p0intblank
Oct 26, 09:16 PM
Awesome, I love it! I want to sign up for .Mac so bad, but I can't justify it being worth $99 per year. I would gladly pay $49 per year, especially since I would use iWeb, Photocasting, and all the other good stuff.
relimw
Sep 20, 10:52 PM
after installing the EFI update and running software update it said no updates.
So I downloaded it directly and tried to update it. It told me I didn't need it.
Trekkie, since your machine and mine came about the same time, ours should be about the same. I checked in Profiler, and didn't need to update the SMC. Have you seen anything useful in the EFI update?
So I downloaded it directly and tried to update it. It told me I didn't need it.
Trekkie, since your machine and mine came about the same time, ours should be about the same. I checked in Profiler, and didn't need to update the SMC. Have you seen anything useful in the EFI update?
jeffreyropp
Oct 6, 11:56 AM
I don't find 3.5" too big.
That's what she said.
That's what she said.
Tones2
Apr 12, 04:48 PM
Not a good survey. The stats seem wrong based on what I'm seeing everywhere else. 2000 people is not a large enough sample set. And although the 40% higher demand makes sense given the full year that took place between introduction of "tablets" as a concept versus as an established product, it means very little. These Apple speculator people need real jobs.
more...
vocaro
Apr 2, 07:42 PM
Except for a minor cursor glitch, I haven't encountered any bugs in Pages, and it does everything I've asked of it. I especially love the way it handles graphics. Being able to drag pictures where you want them and keep them there, letting text flow around them as you type, is sooo much nicer than what I've experienced in Word, which is usually "Dammit, Word, why did you bump my picture to the next page just because I typed three letters?"
So contrary to most of the posters here, I'm quite happy with Pages. I agree that the user interface could use some remodeling, especially the tedious Inspector pane, but overall I've been impressed with the quality of this 1.0-level app that only costs $40 (so to speak). It's a great Word alternative for those who don't need Excel and don't want to shell out several hundred bucks (MS Office) just to get something better than TextEdit.
So contrary to most of the posters here, I'm quite happy with Pages. I agree that the user interface could use some remodeling, especially the tedious Inspector pane, but overall I've been impressed with the quality of this 1.0-level app that only costs $40 (so to speak). It's a great Word alternative for those who don't need Excel and don't want to shell out several hundred bucks (MS Office) just to get something better than TextEdit.
Laird Knox
Apr 5, 08:07 PM
I don't think it needs 5 years, the hardware is already powerful enough to handle image editing and sorting it just needs a well designed app and someway of assessing wireless storage.
Don't think just hardware though - Even though the hardware will continue to evolve, the software has a long way to go as well. They have really been making some great strides lately but still have much to do.
In addition, people's usage habits will continue to evolve. My Mom doesn't do much more than email, web, word processing and photo browsing. Does she really need a big box to do that? I see a tablet sitting in a dock connected to a keyboard/mouse and possibly an external monitor. Works just as well as that big box. Then she can pick it up and use it as a tablet when she doesn't need the keyboard.
All the pieces are falling into place but I have to agree that five years is a pretty good timeline. In ten things are really going to get interesting. ;)
Don't think just hardware though - Even though the hardware will continue to evolve, the software has a long way to go as well. They have really been making some great strides lately but still have much to do.
In addition, people's usage habits will continue to evolve. My Mom doesn't do much more than email, web, word processing and photo browsing. Does she really need a big box to do that? I see a tablet sitting in a dock connected to a keyboard/mouse and possibly an external monitor. Works just as well as that big box. Then she can pick it up and use it as a tablet when she doesn't need the keyboard.
All the pieces are falling into place but I have to agree that five years is a pretty good timeline. In ten things are really going to get interesting. ;)
more...
JPark
Apr 1, 09:44 AM
I'm always amazed at how much work studios go to to keep people from watching their shows.
HMFIC03
Apr 5, 07:01 PM
So does this mean we would need an adapter for the 30pin connector to HDMI out?
more...
jayP1201
Jan 6, 05:12 PM
I have the Push working for Facebook but I cant hear anything... The notifications just come up... How do I set the sound?
Small White Car
Apr 5, 09:00 AM
Well, this is confusing.
Last year Macrumors posters told me in no uncertain terms that CR is always wrong.
So how am I supposed to take this news?
Last year Macrumors posters told me in no uncertain terms that CR is always wrong.
So how am I supposed to take this news?
more...
CalmEnvy
Mar 31, 11:14 AM
$1.24/L for Basic here in Canada and Premium is at $1.39/L.
-SD-
Jun 14, 07:10 PM
I'm starting to quite like the new design. What I really want is dimensions, or a couple of comparison pictures alongside the original console. I'm quite surprised there's no slot-loading DVD drive though.
I think I'll wait until closer to Xmas to see what deals they do with Kinect, and make sure the hardware is more reliable. The Wii is definitely being replaced with an Xbox and Kinect though.
:apple:
I think I'll wait until closer to Xmas to see what deals they do with Kinect, and make sure the hardware is more reliable. The Wii is definitely being replaced with an Xbox and Kinect though.
:apple:
more...
Digital Skunk
Feb 27, 04:33 PM
Let's say that the desktop and the server editions are DIFFERENT software. Ubuntu is a desktop OS with a full graphical user interface and Ubuntu Server is a full server platform WITHOUT ANY graphical user interface. Repeat: no GUI at all, leave your mouse at home, you won't be needing it. Instead, Ubuntu Server comes with options to be installed as a cloud server, a LAMP stack or for other typical server-only tasks like file and print or database or directory services.
But you are right that both Ubuntu versions use the same repositories and that with sufficient work one can eventually do what the other does or be configured to become the other edition; they are just pre-packaged for completely different uses.
While on the other hand, the OS X client before Lion could never become a full OS X server, at least not when you wanted to replicate or use Apple's proprietary server software and tools on the desktop version of the OS.
When I first read about, I still thought that they would be releasing another version of OS X server. But then I visited Apple's website and their wording didn't leave much room for interpretation: Yes, whatever server features Apple wants to save are now becoming a part of the standard package of OS X Lion. There won't be a separate server edition anymore.
And it makes sense. They buried their server business, so they don't need to develop, market, ship and support a separate server OS anymore.
This all goes along with some of the speculation in my neck of the woods. Apple may have just setup the Mac Pro server option as a temporary fix for those needing a dedicated server that wasn't a mini . . . since they murdered the Xserve.
There's no way anyone in the market for an Xserve will want to stick a Mac Pro in their racks, and a Mini just won't cut it power wise.
Putting the features that SoHo users want in a server in the desktop client will just push the desktop version further up the "what a deal" ladder and leave the Mac server business buried forever.
But you are right that both Ubuntu versions use the same repositories and that with sufficient work one can eventually do what the other does or be configured to become the other edition; they are just pre-packaged for completely different uses.
While on the other hand, the OS X client before Lion could never become a full OS X server, at least not when you wanted to replicate or use Apple's proprietary server software and tools on the desktop version of the OS.
When I first read about, I still thought that they would be releasing another version of OS X server. But then I visited Apple's website and their wording didn't leave much room for interpretation: Yes, whatever server features Apple wants to save are now becoming a part of the standard package of OS X Lion. There won't be a separate server edition anymore.
And it makes sense. They buried their server business, so they don't need to develop, market, ship and support a separate server OS anymore.
This all goes along with some of the speculation in my neck of the woods. Apple may have just setup the Mac Pro server option as a temporary fix for those needing a dedicated server that wasn't a mini . . . since they murdered the Xserve.
There's no way anyone in the market for an Xserve will want to stick a Mac Pro in their racks, and a Mini just won't cut it power wise.
Putting the features that SoHo users want in a server in the desktop client will just push the desktop version further up the "what a deal" ladder and leave the Mac server business buried forever.
JackAxe
Mar 17, 07:36 PM
COOOL! I didn't know about the Master Quest! It will be a whole game for me... Well, sort of. :)
more...
satcomer
Apr 8, 10:37 PM
The price at Sonco(US) today:
alent1234
Dec 28, 09:29 AM
you can still buy the phone in a store in NYC
AT&T has the worst marketing/PR ever. people complain about Apple, but at least every someone speaks from Apple they are on the right message
AT&T has the worst marketing/PR ever. people complain about Apple, but at least every someone speaks from Apple they are on the right message
more...
FoxyKaye
Nov 2, 11:36 AM
well i hope it's not from already mac owners buying intel macs. i hope the marketshare continues to increase
I do to, though I wonder how much this matters. Since Apple's recent acendency in pop culture, even if the marketshare numbers are slightly inflated by PPC Mac users switching to Intel Macs, I doubt this is something that new Apple consumers consider. Rather, all they hear is the press and Apple saying, "our market share has increased" and it somewhat diminishes the notion in their minds that Apple is just too small of a company with too little support for its platform to invest in a Mac.
I do to, though I wonder how much this matters. Since Apple's recent acendency in pop culture, even if the marketshare numbers are slightly inflated by PPC Mac users switching to Intel Macs, I doubt this is something that new Apple consumers consider. Rather, all they hear is the press and Apple saying, "our market share has increased" and it somewhat diminishes the notion in their minds that Apple is just too small of a company with too little support for its platform to invest in a Mac.
Daveoc64
Aug 19, 11:21 PM
The amount of stupidity in this thread is mind-blowing. Don't want people to know where you are? Don't check in. It's so simple.
By default, your friends can check you in to any location - whether you're there or not.
That's where the real privacy concern is coming from.
It's one thing if YOU put your location out to the world, but it's another thing entirely when your friends can do it (and I'm sure many would do that, quite innocently).
By default, your friends can check you in to any location - whether you're there or not.
That's where the real privacy concern is coming from.
It's one thing if YOU put your location out to the world, but it's another thing entirely when your friends can do it (and I'm sure many would do that, quite innocently).
Mowgli21
Apr 24, 08:51 AM
have you tried adding the NAS to your login items via system preferences > accounts > login items ?
this will ensure the NAS mounts automatically when you boot your Mac.
Just tried that to no avail. It comes up with a little box saying "Connection failed. The server"nasbox" may not exist or it is unavailable at this time. Check the server name or IP address, check your network connection and then try again"
I have noticed when i go into finder and click on the nasbox it auto logs in but for about 2 seconds it says "connecting" and then works when i launch itunes.:confused:
this will ensure the NAS mounts automatically when you boot your Mac.
Just tried that to no avail. It comes up with a little box saying "Connection failed. The server"nasbox" may not exist or it is unavailable at this time. Check the server name or IP address, check your network connection and then try again"
I have noticed when i go into finder and click on the nasbox it auto logs in but for about 2 seconds it says "connecting" and then works when i launch itunes.:confused:
scem0
May 30, 03:12 AM
Originally posted by iJon
yeah i think so. i am 17 and i buy my own computers. its called a job and i have one. luckily, i have a job that is easy, fun, and pays well. i find most of my friends who dont have jobs are just lazy.
iJon
What I am saying is - if SJ wants to sell his computer to the sub 20-year-old community, he better get his prices down. Because even though I could work my tail off at work, and earn enough money to buy a mac, a mac still might not be worth it. For example, if apple sold a dual 1.5 GHz 970 in addition to the current line-up for $10,000, it still wouldn't be worth $10,000 for me because that equates to ~1,170 hours of work for me. If I was a extremely well off person, and money wasn't an issue, the computer would be worth the money.
So, basically what I am saying is Apple needs to get down their prices in order to sell their high end systems to people who want them but don't have the highest paycheck.
yeah i think so. i am 17 and i buy my own computers. its called a job and i have one. luckily, i have a job that is easy, fun, and pays well. i find most of my friends who dont have jobs are just lazy.
iJon
What I am saying is - if SJ wants to sell his computer to the sub 20-year-old community, he better get his prices down. Because even though I could work my tail off at work, and earn enough money to buy a mac, a mac still might not be worth it. For example, if apple sold a dual 1.5 GHz 970 in addition to the current line-up for $10,000, it still wouldn't be worth $10,000 for me because that equates to ~1,170 hours of work for me. If I was a extremely well off person, and money wasn't an issue, the computer would be worth the money.
So, basically what I am saying is Apple needs to get down their prices in order to sell their high end systems to people who want them but don't have the highest paycheck.
pika2000
Feb 24, 12:16 PM
Parents need to do their part, but government needs to try to protect from the greed that that brought us to the mess we are in today....
Oh sure, like the banks for example.... oh wait, the government actually gave them our tax money! :rolleyes:
Oh sure, like the banks for example.... oh wait, the government actually gave them our tax money! :rolleyes:
Geckotek
Apr 14, 01:11 PM
LOL I feel the same way...oh..wait a sec.
bbeagle
Mar 23, 01:43 PM
This would greatly improve the usability of airplay, in my opinion.
Imagine you had your TV on some random channel, while surfing the internet on your iPad. If your TV supported AirPlay, then you could just click the Airplay button on your iPad, and the random channel would be changed to the Airplay content. You wouldn't have to change the tuners over to Apple TV. Much more convenient.
Imagine you had your TV on some random channel, while surfing the internet on your iPad. If your TV supported AirPlay, then you could just click the Airplay button on your iPad, and the random channel would be changed to the Airplay content. You wouldn't have to change the tuners over to Apple TV. Much more convenient.
Orion09
Apr 4, 11:50 AM
Im tryin to print some episodes to tape and runnin into some issues. I have been doing this with no problem for a couple years now but no more...My setup to give you an idea is Firewire out of my mac into my tapedeck and a/v out of my tapedeck into a monitor just to make sure everything is ok. When i play my video it usually has a straight stream to my monitor through the tapedeck but what its doing now is just playing the audio and showing the first frame of the video and nothing else till i stop the video, then it changes the first frame to the last frame i stopped the video on. When I try to print to tape it will record the audio and just the frame that the playhead was on when I hit record. Not sure if anyone else has had this problem before, its kinda strange. I have restarted FCP, refresed the A/V devices checked my settings and not sure whats goin on. There is a connection because it brings the picture and audio in, it just wont stream the video to my tape deck. Any help would be much appreciated. Thanks.
No comments:
Post a Comment