generation of processors will in the long term make a difference in the OS as well as in the Pro apps. There are also large energy management differences between Yonah and Merom giving the portables noticably longer battery life immediately.
well i agree that 64-bit is something, but considering you can't put more than 4 GB of RAM in a Macbook now anyways, it's not going to help that much.(i know i'm just using the Macbook as an example) and by the time you need 64-bit because of software, it'll probably be time for a new computer anyways.....right?
well i agree that 64-bit is something, but considering you can't put more than 4 GB of RAM in a Macbook now anyways, it's not going to help that much.(i know i'm just using the Macbook as an example) and by the time you need 64-bit because of software, it'll probably be time for a new computer anyways.....right?
Ava's Meeshee
Apr 20, 10:18 AM
I can buy an iPhone without contract and I don't live in Europe.
This is a world phone.
:confused: that's not the point?
Still doesn't mean we have to make sure nothing we say fails to take into account the existence of every potential Apple customer. And that anyone should self-righteously "correct" any statements that do. IOW in the context of this discussion summer ends in September. What relevance does the existence of different season schedules have when the U.S. company references northern hemisphere seasons?
This is a world phone.
:confused: that's not the point?
Still doesn't mean we have to make sure nothing we say fails to take into account the existence of every potential Apple customer. And that anyone should self-righteously "correct" any statements that do. IOW in the context of this discussion summer ends in September. What relevance does the existence of different season schedules have when the U.S. company references northern hemisphere seasons?
JackSYi
Jul 21, 02:17 PM
I really should of waited. *sigh
PBF
Mar 30, 08:33 PM
And yes, you can remove Launchpad from the dock.
Without editing code, plist or whatever, correct?
Without editing code, plist or whatever, correct?
iphoneIA
Mar 28, 09:52 AM
Sort of relieved no iPhone 5 announcements, Im firmly bogged down into a 2 year contract.
I have to agree with this one. I have a two year contract and seeing a new iPhone would tempt my wallet.
I have to agree with this one. I have a two year contract and seeing a new iPhone would tempt my wallet.