manu chao
Apr 11, 11:44 AM
This makes no sense. Not everyone needs or desires an Airport Express. I never asked Apple for free hardware.
And not everybody needs the free WiFi router you got from your ISP.
Do they license Airplay technology to software developers? I don't think so.
Show me an app on the Mac App Store (or wherever) that acts like an Airport Express and i'll buy it at once.
As said 100 times already, Airfoil Speakers. Yes, you need the Airfoil app but to me that is close enough to acting like an Airport Express unless you want to stream music from your iPad to your iPhone.
What you should think about is: How hard is for a Mac to act like an Airport Express with the proper software? It shouldn't.
Why it there no software like this? Apple does not want to.
Again, what scenario cannot be solved with either the remote app, plugging in your or some guest's iOS device or iPod or connecting to guest's iTunes library via Home Sharing?
Let's see, a guest's iOS device or iPod would have to 'controlled' from your Mac and not from the device itself, ditto for a laptop (though the trial version of Airfoil should transmit a song or two without problems for free wirelessly from anybody's computer to your computer).
And not everybody needs the free WiFi router you got from your ISP.
Do they license Airplay technology to software developers? I don't think so.
Show me an app on the Mac App Store (or wherever) that acts like an Airport Express and i'll buy it at once.
As said 100 times already, Airfoil Speakers. Yes, you need the Airfoil app but to me that is close enough to acting like an Airport Express unless you want to stream music from your iPad to your iPhone.
What you should think about is: How hard is for a Mac to act like an Airport Express with the proper software? It shouldn't.
Why it there no software like this? Apple does not want to.
Again, what scenario cannot be solved with either the remote app, plugging in your or some guest's iOS device or iPod or connecting to guest's iTunes library via Home Sharing?
Let's see, a guest's iOS device or iPod would have to 'controlled' from your Mac and not from the device itself, ditto for a laptop (though the trial version of Airfoil should transmit a song or two without problems for free wirelessly from anybody's computer to your computer).
longofest
Oct 12, 12:25 PM
I hope people like Red, because this is definitely the iPod to buy... goes to a great cause, and doesn't cost you anything more.
cmaier
Nov 14, 12:08 AM
Dude. You have a double standard. If Apple were to infringe on the copyright of someone else, you would be here pitchfork in hand screaming for blood.
If you look on other sites like macnn, you will see that the airfoil app does not only display Apple icons but rather the icon of whatever browser is configured as the main browser. They cannot make the claim that they have to right to use the Firefox, Camino or Omniweb icon in their app. It is not "streaming" the icon data, it is copied over and displayed superimposed on another icon which is presumably an internal OS X bundle. The audio is streamed but those icons are copied over and superimposed on each other on the phone. That is a clear violation of the IP of other programs in a manner that is not consistent with use on the mac it was pulled from.
Mozilla's trademark policy appears to allow this sort of use:
http://www.mozilla.org/foundation/trademarks/policy.html
More importantly, each of these companies is likely to argue for trademark infringement/unfair competition, not copyright infringement, particularly when the icon is trademarked (which is a different case than the Mac icons we are talking about).
It is permissible to use a trademark so long as there is no confusion as to source. That is, if people using the RA software are likely to think that somehow Mozilla (or the other companies) are the source of the software, this would be impermissible. It is permissible to use trademarks in a descriptive sense - i.e.: this icon means that the thing you are connecting to is the product Mozilla. There is also a fair use/non-trademark use defense. As long as the message I am sending is not "this product IS mozilla" it probably is not trademark infringement.
If you look on other sites like macnn, you will see that the airfoil app does not only display Apple icons but rather the icon of whatever browser is configured as the main browser. They cannot make the claim that they have to right to use the Firefox, Camino or Omniweb icon in their app. It is not "streaming" the icon data, it is copied over and displayed superimposed on another icon which is presumably an internal OS X bundle. The audio is streamed but those icons are copied over and superimposed on each other on the phone. That is a clear violation of the IP of other programs in a manner that is not consistent with use on the mac it was pulled from.
Mozilla's trademark policy appears to allow this sort of use:
http://www.mozilla.org/foundation/trademarks/policy.html
More importantly, each of these companies is likely to argue for trademark infringement/unfair competition, not copyright infringement, particularly when the icon is trademarked (which is a different case than the Mac icons we are talking about).
It is permissible to use a trademark so long as there is no confusion as to source. That is, if people using the RA software are likely to think that somehow Mozilla (or the other companies) are the source of the software, this would be impermissible. It is permissible to use trademarks in a descriptive sense - i.e.: this icon means that the thing you are connecting to is the product Mozilla. There is also a fair use/non-trademark use defense. As long as the message I am sending is not "this product IS mozilla" it probably is not trademark infringement.
anim8or
Aug 28, 01:15 PM
It makes more sense for Apple to wait for tomorrow, anyway. This way, they can avoid being drowned out by the other manufacturer's announcements and simultaneously steel their fanfare. They'll probably do something like "New, with Merom, and more..." and add on another fancy feature or two to each thing to outdo the other laptop guys.
Though, I still think they're coming on the 18th of sept.
Every time i read a post like this i cringe a little!
There are so many rumors about a new ipod coming in the next few weeks/months/etc, most likely announced at Paris (maybe).
Therefor if apple were to release a new ipod they would want to try and get rid of some older models! Thus i conclude that even if the new MBPs are announced or even shipping tomorrow then more people would buy one with the ipod offer... ...getting rid of sed older models!
So why would they wait til after the promotion?
Apple dont needhelp shifting notebooks but if they announce a new ipod you would bet that not many people would want the original ipod video over a new improved one!?
Though, I still think they're coming on the 18th of sept.
Every time i read a post like this i cringe a little!
There are so many rumors about a new ipod coming in the next few weeks/months/etc, most likely announced at Paris (maybe).
Therefor if apple were to release a new ipod they would want to try and get rid of some older models! Thus i conclude that even if the new MBPs are announced or even shipping tomorrow then more people would buy one with the ipod offer... ...getting rid of sed older models!
So why would they wait til after the promotion?
Apple dont needhelp shifting notebooks but if they announce a new ipod you would bet that not many people would want the original ipod video over a new improved one!?
diamond.g
May 3, 12:41 PM
I stopped by my local Apple store and had a similar experience. Actually, it was a bit worse... they still had the old iMacs out and when I asked about the new ones, I was told "What new iMacs?"
Did you log into store.apple.com and show them? :D
Did you log into store.apple.com and show them? :D
aiqw9182
Apr 16, 01:14 PM
You have a fundamental misunderstanding of how those adapters work. Going from thunderbolt to USB 3 would require active electronics embedded in the adapter. The $6 MDP to HDMI adapter is just copper internally because the signaling is compatible from the source.
So did you miss the USB to PS2 adapters I posted? :rolleyes:
Again, you have a fundamental flaw in your argument that you're not addressing. It doesn't matter if the bus is capable of delivering massive speed when the source is incapable of serving data fast enough. Any single-drive enclosure that is currently available will be incapable of maxing out a USB 3 connection. Again, any single drive enclosure doesn't need USB 3 and that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about the future, a couple of years down the road there will be affordable external SSD's and you will have an SSD in your machine and the only bottleneck is going to be your connector.
When they contain active electronics, they get expensive. Apple's own MDP to dual-link DVI adapter is a great example, at $99.00. USB 3 and Thunderbolt are not electrically compatible, and therefore it is impossible to have a simple copper-only dongle that has a TB port on one end, and USB on the other. Wow, you are using an Apple adapter for price comparisons. :rolleyes:
Apple sells mini-display port to HDMI adapters for $30 when you can buy them for $5. Find a better example.
Then why do you keep pointing to that article as proof that USB 3 is incapable of reaching it's theoretical maximum?Uhh, I'm not? USB 3 has overhead and I've yet to see it actually go its maximum, when have you ever seen USB 2 reach 480Mbps?
USB 2 is the universal standard for high speed devices. If you think otherwise, you must have never used a USB thumb drive. You may have never used a USB thumb drive? L.o.l.
USB 2 is TERRIBLE at high speed data transfer, 'standard' or not. A PS2 port could still be standard for all I care.
Thunderbolt in a copper implementation is capped at 10Gbs. For higher speeds, the physical connections become impractical for "normal" devices, which is why Intel designed TB as a transport bus, say for a single cable between a tower and a monitor, which would then break the TB bus back into it's component protocols, including USB 3. The copper implementation is limited only by the cable and not the port.
Which as I said above, makes it practical for a transport bus. For replacing USB? Not so much. Backwards compatibility alone will likely dictate the continual presence of USB 3 ports on virtually every computer for years to come.
I never said it would replace USB. I said they compliment each other. I said USB 3 is hardly needed as all of the heavy lifting is done through Thunderbolt then you leave the low bandwidth peripherals (that USB 2.0 was capable of handling) to USB 3.0.
Is it "difficult" to carry an adaptor? Of course not (weight and size wise).
But in real life, you run into situations where you don't have it on hand. Like the noon conference at my residency program where we had problems with the laptop on which an attending was to give a presentation. One of the other residents had a MBP and volunteered its use, but...no DP adaptor to connect to the projector. I can only imagine how many times that scenario must occur each day at businesses, etc.
It's a poor solution compared to having USB 3 built in.
In real life you should carry around your laptop in a bag or sleeve that has everything you need in it. USB 3 is not a necessity and the majority of devices will continue to be USB 2.0 compatible as well before 3.0 takes off and Thunderbolt steals all of the high bandwidth peripherals.
So did you miss the USB to PS2 adapters I posted? :rolleyes:
Again, you have a fundamental flaw in your argument that you're not addressing. It doesn't matter if the bus is capable of delivering massive speed when the source is incapable of serving data fast enough. Any single-drive enclosure that is currently available will be incapable of maxing out a USB 3 connection. Again, any single drive enclosure doesn't need USB 3 and that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about the future, a couple of years down the road there will be affordable external SSD's and you will have an SSD in your machine and the only bottleneck is going to be your connector.
When they contain active electronics, they get expensive. Apple's own MDP to dual-link DVI adapter is a great example, at $99.00. USB 3 and Thunderbolt are not electrically compatible, and therefore it is impossible to have a simple copper-only dongle that has a TB port on one end, and USB on the other. Wow, you are using an Apple adapter for price comparisons. :rolleyes:
Apple sells mini-display port to HDMI adapters for $30 when you can buy them for $5. Find a better example.
Then why do you keep pointing to that article as proof that USB 3 is incapable of reaching it's theoretical maximum?Uhh, I'm not? USB 3 has overhead and I've yet to see it actually go its maximum, when have you ever seen USB 2 reach 480Mbps?
USB 2 is the universal standard for high speed devices. If you think otherwise, you must have never used a USB thumb drive. You may have never used a USB thumb drive? L.o.l.
USB 2 is TERRIBLE at high speed data transfer, 'standard' or not. A PS2 port could still be standard for all I care.
Thunderbolt in a copper implementation is capped at 10Gbs. For higher speeds, the physical connections become impractical for "normal" devices, which is why Intel designed TB as a transport bus, say for a single cable between a tower and a monitor, which would then break the TB bus back into it's component protocols, including USB 3. The copper implementation is limited only by the cable and not the port.
Which as I said above, makes it practical for a transport bus. For replacing USB? Not so much. Backwards compatibility alone will likely dictate the continual presence of USB 3 ports on virtually every computer for years to come.
I never said it would replace USB. I said they compliment each other. I said USB 3 is hardly needed as all of the heavy lifting is done through Thunderbolt then you leave the low bandwidth peripherals (that USB 2.0 was capable of handling) to USB 3.0.
Is it "difficult" to carry an adaptor? Of course not (weight and size wise).
But in real life, you run into situations where you don't have it on hand. Like the noon conference at my residency program where we had problems with the laptop on which an attending was to give a presentation. One of the other residents had a MBP and volunteered its use, but...no DP adaptor to connect to the projector. I can only imagine how many times that scenario must occur each day at businesses, etc.
It's a poor solution compared to having USB 3 built in.
In real life you should carry around your laptop in a bag or sleeve that has everything you need in it. USB 3 is not a necessity and the majority of devices will continue to be USB 2.0 compatible as well before 3.0 takes off and Thunderbolt steals all of the high bandwidth peripherals.
hobo.hopkins
Apr 4, 12:10 PM
Only in America.... Bad form unless it was in defence. How about non lethal take downs, fair courts and appropriate justice, such as jail with community service, get criminals doing something constructive for society and trying to get them back on track?
The right to carry guns and to kill absolutely baffles me. Surely shooting and killing is a worser crime than stealing? The threat of being shot/killed sounds too authoritarian/totalitarian for me.
I can't believe the mentality of people on these forums sometimes! Each to their own I guess... Democracy and all...
It was in defence. And no one has the "right" to kill, it's a necessary evil that has to be allowed in certain instances. You'd have to be a dunce to not see that lethal force is sometimes required.
The right to carry guns and to kill absolutely baffles me. Surely shooting and killing is a worser crime than stealing? The threat of being shot/killed sounds too authoritarian/totalitarian for me.
I can't believe the mentality of people on these forums sometimes! Each to their own I guess... Democracy and all...
It was in defence. And no one has the "right" to kill, it's a necessary evil that has to be allowed in certain instances. You'd have to be a dunce to not see that lethal force is sometimes required.
tigress666
Mar 30, 12:28 PM
I think the fact that Microsoft is spending so much money to fight the trademark so they can use it rather than just coming up with their own name (after all that would be much cheaper) says they don't think it's generic.
If it was generic, the name wouldn't have so much marketing power that Microsoft is willing to spend this much money so they can use it too... Microsoft obviously feels that the marketing power of being able to use that name will draw enough users in to make up for the money they are paying to fight Apple claiming no one else can use it. Otherwise, they'd feel it was not worth all that money to spend rather than just getting one of their employees to come up with a name or even a simple contest amongst employees (or even the public) with a reward (That most likely would be cheaper than the lawyers) for who picks the winning name.
The fact that MS is willing to spend all this money alone says that the name is not generic.
If it was generic, the name wouldn't have so much marketing power that Microsoft is willing to spend this much money so they can use it too... Microsoft obviously feels that the marketing power of being able to use that name will draw enough users in to make up for the money they are paying to fight Apple claiming no one else can use it. Otherwise, they'd feel it was not worth all that money to spend rather than just getting one of their employees to come up with a name or even a simple contest amongst employees (or even the public) with a reward (That most likely would be cheaper than the lawyers) for who picks the winning name.
The fact that MS is willing to spend all this money alone says that the name is not generic.
Michaelgtrusa
Apr 4, 12:53 PM
Well done.
Mundy
Sep 10, 04:54 PM
Whats wrong with having two dual core processors on one chip? I can understand that the FSB might become a bottleneck but thats not only a issue related to the number of cores/processors is it?
The problem is that a double-dual-core solution (like Intel's Kentsfield and Clovertown) still requires that two cores communicate with the other two cores over the FSB. A single, shared FSB is one of the reasons that Intel's first generation of dual-core CPUs could not compete with AMD's 64-bit X2 line.
Intel has its reasons for the way it's doing its first generation of quad-core CPUs, but performance is not one of them. Right now, the primary concern is silicon yields, and the double-dual-core method allows Intel to throw away a bad core without tossing the entire quad-core silicon wafer. A true quad-core CPU would not allow this�i.e. Intel couldn't "cut out" the bad silicon�and therefore the potential for monetary loss is greater.
The truth is that Kentsfield and Clovertown are trial runs. They are stopgap measures in the same way that Yonah was a stopgap on the way to Merom. Once Intel goes to true quad-core CPUs and a 45 nm process, it might be time to worry about the Mac Pro being obsolete. Until then, anything Intel releases will be incremental.
Just my 2 cents.
The problem is that a double-dual-core solution (like Intel's Kentsfield and Clovertown) still requires that two cores communicate with the other two cores over the FSB. A single, shared FSB is one of the reasons that Intel's first generation of dual-core CPUs could not compete with AMD's 64-bit X2 line.
Intel has its reasons for the way it's doing its first generation of quad-core CPUs, but performance is not one of them. Right now, the primary concern is silicon yields, and the double-dual-core method allows Intel to throw away a bad core without tossing the entire quad-core silicon wafer. A true quad-core CPU would not allow this�i.e. Intel couldn't "cut out" the bad silicon�and therefore the potential for monetary loss is greater.
The truth is that Kentsfield and Clovertown are trial runs. They are stopgap measures in the same way that Yonah was a stopgap on the way to Merom. Once Intel goes to true quad-core CPUs and a 45 nm process, it might be time to worry about the Mac Pro being obsolete. Until then, anything Intel releases will be incremental.
Just my 2 cents.
Fukui
Sep 19, 04:07 PM
You might be right, I am not going to discuss specifics. but the truth of the matter is that the quality of a DVD is better than the 640x480. Even Apple stats that on their site.
http://www.apple.com/itunes/store/movies.html
That's what I was trying to convey.
Cheers
Yea, I understand. I too would neverthless have liked 720x480p....
http://www.apple.com/itunes/store/movies.html
That's what I was trying to convey.
Cheers
Yea, I understand. I too would neverthless have liked 720x480p....
BlindMellon
Apr 22, 06:32 AM
How does streaming music to my iPhone help me, when O2 cap my Internet usage, and then charge when you use more.
this service is for apple fans who will swallow anything apple sells and ask for more, even as they pay extra data charges to listen to music they already own.
this service is for apple fans who will swallow anything apple sells and ask for more, even as they pay extra data charges to listen to music they already own.
Calidude
Mar 23, 07:06 PM
Just downloaded both mentioned in the article, thanks for the heads-up MR.
Typical, guilty until proven innocent, isn't that always the way.
I downloaded both as well and I'm going to make sure they get ad revenue because these companies are doing a great service to the American people.
The Senators on the other hand, are traitors to the Constitution.
Typical, guilty until proven innocent, isn't that always the way.
I downloaded both as well and I'm going to make sure they get ad revenue because these companies are doing a great service to the American people.
The Senators on the other hand, are traitors to the Constitution.
steve_hill4
Sep 9, 08:06 AM
The fact that the new iMacs can't address more than 3Gb of memory and are therefore operating on a 32bit logic-board makes me doubtful as to whether or not these systems are really 64-bit capable... It seems like some kind of hybrid 32/64bit system.
Will the C2D iMacs be able to run 64bit code, despite not having the 64bit address space (and being able to access over 4Gb or RAM)?
Well, wasn't the iMac G5 restricted to 2GB, yet it was a 64-bit processor? A 32-bit computer can take up to 4GB, but due to the hardware Apple was/is using, they can't even take this.
What i find odd is that it appears to allow 1 or 2GB in either slot, but no more than 3GB in total. That is obviously the maximum the board can take, but it would have made a little more sense to allow 2GB in each. This will not really effect it's ability to run 64-bit software, just restricts how much memory can be used. Remember that you have been able to get AMD systems with 64-bit processors for some time now. They won't take more than 4GB, but will allow you to run 64-bit OSes and Apps.
I'm hoping by the time I'm after an iMac, it will take at least 4GB, have Blu-Ray as an option, (although I may opt for standard Superdrive if it is an option and buy a Mac compatible external later), include bigger hard drives and stick to a similar price point to now.
I'm tempted by the 20" now, but am not buying yet and would want about 320-400GB in there for the same price, perhaps even 2GB RAM. I've got time to wait however.
Will the C2D iMacs be able to run 64bit code, despite not having the 64bit address space (and being able to access over 4Gb or RAM)?
Well, wasn't the iMac G5 restricted to 2GB, yet it was a 64-bit processor? A 32-bit computer can take up to 4GB, but due to the hardware Apple was/is using, they can't even take this.
What i find odd is that it appears to allow 1 or 2GB in either slot, but no more than 3GB in total. That is obviously the maximum the board can take, but it would have made a little more sense to allow 2GB in each. This will not really effect it's ability to run 64-bit software, just restricts how much memory can be used. Remember that you have been able to get AMD systems with 64-bit processors for some time now. They won't take more than 4GB, but will allow you to run 64-bit OSes and Apps.
I'm hoping by the time I'm after an iMac, it will take at least 4GB, have Blu-Ray as an option, (although I may opt for standard Superdrive if it is an option and buy a Mac compatible external later), include bigger hard drives and stick to a similar price point to now.
I'm tempted by the 20" now, but am not buying yet and would want about 320-400GB in there for the same price, perhaps even 2GB RAM. I've got time to wait however.
dondark
Sep 15, 06:57 PM
I'll be very tempted if it has;
3MP
All the display info in the latest iPods
BT
4-8 GB
Full iLife intergration (iSync, iTunes, iPhoto, iCal, Address book (with pictures), Mail)
Earphones (Pref BT and acts as hands free)
Desire
3G?
iChat with BT for Audio?
Widgets?
WiFi
IR remote feature
Light / Flash
Two Choices: Good design Apple Style with decent Camera and Music Quality
about $399
Or, Smart phone like with the feature above.(it means iLife , iChat for live video chat), they only need a good cpu,gpu and wifi for these.
about $599
3MP
All the display info in the latest iPods
BT
4-8 GB
Full iLife intergration (iSync, iTunes, iPhoto, iCal, Address book (with pictures), Mail)
Earphones (Pref BT and acts as hands free)
Desire
3G?
iChat with BT for Audio?
Widgets?
WiFi
IR remote feature
Light / Flash
Two Choices: Good design Apple Style with decent Camera and Music Quality
about $399
Or, Smart phone like with the feature above.(it means iLife , iChat for live video chat), they only need a good cpu,gpu and wifi for these.
about $599
Eidorian
May 3, 11:09 AM
You think SB IGP could drive 2 Cinema Displays? :eek:For a desktop OS, sure.
Ivy Bridge will bring it up to 3 displays. AMD has 6 displays for embedded systems now.
Ivy Bridge will bring it up to 3 displays. AMD has 6 displays for embedded systems now.
alent1234
Apr 29, 12:48 PM
x-box wasn't a money loser for that long. on the financial statements i think they had bing/live whatever in the same category making it seem as though they were losing money. recently they took it out.
microsoft had a gaming division that made money since the mid to late 1990's with some of the best games on the market.
the first x-box wasnt that big a seller as the PS and gamecube but it had a higher rate of people buying games and x-box live was a hit from the start.
same with the 360, it wasn't a top seller but people bought more games for it than for the PS or Wii. a lot of people like myself have a PS3 with no games because it's a killer media box and blu ray player. when it first came out at $499 it was the same price as a blu ray player. at $299 it's the same price as a high end internet enabled player but with better support and a hard drive to store data
i had the wii as well and only used it for the balance board. just like a lot of people that bought it. compared to a health club membership it was a killer deal
and with gamestop in the used business, it's even more profits for MS due to all the DLC that is sold now
microsoft had a gaming division that made money since the mid to late 1990's with some of the best games on the market.
the first x-box wasnt that big a seller as the PS and gamecube but it had a higher rate of people buying games and x-box live was a hit from the start.
same with the 360, it wasn't a top seller but people bought more games for it than for the PS or Wii. a lot of people like myself have a PS3 with no games because it's a killer media box and blu ray player. when it first came out at $499 it was the same price as a blu ray player. at $299 it's the same price as a high end internet enabled player but with better support and a hard drive to store data
i had the wii as well and only used it for the balance board. just like a lot of people that bought it. compared to a health club membership it was a killer deal
and with gamestop in the used business, it's even more profits for MS due to all the DLC that is sold now
cmaier
Nov 13, 05:49 PM
I'm not missing the point. You are. They have a right to determine how their trademarks are to be used and if they did not vigourously defend them, you would see MSFT stealing even icons from OS X.
Apple is a company with a responsibility to shareholders. They are not your friends. Google is not your friend either.
The purpose of the image use is on a mac. You are also not looking at it from Apple's point of view that Apple wants to have the iPhone be a success regardless of whether the server used in a client server environment is running OS X, linux, some other unix or windows. If they were to allow some of their third party developer running OS X based services use their icons, the real client server developers running in the cloud would complain about favouritism. They have to keep third party developers under the same rules regardless of whether the app uses a mac based service or not.
You say you're not missing the point, but your response immediately jumped back to "they have a right."
yes, we know. We aren't arguing what they have a right to do.
We are arguing about how stupid and arbitrary it is to enforce that right.
And your argument about the icons in the last paragraph makes no sense - why would someone want to use an image of a mac to represent a non-OS X box?
And, you still haven't addressed the fact that there is no solution for the developer other than making their software significantly worse - they can't use their own icons that depict the machine being connected to, they can't necessarily use the NAME of the machine being connected to - what is it they are supposed to do? List the machines by ip address?
Apple is a company with a responsibility to shareholders. They are not your friends. Google is not your friend either.
The purpose of the image use is on a mac. You are also not looking at it from Apple's point of view that Apple wants to have the iPhone be a success regardless of whether the server used in a client server environment is running OS X, linux, some other unix or windows. If they were to allow some of their third party developer running OS X based services use their icons, the real client server developers running in the cloud would complain about favouritism. They have to keep third party developers under the same rules regardless of whether the app uses a mac based service or not.
You say you're not missing the point, but your response immediately jumped back to "they have a right."
yes, we know. We aren't arguing what they have a right to do.
We are arguing about how stupid and arbitrary it is to enforce that right.
And your argument about the icons in the last paragraph makes no sense - why would someone want to use an image of a mac to represent a non-OS X box?
And, you still haven't addressed the fact that there is no solution for the developer other than making their software significantly worse - they can't use their own icons that depict the machine being connected to, they can't necessarily use the NAME of the machine being connected to - what is it they are supposed to do? List the machines by ip address?
logandzwon
Mar 30, 01:36 PM
Yes, you know what an "app store" means if you know what an "app" means.
Does an "app" mean an Apple program?
It's doesn't matter what MS calls it. There's a class of programs everywhere called "applications". There's no other name for it.
Applications are a strict subset of programs.
So, here is an interesting argument, as app is short for Applications, and Applications are a strict subset of programs, doesn't the App Store technically sell Programs, not Apps? Thus, the term is no generic at all. "Program Store" would the generic term. It's the same as a club called "Liqueur Store" (which is TMed.)
Does an "app" mean an Apple program?
It's doesn't matter what MS calls it. There's a class of programs everywhere called "applications". There's no other name for it.
Applications are a strict subset of programs.
So, here is an interesting argument, as app is short for Applications, and Applications are a strict subset of programs, doesn't the App Store technically sell Programs, not Apps? Thus, the term is no generic at all. "Program Store" would the generic term. It's the same as a club called "Liqueur Store" (which is TMed.)
tbobmccoy
Mar 23, 05:40 PM
It's illegal. Police need to publicly announce check points before setting up. Ironic they would want to pull the app since this is the basis that makes them legal in the first place.
I'm not sure that's the case in Texas, but I will acquiesce since I don't remember that from school and also am typing on my iPhone. Either way, the app is still a good one, and shouldn't be removed.
I'm not sure that's the case in Texas, but I will acquiesce since I don't remember that from school and also am typing on my iPhone. Either way, the app is still a good one, and shouldn't be removed.
Eidorian
May 3, 10:12 AM
Dual ports should have been on the notebooks as well.
Multimedia
Aug 28, 06:41 PM
Post #20 Page 1 Conroe cannot be dropped in to Yonah MB only merom.Not in MacBook nor MacBook Pros because they have no socket. You can only upgrade mini and iMac with Merom because only they both have compatible sockets. :rolleyes:
Keep in mind that a 2.33GHz Merom costs almost as much as a new mini. But it will run way faster. Hope the mini's cooling system can handle the higher temperature. Good luck all you brave upgraders.
Core 2 Duo Product Line
Model....Frequency........MSRP
T7600...2.33 GHz-4L2...$637
T7400...2.16 GHz-4L2...$432
T7200...2.00 GHz-4L2...$294
T5600...1.83 GHz-2L2...$241
T5500...1.66 GHz-2L2...$209
Keep in mind that a 2.33GHz Merom costs almost as much as a new mini. But it will run way faster. Hope the mini's cooling system can handle the higher temperature. Good luck all you brave upgraders.
Core 2 Duo Product Line
Model....Frequency........MSRP
T7600...2.33 GHz-4L2...$637
T7400...2.16 GHz-4L2...$432
T7200...2.00 GHz-4L2...$294
T5600...1.83 GHz-2L2...$241
T5500...1.66 GHz-2L2...$209
W1MRK
Mar 23, 06:04 PM
I am for this app and I used to assist Local Law Enforcement at these types of events as a Vol. Emergency Management officer.
The fact of the matter is that while they remove some drunks off the road the Vast majority of tickets are for seatbelt, insurance, registration, and other minor factors. My Wife was ticketed 1 mile from our house ( at a "drunkcheck" ) for not having her license on her. The Round Lake Park, Illinois cop was to lazy and wanted his quota so he didn't run her in LEADS (Database) or call it in.
I saw the light. One thing to check for drunk drivers. Another completely to work for the budget.
Yes I wasn't a cop. But I stood next to them the whole time, an oh what I saw and Heard. ( I really should write a book )
Please Apple Keep this App. Like someone who is drunk will remember to check this app while driving or update it for the rest of us.
Michael Kulis
The fact of the matter is that while they remove some drunks off the road the Vast majority of tickets are for seatbelt, insurance, registration, and other minor factors. My Wife was ticketed 1 mile from our house ( at a "drunkcheck" ) for not having her license on her. The Round Lake Park, Illinois cop was to lazy and wanted his quota so he didn't run her in LEADS (Database) or call it in.
I saw the light. One thing to check for drunk drivers. Another completely to work for the budget.
Yes I wasn't a cop. But I stood next to them the whole time, an oh what I saw and Heard. ( I really should write a book )
Please Apple Keep this App. Like someone who is drunk will remember to check this app while driving or update it for the rest of us.
Michael Kulis
flopticalcube
Apr 19, 10:08 PM
Keep listening to corporate run media which lies and doesn't tell the whole story.. my friend, unemployment and the economy aren't getting any better.. in fact, very soon it will collapse.. as inflation starts to settle in.. and if you wanna know the truth, look at BBC and other non-corporate run media for the truth. I know in my home state its like 7.9 percent and most of the jobs are health care and IT - no industrial, no customer service, nothing else.
See the roll eyes after his post, I think he was being sarcastic.
See the roll eyes after his post, I think he was being sarcastic.