aurichie
Apr 20, 06:05 PM
We're winning! We're really winning this time!
Suck on these :apple: :apple: :apple: :apple: fandroids.
Suck on these :apple: :apple: :apple: :apple: fandroids.
Michaelgtrusa
Oct 10, 04:09 AM
Here's mine
Where can I find this?
Where can I find this?
cherrypop
Sep 28, 03:11 PM
Using your numbers that's $80/year, or 20% off. Not bad for doing basically nothing.
For what it's worth, you can get .Mac packages on eBay for $50. I did earlier this week and have already renewed using the Auth Key.
Again, see my post just above where I listed URL to a How-To I posted on how to save on DotMac. There are different ways to search that should help you if you've only been able to find $80 listings.
Where do you see this? Every ebay auction I see for dotmac ends up being at least $75 or more with $5 shipping at least.
Not that great a deal.
For what it's worth, you can get .Mac packages on eBay for $50. I did earlier this week and have already renewed using the Auth Key.
Again, see my post just above where I listed URL to a How-To I posted on how to save on DotMac. There are different ways to search that should help you if you've only been able to find $80 listings.
Where do you see this? Every ebay auction I see for dotmac ends up being at least $75 or more with $5 shipping at least.
Not that great a deal.
JRSY37
Feb 3, 04:45 PM
mine for february:
more...
kre62
Mar 26, 09:03 PM
*Calls Judge Judy *
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zuP1pXSvNJI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zuP1pXSvNJI
fun173
May 3, 06:35 AM
Links to here:
http://www.htc.com/us/products/inspire-att?%20extcid=AlwaysOn-Inspire-Disp
http://www.htc.com/us/products/inspire-att?%20extcid=AlwaysOn-Inspire-Disp
more...
Stig McNasty
Apr 7, 08:29 AM
I'll go with the poorer batt life since 4.3.1. Mine's notably down.
Corpus_Callosum
Nov 22, 08:50 PM
just to clear something up. This right now appears to be a text-based phone. I don't think Wu is talking about iChat AV functionality. Some other sites (of much, much less accuracy) have been claiming that the iPhone would be able to do videoconferencing and whatnot, but currently there isn't any good evidence to support this, and in my opinion it doesn't look like current 3G GSM cellular networks simply don't have the duplex bandwidth to deliver that kind of content. (and 4G is still a ways off)
Apple would not try to deliver iChatAV video conferencing services over 3G (or any other cellular network). It's a ridiculous idea. However, having iChatAV capability over WiFi is totally doable and completely within the realm of possibility. Apple would be retarded not to have a camera and WiFi on their new phone, mostly because it would represent a step backwards from current state of the art cellular phones.
So, what is the real issue? If they have WiFi capability and have a camera, all they need is the horsepower to encode and decode H.264 and iChatAV on the iPhone becomes a reality. While H.264 is a demanding codec, there already exists hardware encoders/decoders in the wild. This is the stopping point. If Apple includes silicon that can handle H.264, iPhone will do AV conferencing ala iChatAV. My own personal belief is that this one feature is the primary differentiator that Apple is going to leverage to gain traction in the mobile market. While everyone else is yakking and texting, iPhone users are holding their phones up to show their friends what they are seeing, watching iTunes movies and listening to iTunes music. A true lifestyle change as is the Apple way.
You can speculate all you want, but until you realize that Steve Jobs isn't going to enter a market that he can't shatter preconceived notions in, you aren't going to understand Apple's modus opperandi.
I also believe that this will be sold in Apple stores and not through carriers. There are two reasons for this:
(1) Apple will be selling a WiFi digital lifestyle device as the iPhone's primary role (e.g. if you are within range of usable WiFi, it will perform all functions through WiFi, including VOIP) and only use cellular networks as a fallback condition when WiFi is not available, crippling many features of the iPhone. Carriers are not going to be happy about this and would have no incentive to carry such a device as it represents a competitive threat. But don't let that alarm you, you should be able to slip any normal SIM card into the iPhone and make use of your existing carrier. Just don't expect to be subsidized - Apple doesn't tend to market to cheap consumers anyhow, they won't be worried about starting out with a non-subsidized and reasonably expensive phone. People will pay for this advancement and prices will go down over time.
(2) Apple will promote direct purchasing of video and audio content from iTunes using the device when on a WiFi network. This direct sales approach is also a threat to the carriers who want a piece of the action and demand much higher price/margins on digital content ($2 for a ringtone anyone?)
This all seems pretty obvious to me.
Apple would not try to deliver iChatAV video conferencing services over 3G (or any other cellular network). It's a ridiculous idea. However, having iChatAV capability over WiFi is totally doable and completely within the realm of possibility. Apple would be retarded not to have a camera and WiFi on their new phone, mostly because it would represent a step backwards from current state of the art cellular phones.
So, what is the real issue? If they have WiFi capability and have a camera, all they need is the horsepower to encode and decode H.264 and iChatAV on the iPhone becomes a reality. While H.264 is a demanding codec, there already exists hardware encoders/decoders in the wild. This is the stopping point. If Apple includes silicon that can handle H.264, iPhone will do AV conferencing ala iChatAV. My own personal belief is that this one feature is the primary differentiator that Apple is going to leverage to gain traction in the mobile market. While everyone else is yakking and texting, iPhone users are holding their phones up to show their friends what they are seeing, watching iTunes movies and listening to iTunes music. A true lifestyle change as is the Apple way.
You can speculate all you want, but until you realize that Steve Jobs isn't going to enter a market that he can't shatter preconceived notions in, you aren't going to understand Apple's modus opperandi.
I also believe that this will be sold in Apple stores and not through carriers. There are two reasons for this:
(1) Apple will be selling a WiFi digital lifestyle device as the iPhone's primary role (e.g. if you are within range of usable WiFi, it will perform all functions through WiFi, including VOIP) and only use cellular networks as a fallback condition when WiFi is not available, crippling many features of the iPhone. Carriers are not going to be happy about this and would have no incentive to carry such a device as it represents a competitive threat. But don't let that alarm you, you should be able to slip any normal SIM card into the iPhone and make use of your existing carrier. Just don't expect to be subsidized - Apple doesn't tend to market to cheap consumers anyhow, they won't be worried about starting out with a non-subsidized and reasonably expensive phone. People will pay for this advancement and prices will go down over time.
(2) Apple will promote direct purchasing of video and audio content from iTunes using the device when on a WiFi network. This direct sales approach is also a threat to the carriers who want a piece of the action and demand much higher price/margins on digital content ($2 for a ringtone anyone?)
This all seems pretty obvious to me.
more...
VSMacOne
Oct 9, 05:51 PM
i'm very tempted...
I purchased Tweetie 1.0 but got bored with it and went back to TweetDeck. Still loving that dark theme from TweetDeck so not sure about Tweetie 2.0. Although, the Offline stuff sounds great!
I purchased Tweetie 1.0 but got bored with it and went back to TweetDeck. Still loving that dark theme from TweetDeck so not sure about Tweetie 2.0. Although, the Offline stuff sounds great!
Hrududu
Jul 11, 12:31 AM
A well known auction site (http://cgi.ebay.com/iBook-G3-Clamshell-CD-Door-Bezel-Tangerine-/120593191289?cmd=ViewItem&pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item1c13ea1179#ht_500wt_928)
more...
rsherid
Jan 24, 08:22 PM
I restored my iPod Photo using iTunes without problem. Then it said to connect to the wall charger. I did that and nothing happened after 30 minutes. I connected it back to my computer using a USB (not Firewire) cable and the battery icon came up (not animated, just flashed).
So what can I do at this point?
So what can I do at this point?
sbmrnr
Feb 11, 02:57 PM
still working on it, but this is how it currently looks...
more...
AppleCode
Aug 12, 11:13 AM
Changed some stuff
http://img21.imageshack.us/img21/5182/capturedcran20100812120.png
Wallpaper (http://media.smashingmagazine.com/cdn_smash/wp-content/uploads/uploader/wallpapers/august10/august-10-superstar-nocal-1920x1200.jpg)
What icon set is that?, I like it Link Please
http://img21.imageshack.us/img21/5182/capturedcran20100812120.png
Wallpaper (http://media.smashingmagazine.com/cdn_smash/wp-content/uploads/uploader/wallpapers/august10/august-10-superstar-nocal-1920x1200.jpg)
What icon set is that?, I like it Link Please
Flying Llama
Aug 18, 10:56 AM
I love the first one! It looks like asbestos, but friendlier and meshed together with quartz!
Thanks!
Thanks!
more...
MacRumors
Apr 6, 11:39 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/06/apple-locks-in-12-petabytes-of-itunes-video-content-storage/)
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/06/123806-isilon_systems_logo.jpg
cute long haircuts for girls.
more...
Scene Hairstyles for girls
cute emo hairstyles for girls.
Long gothic hairstyle with
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/06/123806-isilon_systems_logo.jpg
Shark
Feb 2, 08:28 PM
Haven't posted a shot in a long time. Enjoy!
http://members.shaw.ca/jaos/Green.png (http://jaos.deviantart.com/#/d38o00r)
http://members.shaw.ca/jaos/Green.png (http://jaos.deviantart.com/#/d38o00r)
more...
gnomeisland
Apr 28, 09:21 AM
720p what?
h.264 if I recall. To be fair I can't really quantify the details, etc. I gave the machine to friend after I got my 2.0ghz mini in late 2009. It did take a bit of doing and I wouldn't be surprised if there a few dropped frames and a low bitrate. My of the material was 480p h.264 samples which did play just fine.
h.264 if I recall. To be fair I can't really quantify the details, etc. I gave the machine to friend after I got my 2.0ghz mini in late 2009. It did take a bit of doing and I wouldn't be surprised if there a few dropped frames and a low bitrate. My of the material was 480p h.264 samples which did play just fine.
Melrose
Apr 17, 12:05 PM
Not really a fan of her's, just thought the pic was cool haha
Thanks to Melrose for sending me the icons. Hope i gave you a lot to go with now haha
Dude I love the Download icon. Imma make one for me now :D
BTW I made one for Bean word processor app if you'd like that too. I'm working on building a central place for the icons. If you want, I can share a folder in Dropbox where we can both have access to the files at any given moment.
Thanks to Melrose for sending me the icons. Hope i gave you a lot to go with now haha
Dude I love the Download icon. Imma make one for me now :D
BTW I made one for Bean word processor app if you'd like that too. I'm working on building a central place for the icons. If you want, I can share a folder in Dropbox where we can both have access to the files at any given moment.
Thunderhawks
Apr 25, 07:17 AM
I know the reason, or the supposed reason (who knows, Apple has been as tight lipped as ever on the issue) . If true, its a disgrace it made it to the keynote presentation, without the issue being identified or a reasonable fix found. I don't care how you square it - being 10 months late for a device who has an average life of 12 months is utter incompetence and hence disgraceful.
Hats off for Apple sticking to it, but that does not take away from the fact that they should never have made the promise w/o a better understanding of production issues. The iPhone 4 design has been around since at least January per spy shots of the iPad before release. So, its not as if the design was so new that they could claim there was no time to identify the issue until after the June 2010 keynote by Steve Jobs.
Once again you are proving that you know nothing about production issues.
There is a big difference between making a few samples to show and circulate and real en masse production.
There are also issues with white products that only show up after a certain amount of time.
White tends to have aluminum oxide pigments and in many cases light inhibitors. Depending on the material used there may have been a delayed photo mechanical reaction.
That especially, when several layers of white are used.
But I am only guessing, the real issues are only know to Apple.
You also know absolutely NOTHING about the real issues other than what people speculated.
For Apple to recognize it and NOT ship it, just because they showed it proves what a good company they are.
Whatever time it then took to fix it is unimportant.
If you would be for once logical you could see that in Apple's eyes there was a significant problem that took time to figure out.
If there wasn't it would have shipped already long time ago!
Hats off for Apple sticking to it, but that does not take away from the fact that they should never have made the promise w/o a better understanding of production issues. The iPhone 4 design has been around since at least January per spy shots of the iPad before release. So, its not as if the design was so new that they could claim there was no time to identify the issue until after the June 2010 keynote by Steve Jobs.
Once again you are proving that you know nothing about production issues.
There is a big difference between making a few samples to show and circulate and real en masse production.
There are also issues with white products that only show up after a certain amount of time.
White tends to have aluminum oxide pigments and in many cases light inhibitors. Depending on the material used there may have been a delayed photo mechanical reaction.
That especially, when several layers of white are used.
But I am only guessing, the real issues are only know to Apple.
You also know absolutely NOTHING about the real issues other than what people speculated.
For Apple to recognize it and NOT ship it, just because they showed it proves what a good company they are.
Whatever time it then took to fix it is unimportant.
If you would be for once logical you could see that in Apple's eyes there was a significant problem that took time to figure out.
If there wasn't it would have shipped already long time ago!
Peter9
Aug 14, 07:25 PM
yes, they're all astonishing
IngerMan
Apr 18, 09:40 PM
This is the place I thought was full of answers:cool: Should I check PC World:eek:
Winni
Dec 21, 08:06 AM
Macs would be an excellent choice for any business to use ...
Yeah, sure. Because all of those business/enterprise applications written exclusively for Windows run ah-so smoothly on Macs...
Just accept it, folks: There is no business case for using Macs in an enterprise environment.
Compatibility? Fail. (There is a world beyond the Microsoft .doc format where enterprise applications live. There's OLD Java, and many Java apps require a very specific Oracle JVM to run. There's .NET. There's Sharepoint. There's an IBM mainframe you need to talk to. There are department printers that have no OS X drivers. There's a long list of office equipment that only plays well with Windows.)
Enterprise-ready? Fail. See compatibility, see support, see backup.
Central administration? Fail. Try applying group policies to a Mac.
Central backup? Fail. No, Time Machine is NOT an enterprise solution.
TCO? Fail. Expensive hardware, short-lived platform support.
Enterprise-support from the manufacturer (Apple)? HUGE fail.
Roadmaps? Fail. Apple doesn't even know what the word means. You just cannot plan with this company and their products.
Product longevity? Knock-out Fail. (Try getting support for OS X Leopard in two years from now. Try getting support for Tiger or Panther TODAY. Then compare it to Windows XP, an OS from the year that will be officially supported until 2014. Then make your strategic choice and tell me with a straight face that you want to bet your money on Cupertino toys.)
It's MUCH easier to integrate Linux desktops into an enterprise environment than it is to put Mac OS X boxes in there. Why? Because some "blue chip" companies like Oracle and IBM actually use, sell and support Linux and make sure that it can be used in an enterprise environment.
Trying to push a home user/consumer platform like the Mac into a corporate environment is a very bad idea. Especially if the company behind the product recently even announced that they dropped their entire server hardware because nobody wanted them. Why should the head of a large IT department trust a company that just dropped their only product that was even remotely targeted at the enterprise market? It's like asking a CTO to bet the company's IT future on Nintendo Wiis.
And just for your info: I've had those discussions at the World Health Organization of the United Nations, and it turned out to be IMPOSSIBLE to integrate Macs into their IT environment. I had the only Mac (a 20" Core Duo) in a world wide network because I was able to talk someone higher up the ladder into approving the purchase order for it, but then I quickly had to give up on OS X and instead run Windows on it in order to get my job as an IT admin done and be able to use the IT resources of the other WHO centers. OS X Tiger totally sucked in our network for almost all of the above reasons, but Windows Vista and XP got the job done perfectly. It wasn't very persuasive to show off a Mac that only runs Windows. That's what you get for being an Apple fanboy, which I admittedly was at that time.
Where I work now, two other people bought Macs, and one of them has ordered Windows 7 yesterday and wants me to wipe out OS X from his hard disk and replace it with Windows. He's an engineer and not productive with OS X, rather the opposite: OS X slows him down and doesn't provide any value to him.
And personally, after more than five years in Apple land, I will now also move away from OS X. It's a consumer platform that's only there to lock people into the Apple hardware and their iTunes store. If the web browser and iTunes and maybe Final Cut Studio, Logic Studio or the Adobe Creative Suites are the only pieces of software that you need to be happy, then OS X probably is okay for you. For everything else, it quickly becomes a very expensive trap or just a disappointment. When Apple brag about how cool it is to run Windows in "Boot Camp" or a virtualization software, then this rather demonstrates the shortcomings of the Mac platform instead of its strengths. I can also run Windows in VirtualBox on Linux. But why is this an advantage? Where's the sense in dividing my hardware resources to support TWO operating systems to get ONE job done? What's the rationalization for that? There is none. It just shows that the Mac still is not a full computing platform without Microsoft products. And that is the ultimate case AGAINST migrating to Mac OS X.
Yeah, sure. Because all of those business/enterprise applications written exclusively for Windows run ah-so smoothly on Macs...
Just accept it, folks: There is no business case for using Macs in an enterprise environment.
Compatibility? Fail. (There is a world beyond the Microsoft .doc format where enterprise applications live. There's OLD Java, and many Java apps require a very specific Oracle JVM to run. There's .NET. There's Sharepoint. There's an IBM mainframe you need to talk to. There are department printers that have no OS X drivers. There's a long list of office equipment that only plays well with Windows.)
Enterprise-ready? Fail. See compatibility, see support, see backup.
Central administration? Fail. Try applying group policies to a Mac.
Central backup? Fail. No, Time Machine is NOT an enterprise solution.
TCO? Fail. Expensive hardware, short-lived platform support.
Enterprise-support from the manufacturer (Apple)? HUGE fail.
Roadmaps? Fail. Apple doesn't even know what the word means. You just cannot plan with this company and their products.
Product longevity? Knock-out Fail. (Try getting support for OS X Leopard in two years from now. Try getting support for Tiger or Panther TODAY. Then compare it to Windows XP, an OS from the year that will be officially supported until 2014. Then make your strategic choice and tell me with a straight face that you want to bet your money on Cupertino toys.)
It's MUCH easier to integrate Linux desktops into an enterprise environment than it is to put Mac OS X boxes in there. Why? Because some "blue chip" companies like Oracle and IBM actually use, sell and support Linux and make sure that it can be used in an enterprise environment.
Trying to push a home user/consumer platform like the Mac into a corporate environment is a very bad idea. Especially if the company behind the product recently even announced that they dropped their entire server hardware because nobody wanted them. Why should the head of a large IT department trust a company that just dropped their only product that was even remotely targeted at the enterprise market? It's like asking a CTO to bet the company's IT future on Nintendo Wiis.
And just for your info: I've had those discussions at the World Health Organization of the United Nations, and it turned out to be IMPOSSIBLE to integrate Macs into their IT environment. I had the only Mac (a 20" Core Duo) in a world wide network because I was able to talk someone higher up the ladder into approving the purchase order for it, but then I quickly had to give up on OS X and instead run Windows on it in order to get my job as an IT admin done and be able to use the IT resources of the other WHO centers. OS X Tiger totally sucked in our network for almost all of the above reasons, but Windows Vista and XP got the job done perfectly. It wasn't very persuasive to show off a Mac that only runs Windows. That's what you get for being an Apple fanboy, which I admittedly was at that time.
Where I work now, two other people bought Macs, and one of them has ordered Windows 7 yesterday and wants me to wipe out OS X from his hard disk and replace it with Windows. He's an engineer and not productive with OS X, rather the opposite: OS X slows him down and doesn't provide any value to him.
And personally, after more than five years in Apple land, I will now also move away from OS X. It's a consumer platform that's only there to lock people into the Apple hardware and their iTunes store. If the web browser and iTunes and maybe Final Cut Studio, Logic Studio or the Adobe Creative Suites are the only pieces of software that you need to be happy, then OS X probably is okay for you. For everything else, it quickly becomes a very expensive trap or just a disappointment. When Apple brag about how cool it is to run Windows in "Boot Camp" or a virtualization software, then this rather demonstrates the shortcomings of the Mac platform instead of its strengths. I can also run Windows in VirtualBox on Linux. But why is this an advantage? Where's the sense in dividing my hardware resources to support TWO operating systems to get ONE job done? What's the rationalization for that? There is none. It just shows that the Mac still is not a full computing platform without Microsoft products. And that is the ultimate case AGAINST migrating to Mac OS X.
liamkp
Jul 11, 10:16 AM
Yep.
Full of Win
Apr 30, 08:43 PM
Let me clairfy, I should of realized the Full OF Win would go to extremes. Anything that in public context is not offense or profane, which .Me is does not fall into. You get hung up a too much minor s__t. Fill in the blank.
No, but I think the word 'me' does have negative connotations such as narcissism and self centeredness. That is my beef with it. The last word I want someone to associate with my name is 'me'.
No, but I think the word 'me' does have negative connotations such as narcissism and self centeredness. That is my beef with it. The last word I want someone to associate with my name is 'me'.
No comments:
Post a Comment