KingYaba
Sep 4, 09:06 AM
Ok no one cares about iPod nanos. We want Merom MacBook Pros!!!!!
deankaradimas
Mar 15, 10:25 AM
New Powerbooks Tuesday :eek:
HAHAHA
:D:D:D
HAHAHA
:D:D:D
ts1973
Jan 11, 04:50 PM
Honestly, I hope it's just matter of speaking : like "spring is in the air", or can you feel the changes "in the air"...
I'm totally NOT interested in any wireless products, least of all iPhone announcements or iTunes (or was that iPay :rolleyes:) commercials. Got my belly more than full of that...
Give me some good Macs, plz pretty plzzz !
I'm totally NOT interested in any wireless products, least of all iPhone announcements or iTunes (or was that iPay :rolleyes:) commercials. Got my belly more than full of that...
Give me some good Macs, plz pretty plzzz !
WeegieMac
Apr 3, 12:43 PM
Your wife said 'no'?
You know, this is a question that I've been wanting to ask for a long time, and this is not directed only at you, but to all responses similar to yours I've seen on such topics. It's an honest question I have, because it just blows my mind:
What the hell kind of relationship do you people have with your spouses?? I mean, seriously??! You need their explicit PERMISSION to buy something you want, with your money, and it gets to their point of people BEGGING their wives to let them buy something, only to be turned down?! How the hell do you get yourself into this kind of dynamic? The only plausible reason that a wife may be against it is if you guys are so short on cash, that $500 will break the account and drive you into poverty? And if this is the case, then you people should have a bit more responsibility than to beg your wives to let you buy something that you clearly can't afford. If you CAN afford it, and it is your $$, then why the hell do you even need to ask your wife in the 1st place, and what right does she have to refuse you? Do your wives make all the money? An iPad isn't a car or a house that needs to be a consensual and debated purchase. Your wife shouldn't have the ability (nor the desire) to stop you from buying one.
This is honestly something that Id like an answer to. Some of you seem to have a 'child/parent' relationship, instead of husband/wife. If she's the breadwinner of the house, and you mooch of her, fine I'd understand. But if you bring in the $$? Sounds like a disturbing and cold relationship. Why does she get to dominate you and dictate your decisions, void of any debate or discussion?
When you're married, it's a partnership, and it's no longer a case of "your money" and "her money", but a case of "OUR" money. Once responsibilities are out the way, then personal purchases can be looked at, but unless you're in a job where you have a LOT of disposable income far in excess of what's required to pay the mortgage and many bills, then yes it's only right you make sure you have the money to go out and buy a gadget which, most of the time, only you will use.
I'm fortunate that my wife enjoys using technology, but I still wouldn't go out on payday and just buy a new gadget without at least letting her know I was doing it, and if I spend money on something, it's only fair she does the same ... which means for whatever you spend, you need to double it and again it's only after looking at bills and responsibilities that you can do so.
You know, this is a question that I've been wanting to ask for a long time, and this is not directed only at you, but to all responses similar to yours I've seen on such topics. It's an honest question I have, because it just blows my mind:
What the hell kind of relationship do you people have with your spouses?? I mean, seriously??! You need their explicit PERMISSION to buy something you want, with your money, and it gets to their point of people BEGGING their wives to let them buy something, only to be turned down?! How the hell do you get yourself into this kind of dynamic? The only plausible reason that a wife may be against it is if you guys are so short on cash, that $500 will break the account and drive you into poverty? And if this is the case, then you people should have a bit more responsibility than to beg your wives to let you buy something that you clearly can't afford. If you CAN afford it, and it is your $$, then why the hell do you even need to ask your wife in the 1st place, and what right does she have to refuse you? Do your wives make all the money? An iPad isn't a car or a house that needs to be a consensual and debated purchase. Your wife shouldn't have the ability (nor the desire) to stop you from buying one.
This is honestly something that Id like an answer to. Some of you seem to have a 'child/parent' relationship, instead of husband/wife. If she's the breadwinner of the house, and you mooch of her, fine I'd understand. But if you bring in the $$? Sounds like a disturbing and cold relationship. Why does she get to dominate you and dictate your decisions, void of any debate or discussion?
When you're married, it's a partnership, and it's no longer a case of "your money" and "her money", but a case of "OUR" money. Once responsibilities are out the way, then personal purchases can be looked at, but unless you're in a job where you have a LOT of disposable income far in excess of what's required to pay the mortgage and many bills, then yes it's only right you make sure you have the money to go out and buy a gadget which, most of the time, only you will use.
I'm fortunate that my wife enjoys using technology, but I still wouldn't go out on payday and just buy a new gadget without at least letting her know I was doing it, and if I spend money on something, it's only fair she does the same ... which means for whatever you spend, you need to double it and again it's only after looking at bills and responsibilities that you can do so.
AndroidfoLife
Apr 16, 07:54 PM
1. My statement made perfect sense. Apple builds excellent hardware that competes very well with other expensive hardware, the build quality is better than what anyone else produces, and Apple's Macintosh computers often have unique design that you cannot find elsewhere. Anybody who needs to run Windows and is willing to pay for top quality hardware is well advised to consider buying a Macintosh.
2. You are in LOVE with an ASUS board? I'm in love with my wife. If my MacBook was stolen or damaged I wouldn't shed one tear; I would just wait for the insurance money and buy a new one. You seem to have a strange irrational emotional attachment here.
Apple does not have the best have a build quality better then everyone else. They have some very good computers, but their are companies who build much better computers you have no evidence to back up your statement. Macs use the same hardware as everyone else.
2. You are in LOVE with an ASUS board? I'm in love with my wife. If my MacBook was stolen or damaged I wouldn't shed one tear; I would just wait for the insurance money and buy a new one. You seem to have a strange irrational emotional attachment here.
Apple does not have the best have a build quality better then everyone else. They have some very good computers, but their are companies who build much better computers you have no evidence to back up your statement. Macs use the same hardware as everyone else.
RaceTripper
Mar 11, 08:50 PM
Yes, I know that they are two different categories, but the MBPs would definitely steal a lot of the iPad's thunder.I doubt a new MBP announcement will hurt the iPad in any way. I think only an inconsequential percentage of Apple's iPad customer base would change plans for an iPad and choose a MBP instead.
DotCom2
Apr 2, 10:24 AM
Next week's front page story: "Sony guy loses job after Steve Jobs rips Sony CEO a new @ss for leak."
Have you ever heard of "Controlled Leaks"? :rolleyes:
Have you ever heard of "Controlled Leaks"? :rolleyes:
mingoglia
Mar 29, 09:56 AM
Sometimes the stores that someone wouldn't suspect (or ever shop out) of having something are the ones that those "in the know" can find something.
Just before Christmas I figured my son and daughter were old enough for our first XBox 360. I went to the 4 Best Buys close to my house (Gilbert, AZ) and all pretty much laughed at me, out of stock. I called a guy that I know from a club I'm in that managed a local Walmart. He said of his stock of 12 that he got in the prior week he had only sold 1. Apparently in my town no one shops at Walmart for an Xbox? All I know is I drove down there and sure enough they had a small pile of them with hardly anyone in the electronics department.
Just before Christmas I figured my son and daughter were old enough for our first XBox 360. I went to the 4 Best Buys close to my house (Gilbert, AZ) and all pretty much laughed at me, out of stock. I called a guy that I know from a club I'm in that managed a local Walmart. He said of his stock of 12 that he got in the prior week he had only sold 1. Apparently in my town no one shops at Walmart for an Xbox? All I know is I drove down there and sure enough they had a small pile of them with hardly anyone in the electronics department.
Frisco
Mar 30, 08:18 PM
That is if America is under immediate threat, hence Bush's big case about WMDs before invading Iraq. America was under no threat from Libya. The President cannot simply go to war because he feels like it. That is definitely not a power he has by the Constitution but it is a power he'll take nonetheless. The Executive branch has taken more and more power away from the legislature and, most of all, the people and I don't think it'll stop until things get much worse.
I really hope he isn't under the Keynesian impression that war is good for one's economy. This is the mark of an empire in decline.
America did not go to war. It was a UN resolution. If America went to war Muammar Muhammad al-Gaddafi would be dead by now. Anyone who wishes this comparison to Bush is a fool.
I really hope he isn't under the Keynesian impression that war is good for one's economy. This is the mark of an empire in decline.
America did not go to war. It was a UN resolution. If America went to war Muammar Muhammad al-Gaddafi would be dead by now. Anyone who wishes this comparison to Bush is a fool.
chrono1081
Apr 2, 05:12 AM
Apple always does that, yet people still buy the next ver of their hardware. If people stopped buying into their games of incremental fragmented releases, Apple would quit doing it.
Please show me a company that doesn't do that. You know that there is a lot more technology out there then what is on the market right?
Please show me a company that doesn't do that. You know that there is a lot more technology out there then what is on the market right?
4God
Sep 22, 05:11 PM
Unfortunately, you wouldn't because you'd probably be out of business.
So, what you're saying is that hard copies of DVD's are the wave of the future? :rolleyes:
Funny, I thought technology was taking over and that downloading mulitmedia was the wave of the future. :confused:
I believe over a few year period, you would be the one out of business if that's your convicted thought.
So, what you're saying is that hard copies of DVD's are the wave of the future? :rolleyes:
Funny, I thought technology was taking over and that downloading mulitmedia was the wave of the future. :confused:
I believe over a few year period, you would be the one out of business if that's your convicted thought.
hulugu
Aug 2, 11:23 PM
Yeah, hacking is just taking something and tinkering with it to make it do something that it's not really designed to do, isn't it? This can sometimes be useful and fun, but can obviously also be done for malicious purposes, and that's sometimes referred to as "cracking" and the ones who do it as "crackers".
Wait a second. They use a 3rd party wireless card, and he said in the end that "the flaw is not in the Apple operating system as we used 3rd party hardware". I'd say that's quite different from the impression I got from reading the macrumors headline here. A default MacBook using the built in Airport isn't vulnerable as far as I can tell.
He also said that the exploit isn't as trivial as a generic buffer overflow. Now, to exploit a generic buffer overflow, you need to have a certain level of l337ness to begin with, so that means you don't have to worry about your neighbour braking into your wireless network, just yet. Unless someone releases premade tools to do the exploitation, I'd say that normal people and small businesses don't have to worry at the moment.
This appears to be a variation of another wireless attack in which you decoy the wireless network. In the old attack you could create your own wireless network that appeared as the one you'd expect. This attack uses similar principles.
The lesson here is: wireless networks are not secure. What bugs me most about this story is how it was presented as an Apple flaw, when really this is the fault of a buggy device driver and the OS. Windows and possibly Linux would fall under the same flaw.
Using wireless networks is inherently risky and if you're concerned about attacks, say in a financial or security environment, you don't use it.
Of course, all the people who pointed out how 'smug' Mac users are and how they deserved such an attack won't notice this particular situation and will merely cheer and clap in their glee that Apple hasn't built a Olympian-OS.
Wait a second. They use a 3rd party wireless card, and he said in the end that "the flaw is not in the Apple operating system as we used 3rd party hardware". I'd say that's quite different from the impression I got from reading the macrumors headline here. A default MacBook using the built in Airport isn't vulnerable as far as I can tell.
He also said that the exploit isn't as trivial as a generic buffer overflow. Now, to exploit a generic buffer overflow, you need to have a certain level of l337ness to begin with, so that means you don't have to worry about your neighbour braking into your wireless network, just yet. Unless someone releases premade tools to do the exploitation, I'd say that normal people and small businesses don't have to worry at the moment.
This appears to be a variation of another wireless attack in which you decoy the wireless network. In the old attack you could create your own wireless network that appeared as the one you'd expect. This attack uses similar principles.
The lesson here is: wireless networks are not secure. What bugs me most about this story is how it was presented as an Apple flaw, when really this is the fault of a buggy device driver and the OS. Windows and possibly Linux would fall under the same flaw.
Using wireless networks is inherently risky and if you're concerned about attacks, say in a financial or security environment, you don't use it.
Of course, all the people who pointed out how 'smug' Mac users are and how they deserved such an attack won't notice this particular situation and will merely cheer and clap in their glee that Apple hasn't built a Olympian-OS.
Moyank24
Nov 23, 04:31 PM
That's actually pretty impressive.
It really is. So much for all the people who thought the big deal Apple was making out of it was lame.
It really is. So much for all the people who thought the big deal Apple was making out of it was lame.
StokeLee
Sep 12, 02:27 PM
I think its fantastic, I like how it looks, I love the cover flow, and the ability to get the covers, and it gets the whole album, not just the one song. The movies/videos Ive got in my library now play flawlessly.
I love it, now all i need is a new iPod, If the iPod photo as it was called. I presume I cant play games on that one?
Edit. Just connected my iPod to my iMac, I love the new screen that itunes comes up with showing your iPod.
I love it, now all i need is a new iPod, If the iPod photo as it was called. I presume I cant play games on that one?
Edit. Just connected my iPod to my iMac, I love the new screen that itunes comes up with showing your iPod.
nomad01
Oct 28, 06:08 AM
I'm pretty sure readings of 15C-19C are incorrect. I've NEVER seen or heard of modern laptop/desktop CPUs running that cool.
I'm sure you're correct but I'm confused as to what results to believe.
I'm now using istat Pro, Temperature Monitor and Core2Duotemp. All are saying the same thing.
See the screen grab below.
If I put the machine under stress it does go up to 50 or 60 degrees but generally, it's saying around 21 when idle.
I'm sure you're correct but I'm confused as to what results to believe.
I'm now using istat Pro, Temperature Monitor and Core2Duotemp. All are saying the same thing.
See the screen grab below.
If I put the machine under stress it does go up to 50 or 60 degrees but generally, it's saying around 21 when idle.
metalblaze
Mar 11, 05:15 PM
Apologies...if it has already been discussed...I am at an airport, and dont have the time to scroll through all the pages before my flight departure:
http://www.9to5mac.com/new-macbook-pros-5464563
Looks like a hoax to me anyway.....
http://www.9to5mac.com/new-macbook-pros-5464563
Looks like a hoax to me anyway.....
retrospek
Oct 26, 06:23 PM
I've just installed this update and my Macbook volume seems much louder than before..
Unless I'm imagining it :D Anyone else noticed ?
Unless I'm imagining it :D Anyone else noticed ?
IronLogik
Nov 12, 12:24 PM
I think the irony has to do with the approval process for Facebook applications (like all of those games people play on Facebook), not access to personal information.
I suspect a lot of that approval is related to security of the personal information obtained within Facebook. Don't applications have some access to that information? As a result, yea. The approval is pretty important.
The sandboxing done on the iPhone means no application can access other applications data, and the only access they have is to the address book. This could be mitigated by prompting the user to allow an app to be granted access to the address book in cases where the app wasn't approved by apple.
Security reasons are pretty small on most iPhone applications.
I suspect a lot of that approval is related to security of the personal information obtained within Facebook. Don't applications have some access to that information? As a result, yea. The approval is pretty important.
The sandboxing done on the iPhone means no application can access other applications data, and the only access they have is to the address book. This could be mitigated by prompting the user to allow an app to be granted access to the address book in cases where the app wasn't approved by apple.
Security reasons are pretty small on most iPhone applications.
iByrd441
Mar 2, 03:39 PM
http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d8/sukyamadda/DSC_0007.jpg
Clockwork Orange... 15 mins from my apartment.
I am open to criticism since I am new to photography
Clockwork Orange... 15 mins from my apartment.
I am open to criticism since I am new to photography
gnasher729
Nov 7, 10:49 AM
The MacBook doesn't need a Core 2 Duo processor. Apple needs to leave a gap between the MacBook and the MacBook Pro.
That is marketing for losers.
If there is a gap, and Apple doesn't fill it, someone else will. An artificial gap like this one, when Intel's price for Yonah and Merom at same clock speed is identical, just annoys people. At the moment this is still acceptable; Merom production is not a full capacity yet, and you can't expect Apple to update all products simultaneously, but in two months time MacBook sales would just disappear.
Smaller screen, smaller harddisk, integrated graphics, these are all things that people can accept because they save money. Using CoreDuo doesn't save Apple any money; that kind of gap would be just taking your customers for idiots. And I could not possibly imagine that kind of thinking from Apple at all.
That is marketing for losers.
If there is a gap, and Apple doesn't fill it, someone else will. An artificial gap like this one, when Intel's price for Yonah and Merom at same clock speed is identical, just annoys people. At the moment this is still acceptable; Merom production is not a full capacity yet, and you can't expect Apple to update all products simultaneously, but in two months time MacBook sales would just disappear.
Smaller screen, smaller harddisk, integrated graphics, these are all things that people can accept because they save money. Using CoreDuo doesn't save Apple any money; that kind of gap would be just taking your customers for idiots. And I could not possibly imagine that kind of thinking from Apple at all.
MacNut
Sep 12, 02:48 PM
Movies purchased from the iTunes Store can't be burned to a DVD or VCD that will play in a DVD player or Video CD.Ya and Im sure you wont get the nice DVD extras either.
JDMFSeanP
Oct 10, 03:43 PM
http://i.imgur.com/qOb1z.jpg
zero2dash
Aug 29, 02:06 PM
It's really amazing to see here people justifying the price of Windows Vista, when not even corporations think about migrating to the "new" OS in 2-years time...Vista is just a rehashed NT, and no company will need it in the short term.
Agreed wholeheartedly; I worked for FedEx Kinkos for 5 years. On a corporate level - they stay at least 1 version behind on all their software. We were still running Windows 95b when I started there in 2000 (long after Windows 2000 had already been released). I'm surprised our monitors didn't have blue screen burn in; my god Win95 is the utterest of garbage in an OS. I'd rather run OS2/Warp or something. Anyhow, it wasn't until roughly 2003 that they finally upgraded to Windows 2000 Professional on all their computers (and updated the Macs to 10.2 (Jaguar?) from OS 9). I no longer work for that (now) horrendous company, but I'm sure they'll upgrade to XP Pro within the next 2 years and wait for all the BS to surface from Vista before even bothering with it.
Most corporations are this way, so (again) I absolutely agree with you. For at least the first year of its existence - no companies will be running Vista, only home users.
Second, has anyone else here used the public beta? I haven't seen any comments on it in the first 3 pages, but let me tell you...it sucks! I had to take it off my PC that I am using until my MacPro arrives and went back to XP.
From my experience, Vista Beta is full of bugs and issues. Yes, I know it is still a Beta, but if it is slated for a Jan 30 release, they have a lot of work to do.
I mentioned it on page 3. I've used several betas and they all suck. Bugs and crashes that come from using a beta OS aside - the system requirements are absurd. At this point I can't tell if the beta sucks because of bugs or because I no longer have bleeding edge hardware. Mind you though, none of my computers have ever pitched a fit at running *nix, Windows 2k or XP, or even OSX86.
I still don't know why the average person would change from XP to Vista--it doesn't look that different and doesn't offer much more to the average websurfer/emailer.
The major change is UAP, User Account Protection, which is basically a ripped off version of (Administrator) Authentication with a User access account that *nix and OSX have had for years now.
IMO Vista will undoubtedly add more Genuine Advantage, DRM, and Activation BS that I'll steer clear of that mess and keep running the old versions of Windows that already work trouble-free for me. When they stop supporting Win2k (after the 7-year (or whatever it is) product 'cycle'), I'll keep running it because IMO it's the best version of Windows that has ever (and most likely *will ever*) be released.
Agreed wholeheartedly; I worked for FedEx Kinkos for 5 years. On a corporate level - they stay at least 1 version behind on all their software. We were still running Windows 95b when I started there in 2000 (long after Windows 2000 had already been released). I'm surprised our monitors didn't have blue screen burn in; my god Win95 is the utterest of garbage in an OS. I'd rather run OS2/Warp or something. Anyhow, it wasn't until roughly 2003 that they finally upgraded to Windows 2000 Professional on all their computers (and updated the Macs to 10.2 (Jaguar?) from OS 9). I no longer work for that (now) horrendous company, but I'm sure they'll upgrade to XP Pro within the next 2 years and wait for all the BS to surface from Vista before even bothering with it.
Most corporations are this way, so (again) I absolutely agree with you. For at least the first year of its existence - no companies will be running Vista, only home users.
Second, has anyone else here used the public beta? I haven't seen any comments on it in the first 3 pages, but let me tell you...it sucks! I had to take it off my PC that I am using until my MacPro arrives and went back to XP.
From my experience, Vista Beta is full of bugs and issues. Yes, I know it is still a Beta, but if it is slated for a Jan 30 release, they have a lot of work to do.
I mentioned it on page 3. I've used several betas and they all suck. Bugs and crashes that come from using a beta OS aside - the system requirements are absurd. At this point I can't tell if the beta sucks because of bugs or because I no longer have bleeding edge hardware. Mind you though, none of my computers have ever pitched a fit at running *nix, Windows 2k or XP, or even OSX86.
I still don't know why the average person would change from XP to Vista--it doesn't look that different and doesn't offer much more to the average websurfer/emailer.
The major change is UAP, User Account Protection, which is basically a ripped off version of (Administrator) Authentication with a User access account that *nix and OSX have had for years now.
IMO Vista will undoubtedly add more Genuine Advantage, DRM, and Activation BS that I'll steer clear of that mess and keep running the old versions of Windows that already work trouble-free for me. When they stop supporting Win2k (after the 7-year (or whatever it is) product 'cycle'), I'll keep running it because IMO it's the best version of Windows that has ever (and most likely *will ever*) be released.
BRLawyer
Mar 11, 04:24 PM
Is it possible to discredit a rumors site?
Roger that. :rolleyes:
Roger that. :rolleyes: