nfl46
Apr 15, 04:33 PM
People FAIL to realize that the case could have been taken with a iPhone 3G or something of that sorts. These are not high quality pictures so its not going to look perfect. Because one pictures has a spot on it and the other doesn't, does not mean the pictures are fake.
Nevertheless, I don't like the back casing. Oh well, MOST of us are going to have a case on it anyway. So, we won't be seeing it.
The screen looks bigger...well the case looks longer. A 3.7" screen perhaps?
Nevertheless, I don't like the back casing. Oh well, MOST of us are going to have a case on it anyway. So, we won't be seeing it.
The screen looks bigger...well the case looks longer. A 3.7" screen perhaps?
KnightWRX
Mar 13, 11:25 AM
I think there will be a change in computing
So you mean computing won't be "Input, Process, Output, Storage" but something else ?
No, there will be no change in computing. It's already general and basic enough to cover all the bases.
and tablets are the future of it. I do think servers/ power machines will remain, but I can see them becoming specialised (such as in power stations etc). I can see Linux filling that whole perfectly. I do feel that tablets/ touch based computers are the future, but I think they need voice recognition software to truly come into play for text input. If the iPad had a killer voice recognition software, then MS Word for iPad might truly become a game changer. As good as any touchscreen is, typing 2,000 words on a touchscreen would be a bit of a push.
You failed to see any of my points. Tablets are not some kind of "future change to computers!", tablets are very much computing devices utilizing the same concepts and ideas that have been the very core of the industry for the last 50 years.
Touch based computer ? It's still input and input is just that, input. It doesn't matter whether is touch, keyboards, mice, network, voice, biometrics. Input is input.
A lot of you people want to see a massive change where frankly there isn't any. A new type of device doesn't somehow make everything different. It can just be a "new type of device", something the computer industry of the last 50 years has seen plenty of.
Read my post again carefully, you'll see that I already addressed all your points. Don't just respond to me without even understanding what I'm talking about and at least trying to counteract my points if you're going to try to contradict me.
So you mean computing won't be "Input, Process, Output, Storage" but something else ?
No, there will be no change in computing. It's already general and basic enough to cover all the bases.
and tablets are the future of it. I do think servers/ power machines will remain, but I can see them becoming specialised (such as in power stations etc). I can see Linux filling that whole perfectly. I do feel that tablets/ touch based computers are the future, but I think they need voice recognition software to truly come into play for text input. If the iPad had a killer voice recognition software, then MS Word for iPad might truly become a game changer. As good as any touchscreen is, typing 2,000 words on a touchscreen would be a bit of a push.
You failed to see any of my points. Tablets are not some kind of "future change to computers!", tablets are very much computing devices utilizing the same concepts and ideas that have been the very core of the industry for the last 50 years.
Touch based computer ? It's still input and input is just that, input. It doesn't matter whether is touch, keyboards, mice, network, voice, biometrics. Input is input.
A lot of you people want to see a massive change where frankly there isn't any. A new type of device doesn't somehow make everything different. It can just be a "new type of device", something the computer industry of the last 50 years has seen plenty of.
Read my post again carefully, you'll see that I already addressed all your points. Don't just respond to me without even understanding what I'm talking about and at least trying to counteract my points if you're going to try to contradict me.
Nekbeth
Apr 26, 09:24 PM
Update **
It now works !! that logic will help me a lot with future projects.
thanks wlh99 and to everyone who contribute.
It now works !! that logic will help me a lot with future projects.
thanks wlh99 and to everyone who contribute.
IJ Reilly
Oct 23, 10:27 AM
I would love for apple to use 10 billion to innovate fantastically, enter new markets, go green, and more. I don't think it's going to happen- the purpose of 10 billion in the bank for apple is having 10 billion in the bank. Apple's expertise is in taking big risks (at least large for a compnay of their size), a good number of which pay off very, very well. But people- investors, CEOs, are risk adverse, and a huge pile of cash to operate on, so big they can operate and continue to invest in risky and exciting products, mitigates their risks. For apple, a pile of money might actually be worth more than investing that money at a high rate of return.
Huge cash hordes are only good for three things, in order of desirability: reinvesting in future growth (which is why it's called capitalism); returning to the stockholders in the form of dividends; or holding for a rainy day. The last reason, which you seem to think is the best one, should be seen by investors as a signal that the company lacks confidence in the future.
Actually, there's a fourth use of excess cash: a stock buy-back. Apple isn't doing this with the money currently, either.
I agree, the huge stockpile of cash is an issue. That's money that should be working for Apple, and IMHO that should be in the form of purchasing other companies that will strengthen Apple in key areas, like music distribution and/or audio/video/graphics production.
And I also agree with you on the dividend issue. A small investment of that money into dividends may have the exact effect as you describe. On the other hand, putting that money into new products/enhancing existing products, may do more for Apple's long-term health vs. providing a dividend to improve the 'optics' of the company in shareholders' eyes.
New investments in technologies and products would be by far the best use of the money. With Apple's cash, they could set up a research arm similar to Xerox PARC or the old Bell Labs and place themselves in the forefront of new technology for a long time. Instead, they seem to be notably stingy with their R&D dollars. Purchasing technologies by buying out smaller companies could also be advantageous, and Apple does do some of this, but not much -- not enough to make even a dent in their cash hoard.
Huge cash hordes are only good for three things, in order of desirability: reinvesting in future growth (which is why it's called capitalism); returning to the stockholders in the form of dividends; or holding for a rainy day. The last reason, which you seem to think is the best one, should be seen by investors as a signal that the company lacks confidence in the future.
Actually, there's a fourth use of excess cash: a stock buy-back. Apple isn't doing this with the money currently, either.
I agree, the huge stockpile of cash is an issue. That's money that should be working for Apple, and IMHO that should be in the form of purchasing other companies that will strengthen Apple in key areas, like music distribution and/or audio/video/graphics production.
And I also agree with you on the dividend issue. A small investment of that money into dividends may have the exact effect as you describe. On the other hand, putting that money into new products/enhancing existing products, may do more for Apple's long-term health vs. providing a dividend to improve the 'optics' of the company in shareholders' eyes.
New investments in technologies and products would be by far the best use of the money. With Apple's cash, they could set up a research arm similar to Xerox PARC or the old Bell Labs and place themselves in the forefront of new technology for a long time. Instead, they seem to be notably stingy with their R&D dollars. Purchasing technologies by buying out smaller companies could also be advantageous, and Apple does do some of this, but not much -- not enough to make even a dent in their cash hoard.
�algiris
Mar 24, 03:54 PM
Ten years, and TheWormyFruit� still hasn't FTFF (http://tinyurl.com/66wkbe3)!
Don't be ridiculous.
Don't be ridiculous.
nosen
Sep 25, 01:58 PM
Breaking News: First Look at Aperture 1.5
http://www.creativepro.com/story/news/24732.html?cprose=daily
by Ben Long - coAuthor Aperture Pro Training
Thanks for the link! After reading this, I'm VERY excited about upgrading now! The enhancements to the library are very welcome for me. It might even tempt me to import my entire photo library... :o
http://www.creativepro.com/story/news/24732.html?cprose=daily
by Ben Long - coAuthor Aperture Pro Training
Thanks for the link! After reading this, I'm VERY excited about upgrading now! The enhancements to the library are very welcome for me. It might even tempt me to import my entire photo library... :o
belvdr
Mar 16, 10:43 AM
Which is the entire problem with Android. And which is why you will never, ever, see any single Android device outsell the iPhone.
What difference does it make if one Android device outsells the iPhone? Many of the features are in the OS, not the hardware.
What difference does it make if one Android device outsells the iPhone? Many of the features are in the OS, not the hardware.
Ommid
Apr 25, 11:49 AM
4s ftw.
baryon
Apr 15, 02:14 PM
Agreed.
No, guys, this is simply because of the effect of perspective. Parallel lines draw towards a single point at infinity, so the two parallel top and bottom edges of the phone are not parallel on the photo, this is normal!
However, that doesn't mean the image isn't fake. Any 3D program will produce a correct rendering of perspective, that isn't the problem.
Why do these images always come in such low quality? I imagine someone with enough interest in new technology, having photographed a claimed future iPhone back, owns a decent camera that doesn't produce images of such bad quality! It's easy to fake an image if the quality is deliberately made worse, preventing us from seeing important details...
I don't know whether this is fake or not, I can't tell just by the photos, but it could easily be fake. Apple got away with not putting a plastic "antenna patch" on the WiFi-only iPad, but they're not doing that for the 3G iPad.
No, guys, this is simply because of the effect of perspective. Parallel lines draw towards a single point at infinity, so the two parallel top and bottom edges of the phone are not parallel on the photo, this is normal!
However, that doesn't mean the image isn't fake. Any 3D program will produce a correct rendering of perspective, that isn't the problem.
Why do these images always come in such low quality? I imagine someone with enough interest in new technology, having photographed a claimed future iPhone back, owns a decent camera that doesn't produce images of such bad quality! It's easy to fake an image if the quality is deliberately made worse, preventing us from seeing important details...
I don't know whether this is fake or not, I can't tell just by the photos, but it could easily be fake. Apple got away with not putting a plastic "antenna patch" on the WiFi-only iPad, but they're not doing that for the 3G iPad.
hob
Jan 9, 01:20 PM
The wait is actually killing me. This is the first time I've not followed on MR Live!
I bet they're getting a gazillion hits on that MWSF '07 site...
I'm giving them till 20.00GMT then I'm just gonna spoil the surprise...
I bet they're getting a gazillion hits on that MWSF '07 site...
I'm giving them till 20.00GMT then I'm just gonna spoil the surprise...
dethmaShine
Apr 29, 04:15 PM
Agreed. I thought we were well past the days when computer applications had to emulate their analog compatriots. Leather, wood, paper, stone = not for computer UIs please! :mad:
Speaking of bad iCal, why is it I can't flip pages in the Calendar app on my iPad by actually flicking the pages (a la iBooks)? Instead I have to tap on arrow buttons? What's up with that???
In Mac OS X, there are known as gestures. :D
Navigation gestures, for eg. 3 finger navigation.
Speaking of bad iCal, why is it I can't flip pages in the Calendar app on my iPad by actually flicking the pages (a la iBooks)? Instead I have to tap on arrow buttons? What's up with that???
In Mac OS X, there are known as gestures. :D
Navigation gestures, for eg. 3 finger navigation.
fidelisimo
May 3, 10:01 PM
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) Mobile/8H7)
I really like the tone of these commercials.
Also, I enjoy that they keep saying magic or magical; only because I know how angry people (trolls, mostly) here get about it.
Apple commercials are bright, uplifting and show how technology enhances the human experience. They show people using iPads, iPhones, MacBooks, etc in everyday situations. However Android Zoom, BB Playbook, Tab are dark, joyless with people abducted by aliens, enveloped and overpowered by machines, etc.
I really like the tone of these commercials.
Also, I enjoy that they keep saying magic or magical; only because I know how angry people (trolls, mostly) here get about it.
Apple commercials are bright, uplifting and show how technology enhances the human experience. They show people using iPads, iPhones, MacBooks, etc in everyday situations. However Android Zoom, BB Playbook, Tab are dark, joyless with people abducted by aliens, enveloped and overpowered by machines, etc.
tvachon
Jan 9, 01:38 PM
I was hoping when I got back from the gym it will be done. But alas, no.
dontmatter
Oct 22, 01:19 PM
Of course the point is, they aren't doing these or any or things with the money. It's been accumulating steadily for nearly ten years, and is really building up quickly now. I don't think any of us "grumpy" stockholders would be complaining if Apple was doing something worthwhile with it. Dividends, BTW, are a message from a company to stockholders that they don't have to sell to realize a benefit from owning shares. They are good for improving the long term stability of the stock.
I would love for apple to use 10 billion to innovate fantastically, enter new markets, go green, and more. I don't think it's going to happen- the purpose of 10 billion in the bank for apple is having 10 billion in the bank. Apple's expertise is in taking big risks (at least large for a compnay of their size), a good number of which pay off very, very well. But people- investors, CEOs, are risk adverse, and a huge pile of cash to operate on, so big they can operate and continue to invest in risky and exciting products, mitigates their risks. For apple, a pile of money might actually be worth more than investing that money at a high rate of return.
I would love for apple to use 10 billion to innovate fantastically, enter new markets, go green, and more. I don't think it's going to happen- the purpose of 10 billion in the bank for apple is having 10 billion in the bank. Apple's expertise is in taking big risks (at least large for a compnay of their size), a good number of which pay off very, very well. But people- investors, CEOs, are risk adverse, and a huge pile of cash to operate on, so big they can operate and continue to invest in risky and exciting products, mitigates their risks. For apple, a pile of money might actually be worth more than investing that money at a high rate of return.
Edge100
Oct 20, 02:22 PM
Oh, I dunno, perhaps acquire some more companies? You know, like TiVo - with its valuable IP - for an easy $400 million. Or pump it into R&D. Or a stake in Nintendo or Sony. Or acquire the EMI Music Group (for $1 billion) as a buffer against the other RIAA members pressuring for an increase in the iTunes Store pricing. Or finally pay off Apple Records once and for all. Those are several things Apple could do* with that $10 billion that could be more useful than artificially boosting the stock by paying out an expensive dividend to grumpy shareholders.
Heck, maybe they could go all-solar on the Apple campus like what Google is doing.
*My personal favorite idea would be for Apple to acquire Atari dirt-cheap. This would give Apple a large library of classic titles that could be ported to the iPod, not to mention giving Apple a brand that could be used to pump out OS X "compatible" computers geared towards gamers in order to boost gaming on OS X overall and a means at gunning after Dell-owned Alienware and Dell's own XPS line.
I whole-heartedly agree with this.
Apple should be buying up companies, but only those that can give it some actual edge in competitive markets.
I'll give you three examples:
1) Adobe, for obvious reasons. This probably wont happen, but just imagine if it did!
2) EMI Music Group. This would be HUGE, but I'm not sure Apple has the cash. It might not even be legal, given the Apple (Computer) vs. Apple (Corps...the Beatles) stuff. What's even more odd is that EMI OWNS the master recordings of the Beatles.
3) Digidesign. This is the most likely, and probably the best bet for Apple. In case people don't know, Digidesign makes ProTools software and hardware. ProTools is the Photoshop of the audio production world; EVERYONE uses it. Apple already owns Emagic, which made Logic. The purchase of Digidesign would be a massive coup for Apple, and make it the undisputed champ of the pro audio world. And if you think this is a relatively small market, you're wrong. Nearly every movie is recorded/mixed in ProTools (with some people using either Nuendo or Digital Performer). I would LOVE to see Apple buy Digidesign, kill ProTools on Windows, and make a truly top-notch audio solution.
Forget about paying dividends; people are making enough money on Apple stock. Apple needs to think about how to turn its $10 billion in cash into $50 billion in cash. And the way to do that is to grow. Buy up companies!!!
Heck, maybe they could go all-solar on the Apple campus like what Google is doing.
*My personal favorite idea would be for Apple to acquire Atari dirt-cheap. This would give Apple a large library of classic titles that could be ported to the iPod, not to mention giving Apple a brand that could be used to pump out OS X "compatible" computers geared towards gamers in order to boost gaming on OS X overall and a means at gunning after Dell-owned Alienware and Dell's own XPS line.
I whole-heartedly agree with this.
Apple should be buying up companies, but only those that can give it some actual edge in competitive markets.
I'll give you three examples:
1) Adobe, for obvious reasons. This probably wont happen, but just imagine if it did!
2) EMI Music Group. This would be HUGE, but I'm not sure Apple has the cash. It might not even be legal, given the Apple (Computer) vs. Apple (Corps...the Beatles) stuff. What's even more odd is that EMI OWNS the master recordings of the Beatles.
3) Digidesign. This is the most likely, and probably the best bet for Apple. In case people don't know, Digidesign makes ProTools software and hardware. ProTools is the Photoshop of the audio production world; EVERYONE uses it. Apple already owns Emagic, which made Logic. The purchase of Digidesign would be a massive coup for Apple, and make it the undisputed champ of the pro audio world. And if you think this is a relatively small market, you're wrong. Nearly every movie is recorded/mixed in ProTools (with some people using either Nuendo or Digital Performer). I would LOVE to see Apple buy Digidesign, kill ProTools on Windows, and make a truly top-notch audio solution.
Forget about paying dividends; people are making enough money on Apple stock. Apple needs to think about how to turn its $10 billion in cash into $50 billion in cash. And the way to do that is to grow. Buy up companies!!!
JAT
May 4, 04:14 PM
Make sure to post back when you figure out a way to do that lol
Figuring (http://www.jr.com/optoma/pe/OTM_PK201/) it out isn't a question, just whether I'd want to be that obnoxious. And blow a couple hundred for the privilege. :p
Figuring (http://www.jr.com/optoma/pe/OTM_PK201/) it out isn't a question, just whether I'd want to be that obnoxious. And blow a couple hundred for the privilege. :p
vladinecko
Nov 24, 09:15 AM
Nike+ armband is actually discounted by $11, not $5 as stated on page 1. this brings the price down to $18 (or $19.26 after [7%] sales tax).
obeygiant
Apr 25, 05:18 PM
Is anyone mad as the two *******s who actually beat this person up? I am. They should be charged with aggravated assault.
mw360
Apr 6, 07:41 AM
The bigger problem is that Apple rejected an app that served just this purpose (but was surely less pretty), as was already mentioned. This is a cool app, but they should be giving all of the money they earn from it to those that tried to submit this app long ago. I love Apple and have been converting slowly since my first iPod several years ago, but this is absolutely lame of them, even if it only effected a few people.
And what was the motivation of the third party app makers? To make a fast buck out of serving ads to people more interested in the ad than the product. That is bad for advertisers and probably the real reason the app was rejected.
Who know whether clicks inside this app count as regular impressions? Unlike any third party, Apple is in a position to refund any advertisers for clicks on these ads. If they are doing that then I don't see anything wrong with them releasing this niche product.
And what was the motivation of the third party app makers? To make a fast buck out of serving ads to people more interested in the ad than the product. That is bad for advertisers and probably the real reason the app was rejected.
Who know whether clicks inside this app count as regular impressions? Unlike any third party, Apple is in a position to refund any advertisers for clicks on these ads. If they are doing that then I don't see anything wrong with them releasing this niche product.
psycoswimmer
Nov 23, 04:55 PM
Hmm. Anyone think that there's a chance of a price drop on the Airport Express?
KnightWRX
Apr 28, 06:34 AM
Nekbeth, I'm looking at the code and I'm thinking you still don't quite understand what NSTimer is and does. You keep track of "Elapsed" using 2 implementation scope global variables :
NSInteger seconds = 0;
NSInteger minutes = 0;
However, grepping for these variables, you never reset them back to 0 aside from their initial initialization :
$ grep -e minutes -e seconds ATimerViewController.m
NSInteger seconds = 0;
NSInteger minutes = 0;
NSInteger seconds = 0;
NSInteger minutes = 0;
However, grepping for these variables, you never reset them back to 0 aside from their initial initialization :
$ grep -e minutes -e seconds ATimerViewController.m
NSInteger seconds = 0;
NSInteger minutes = 0;
darthraige
Dec 13, 01:40 PM
I highly doubt an early 2011 verizon iphone. LTE, doubly so. If it's coming for Verizon, it will be unveiled/launch the same time as the AT&T iphone 5.
And if you're wrong and it's announced in January? ;)
And if you're wrong and it's announced in January? ;)
Garvo
Oct 3, 07:18 PM
IDG World Expo announced on Tuesday that Apple CEO Steve Jobs would deliver the opening keynote address (http://www.macworld.com/news/2006/10/03/jobs/index.php) at Macworld Expo San Francisco.
And this just in.....
Mickey Mouse will be leading the Parade at Disney World!:p
And this just in.....
Mickey Mouse will be leading the Parade at Disney World!:p
lmalave
Oct 19, 10:44 AM
Well my 1300 shares will become 2600 in less than an year.:D Apple will keep going up and up as long the economy does not tank.:)
Showoff ;)
You're basically bragging that you have $100K in Apple stock. Nice!!!! :D Your faith is being rewarded handsomely...
Showoff ;)
You're basically bragging that you have $100K in Apple stock. Nice!!!! :D Your faith is being rewarded handsomely...