Josias
Oct 23, 07:45 AM
yes baby. give me my mormom MBP!:D
I stopped wondering whether they'll come at all...;)
I stopped wondering whether they'll come at all...;)
blondepianist
Mar 22, 08:01 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8F190 Safari/6533.18.5)
Because USB is much slower than a hard drive. It's why the iPod originally shipped with FireWire.
Because USB is much slower than a hard drive. It's why the iPod originally shipped with FireWire.
N10248
Mar 24, 01:35 PM
But for something like the MBA, where your options are a C2D or iX CPU, and a GPU that's runs like it's 2+ years old, vs a new GPU and a newish CPU, I'll choose AMD over Intel any day of the week.
Unless Apple gets clever and uses ThunderBolt for connecting external graphics cards, after all it is a PCI-E based connector.
Edit: Travis beat me by moments
Unless Apple gets clever and uses ThunderBolt for connecting external graphics cards, after all it is a PCI-E based connector.
Edit: Travis beat me by moments
Multimedia
Sep 6, 09:18 AM
It may have been introduced then, but that wasn't the last time it was refreshed . See here (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/05/20060516092750.shtml) which is actually on May 16th.I do not consider a minor speed bump to be a refresh.
JoEw
Jun 22, 05:07 PM
touch screen is usefull for mobile devices because you don't have any place to put a screen, mouse and keyboard. But desktops you have room for keyboard and mic so i don't see this happening in imacs.
Steve said a D8, he believes that there will always be a place for desktops but a majority of our tasks will be done from tablets or mobile devices that are touch screen enabled.
And there are just some things that require keyboard and mice! steve acknowledges that and so does the rest of the world.
Steve said a D8, he believes that there will always be a place for desktops but a majority of our tasks will be done from tablets or mobile devices that are touch screen enabled.
And there are just some things that require keyboard and mice! steve acknowledges that and so does the rest of the world.
DotComName
May 2, 04:54 PM
Nice to see Apple bringing all of these nifty iOS elements to the Mac... But come on Apple, no need to beat around the bush.. We know iOS and OSX will soon be one in the same, trackpads and mice in the garbage and transverse plane oriented multitouch desktop screens.
Donnacha
Nov 27, 05:05 PM
*smacks head on desk*
Beating a dead horse...
Congratulations on starting your point with not one but two violent images... clearly, you must be a real PRO.
This thread is about the possible introduction of a 17" monitor to possibly complement the Mac Mini, Apple's only headless consumer desktop.
My point is that introducing a new size will do little to plug the consumer-sized hole in Apple's monitor line-up. If Apple can squeeze extra money out of some egotists who like to think of themselves as prosumers, fine, but the overwhelming majority of users aren't going to get anal about some supposed color-accuracy issues: they want a good-quality, good-looking reliable monitor and if Apple can't provide that at a decent price, Apple loses them to someone who can.
Apple could, of course, bring out two lines of monitors, one for print professionals and one to compete directly with Dell but, of course, they won't because it wouldn't take long for people to realize that there isn't really that much difference.
Terms such as "color accuracy" probably make people worry that Dell's display all reds as green whereas, in fact, we're talking about differences that are indiscernible to the untrained eye. I would wager that barely 1% of customers who pore such technical details actually need or even understand them.
You're right, Dell monitor's are fine for my needs. Before you write them off, however, as being "cheapo" and irrelevant to Apple's market, I suggest you take a look at one of these Ultrasharps - personally, I'm not a fan of Dell computers, but their recent monitors are catching up fast with Apple.
Beating a dead horse...
Congratulations on starting your point with not one but two violent images... clearly, you must be a real PRO.
This thread is about the possible introduction of a 17" monitor to possibly complement the Mac Mini, Apple's only headless consumer desktop.
My point is that introducing a new size will do little to plug the consumer-sized hole in Apple's monitor line-up. If Apple can squeeze extra money out of some egotists who like to think of themselves as prosumers, fine, but the overwhelming majority of users aren't going to get anal about some supposed color-accuracy issues: they want a good-quality, good-looking reliable monitor and if Apple can't provide that at a decent price, Apple loses them to someone who can.
Apple could, of course, bring out two lines of monitors, one for print professionals and one to compete directly with Dell but, of course, they won't because it wouldn't take long for people to realize that there isn't really that much difference.
Terms such as "color accuracy" probably make people worry that Dell's display all reds as green whereas, in fact, we're talking about differences that are indiscernible to the untrained eye. I would wager that barely 1% of customers who pore such technical details actually need or even understand them.
You're right, Dell monitor's are fine for my needs. Before you write them off, however, as being "cheapo" and irrelevant to Apple's market, I suggest you take a look at one of these Ultrasharps - personally, I'm not a fan of Dell computers, but their recent monitors are catching up fast with Apple.
twoodcc
Mar 21, 06:25 PM
I guess I'm number 1 on the team now :cool:
congrats! keep it up!
congrats! keep it up!
Mike84
Apr 26, 02:29 PM
You make it sound as though this is such an obvious distinction that Apple could never get a trademark for "app store". But apparently this argument is not so strong in trademark law as Apple actually has the trademark already. If that were not the case how could they sue another entity for trademark infringement?
I think all of you who believe you have trademark law all figured out should keep this in mind. Apple has a trademark for app store. Previously another company had a trademark for "appstore" which is very similar.
You can write about the topic as though you have it all figured out but clearly your interpretation is not definitive as Apple was awarded the trademark.
Now perhaps eventually apple will lose it or have to modify it but the fact that they got the trademark and a legal battle would need to be waged for them to lose proves that your opinion of trademark law in this case is oversimplified.
It was.
Can you please show me the trademark that was granted to Apple for App Store by the USPTO? You won't be able to find it because their trademark has not been approved. An opposition to their application was filed, if you didn't catch that from the text.
Trademark is having property rights in a trade name. Apple, or any other company, can file to protect a trademark they have been using and the USPTO decides if it is too generic to be an actual trademark. I suggest you learn about the process of how trademarks.
"How does a mark qualify for federal registration?
To register a trademark with the PTO, the mark's owner first must put it into use " in commerce that Congress may regulate." This means the mark must be used on a product or service that crosses state, national or territorial lines or that affects commerce crossing such lines--for example, a catalog business or a restaurant or motel that caters to interstate or international customers. Even if the owner files an intent-to-use (ITU) trademark application (ITU applications are discussed in the previous set of questions), the mark will not actually be registered until it is used in commerce."
Source: http://www.inc.com/articles/1999/10/14646.html
Also, take a look at the Lanham Act, which is pretty important when it comes to trademark law ;)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lanham_Act <-- particularly Subchapters I and II.
Just because you use a mark does not mean you have been granted the trademark rights in it.
So, as you can see Apple does not have the trademark to App Store. Therefore, your argument fails on that premise alone.
I think all of you who believe you have trademark law all figured out should keep this in mind. Apple has a trademark for app store. Previously another company had a trademark for "appstore" which is very similar.
You can write about the topic as though you have it all figured out but clearly your interpretation is not definitive as Apple was awarded the trademark.
Now perhaps eventually apple will lose it or have to modify it but the fact that they got the trademark and a legal battle would need to be waged for them to lose proves that your opinion of trademark law in this case is oversimplified.
It was.
Can you please show me the trademark that was granted to Apple for App Store by the USPTO? You won't be able to find it because their trademark has not been approved. An opposition to their application was filed, if you didn't catch that from the text.
Trademark is having property rights in a trade name. Apple, or any other company, can file to protect a trademark they have been using and the USPTO decides if it is too generic to be an actual trademark. I suggest you learn about the process of how trademarks.
"How does a mark qualify for federal registration?
To register a trademark with the PTO, the mark's owner first must put it into use " in commerce that Congress may regulate." This means the mark must be used on a product or service that crosses state, national or territorial lines or that affects commerce crossing such lines--for example, a catalog business or a restaurant or motel that caters to interstate or international customers. Even if the owner files an intent-to-use (ITU) trademark application (ITU applications are discussed in the previous set of questions), the mark will not actually be registered until it is used in commerce."
Source: http://www.inc.com/articles/1999/10/14646.html
Also, take a look at the Lanham Act, which is pretty important when it comes to trademark law ;)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lanham_Act <-- particularly Subchapters I and II.
Just because you use a mark does not mean you have been granted the trademark rights in it.
So, as you can see Apple does not have the trademark to App Store. Therefore, your argument fails on that premise alone.
puuukeey
Sep 1, 02:43 PM
if it gets bigger, does it get thinner?
yellow
Jan 4, 07:59 AM
Not mounted, but they are in the toolbox, along with a M2 that someone can operate while standing in the bed. :D
Mah-Duce! :cool:
Wow, a lota rich folks with fancy cars in this thread! :)
Mah-Duce! :cool:
Wow, a lota rich folks with fancy cars in this thread! :)
twoodcc
Sep 1, 02:46 PM
can't wait til Sep. 12! :eek:
ObsidianIce
Jul 19, 06:55 PM
Ahhh, as a loyal user, and stockholder this is what i like to hear. And i agree it is nice to personally be able to say that you've helped!
Benguitar
Nov 25, 11:18 PM
^^^^^Could I recommend a case for that?
:D
/facepalm
He's pretty tough on stuff, That's why I didn't get him a nano because it has a screen.
I wish I could find a pelican for a shuffle.. :p
Seriously though, Stop, I don't wanna get banned for spamming this thread.
:D
/facepalm
He's pretty tough on stuff, That's why I didn't get him a nano because it has a screen.
I wish I could find a pelican for a shuffle.. :p
Seriously though, Stop, I don't wanna get banned for spamming this thread.
jb1280
Apr 3, 06:12 AM
Very powerful ad.
ssk2
Apr 3, 01:27 PM
The Playbook does NOT exist, until people can buy it and compare it with an existing product. You "Haven't made up your mind yet?" On what conceivable basis could you make up your mind between an actual shipping product and pie-in-the-sky vaporware? How is that rational? It used to be Apple products were only sneered at in comparison with existing competitors. Now they have to compete with every imaginary device anybody can dream up, from the HP Slate to next years "100 x as fast" Tegra 3 barn-burner.
So the fact that you can pre-order the Playbook and it starts to ship in a couple of weeks, means nothing to you? I have the will-power to wait 2 measly weeks to try both damned products before I spend my money on it. Its really that simple.
So the fact that you can pre-order the Playbook and it starts to ship in a couple of weeks, means nothing to you? I have the will-power to wait 2 measly weeks to try both damned products before I spend my money on it. Its really that simple.
celticpride678
Apr 1, 11:02 PM
Use the dev version instead. A lot more stable than the beta one.
Which is kind of ironic.
Google is likely going to be updating the dev build of Chrome to work with Lion has they have been doing over the past month, rather than the stable or beta builds.
Which is kind of ironic.
Google is likely going to be updating the dev build of Chrome to work with Lion has they have been doing over the past month, rather than the stable or beta builds.
twoodcc
Apr 21, 05:57 AM
7 mil; I remember those days, not so long ago... Grats!
thanks. hopefully this weekend i can get some things straightened out
thanks. hopefully this weekend i can get some things straightened out
andrew.gw
Apr 5, 05:23 PM
All together I just love Lion, and there's no going back to SL! :)
Snow Leopard feels like Windows XP to me, now. All the little UI enhancements really add�up.
Snow Leopard feels like Windows XP to me, now. All the little UI enhancements really add�up.
Evangelion
Jul 14, 08:13 AM
I agree. I would be surprised if Apple even offers it before next year. Blu-Ray DVRs are still about $1k and the blank media is also very expensive. Apple will have enough challenges keeping the Intel Quad under $4k without including Blu-Ray yet. But by this time next year, I would expect it to be a BTO option for the desktops at least.
Currently, prices of Xeons seem to hover between $500 and $1000. And note: these are RETAIL PRICES for consumers! Apple's prices for those CPU's would be considerably less. So I don't see Apple having any problems offering quad-Woodcrest for under $4000. I wouldn't be one bit surprised if we saw quad-Woodcrest for under $3000!
Currently, prices of Xeons seem to hover between $500 and $1000. And note: these are RETAIL PRICES for consumers! Apple's prices for those CPU's would be considerably less. So I don't see Apple having any problems offering quad-Woodcrest for under $4000. I wouldn't be one bit surprised if we saw quad-Woodcrest for under $3000!
Carl Spackler
Nov 29, 03:46 PM
With HDMI, they'd have to be shooting higher than 480p. I'd say they'd go all out with 1080p, why not?
I was pleased and surprised to see no s-video out. They're clearly aiming for a product that's designed to stick around for a while. If we're going to see blu-ray Macs, and how can we not, iTV will have to be able to handle 1080p content.
I was pleased and surprised to see no s-video out. They're clearly aiming for a product that's designed to stick around for a while. If we're going to see blu-ray Macs, and how can we not, iTV will have to be able to handle 1080p content.
Benguitar
Nov 25, 06:27 PM
They're just ****ing sunglasses...
Yeah, I know, They are very expensive sunglasses that I don't feel comfortable just "tossing into a gym bag or suitcase."
It feels awesome to have every god damn person here giving you crap about your last purchase.
What if I gave everyone who purchases McDonalds a "fat@$$" or anyone with a nice car a "rich snob."
Gosh, Is everyone here so desensitized towards expensive things, That if they break them they just don't care?
I bought a protective case to put something I invested a lot of money in, And IF anyone cared to read my replies to your jerky comments, I explained that I plan on putting a SECOND pair of glasses in the case, Which would cost 400-500 dollars, Which is a great amount of money to me, So I don't want to break them.
I find it repulsing that so many people on here find my latest purchase SO DISTURBING and bothering to them that they feel they need to make me feel bad about it.
Happy Thanksgiving. Jerk.
Yeah, I know, They are very expensive sunglasses that I don't feel comfortable just "tossing into a gym bag or suitcase."
It feels awesome to have every god damn person here giving you crap about your last purchase.
What if I gave everyone who purchases McDonalds a "fat@$$" or anyone with a nice car a "rich snob."
Gosh, Is everyone here so desensitized towards expensive things, That if they break them they just don't care?
I bought a protective case to put something I invested a lot of money in, And IF anyone cared to read my replies to your jerky comments, I explained that I plan on putting a SECOND pair of glasses in the case, Which would cost 400-500 dollars, Which is a great amount of money to me, So I don't want to break them.
I find it repulsing that so many people on here find my latest purchase SO DISTURBING and bothering to them that they feel they need to make me feel bad about it.
Happy Thanksgiving. Jerk.
Austin M.
Nov 23, 02:08 PM
The SwitchEasy TRIM case (lime color) for iPhone 4.
floatingspirit
Jan 12, 01:36 PM
................... I hardly EVER use my optical drive. Why am I carrying it everywhere I go?
Here, here! Though I use the optical drive plenty at home or in the office, I have never carried my laptop to a place with the intention of using or playing a cd or dvd. I would love the option to have a slimmed down macbook. In fact, I might carry it around even more just because it's that much easier to do.
Here, here! Though I use the optical drive plenty at home or in the office, I have never carried my laptop to a place with the intention of using or playing a cd or dvd. I would love the option to have a slimmed down macbook. In fact, I might carry it around even more just because it's that much easier to do.
No comments:
Post a Comment