Otaillon
Jan 31, 12:15 PM
http://www.abload.de/img/img_1259vmsw.jpg
http://www.abload.de/img/img_1263bm6v.jpg
:rolleyes:
I searched for one on eBay last week! :eek: Where did you get it?
http://www.abload.de/img/img_1263bm6v.jpg
:rolleyes:
I searched for one on eBay last week! :eek: Where did you get it?
maclaptop
Apr 22, 11:07 AM
Yeah - I know if will never happen because SJ is compulsive obsessive with never making things bigger.
Most likely because he has the "Little man" complex.
Most likely because he has the "Little man" complex.
saving107
Apr 12, 09:42 AM
No.
Simply because htcSensation is 1.2GHz dual core
and... and... iphone5 will have lesser RAM than htcSensation.
Also, Apple is closed and Google is open.
okthxbai
Ok, I'm convinced.
Also, comparing a product that hasn't been released yet to a product that hasn't been announced yet is a rather weak argument and makes zero sense.
Simply because htcSensation is 1.2GHz dual core
and... and... iphone5 will have lesser RAM than htcSensation.
Also, Apple is closed and Google is open.
okthxbai
Ok, I'm convinced.
Also, comparing a product that hasn't been released yet to a product that hasn't been announced yet is a rather weak argument and makes zero sense.
SevenInchScrew
Sep 15, 10:37 AM
How is the statue of the noble team that comes with the legendary edition? Is it cheap looking or actually worth it?
It is really nice, and very worth it. It is plastic, but is very sturdy and looks great. They are all hand-painted, and very detailed. The real gem of the set, though, is Dr. Halsey's journal that comes with the Limited and Legendary versions. That thing is CRAZY awesome, and is filled with so much stuff, it boggles the mind. If you are into the lore and back story of the Halo universe, Bungie made this for you, and they didn't hold back.
Click to huge-size
http://i52.tinypic.com/2zjcopg.jpg
http://i53.tinypic.com/34pkz8g.jpg
http://i52.tinypic.com/2gxqjq1.jpg
http://i55.tinypic.com/218uo4.jpg
http://i56.tinypic.com/2z4adlc.jpg
It is really nice, and very worth it. It is plastic, but is very sturdy and looks great. They are all hand-painted, and very detailed. The real gem of the set, though, is Dr. Halsey's journal that comes with the Limited and Legendary versions. That thing is CRAZY awesome, and is filled with so much stuff, it boggles the mind. If you are into the lore and back story of the Halo universe, Bungie made this for you, and they didn't hold back.
Click to huge-size
http://i52.tinypic.com/2zjcopg.jpg
http://i53.tinypic.com/34pkz8g.jpg
http://i52.tinypic.com/2gxqjq1.jpg
http://i55.tinypic.com/218uo4.jpg
http://i56.tinypic.com/2z4adlc.jpg
more...
Mustafa Monde
Dec 1, 04:25 PM
iAdware is an ugly development to-be-sure, but not a big an scary one. As most Mac users know, proof of concept is not the same as actually having this kind of thing happen in the wild.
Still, Apple should take this seriously and anticipate similar developments in the coming months. If something like this does take off, it'll likely be through spoofing type sites and so on. For now I'm not going to loose any sleep over this and trust that Apple, as it angles itself-towards dominance in the marketplace, won't make the same blunders MS did with their buggy OS.
Apple knows that MS has them in their sights and any slip would be exploited. You can just see them shouting from the rooftops, "My Gawd, Apple has viruses, malware and adware!" as if that paralleled the umpteen thousands of virus developed to exploit their own sub-par software.
I suspect it's being looked into now by Apple's security team with an update to emerge long before this pup is found in the wild.
Still, Apple should take this seriously and anticipate similar developments in the coming months. If something like this does take off, it'll likely be through spoofing type sites and so on. For now I'm not going to loose any sleep over this and trust that Apple, as it angles itself-towards dominance in the marketplace, won't make the same blunders MS did with their buggy OS.
Apple knows that MS has them in their sights and any slip would be exploited. You can just see them shouting from the rooftops, "My Gawd, Apple has viruses, malware and adware!" as if that paralleled the umpteen thousands of virus developed to exploit their own sub-par software.
I suspect it's being looked into now by Apple's security team with an update to emerge long before this pup is found in the wild.
dongmin
Aug 15, 03:18 PM
� Finder Prefs (http://images.macrumors.com/downloads/findergrid.png) - Grid spacingYes! Welcome to the 21th century, Apple. About time. The current grid spacing is one of my biggest OS X peeves.
more...
hooch
Oct 18, 04:36 PM
Man, I wish I had enough money for Apple stock!
R94N
Oct 21, 12:57 AM
New bike and a smartphone of some sort; haven't decided on an OS yet although I'm leaning towards the iPhone.
more...
DTphonehome
Jul 21, 12:41 PM
Don't mean to be a wet blanket, but I didn't care about Apple's market share when it was slipping in the 90s and I don't care about it now that it's climbing. I didn't buy my Mac to be popular and I don't particularly care that lots of people are (or are not) using them. It's just an irrelevant metric to me.
...
Besides, Apple deals in the kind of quality that will keep it around for many, many years, regardless of which way its market share is going and that's all that I care about.
You do realize that if Apple's marketshare were to drop to, say, 1% or lower, they would have very little money to spend on R&D, and the quality and innovation you seek would suffer tremendously? Which is why Apple was doing dismally in the 90's and is doing much better today. They are now flush with cash, and can pump out great hardware products, and develop and refine the software that drives sales. Market share (and high margins) is important to ensure a steady flow of cash for those projects.
So, you don't care about how market share affects you, but if you were the only Mac user, I assure you, Apple wouldn't be manufacturing products just for your puny market share. (To make an extreme example)
...
Besides, Apple deals in the kind of quality that will keep it around for many, many years, regardless of which way its market share is going and that's all that I care about.
You do realize that if Apple's marketshare were to drop to, say, 1% or lower, they would have very little money to spend on R&D, and the quality and innovation you seek would suffer tremendously? Which is why Apple was doing dismally in the 90's and is doing much better today. They are now flush with cash, and can pump out great hardware products, and develop and refine the software that drives sales. Market share (and high margins) is important to ensure a steady flow of cash for those projects.
So, you don't care about how market share affects you, but if you were the only Mac user, I assure you, Apple wouldn't be manufacturing products just for your puny market share. (To make an extreme example)
MacNut
May 1, 11:19 PM
What do you expect?! If a very important leader like the president got killed by the Taliban, the Americans would be very angry and would want revenge. Same goes to the Taliban. It will only make situations worse. Let's just hope that it doesn't.They also mocked us saying we would never catch him. Well we caught him and we won't stop.
more...
asleitz
Mar 31, 09:48 PM
Next the Pinto is going to make a come back with the wood trim
kwikdeth
Apr 23, 06:53 PM
now we know what the iPhone3,3 model was that kept popping up in iOS references.
i came over to AT&T with my iphone 4 from tmobile i bought off contract because i was tired of jailbreaking all the time with every update and having everything break like MMS and internet. the quality of service on ATT is awful, both in phone and with MMS/Text. I love it how on the ATT network it breaks up every text into pieces, and delivers the second half before the first.
if tmobile got an iphone, i would go back in a heartbeat. screw att, even with the merger.
i came over to AT&T with my iphone 4 from tmobile i bought off contract because i was tired of jailbreaking all the time with every update and having everything break like MMS and internet. the quality of service on ATT is awful, both in phone and with MMS/Text. I love it how on the ATT network it breaks up every text into pieces, and delivers the second half before the first.
if tmobile got an iphone, i would go back in a heartbeat. screw att, even with the merger.
more...
nick004
Oct 24, 09:13 AM
Looking at the 15" models. With the educational discount, is it worth an extra $500 for the 15" 2.33GHz, 2GB Ram, 256MB Graphics. The other model is 2.16GHz, 1GB Ram & 128MB Graphics.
I'm going for the extra video RAM, i know it doesn't help much but it is a crappy card and needs to last me at least 2 years. Good enough for WoW though!
I'm going for the extra video RAM, i know it doesn't help much but it is a crappy card and needs to last me at least 2 years. Good enough for WoW though!
dubAdub
May 2, 09:34 AM
I suspect it will be an early Thursday morning update, particularly as today is a public holiday in so many countries.
more...
daveschroeder
Oct 23, 08:35 AM
Dave,
I understand where you are coming from, but I still don't interpret the EULA as you do. Neither does Paul Thurrott http://www.winsupersite.com/showcase/winvista_licensing.asp. Can you please provide links to others who think like you, preferably if they happen to work for MS. ;)
Coincidentally, I had just emailed Paul.
He already responded:
From: thurrott [at] gmail.com
Subject: RE: Row over Vista virtualization much ado about nothing?
Date: October 23, 2006 8:23:04 AM CDT
To: das [at] doit.wisc.edu
Microsoft told me that the retail EULA forbids the installation of Windows
Vista Home Basic or Home Premium in virtual machines. They said that if
developers wanted to do this, they should get an MSDN subscription, which
has a different license allowing such an install. All that said, there's
nothing technical from preventing users from installing any Vista version in
a virtual machine.
Paul
...to which I replied:
From: das [at] doit.wisc.edu
Subject: Re: Row over Vista virtualization much ado about nothing?
Date: October 23, 2006 8:30:57 AM CDT
To: thurrott [at] gmail.com
Security: Signed
So Microsoft actually does intend the EULA to prohibit someone from, say, buying Vista Home as a retail box and then installing it in Parallels Desktop on a Mac? (I know there is nothing technical preventing that.)
This still seems curious, given that in that scenario, not only does Vista Ultimate allow VM use, but also includes an additional license specifically so that same copy can be installed in a VM on the same device. Why wouldn't Home's license allow a single instance of itself to be used in a VM as long as it's not already installed somewhere else? The language all revolves around "the software installed on the licensed device", and I take that to mean the software *already* installed on that device, but I suppose that could be argued to mean that it can't be installed on *any* device where it would be used in a virtualization environment...
Update: Paul's response:
From: thurrott [at] gmail.com
Subject: RE: Row over Vista virtualization much ado about nothing?
Date: October 23, 2006 8:34:07 AM CDT
To: das [at] doit.wisc.edu
Yeah, that's what they told me. My guess is that they don't want people
purchasing the low-cost versions, installing them on virtual machine
environments they don't understand (like Parallels) and then demanding
support.
You can understand why this is an issue, given that the Business and Ultimate EULAs not only explicitly allow VM use, but also include additional licenses to use that copy a second time in a VM, legally (on the same device). Also, all the language, as I said, revolves around using "the software installed on the licensed device" (implying that it's an installation that already exists on a licensed device) in a VM.
So I'll say that, if this is accurate, I stand corrected. After a few years of reading Microsoft (and other) EULAs, even I thought Microsoft wouldn't be that retarded. ;-)
Given the language, and given the additional-license situation with Business and Ultimate, I still have to say I'm surprised.
I understand where you are coming from, but I still don't interpret the EULA as you do. Neither does Paul Thurrott http://www.winsupersite.com/showcase/winvista_licensing.asp. Can you please provide links to others who think like you, preferably if they happen to work for MS. ;)
Coincidentally, I had just emailed Paul.
He already responded:
From: thurrott [at] gmail.com
Subject: RE: Row over Vista virtualization much ado about nothing?
Date: October 23, 2006 8:23:04 AM CDT
To: das [at] doit.wisc.edu
Microsoft told me that the retail EULA forbids the installation of Windows
Vista Home Basic or Home Premium in virtual machines. They said that if
developers wanted to do this, they should get an MSDN subscription, which
has a different license allowing such an install. All that said, there's
nothing technical from preventing users from installing any Vista version in
a virtual machine.
Paul
...to which I replied:
From: das [at] doit.wisc.edu
Subject: Re: Row over Vista virtualization much ado about nothing?
Date: October 23, 2006 8:30:57 AM CDT
To: thurrott [at] gmail.com
Security: Signed
So Microsoft actually does intend the EULA to prohibit someone from, say, buying Vista Home as a retail box and then installing it in Parallels Desktop on a Mac? (I know there is nothing technical preventing that.)
This still seems curious, given that in that scenario, not only does Vista Ultimate allow VM use, but also includes an additional license specifically so that same copy can be installed in a VM on the same device. Why wouldn't Home's license allow a single instance of itself to be used in a VM as long as it's not already installed somewhere else? The language all revolves around "the software installed on the licensed device", and I take that to mean the software *already* installed on that device, but I suppose that could be argued to mean that it can't be installed on *any* device where it would be used in a virtualization environment...
Update: Paul's response:
From: thurrott [at] gmail.com
Subject: RE: Row over Vista virtualization much ado about nothing?
Date: October 23, 2006 8:34:07 AM CDT
To: das [at] doit.wisc.edu
Yeah, that's what they told me. My guess is that they don't want people
purchasing the low-cost versions, installing them on virtual machine
environments they don't understand (like Parallels) and then demanding
support.
You can understand why this is an issue, given that the Business and Ultimate EULAs not only explicitly allow VM use, but also include additional licenses to use that copy a second time in a VM, legally (on the same device). Also, all the language, as I said, revolves around using "the software installed on the licensed device" (implying that it's an installation that already exists on a licensed device) in a VM.
So I'll say that, if this is accurate, I stand corrected. After a few years of reading Microsoft (and other) EULAs, even I thought Microsoft wouldn't be that retarded. ;-)
Given the language, and given the additional-license situation with Business and Ultimate, I still have to say I'm surprised.
Thataboy
Jul 21, 01:08 PM
I have a baseless, out-of-left-field prediction that I think would increase the Mac marketshare even further:
I think Apple and Microsoft will partner to include Virtual PC in Leopard. I can see them doing it as a BTO pre-install (like iWork), either Virtual PC alone, or with an XP/Vista bundle.
I can see no reason why Microsoft would have such a hard time with a virtualization program when little old Parallels can do it so quickly. They state they are "working with Apple to determine the future of the Virtual PC roadmap" or something like that. It would allow Apple to leverage the new "big plus" of having Windows run in virtualization, but it would force MICROSOFT to support it.
Everyone wins.
Just a guess :)
I think Apple and Microsoft will partner to include Virtual PC in Leopard. I can see them doing it as a BTO pre-install (like iWork), either Virtual PC alone, or with an XP/Vista bundle.
I can see no reason why Microsoft would have such a hard time with a virtualization program when little old Parallels can do it so quickly. They state they are "working with Apple to determine the future of the Virtual PC roadmap" or something like that. It would allow Apple to leverage the new "big plus" of having Windows run in virtualization, but it would force MICROSOFT to support it.
Everyone wins.
Just a guess :)
more...
puckhead193
Apr 14, 12:22 PM
wait i'm confused is this for iphone or iPad or both? :confused:
elray
Apr 14, 08:30 AM
I will probably buy the white iPhone 4 if it really does come out this month. My current (and first) iPhone is a refurbed white 3g with a cracked screen. I had planned on upgrading to the white iPhone 4 until they kept pushing the release back, then seemingly cancelled it completely. I was just going to wait for the 5 at that point, but now with the rumored delay I don't think I want to wait until fall (or later) for a new phone.
firestarter
May 1, 10:01 PM
I'm kind of surprised that he was still alive.
Apparently he had long term kidney disease... I thought he would have died in a cave years ago and no-one had found his body (we haven't seen him in the media for years).
Props to the US forces.
It's certainly good news... but might not mean very much. Al Qaeda was always more of a movement or 'franchise' than a hierarchical organisation with command and control.
Apparently he had long term kidney disease... I thought he would have died in a cave years ago and no-one had found his body (we haven't seen him in the media for years).
Props to the US forces.
It's certainly good news... but might not mean very much. Al Qaeda was always more of a movement or 'franchise' than a hierarchical organisation with command and control.
simX
Oct 18, 06:22 PM
Yes, thank you. At least someone else out there is emotionally distanced enough from the iPod and the Apple entertainment sector to be a bit objective.
Innovation: just what happened to Apple's innovative spirit when it comes to computers? The latest Mac Pro was fitted into the existing (and way oversized) G5 case. The MacBook was disappointing in that - proportionally - Apple did not shrink it at all or make it lighter than its predecessor (a design which had been in existence for about four years). There are more things, but I really don't want to sound like a troll here...
Apple needs to come out with new computer models that are unlike anything else out there. What about a tiny, thin ultraportable? What about a smaller tower, so those of us that want a pro computer don't have to invest in an oversized monster (which is larger than any PCs in the market that I am aware of). Aren't computers supposed to get SMALLER as the technology advances? Why is Apple obsessed with making the iPod smaller and smaller, but does not care as much about its laptops and desktops?
The answer: profit, or course. The iPod is Apple's cash cow. And this, my friends, is what I mean when I say that Apple needs to be partitioning off a little of its innovative energy that it is putting into its entertainment sector and bring it back to the computer line.
Understood now?
OK, now fire away :)
*sigh* How many times do we have to refute your assertions with facts before you stop repeating them?
To wit, the iPod is not Apple's "cash cow". By definition, if there is something that gains more revenue/profit than the iPod, then the iPod cannot be the cash cow. 58% of Apple's revenue still came from sales of Macs. Gross margins for both Macs and iPods has always been similar (hovering a bit below 30%), so the Mac also generates the majority of the profit for Apple.
As for Apple's innovative spirit lacking when it comes to the Macs, let's just point out that it Apple updated the iPod in October 2005 to the 5th generation, and we JUST got the 5.5th generation last month. Apple took a year to add slightly brighter screens, better battery life (only for video), and games. The nano just gained the anodized aluminum exterior -- wow, Apple's reaching back to the past for it's innovation now! And the shuffle got slimmed down and consolidated into one product. All this doesn't sound exactly like innovation to me. (Of course, Apple doesn't really need to innovate, since they're already selling iPods by the boatload.)
In contrast, Apple brought all of its Macs over to the Intel processor. The Mac Pro was dramatically higher value, what with double-wide graphics card slot, dual optical drives, 4 internal hard drive bays, etc., etc. All Macs (except for the Mac Pro) now have Front Row and a remote, which is a great feature. Built-in iSights have also migrated across the entire product line. The MacBook and MacBook Pro now have MagSafe -- a great innovation. Boot Camp is now supported on all new Macs. The Xserve has new features like lights-out management, redundant power supplies, etc. And we've seen some great things coming for Leopard, what with Time Machine and Spaces and iChat Theater and Core Animation and iCal Server, etc., etc., etc.
It seems to me that Apple is innovating more on the Macintosh side of things than they are with the iPod. What are they going to add next on the iPod -- wireless? *gasp*, so innovative!
Seriously, can we stop with this myth already? It's the same thing with all of Apple's "woes" with quality control (which was busted by the recent consumer reports articles where Apple has actually brought DOWN the number of new computers needing repair in their first year). It's something that's repeated ad nauseum by a few vocal people, when it's really not a problem at all. Same here: everybody gawks and writes about the iPod precisely because more people can afford it and more people can use it with whatever computer they have. So, obviously, you will hear more about the iPod.
Let's see if repeating myself again has any effect: the iPod is not Apple's cash cow!
Understood now?
OK, now fire away :rolleyes:
Innovation: just what happened to Apple's innovative spirit when it comes to computers? The latest Mac Pro was fitted into the existing (and way oversized) G5 case. The MacBook was disappointing in that - proportionally - Apple did not shrink it at all or make it lighter than its predecessor (a design which had been in existence for about four years). There are more things, but I really don't want to sound like a troll here...
Apple needs to come out with new computer models that are unlike anything else out there. What about a tiny, thin ultraportable? What about a smaller tower, so those of us that want a pro computer don't have to invest in an oversized monster (which is larger than any PCs in the market that I am aware of). Aren't computers supposed to get SMALLER as the technology advances? Why is Apple obsessed with making the iPod smaller and smaller, but does not care as much about its laptops and desktops?
The answer: profit, or course. The iPod is Apple's cash cow. And this, my friends, is what I mean when I say that Apple needs to be partitioning off a little of its innovative energy that it is putting into its entertainment sector and bring it back to the computer line.
Understood now?
OK, now fire away :)
*sigh* How many times do we have to refute your assertions with facts before you stop repeating them?
To wit, the iPod is not Apple's "cash cow". By definition, if there is something that gains more revenue/profit than the iPod, then the iPod cannot be the cash cow. 58% of Apple's revenue still came from sales of Macs. Gross margins for both Macs and iPods has always been similar (hovering a bit below 30%), so the Mac also generates the majority of the profit for Apple.
As for Apple's innovative spirit lacking when it comes to the Macs, let's just point out that it Apple updated the iPod in October 2005 to the 5th generation, and we JUST got the 5.5th generation last month. Apple took a year to add slightly brighter screens, better battery life (only for video), and games. The nano just gained the anodized aluminum exterior -- wow, Apple's reaching back to the past for it's innovation now! And the shuffle got slimmed down and consolidated into one product. All this doesn't sound exactly like innovation to me. (Of course, Apple doesn't really need to innovate, since they're already selling iPods by the boatload.)
In contrast, Apple brought all of its Macs over to the Intel processor. The Mac Pro was dramatically higher value, what with double-wide graphics card slot, dual optical drives, 4 internal hard drive bays, etc., etc. All Macs (except for the Mac Pro) now have Front Row and a remote, which is a great feature. Built-in iSights have also migrated across the entire product line. The MacBook and MacBook Pro now have MagSafe -- a great innovation. Boot Camp is now supported on all new Macs. The Xserve has new features like lights-out management, redundant power supplies, etc. And we've seen some great things coming for Leopard, what with Time Machine and Spaces and iChat Theater and Core Animation and iCal Server, etc., etc., etc.
It seems to me that Apple is innovating more on the Macintosh side of things than they are with the iPod. What are they going to add next on the iPod -- wireless? *gasp*, so innovative!
Seriously, can we stop with this myth already? It's the same thing with all of Apple's "woes" with quality control (which was busted by the recent consumer reports articles where Apple has actually brought DOWN the number of new computers needing repair in their first year). It's something that's repeated ad nauseum by a few vocal people, when it's really not a problem at all. Same here: everybody gawks and writes about the iPod precisely because more people can afford it and more people can use it with whatever computer they have. So, obviously, you will hear more about the iPod.
Let's see if repeating myself again has any effect: the iPod is not Apple's cash cow!
Understood now?
OK, now fire away :rolleyes:
Choppaface
Oct 23, 11:27 PM
you mean people PAY for windows? :confused: :confused:
Kurgan
May 3, 07:59 AM
To bad there was no mini. I have been warming up my shop finger all morning...
b_scott
Apr 15, 12:51 PM
I did that but it still does not work. I rebooted my macbook, installed the latest security updates, wiped my 3GS, tried restoring and then updating to 4.3.2 - same thing just happened.
I fixed it on my end - it was my work's firewall. The wired internet is firewalled really hardcore, but the wifi is not - it verified on the wifi. If you're still having issues, maybe it's your work's firewall or your own.
I fixed it on my end - it was my work's firewall. The wired internet is firewalled really hardcore, but the wifi is not - it verified on the wifi. If you're still having issues, maybe it's your work's firewall or your own.
Wontu
Apr 15, 04:56 AM
Just updated�Now having a problem with people hearing me. If i use speaker phone they can hear me just fine. I have done a voice memo, and it sounds like I'm being recorded at half volume. Anyone else having this problem :mad:
Just had my 16 GB iPhone 4 replaced for that same problem. Haven't upgraded yet (well I haven't even picked up the exchange unit from the store yet...)
Just had my 16 GB iPhone 4 replaced for that same problem. Haven't upgraded yet (well I haven't even picked up the exchange unit from the store yet...)
