macdoodled
May 7, 12:49 PM
now mac 10.4 512 we have to pay multitudes
to have access to the mac mail we bought
with cox cable slower than h3ll high speed internet
CONSTANTLY RELOADING
JUST TO SEE AND WRITE an EMAIL
ON WHAT LOOKS LIKE A CHEEZY FREE EMAIL PLATFORM
IS MADDENING.
MULTI DISABLED AND TYRING TO AVOID HOMELESSNESS
again
- another help to slow me down or give up food income to fix isn't what i needed.
to have access to the mac mail we bought
with cox cable slower than h3ll high speed internet
CONSTANTLY RELOADING
JUST TO SEE AND WRITE an EMAIL
ON WHAT LOOKS LIKE A CHEEZY FREE EMAIL PLATFORM
IS MADDENING.
MULTI DISABLED AND TYRING TO AVOID HOMELESSNESS
again
- another help to slow me down or give up food income to fix isn't what i needed.
Eidorian
Jul 22, 04:15 PM
Agreed. A light, small, cheap Apple laptop targeted at students would be excellent, and an education iMac that's available to the public would be great too. Unlikely, but I'm with you on this one.
In other news, I expect the iMac to stay with an X1600 series card (because Apple have historically used the mid-range cards: 9600, X600, X1600 and possibly the rumored X2600s next year) so maybe an X1600 Pro and/or an XT. I also think that they should update the MacBook Pros graphics card because its a Pro laptop with a mid-range card so a Mobility X1800 would be nice.X600 Pro (iSight iMac G5 17") and X600 XT (iSight iMac G5 20") Hopefully we'll see a slight bump on the GPU.
In other news, I expect the iMac to stay with an X1600 series card (because Apple have historically used the mid-range cards: 9600, X600, X1600 and possibly the rumored X2600s next year) so maybe an X1600 Pro and/or an XT. I also think that they should update the MacBook Pros graphics card because its a Pro laptop with a mid-range card so a Mobility X1800 would be nice.X600 Pro (iSight iMac G5 17") and X600 XT (iSight iMac G5 20") Hopefully we'll see a slight bump on the GPU.
j_maddison
Mar 30, 06:45 PM
This question is primarily because I have a Macbook Air.
If Apple are going to release this via the App Store (assuming the speculation is true), does this mean that you don't have to burn Lion to a disk to install it? Or would I have to transfer it to some sort of USB drive first?
I guess I'm asking if you can just double click it in your downloads folder and run the OS installation from there
If Apple are going to release this via the App Store (assuming the speculation is true), does this mean that you don't have to burn Lion to a disk to install it? Or would I have to transfer it to some sort of USB drive first?
I guess I'm asking if you can just double click it in your downloads folder and run the OS installation from there
.jpg "miley cyrus and selena gomez")
Clydefrog
Sep 15, 05:15 PM
Please don't mess with the keyboard. The Macbook keyboard wouldn't suit the Macbook Pro.
agreed, the keyboard would look FUGLY.
agreed, the keyboard would look FUGLY.
iDemiurge
Apr 23, 05:49 PM
Doesn't OS X already support displays up to 2560x1600? Afaik that was the resolution of Apple's own (now discontinued) 30" display and the resolution of most, if not all, 30" displays available at the moment. 3200x2000 is nothing but the next rung on the ladder. This is just Apple future-proofing their OS a bit. If they release anything in the short term it will most likely be a big-ass iMac or a bigger Apple Display, NOT a laptop running that resolution. Just saying...
GregA
Nov 27, 03:44 PM
No point in what? I am stating my OWN ideas.Yes, but you're stating your OWN ideas while telling others their ideas are stupid. If you can't see how even after re-reading, then ..... c'est la vie I guess.
fivetoadsloth
Apr 10, 02:12 AM
I didn't quite read the whole thread, and I've seen people trying to present definitive answers representing multiple possible answers. While I don't claim to be an end all source, math is one thing that I can do and do understand.
I was tempted not to post, but, I think understanding the order of operations (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_operations)/etc is something that is relatively important.
Multiple people have quoted the order : P(arenthes) E(xponents) M(ultiplication) D(ivision) A(ddition) S(ubtraction).
As stated, that is NOT totally accurate. Multiplication and division are the same operation, as are addition and subtraction. Thus, the order between them can be flipped. That is, P E D M A S is true, as is P E D M S A, as is P E M D S A.
If multiplication and division both appear you go from LEFT to RIGHT.
Parenthesis are implied multiplication.
So, first, in the parenthesis we have 12, so, 48/2(12). As that is written, one does 48/2=24*12. So, as the problem is written, the answer is 288. While the method of writing the problem is certainly not the best, the problem does, to my knowledge, only have one true answer.
An important note: not all calculators correctly apply the orders of operations. Any scientific calculator form the last 5 years or so should, and if it is outputting anything other then 288 I would be interested in knowing. Some pocket calulators with + - x � just go left to right.
Wolfram is, as usual, right. (http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=48%2F2%289%2B3%29)
I was tempted not to post, but, I think understanding the order of operations (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_operations)/etc is something that is relatively important.
Multiple people have quoted the order : P(arenthes) E(xponents) M(ultiplication) D(ivision) A(ddition) S(ubtraction).
As stated, that is NOT totally accurate. Multiplication and division are the same operation, as are addition and subtraction. Thus, the order between them can be flipped. That is, P E D M A S is true, as is P E D M S A, as is P E M D S A.
If multiplication and division both appear you go from LEFT to RIGHT.
Parenthesis are implied multiplication.
So, first, in the parenthesis we have 12, so, 48/2(12). As that is written, one does 48/2=24*12. So, as the problem is written, the answer is 288. While the method of writing the problem is certainly not the best, the problem does, to my knowledge, only have one true answer.
An important note: not all calculators correctly apply the orders of operations. Any scientific calculator form the last 5 years or so should, and if it is outputting anything other then 288 I would be interested in knowing. Some pocket calulators with + - x � just go left to right.
Wolfram is, as usual, right. (http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=48%2F2%289%2B3%29)
alent1234
Mar 29, 08:48 AM
I dont understand the point of this. Is storage really an issue on peoples computers? I understand the mobile app, but why not just store the files locally?
computers are last century, this is aimed at Android users like me with a phone with only 8GB of storage. no need to buy another SD card since i can dump part of my itunes library to amazon now
computers are last century, this is aimed at Android users like me with a phone with only 8GB of storage. no need to buy another SD card since i can dump part of my itunes library to amazon now
MacNut
Apr 14, 11:10 AM
You mean like
http://www.federalbudget.com/
http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/
http://www.usaspending.gov/
or any other websites easily found via google?I want line items on every single thing spent.
http://www.federalbudget.com/
http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/
http://www.usaspending.gov/
or any other websites easily found via google?I want line items on every single thing spent.
CalBoy
May 3, 02:29 AM
Really, most opinions I see in the US to keep the imperial system is because you're not accustomed to it. Fahrenheit being more accurate than Celsius or Kelvins, really? Just add a decimal, that's the beauty of it, you add a decimal point or a factor of ten and Earth doesn't suddenly implode.
I know this sounds incredulous and insulting, but people are terrible at math. The more of it you make them think about (whether it's decimals or fractions or anything else) the worse they perform. It's why you'll see almost every recommended quantity expressed as a whole number. It reduces error for the untrained, and makes expressing the value simpler.
Is it change just for change's sake? Up to you, basically everyone else on Earth made their choice. ;)
Did they really? How many people, after you factor out colonization, dictatorship, and a complete absence of prior standardization, actually switched? I can think of only a few countries, none of which were as large and as diverse as the US is.
Besides, it's not as if sciences and engineering are out of the loop. Only civilian uses are Standard. How does it affect you, a Canadian, if grandma bakes using cups and Fahrenheit?
I think I have to disagree. It may be easier for Americans to grasp the "highs" and "lows" of the Fahrenheit scale, but any European would have a different concept of high and low. Also, the difference in Celsius units is rather insignificant. For example, the difference between 37 and 38 degrees Celsius is 1.8 degrees Fahrenheit, hardly a noticeable difference when it comes to weather forecasts.
No, but 1.8 is a big difference when it comes to taking a baby's temperature or figuring out if your meat is done just right. For a child, 99 is considered a mild fevor and is 37.22. 98.6 is considered "normal" and is 37 flat in C. However, if you had a mother trying to keep track of her child's fever over a period of time, the small variations between those two temps would be a lot more important. The total variation between 99, 99.5, and 100 F is so small on the C scale (37.22, 37.5, 37.77) that it's a lot easier to make mistakes in recording or reporting the results. Sure it's easy to do when it's your job in a professional setting, but lay people make mistakes all the time. Using a scale that makes the number differences larger (and psychologically significant, because you can bet no mother is going to forget that her child has a fever of 100) helps reduce those errors.
I'm not so sure. If a recipe calls for 2 tablespoons, is it not just as easy to measure out 30ml? Might using one graduated measuring "cup" be easier than a series of various-sized spoons and cups? For dry goods, grams are easily measured on a scale. With practice and experience, it's quicker and more precise than measuring exactly three cups of leveled flour: you can just sift the flour into your mixing bowl until the scale reads 375 grams. Indeed this method uses less dishes, too.
There are a lot of measuring cups and spoons that do come graduated these days (no, they're not in the "beyond" section of BBB), but it's not always possible to go by weight. Weight also doesn't solve much because it would add an additional piece of equipment that isn't needed for a lot of recipes. It's also impractical to keep weighing out ingredients, especially if their net weight is going to be in the few grams. You also probably wouldn't save any dishes because flour is usually added into other wet ingredients like butter and sugar separately, so a second bowl would be used regardless.
Other than that, any vessel marked "30ml" used for measuring would essentially be a tablespoon. A rose by any other name, really. Except that the 30ml rose is clunkier to say. In fact, you'd still need names for all of the common measures even using SI. Is everyone really going to go around calling a cup the "237ml vessel?" Are people going to start calling it the "liter quartet of milk?" What would you do for the measures that have a secondary meaning? Will people still be able to call it a "pint" if it's sold as 500ml?
Are there really any benefits to the Customary scale, or do we just perceive benefits because it's what we're used to? And if the latter is the case, why make American students learn two systems of units when one fulfills all needs?
There are some (albeit few these days). For daily tasks, the composite numbers in Imperial units are easy to halve and quarter. This has less relevance today with prepackaged food and digital equipment, but at one time it made practical sense for a lot more uses. The residual benefits are still present in home baking and similar activities where base 10 doesn't help, but those are the few things that still make heavy use of standard units anyhow. I don't think it's that onerous to know these days, especially with apps, Google, and conversion charts everywhere around us.
I know this sounds incredulous and insulting, but people are terrible at math. The more of it you make them think about (whether it's decimals or fractions or anything else) the worse they perform. It's why you'll see almost every recommended quantity expressed as a whole number. It reduces error for the untrained, and makes expressing the value simpler.
Is it change just for change's sake? Up to you, basically everyone else on Earth made their choice. ;)
Did they really? How many people, after you factor out colonization, dictatorship, and a complete absence of prior standardization, actually switched? I can think of only a few countries, none of which were as large and as diverse as the US is.
Besides, it's not as if sciences and engineering are out of the loop. Only civilian uses are Standard. How does it affect you, a Canadian, if grandma bakes using cups and Fahrenheit?
I think I have to disagree. It may be easier for Americans to grasp the "highs" and "lows" of the Fahrenheit scale, but any European would have a different concept of high and low. Also, the difference in Celsius units is rather insignificant. For example, the difference between 37 and 38 degrees Celsius is 1.8 degrees Fahrenheit, hardly a noticeable difference when it comes to weather forecasts.
No, but 1.8 is a big difference when it comes to taking a baby's temperature or figuring out if your meat is done just right. For a child, 99 is considered a mild fevor and is 37.22. 98.6 is considered "normal" and is 37 flat in C. However, if you had a mother trying to keep track of her child's fever over a period of time, the small variations between those two temps would be a lot more important. The total variation between 99, 99.5, and 100 F is so small on the C scale (37.22, 37.5, 37.77) that it's a lot easier to make mistakes in recording or reporting the results. Sure it's easy to do when it's your job in a professional setting, but lay people make mistakes all the time. Using a scale that makes the number differences larger (and psychologically significant, because you can bet no mother is going to forget that her child has a fever of 100) helps reduce those errors.
I'm not so sure. If a recipe calls for 2 tablespoons, is it not just as easy to measure out 30ml? Might using one graduated measuring "cup" be easier than a series of various-sized spoons and cups? For dry goods, grams are easily measured on a scale. With practice and experience, it's quicker and more precise than measuring exactly three cups of leveled flour: you can just sift the flour into your mixing bowl until the scale reads 375 grams. Indeed this method uses less dishes, too.
There are a lot of measuring cups and spoons that do come graduated these days (no, they're not in the "beyond" section of BBB), but it's not always possible to go by weight. Weight also doesn't solve much because it would add an additional piece of equipment that isn't needed for a lot of recipes. It's also impractical to keep weighing out ingredients, especially if their net weight is going to be in the few grams. You also probably wouldn't save any dishes because flour is usually added into other wet ingredients like butter and sugar separately, so a second bowl would be used regardless.
Other than that, any vessel marked "30ml" used for measuring would essentially be a tablespoon. A rose by any other name, really. Except that the 30ml rose is clunkier to say. In fact, you'd still need names for all of the common measures even using SI. Is everyone really going to go around calling a cup the "237ml vessel?" Are people going to start calling it the "liter quartet of milk?" What would you do for the measures that have a secondary meaning? Will people still be able to call it a "pint" if it's sold as 500ml?
Are there really any benefits to the Customary scale, or do we just perceive benefits because it's what we're used to? And if the latter is the case, why make American students learn two systems of units when one fulfills all needs?
There are some (albeit few these days). For daily tasks, the composite numbers in Imperial units are easy to halve and quarter. This has less relevance today with prepackaged food and digital equipment, but at one time it made practical sense for a lot more uses. The residual benefits are still present in home baking and similar activities where base 10 doesn't help, but those are the few things that still make heavy use of standard units anyhow. I don't think it's that onerous to know these days, especially with apps, Google, and conversion charts everywhere around us.
*LTD*
Apr 5, 07:13 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8G4)
Who the hell at Toyota thought this was a good idea?? It was remarkably unprofessional of them to begin with.
You don't establish business relationships by breaking the other's EULA. This is frankly, shocking from a company such as Toyota.
Who the hell at Toyota thought this was a good idea?? It was remarkably unprofessional of them to begin with.
You don't establish business relationships by breaking the other's EULA. This is frankly, shocking from a company such as Toyota.
ARF900
Apr 25, 09:28 AM
They may be preparing but im not holding my breath on this. They havent even gotten retina displays for the iPad yet...
Reach9
Mar 26, 10:25 PM
So could iOS 5 and Mac OS X Lion be linked in anyway? Like software wise?
Hairball
Mar 26, 09:54 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8G4)
I hope I can upgrade as soon as the iPhone 5 is released. This 3GS is getting old.
I hope I can upgrade as soon as the iPhone 5 is released. This 3GS is getting old.
Benjy91
Apr 20, 09:46 AM
I wouldn't mind a heavier phone, if it meant better battery life or a bigger screen.
I think Apple are too obsessed with this "Thinner, Lighter" everything. It's a phone, it is no where near 'Heavy'
I think Apple are too obsessed with this "Thinner, Lighter" everything. It's a phone, it is no where near 'Heavy'
FireArse
Nov 26, 12:30 PM
Rather than a traditional laptop/tablet idea, I'm envisioning a small device that truly combines
1. music/vid player
2. cell phone
3. camera
4. osx capable computer
Not sure there's a place for a cell phone, but I agree with the rest of your comments! This thing would be so sweet! I can't wait. Bet there'd be a $100 premium for a black version!
F
1. music/vid player
2. cell phone
3. camera
4. osx capable computer
Not sure there's a place for a cell phone, but I agree with the rest of your comments! This thing would be so sweet! I can't wait. Bet there'd be a $100 premium for a black version!
F
Don't panic
May 5, 10:53 AM
The system is solid and consistent between the villain and the heroes. I think you all are over thinking it. Ravenvii said early on in his explanation that it might be easier to think of the villains turns as points to avoid confusion. Basically during my round I earn 2 points to spend any way I choose. Some actions require one turn/point to accomplish. For example:
- move to a new room
- self heal
Thus, if during my turn I choose to move or heal then in essence I've used one of the 2 points/turns to accomplish this task meaning for the rest of the round I only have 1 point/turn left. Setting traps or sending out my minions cost various points and thus I must save up points for some things. If I choose to save points then I'm essentially forfeiting action in that turn or for the entire round by choosing to carry over the point or points to my next round.
Heroes actions work the same way they just aren't broken down into points for easier understanding. You could choose to think of it as getting 2 points at the beginning of your rounds as well and in turn it would cost you 1 point to do any of the following:
- explore a room
- move to a new room
Thus, with your entire round you can take two actions or turns, each costing one point. The only difference is heroes can't save up points like the villain can.
So, you see, the system is consistent on both sides.
i see the point, and i am fine with it if that's what the GMs decided.
i am just saying that it is not what was said before (or how i understood it), where the deployment of a trap/minion was portrayed as costing point previoulsy generated.
for example, post #10
For example: let's say a dragon costs 10 turns (or points). To be able to place the dragon on the map, the villain must forgo 10 turns. The fastest way to get the dragon is to skip both his turns for 5 rounds.
with your interpretation, you'd forgo 9 turns, because on the 10th the dragon is deployed, instead of waiting 5 rounds and deploy the dragon in the next turn.
i just want to make sure what the rules are, because it makes a significant difference in terms of keeping track of what might or might not be out there.
for example, by my count, in one round you could deploy one goblin (one turn to get a point, one to deploy), by yours, you deploy two (point and deploy each turn).
also, can you heal and deploy trap/monsters at the same turn, from the Lair?
can you accrue points while moving/healing?
it's the beginning of brand new game, so it's normal the rules are seen in different ways and need some fine tuning in how they are worded.
- move to a new room
- self heal
Thus, if during my turn I choose to move or heal then in essence I've used one of the 2 points/turns to accomplish this task meaning for the rest of the round I only have 1 point/turn left. Setting traps or sending out my minions cost various points and thus I must save up points for some things. If I choose to save points then I'm essentially forfeiting action in that turn or for the entire round by choosing to carry over the point or points to my next round.
Heroes actions work the same way they just aren't broken down into points for easier understanding. You could choose to think of it as getting 2 points at the beginning of your rounds as well and in turn it would cost you 1 point to do any of the following:
- explore a room
- move to a new room
Thus, with your entire round you can take two actions or turns, each costing one point. The only difference is heroes can't save up points like the villain can.
So, you see, the system is consistent on both sides.
i see the point, and i am fine with it if that's what the GMs decided.
i am just saying that it is not what was said before (or how i understood it), where the deployment of a trap/minion was portrayed as costing point previoulsy generated.
for example, post #10
For example: let's say a dragon costs 10 turns (or points). To be able to place the dragon on the map, the villain must forgo 10 turns. The fastest way to get the dragon is to skip both his turns for 5 rounds.
with your interpretation, you'd forgo 9 turns, because on the 10th the dragon is deployed, instead of waiting 5 rounds and deploy the dragon in the next turn.
i just want to make sure what the rules are, because it makes a significant difference in terms of keeping track of what might or might not be out there.
for example, by my count, in one round you could deploy one goblin (one turn to get a point, one to deploy), by yours, you deploy two (point and deploy each turn).
also, can you heal and deploy trap/monsters at the same turn, from the Lair?
can you accrue points while moving/healing?
it's the beginning of brand new game, so it's normal the rules are seen in different ways and need some fine tuning in how they are worded.
Grokgod
Aug 7, 08:29 PM
well I called back and upped the ram to 2 gigs which is what i consider the base really.
I just didnt want to go running around looking for ram to get to work.
Crucial doesnt have anything for the MacPro yet and I was fooled by the strange new words and the "you will have heat problems if you buy other ram from other makers that dont have heat sinks!"
What the??
So I feel for it and bit another 300 offa my wallet.
figure that with this base i can then search at a somewhat leisurely pace to get the other 4 gigs kits that will fit in the remaining slots.
Please someone tell me it was a smart move?
TIA
I just didnt want to go running around looking for ram to get to work.
Crucial doesnt have anything for the MacPro yet and I was fooled by the strange new words and the "you will have heat problems if you buy other ram from other makers that dont have heat sinks!"
What the??
So I feel for it and bit another 300 offa my wallet.
figure that with this base i can then search at a somewhat leisurely pace to get the other 4 gigs kits that will fit in the remaining slots.
Please someone tell me it was a smart move?
TIA
-aggie-
May 3, 08:19 PM
From what you wrote in the rules, the healing treasure could be awhile.
I think whoever understands this game the best (e.g., DP) should make our first decision. We can evaluate it after and learn from it. We�re obviously learning in this game. BTW, my fav video games are the leveling types with HP/AP (don�t have XP in this one). We could do a lot with this format if it�s successful
I think whoever understands this game the best (e.g., DP) should make our first decision. We can evaluate it after and learn from it. We�re obviously learning in this game. BTW, my fav video games are the leveling types with HP/AP (don�t have XP in this one). We could do a lot with this format if it�s successful
jephrey
Jul 29, 11:10 PM
So I thought... Would apple release a phone-only? No chance. It will most definitely have music features including wireless downloads from the iTMS (including a way to put the songs on your computer)... If this rumor is true of course.
My hope is for the phone to work on the Nextel / Sprint network not just because I have a Nextel, but because they have had time with their walkie-talkie feature, and I'd imagine that that would benefit the use of something like iChat over the phone.
Ah well, only a little over a week till the big day!
Jephrey
My hope is for the phone to work on the Nextel / Sprint network not just because I have a Nextel, but because they have had time with their walkie-talkie feature, and I'd imagine that that would benefit the use of something like iChat over the phone.
Ah well, only a little over a week till the big day!
Jephrey
ten-oak-druid
Apr 21, 02:46 PM
Good idea to make it dual purpose as standalone computer or rack mounted server. If the server option takes off, that's good for business but while waiting for that to happen, the product has another purpose.
Now get rid of macbooks and have two lines: macbook pro and air.
Now get rid of macbooks and have two lines: macbook pro and air.
Squire
Nov 26, 04:43 PM
The likelihood of an Apple tablet increases with time because the technology gets better. Here are some of my rumblings from some similar threads started in 2005.
I think the tablet idea is plausible. Here's why:
-Many people wouldn't think twice about buying a new iPod. One problem is everyone already has one. Another problem is that you can't do any "computing" with an iPod.
Enter the tablet. It has a pod-ish name to keep people interested. It plays video, if that's your thing. It's cross-platform compatible (files and stuff) and the bundled software is amazing. Non-Mac users weren't afraid of buying an iPod. Non-Mac-using iPod owners will not be afraid to buy this. It will give them a little taste of what OS X is all about.
I think Apple needs a product like this, especially with Palm's new LifeDrive out (a PDA with a 4GB hard drive).
...And...
hmmm....maybe it's some sort of glorified remote control with a touch-screen interface to manage all your media via wi-fi and/or BT between yor mac, airport, stereo & tv?
Some random thoughts:
Good point. I seem to recall reports of Steve just grinning when asked about the problem of getting up and walking to your computer to change tracks (Walt Mossberg referring to the AirPort Express).
The thought of a video iPod doubling as an AE remote, although initially interesting, seems a bit out of whack. I wouldn't want a remote control any larger (width-wise, anyway) than a normal iPod. And I wouldn't want an iPod video any smaller than the current iPod.
Ever notice how Steve gives a reason for almost everything they do, especially if they were originally against doing it?
* entering the mp3 market: The devices had a limited capacity and/or terrible UI.
* iPod photo: Finally there was some content to display (while there was no content providers for portable video players) [Now, of course, there are music videos.]
* Flash-based mp3 players: They have crappy little screens and cumbersome controls. Solution= ditch the screen and make simple controls.
* Tablets: Who knows? They'll refine them or give us a good enough reason to want one. Same goes for video iPod, I guess.
Squire
I think the tablet idea is plausible. Here's why:
-Many people wouldn't think twice about buying a new iPod. One problem is everyone already has one. Another problem is that you can't do any "computing" with an iPod.
Enter the tablet. It has a pod-ish name to keep people interested. It plays video, if that's your thing. It's cross-platform compatible (files and stuff) and the bundled software is amazing. Non-Mac users weren't afraid of buying an iPod. Non-Mac-using iPod owners will not be afraid to buy this. It will give them a little taste of what OS X is all about.
I think Apple needs a product like this, especially with Palm's new LifeDrive out (a PDA with a 4GB hard drive).
...And...
hmmm....maybe it's some sort of glorified remote control with a touch-screen interface to manage all your media via wi-fi and/or BT between yor mac, airport, stereo & tv?
Some random thoughts:
Good point. I seem to recall reports of Steve just grinning when asked about the problem of getting up and walking to your computer to change tracks (Walt Mossberg referring to the AirPort Express).
The thought of a video iPod doubling as an AE remote, although initially interesting, seems a bit out of whack. I wouldn't want a remote control any larger (width-wise, anyway) than a normal iPod. And I wouldn't want an iPod video any smaller than the current iPod.
Ever notice how Steve gives a reason for almost everything they do, especially if they were originally against doing it?
* entering the mp3 market: The devices had a limited capacity and/or terrible UI.
* iPod photo: Finally there was some content to display (while there was no content providers for portable video players) [Now, of course, there are music videos.]
* Flash-based mp3 players: They have crappy little screens and cumbersome controls. Solution= ditch the screen and make simple controls.
* Tablets: Who knows? They'll refine them or give us a good enough reason to want one. Same goes for video iPod, I guess.
Squire
citizenzen
Apr 19, 12:05 PM
I went and found sources on my own.
Okay. But this is a forum ... an online discussion (or an online cocktail party as I like to think about it). So hear we are at the party and you've just told me that our discussion is over until I've read a 1,000 page book.
So...
Yeah...
Uhhh ... did I see sushi at the buffet table?
Nice chatting with you.
Okay. But this is a forum ... an online discussion (or an online cocktail party as I like to think about it). So hear we are at the party and you've just told me that our discussion is over until I've read a 1,000 page book.
So...
Yeah...
Uhhh ... did I see sushi at the buffet table?
Nice chatting with you.
nutmac
Apr 21, 04:18 PM
I would say make it even smaller.
Mac Pro should be based on Mac mini, but with a choice of i7 or Xeon CPU, 6 user-serviceable memory slots, 2-3 expansion slots, and choice of 256 or 512 GB SSD. Complemented by multiple Thunderbolt port, external Superdrive, and Apple's own 5-bay DAS.
Mac Pro should be based on Mac mini, but with a choice of i7 or Xeon CPU, 6 user-serviceable memory slots, 2-3 expansion slots, and choice of 256 or 512 GB SSD. Complemented by multiple Thunderbolt port, external Superdrive, and Apple's own 5-bay DAS.