kntgsp
Apr 24, 04:52 AM
Apple's problem is that they put "Looks" before performance.
They crippled their chances of ever becoming a serious competitor to the PC for games due to deciding to use giant laptops on a stand which meant they could not cool any decent graphics cards, handing the gaming crown to the PC for years on a plate.
As for the future who knows.
That issue could have been largely solved if they had just faced a standard high end GPU with the intake facing towards the back and the exhaust on the side. But Apple is too vain to put a vent on the rear of the iMac to accomodate the intake of a high quality GPU, let alone a slim exhaust vent on the side.
If they had simply used a standard GPU like that it would have opened up quality gaming on the Mac and made it simple to upgrade to newer cards so that people didn't have to chuck the entire computer every time they wanted a new video card.
They crippled their chances of ever becoming a serious competitor to the PC for games due to deciding to use giant laptops on a stand which meant they could not cool any decent graphics cards, handing the gaming crown to the PC for years on a plate.
As for the future who knows.
That issue could have been largely solved if they had just faced a standard high end GPU with the intake facing towards the back and the exhaust on the side. But Apple is too vain to put a vent on the rear of the iMac to accomodate the intake of a high quality GPU, let alone a slim exhaust vent on the side.
If they had simply used a standard GPU like that it would have opened up quality gaming on the Mac and made it simple to upgrade to newer cards so that people didn't have to chuck the entire computer every time they wanted a new video card.
hobo.hopkins
Mar 29, 04:34 PM
Thousands of people are dying in Japan and all you idiots care about is iPod Touch batteries? That's kind of... selfish.
How dare people think of themselves in any way when something bad has occurred in the world. People in Darfur have been dying for quite some time now and I haven't thought of myself or my interests once since conflicts began. That's what a good person does.
Do you see how ridiculous you're being? There is no reason a person can't be concerned with supply shortages AND the Japanese people. They aren't mutually exclusive. Moreover, if you follow your flawed logic then no one could ever do anything for themselves. Horrific events happen everyday worldwide; tragedies can't stop us from living.
How dare people think of themselves in any way when something bad has occurred in the world. People in Darfur have been dying for quite some time now and I haven't thought of myself or my interests once since conflicts began. That's what a good person does.
Do you see how ridiculous you're being? There is no reason a person can't be concerned with supply shortages AND the Japanese people. They aren't mutually exclusive. Moreover, if you follow your flawed logic then no one could ever do anything for themselves. Horrific events happen everyday worldwide; tragedies can't stop us from living.
wintercs
Mar 28, 10:40 AM
I am a current VZW Blackberry Tour customer. I'm currently eligible to upgrade to iPhone 4 (Verizon has gone well out of its way to make me aware of this). My patience has truly been tested, as I've been assuming all along that iPhone 5 would be coming out in June.
So what the hell do I do now? I'm not waiting until 2012.
So what the hell do I do now? I'm not waiting until 2012.
Eriden
Sep 16, 06:00 PM
If they souped up a 13.3" MB enclosure, wouldn't it require a serious overhaul of the appropriate internals, especially ditching the integrated graphics for a dedicated solution? (Not that Jonathan Ive & Co would have much of a problem making it happen.) Before I went to the recently opened Apple Store in Norfolk, VA, I might have considered a 13.3" MBP. But after having played around with the 17"... I'm in love. When Tuesday cometh, I'll be ordering a 17" MBP... merom or yonah. From all the shipping delays, merom is looking more hopeful all the time!
tstreete
Nov 4, 05:43 PM
I was doing some research on bottom line telecommunications and i came across these good reviews: :D
http://www.resellerratings.com/seller770-p1-s4-d1.html
when tstreete comes back and tells me how it works, I will probably order it from this company.
Gave it a brief test around town this afternoon. MotionX GPS lite status screen reported an accuracy (radius?) of between 30 feet to 50 feet, whereas without the TomTom mount it ranged from about 75 ft to 256 ft or worse. So, yeah, it improves GPS accuracy, and I did notice the difference when using the TomTom app.
The thing is well built and elegant, the nicest carphone mount design I've ever seen. You have to be gentle sticking the iPhone into the mount, but you can do it with one hand. You have to think about where to install the mount in your car -- window, dash, left or right of the wheel etc. -- and you can't leave the iPhone in a case (OK for me, might not be for others). The power and audio cables stick out of the side, which is a bit awkward, especially when you rotate it; I'm thinking of picking up some adhesive-backed clips at RadioShack to keep the wires out of the way as they wind their way down to the power and aux jacks. I've made only one phone call so far, which worked fine, but the phone uses the mount's speaker even when you're plugged into the car stereo (music and/or Tomtom app voice stops in the car speakers, and then the phone call comes out of the mount speaker). I could hear the phone call fine driving around town, but I'm a little worried about how well I'll be able to hear phone calls at freeway speeds in my noisy little car (a Honda Fit).
The acid test will be a substantial trip that includes some skyscraper canyons in a big city.
Last I checked it looked like BLT had sold out and was awaiting more shipments.
http://www.resellerratings.com/seller770-p1-s4-d1.html
when tstreete comes back and tells me how it works, I will probably order it from this company.
Gave it a brief test around town this afternoon. MotionX GPS lite status screen reported an accuracy (radius?) of between 30 feet to 50 feet, whereas without the TomTom mount it ranged from about 75 ft to 256 ft or worse. So, yeah, it improves GPS accuracy, and I did notice the difference when using the TomTom app.
The thing is well built and elegant, the nicest carphone mount design I've ever seen. You have to be gentle sticking the iPhone into the mount, but you can do it with one hand. You have to think about where to install the mount in your car -- window, dash, left or right of the wheel etc. -- and you can't leave the iPhone in a case (OK for me, might not be for others). The power and audio cables stick out of the side, which is a bit awkward, especially when you rotate it; I'm thinking of picking up some adhesive-backed clips at RadioShack to keep the wires out of the way as they wind their way down to the power and aux jacks. I've made only one phone call so far, which worked fine, but the phone uses the mount's speaker even when you're plugged into the car stereo (music and/or Tomtom app voice stops in the car speakers, and then the phone call comes out of the mount speaker). I could hear the phone call fine driving around town, but I'm a little worried about how well I'll be able to hear phone calls at freeway speeds in my noisy little car (a Honda Fit).
The acid test will be a substantial trip that includes some skyscraper canyons in a big city.
Last I checked it looked like BLT had sold out and was awaiting more shipments.
AndroidfoLife
Apr 5, 03:45 PM
Silly people. No one OWNS an iPhone. They own the right to use the iPhone. Welcome to the new world where buying a product does not mean that you can do what you want with it. You can only do what the manufacturers say you can do with it.
netdog
Jul 30, 11:23 AM
In honor of Gene Rodenberry, iCommunicator, or iCom
xbuddycorex
May 3, 03:03 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
Working in medicine in the US, this us the bane of my existence.
Working in medicine in the US, this us the bane of my existence.
Daveoc64
May 4, 03:11 PM
If I want, I can install Mac OS X SL or Leopard on a 1000 machines using the same CD. :)
Not legally.
Not legally.
SilianRail
May 6, 06:35 AM
Intel is spending $9 billion to upgrade its fabs to 22nm. Building all of them from scratch would be much more expensive. ARM's current market cap is $7.5 billion.
jrb363
Mar 28, 10:55 AM
So what are thy going to announce? Is hardware now going to the cloud like software? :rolleyes:
LOL! :D I could totally see Steve doing this. ;)
LOL! :D I could totally see Steve doing this. ;)
Michaelgtrusa
Apr 21, 04:01 PM
This is good news and very much needed.
Don't panic
May 5, 09:11 PM
Maybe there is a special secret door in that closet. Or maybe it's the Lair and we win!
i would settle for a level treasure ;)
i would settle for a level treasure ;)
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.
iStudentUK
Apr 10, 12:05 PM
Agreed again.
I like this! Can I pay you to follow my posts constantly agreeing with me?! :D
I like this! Can I pay you to follow my posts constantly agreeing with me?! :D
notjustjay
Mar 28, 10:23 AM
Well, that's just great. The one year I finally decide I'm going to switch to an iPhone, and it's not coming. :eek:
In all seriousness, I've been on the iPhone fence ever since the first day it came out here in Canada. If it weren't for the 3-year contracts here, I'd have one already. I'm just about ready to finally jump aboard, but so far what has been "saving" me was that every time I go to the local Fido kiosk, they've been sold out. I've been telling myself that since the iPhone 4's been out for quite a while now, the best thing to do is wait for the iPhone 5.
In all seriousness, I've been on the iPhone fence ever since the first day it came out here in Canada. If it weren't for the 3-year contracts here, I'd have one already. I'm just about ready to finally jump aboard, but so far what has been "saving" me was that every time I go to the local Fido kiosk, they've been sold out. I've been telling myself that since the iPhone 4's been out for quite a while now, the best thing to do is wait for the iPhone 5.
iansilv
May 7, 10:14 AM
I get the feeling they are not really making any money on it, so it would make sense to give it away as a benefit of "using a mac."
Tommyg117
Jul 29, 11:45 PM
If this had Verizon support, I'd be really pumped. My plan is up in 2 months!
Small White Car
Apr 26, 02:43 PM
Look. A tablet is not a phone, okay? Nobody is going to carry an iPad in his pants all day.
Phones, mp3 players and tablets all have different uses, functions and form factors which differentiates them enough imo.
And yet iPods, iPads, and iPhones all use the same store.
Look, plenty of other people in here are saying the real fight is which store becomes more popular and how Windows succeeded because of all the programs they had for it.
iPads ABSOLUTELY contribute to that. If someone owns an iPad and bought a bunch of iOS apps, which smartphone do you think he's gonna buy next?
It's all tied together. Ignoring that very important link just because you can't put an iPad in your pants is just silly.
Think about this.
People didn't argue that the iPod or the iPad should be counted until Android smart phones started to get really close and then overtake the iOS smart phones.
You can demand that they should be counted, but everyone will know the real reason for it.
I have always said that. So if me being consistant is a problem, well, sorry.
Phones, mp3 players and tablets all have different uses, functions and form factors which differentiates them enough imo.
And yet iPods, iPads, and iPhones all use the same store.
Look, plenty of other people in here are saying the real fight is which store becomes more popular and how Windows succeeded because of all the programs they had for it.
iPads ABSOLUTELY contribute to that. If someone owns an iPad and bought a bunch of iOS apps, which smartphone do you think he's gonna buy next?
It's all tied together. Ignoring that very important link just because you can't put an iPad in your pants is just silly.
Think about this.
People didn't argue that the iPod or the iPad should be counted until Android smart phones started to get really close and then overtake the iOS smart phones.
You can demand that they should be counted, but everyone will know the real reason for it.
I have always said that. So if me being consistant is a problem, well, sorry.
JapaneseMonkey
Mar 29, 09:49 PM
Well screw Japan
now Apple is being ruined by Japanese again ;;
now Apple is being ruined by Japanese again ;;
AppleDroid
Apr 24, 11:32 AM
Well that would be an awesome upgrade (having a monitor going up to 3200 x 2000!) but I will have to wait until 3rd party (NEC, EIZO) make a nice matte version later down the road.
Should make for some amazing iMac upgrades in the near future though!
Should make for some amazing iMac upgrades in the near future though!
daneoni
Aug 11, 11:52 AM
Agreed.
I like it:D
I like it:D
prady16
Sep 15, 05:24 PM
I am hoping for a new case design to keep the heat down!
Lets keep our fingers crossed!
Lets keep our fingers crossed!
reiggin
May 6, 12:21 AM
This is the most ridiculous thing to appear on the MacRumors front page in quite some time.