diamond.g
Apr 27, 08:16 AM
SATA is also bi-directional....
Pointing out that TBolt speed is of the same order of magnitude as SATA speed isn't trashing - it's countering some of the TBolt hype. Some people seem to think that TBolt is infinitely fast.
Agree with you that the real promise of TBolt is to bring PCIe expansion to systems without PCIe slots.
On first glance I was hoping it would be a reasonably cheaper replacement for FC, but that doesn't appear to be the case...
Pointing out that TBolt speed is of the same order of magnitude as SATA speed isn't trashing - it's countering some of the TBolt hype. Some people seem to think that TBolt is infinitely fast.
Agree with you that the real promise of TBolt is to bring PCIe expansion to systems without PCIe slots.
On first glance I was hoping it would be a reasonably cheaper replacement for FC, but that doesn't appear to be the case...
Jason Beck
Apr 3, 04:52 AM
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5028/5584180139_98845d2cb4_b.jpg
It'sa me on-a Flickr! (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jeevesofrkdia/5584180139/)
1/400
f/11
250mm (55-250 IS)
Okay first off I like the framing in this. That little building doesn't feel cut off really, with that dominating focal point above it. I seriously love the placement of it, and how the picture just spans to the left. The lighting is superb. I love it, is really all I can say. You can see the golden highlights on the trees and the glow everywhere on the foliage. The saturated colors are lifelike and real to the photograph. You also positioned the focal point well. It's slightly under the curve of the hillside. This lets you take in the object with color popping it out all around.
This photo is better than I can do outside with nature. I really love this. That golden hour you shot at shows well. That is quite the capable lens! Loving this pic.
It'sa me on-a Flickr! (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jeevesofrkdia/5584180139/)
1/400
f/11
250mm (55-250 IS)
Okay first off I like the framing in this. That little building doesn't feel cut off really, with that dominating focal point above it. I seriously love the placement of it, and how the picture just spans to the left. The lighting is superb. I love it, is really all I can say. You can see the golden highlights on the trees and the glow everywhere on the foliage. The saturated colors are lifelike and real to the photograph. You also positioned the focal point well. It's slightly under the curve of the hillside. This lets you take in the object with color popping it out all around.
This photo is better than I can do outside with nature. I really love this. That golden hour you shot at shows well. That is quite the capable lens! Loving this pic.
awmazz
Mar 3, 10:34 PM
Sure we are all making jokes about Sheen and his antics. Lets not forget 2 other notable comedians that were huge drug users that showed warning signs, Chris Farley and John Belushi. Sheen is in huge denial and will most likely kill himself at some point.
Sheen's not obese so he's not going to have complicating health issues like an overworked heart/liver/kidneys or cholesterol clogging up his arteries before the drugs even pass through. Sheen's an F18 with firebreathing fists. :)
Is Charlie Sheen a comedian? Is he talented? No. But he does appear to have an emotional health issue that could destroy him.
He was just in the Bahamas with two babe girlfriends and has a hundred million dollars - destroy me please! :D
He's living the dream. He's a rock star from Mars. Seriously. Personally, I'd rather be Keith Richards with just two remaining brain cells and lived his life than corporate middle management at the same age with all my brain cells intact.
Sheen's not obese so he's not going to have complicating health issues like an overworked heart/liver/kidneys or cholesterol clogging up his arteries before the drugs even pass through. Sheen's an F18 with firebreathing fists. :)
Is Charlie Sheen a comedian? Is he talented? No. But he does appear to have an emotional health issue that could destroy him.
He was just in the Bahamas with two babe girlfriends and has a hundred million dollars - destroy me please! :D
He's living the dream. He's a rock star from Mars. Seriously. Personally, I'd rather be Keith Richards with just two remaining brain cells and lived his life than corporate middle management at the same age with all my brain cells intact.
bedifferent
Apr 22, 05:15 PM
Because the hardware is in the CDMA phone on Verizon. The AT&T iphone 4 doesn't have the same chip. If the iphone 5 does, it's still up to apple and at&t to enable it.
Ah cool, didn't know that, thanks!
Ah cool, didn't know that, thanks!
more...
mozmac
Jul 28, 11:05 AM
A.K.A...."If Zune fails, you can't bash us in the media. We told you it wasn't going to be successful." And then when it's still unsuccessful after five years, they'll be like, "Forget about Zune, look at this new operating system we're releasing this year. It's called Vista. It has this new search feature called Floodlight. When you search for something it instantly floods you with results from your hard drive."
solvs
Jul 11, 11:56 PM
I'm all for competition, but this is just a bad idea. MS is only going to be competing with other WMA players like they do with their oh so successful Music Store. The business world is one thing, even gaming I could see them being somewhat successful with one of these years as that's what PCs seem to be best at. The xBox is just a little computer anyway. But this is a different kind of entertainment. It's about cool. It's about style. It's about stuff that people want to just work. MS doesn't have any of that. This will be a me too product that few will care about.
It's not like Apple's resting on it laurels either. I'm sure they've got something cool planned that'll blow us all away, or at least stave off the "competition" for a little while. I just hope it has better battery life. :p
It's not like Apple's resting on it laurels either. I'm sure they've got something cool planned that'll blow us all away, or at least stave off the "competition" for a little while. I just hope it has better battery life. :p
more...
gugy
Apr 13, 03:17 PM
Apple Television
seriously doubt it.
Too big, too expensive, too many costs associate with transport/housing/shipping.
Saturate market with great quality products, fierce competition and very low profit margins.
In another words something Apple basically want to avoid.
seriously doubt it.
Too big, too expensive, too many costs associate with transport/housing/shipping.
Saturate market with great quality products, fierce competition and very low profit margins.
In another words something Apple basically want to avoid.
iJohnHenry
Mar 3, 05:39 PM
but he is doing what he wants with his life because it is... his life, and he seems to be making some pretty strong arguments.
Rock on
Interesting view.
It is true that Society seems to own each and every one of us, as soon as we are conceived.
Keep that nose to the grind-stone, and work till you die.
Oh, and no suicide attempts, please. We own your body, and we'll tell you when we are finished with it.
</devil's advocate>
More Sheen madness. Just slightly alarming.
"I was knocked unconscious and required medical attention, including a CAT scan."
I wonder if they found anything?? ;) Meow.
Rock on
Interesting view.
It is true that Society seems to own each and every one of us, as soon as we are conceived.
Keep that nose to the grind-stone, and work till you die.
Oh, and no suicide attempts, please. We own your body, and we'll tell you when we are finished with it.
</devil's advocate>
More Sheen madness. Just slightly alarming.
"I was knocked unconscious and required medical attention, including a CAT scan."
I wonder if they found anything?? ;) Meow.
more...
ten-oak-druid
Apr 13, 11:31 PM
So am I the only one left with the original iPhone? Had it since Sep 2006. Was going to wait for the 5, but I'll just get a white 4 in a few weeks. I'm happy.
The original smart phone.
The original smart phone.
opeter
Oct 28, 07:11 AM
All I want is a real, good friend.
more...
DTphonehome
Apr 13, 02:58 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
This would be a good quick way for Apple to lose a couple billion dollars, and some face. As has been said, TV is a very mature market with deeply entrenched players fighting over scraps of profit. There is no way Apple could innovate enough in this area that would compel people to ditch their existing sets, and pay an Apple premium. Google is failing miserably with their attempt.
These are the strategies I see Apple taking:
1. License Airplay. Now any iOS device streams to legions of TVs, bluray decks, and receivers.
2. Enhance Apple TV with apps and games.
3. Profit.
This would be a good quick way for Apple to lose a couple billion dollars, and some face. As has been said, TV is a very mature market with deeply entrenched players fighting over scraps of profit. There is no way Apple could innovate enough in this area that would compel people to ditch their existing sets, and pay an Apple premium. Google is failing miserably with their attempt.
These are the strategies I see Apple taking:
1. License Airplay. Now any iOS device streams to legions of TVs, bluray decks, and receivers.
2. Enhance Apple TV with apps and games.
3. Profit.
iPhisch
Apr 13, 01:55 PM
man how much would this thing cost? the 27" display is already 1000 bucks, and this would have to be at lease 42" for people to put it in their living rooms.
more...
Corey Grandy
Sep 12, 09:36 PM
I actually get a half-green, half-passion tea lemonade. Try it. It's good. :)
Corey, that dog is adorable. What breed?
Thank you :)
He is a Toy American Eskimo (Eskimo/German/American Spitz).
Not Japanese, I'm dumb :)
Corey, that dog is adorable. What breed?
Thank you :)
He is a Toy American Eskimo (Eskimo/German/American Spitz).
Not Japanese, I'm dumb :)
FloatingBones
Dec 12, 11:03 PM
it still wont run on hulu
But the hulu plus service runs just fine (http://www.hulu.com/plus#devices) on the iPhone, iPod Touch, and iPad. There is no technical reason why regular hulu can't run on your iOS device. It's a financial decision by hulu.
But the hulu plus service runs just fine (http://www.hulu.com/plus#devices) on the iPhone, iPod Touch, and iPad. There is no technical reason why regular hulu can't run on your iOS device. It's a financial decision by hulu.
more...
FloatingBones
Nov 26, 11:43 PM
this very thread and the sales thereof indicate a HUGE interest in being able to view Flash on iOS devices and no amount of BS nonsense on your part will change that fact.
The popularity of SkyFire is a wake-up call to website owners to update their media inventory from legacy Flash wrappers to HTML5.
Your implication that people would return an iOS device based on just a single feature alone is ludicrous.
Flash is either a mission-critical for people or it is not. Evidently it is not mission-critical to the owners of 120M+ iOS devices.
I've pointed out there is no equivalent of the iPod Touch from Android and therefore no reasonable alternative regardless of one's feelings about the inability to view Flash web sites.
Makes no difference. If Flash were mission-critical, they wouldn't be using an iPad.
Instead of just acknowledging that not everyone likes Steve Jobs decision to not allow Flash
We're all very clear you don't like the decision. There are plenty of Flash fanboys. If they want Flash in browsers, they shouldn't use iPhones, iPads, or iPod Touches.
The owners of 120M+ iOS devices are doing just fine without Flash. There are serious problems with Flash on laptop and desktop computers:
Too many laptop users are tired of the CPU loading and battery suck of Flash apps.
Too many users don't like that Flash alters the UI inside of the browsers: altered scrolling behavior, keyboard shortcuts that don't work in Flash, text searches that don't work with text in a Flash app.
Too many privacy advocates are bothered that Flash maintains a separate set of cookies and those cookies do not honor the privacy settings of the browser. Commercial websites are using those Flash cookies to track users.
Too many security advocates are wary of using Adobe products because of Adobe's poor track record against security attacks.
You can't competently address those serious concerns with Flash in a browser.
(hardly an unreasonable opinion to have and clearly shared by everyone who bought this app to be able to view those sites)
See above. There are serious fundamental problems with Flash on websites. There's also a fundamental problem with Flash for advertisers: more users are blocking their ads with click-to-flash blockers every day. Putting your content in Flash now decreases the odds that it will be seen by users.
Adobe understands all of this. They are providing tools to update sites from Flash to HTML5 (http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2010/10/adobe-demos-flash-to-html5-conversion-tool.html). Sites should do the same and get their videos updated to HTML5. Lose the Flash, and you'll be able to serve up your content to all browser users on all platforms.
I'm sure there's some reason you're unhappy with that solution. That's fine. You're welcome to be a Flash Luddite if you wish.
The popularity of SkyFire is a wake-up call to website owners to update their media inventory from legacy Flash wrappers to HTML5.
Your implication that people would return an iOS device based on just a single feature alone is ludicrous.
Flash is either a mission-critical for people or it is not. Evidently it is not mission-critical to the owners of 120M+ iOS devices.
I've pointed out there is no equivalent of the iPod Touch from Android and therefore no reasonable alternative regardless of one's feelings about the inability to view Flash web sites.
Makes no difference. If Flash were mission-critical, they wouldn't be using an iPad.
Instead of just acknowledging that not everyone likes Steve Jobs decision to not allow Flash
We're all very clear you don't like the decision. There are plenty of Flash fanboys. If they want Flash in browsers, they shouldn't use iPhones, iPads, or iPod Touches.
The owners of 120M+ iOS devices are doing just fine without Flash. There are serious problems with Flash on laptop and desktop computers:
Too many laptop users are tired of the CPU loading and battery suck of Flash apps.
Too many users don't like that Flash alters the UI inside of the browsers: altered scrolling behavior, keyboard shortcuts that don't work in Flash, text searches that don't work with text in a Flash app.
Too many privacy advocates are bothered that Flash maintains a separate set of cookies and those cookies do not honor the privacy settings of the browser. Commercial websites are using those Flash cookies to track users.
Too many security advocates are wary of using Adobe products because of Adobe's poor track record against security attacks.
You can't competently address those serious concerns with Flash in a browser.
(hardly an unreasonable opinion to have and clearly shared by everyone who bought this app to be able to view those sites)
See above. There are serious fundamental problems with Flash on websites. There's also a fundamental problem with Flash for advertisers: more users are blocking their ads with click-to-flash blockers every day. Putting your content in Flash now decreases the odds that it will be seen by users.
Adobe understands all of this. They are providing tools to update sites from Flash to HTML5 (http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2010/10/adobe-demos-flash-to-html5-conversion-tool.html). Sites should do the same and get their videos updated to HTML5. Lose the Flash, and you'll be able to serve up your content to all browser users on all platforms.
I'm sure there's some reason you're unhappy with that solution. That's fine. You're welcome to be a Flash Luddite if you wish.
3goldens
Apr 28, 04:15 PM
Ok.......?
Who cares really?
It's white! That's all I care about :)
I'll tell you who care...
case manufacturers that Apple is constantly screwing.
It remains to be seen if this change will affect many but this constantly happens to these third party partners.
That slight move of the volume button probably cost some of them a great deal in retooling expenses. Apple could have given them a heads up, but, oh god forbid anyone know what the great ones are up too.
But hey what do you care, right?
Were all very glad you like your new phone and hope you find a case that fits!;)
Who cares really?
It's white! That's all I care about :)
I'll tell you who care...
case manufacturers that Apple is constantly screwing.
It remains to be seen if this change will affect many but this constantly happens to these third party partners.
That slight move of the volume button probably cost some of them a great deal in retooling expenses. Apple could have given them a heads up, but, oh god forbid anyone know what the great ones are up too.
But hey what do you care, right?
Were all very glad you like your new phone and hope you find a case that fits!;)
more...
Willis
Aug 1, 10:48 AM
'Microsoft's Zune - Long Term Effort'... yeah, in R&D. 3-5 years time for a product is crazy. The market wont want what they will have on offer in that time. Its like that origami or whatever it is. Something that cropped up on MR, and then disappeared. no one cares.
ten-oak-druid
Apr 13, 08:20 PM
white iphone 4 = iphone 5
Small White Car
Apr 11, 01:36 PM
Could someone clarify this for me: Aren't hard drives too slow to make use of Thunderbolt anyway?
I haven't read for sure, but I'm guessing these products are RAIDed for speed, not redundancy.
How many drives are in there? It's possible they've got the speeds up pretty high on them.
I haven't read for sure, but I'm guessing these products are RAIDed for speed, not redundancy.
How many drives are in there? It's possible they've got the speeds up pretty high on them.
trule
Jan 29, 04:57 PM
I know better than to make to much of the market's verdict on any given week.
long term investors, which seems to be most people commenting here, would do better to look at the market verdict in terms of years. AAPL has broken down through its 50, 100 & 200 day moving average on INCREASING volume. That is a bear signal if ever there was one.
Look back to mid AAPL broke down past its 200 day moving average HOWEVER there was no increase in volume and the stock rebounded. That is a mixed signal.
Whilst I would never buy AAPL, looking at the long term chart I would expect consolidation followed by another fall...how far I don't know. If I look at the 10 year chart on a linear scale, where the price increase of the past 7 years becomes much more dramatic, then 40 dollars looks a good bet....and there seems to be some technical support at 60 dollars.
YMMV
long term investors, which seems to be most people commenting here, would do better to look at the market verdict in terms of years. AAPL has broken down through its 50, 100 & 200 day moving average on INCREASING volume. That is a bear signal if ever there was one.
Look back to mid AAPL broke down past its 200 day moving average HOWEVER there was no increase in volume and the stock rebounded. That is a mixed signal.
Whilst I would never buy AAPL, looking at the long term chart I would expect consolidation followed by another fall...how far I don't know. If I look at the 10 year chart on a linear scale, where the price increase of the past 7 years becomes much more dramatic, then 40 dollars looks a good bet....and there seems to be some technical support at 60 dollars.
YMMV
countach
Oct 24, 09:14 AM
I was disappointed that the resolution was not updated to 1920x1200...I would assume this would have added siginificant costs? or maybe they think the current resolution is good enough and that there is little noticable difference between the current vs 1920x1200 ? Anyone else feel this is a big deal? Reasons why the higher resolution is not necessary? Thanks
On a windows machine, everything seemed absurdly small under 1920x1200, but it might not be such a problem on a mac where more stuff is scaled. I would have liked to see the bigger resolution though.
On a windows machine, everything seemed absurdly small under 1920x1200, but it might not be such a problem on a mac where more stuff is scaled. I would have liked to see the bigger resolution though.
saving107
Apr 14, 01:39 PM
@#*(&$(# and I bought Xcode to get those features a few weeks ago. But they are sweet!!!! I use em all the time.
Why did you buy XCode, all you needed to have done was go to developers.apple.com and sign up for a free Dev account, once there, just download the older version of XCode (v3.2.5) and install. The older version works fine and will enable the Gestures, you only need to buy and download the newest version of XCode if your an actual Developer, then you would want to have the latest version for developing purposes.
Why did you buy XCode, all you needed to have done was go to developers.apple.com and sign up for a free Dev account, once there, just download the older version of XCode (v3.2.5) and install. The older version works fine and will enable the Gestures, you only need to buy and download the newest version of XCode if your an actual Developer, then you would want to have the latest version for developing purposes.
bpaluzzi
Apr 14, 10:24 AM
Besides the arguments about this not really making sense from a business perspective, I'm not sure how it would work from a set-up perspective.
So you have the Apple TV built-in. Great. So you get your programs direct to your TV. Great. Except that you don't want the audio there. You want the audio in your receiver, so you can power your surround system. So now you're running a wire out of the TV and into your receiver. God, how clunky.
This is why a set-top box makes MUCH more sense. One wire out of the box goes into either your TV directly (if it's a small system, bedroom set, etc.), or direct into your receiver, where the audio and video can be handled correctly.
Content in a "living room" TV just doesn't make sense to me. It's one of the reasons (IMO) why you don't see integrated DVD players on big tvs (where they'll be used with a full surround system), but you do see them on small "bedroom" TVs.
Dunno... am I the only one thinking this?
So you have the Apple TV built-in. Great. So you get your programs direct to your TV. Great. Except that you don't want the audio there. You want the audio in your receiver, so you can power your surround system. So now you're running a wire out of the TV and into your receiver. God, how clunky.
This is why a set-top box makes MUCH more sense. One wire out of the box goes into either your TV directly (if it's a small system, bedroom set, etc.), or direct into your receiver, where the audio and video can be handled correctly.
Content in a "living room" TV just doesn't make sense to me. It's one of the reasons (IMO) why you don't see integrated DVD players on big tvs (where they'll be used with a full surround system), but you do see them on small "bedroom" TVs.
Dunno... am I the only one thinking this?
dethmaShine
Apr 16, 06:22 AM
Ah. You mean similar as to how Apple purchased NeXT and based OS X on their NeXTSTEP OS?
Give it up. This has been discussed to death already.
See above.
You really think OS X is just a rip off NeXTSTEP?
As you said its based and a lot of things were shared but it isn't like they said; here's OSX, NeXTSTEP build by Apple.
OSX shares a lot from the opensource community; so does windows;, Android, Symbian, etc etc.
What's the big deal?
Give it up. This has been discussed to death already.
See above.
You really think OS X is just a rip off NeXTSTEP?
As you said its based and a lot of things were shared but it isn't like they said; here's OSX, NeXTSTEP build by Apple.
OSX shares a lot from the opensource community; so does windows;, Android, Symbian, etc etc.
What's the big deal?
Немає коментарів:
Дописати коментар