!� V �!
Apr 25, 02:07 PM
Wake me when iMacs have matte screens again.
Agreed.
Agreed.
littleman23408
Sep 16, 05:41 PM
Creedence Clearwater Revival - Cosmo's Factory
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4145/4996663207_2539377da3_m.jpg
The Beatles - Abbey Road
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4087/4997270044_9f1041dc67_m.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4145/4996663207_2539377da3_m.jpg
The Beatles - Abbey Road
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4087/4997270044_9f1041dc67_m.jpg
SBlue1
Apr 26, 12:06 PM
HAHA! best rumor for weeks! :D
George Knighton
Apr 15, 08:23 AM
3rd party apps crash, all of the them :mad: The standard Apple apps still work.
Terrible update. :mad:
That's strange. Not having the first problem here.
Terrible update. :mad:
That's strange. Not having the first problem here.
more...
Legion93
May 1, 11:43 PM
If anything this will just escalate our wars, from both sides.
let's sure hope not
let's sure hope not
LightSpeed1
Apr 1, 06:40 AM
Please no brown. Stick with gray please.
more...
kiwi-in-uk
Jul 12, 05:57 PM
Too bad you don't have a professional app such as the latest MS Word!:eek:
Then you could just open the new brochure wizard.
Hey life-o-fart!
When last did you use MS Word for Mac?
Then you could just open the new brochure wizard.
Hey life-o-fart!
When last did you use MS Word for Mac?
NT1440
May 1, 11:37 PM
It is not me who decided ... Osama was a Terrorist long before 911 ... you do not seem to know of his involvement ... you should read up on his life of Terrorism.
Oh have done some reading about our former ally then?
more...
%IMG_DESC_9%
%IMG_DESC_10%
more...
%IMG_DESC_11%
%IMG_DESC_12%
more...
%IMG_DESC_13%
%IMG_DESC_14%
more...
%IMG_DESC_15%
%IMG_DESC_16%
more...
%IMG_DESC_17%
%IMG_DESC_18%
%IMG_DESC_19%
Oh have done some reading about our former ally then?
more...
rstansby
Nov 11, 02:08 PM
I was one of the people who paid $3. So far I haven't found a single flash video that will play on it, and I feel really ripped off.
TheOnlyJon
Sep 17, 09:35 AM
Dude I've been looking for a shirt like that! Where'd you buy it???
Target :o $19.99!
Target :o $19.99!
more...
jtara
Apr 14, 11:14 AM
Interesting possibility. It would be extremely difficult to emulate a complete iOS device (custom ASICs and all). But Apple could emulate just enough ARM instructions to emulate an app that was compiled by Xcode & LLVM (which would limit the way ARM instructions were generated), and used only legal public iOS APIs (instead of emulating hardware and all the registers), which could be translated in Cocoa APIs to display on a Mac OS X machine.
There's no need to emulate ARM instructions, though. And they already do emulate all of the complete iOS devices, at least sufficiently to run iOS apps on OSX.
Apple provides developers with a complete emulation package for testing their iOS apps on OSX. Apps are cross-compiled to x86 code. They also provide the complete set of iOS SDKs, cross-compiled to X86 code.
An emulator handles the device hardware - touchscreen, display, sound system, GPS (REALLY simple emulation - it's always sunny in Mountain View...), etc. If an iPhone or iPad are attached via USB cable, the emulator can even use the accelerometer and gyroscope in the device. Obviously, this could be easily changed to use some new peripheral device.
Other than device emulation, the apps suffer no loss of speed, since they are running native x86 code. In fact, they run considerably faster (ignoring, for this discussion, device emulation) than then do on an actual iOS device.
All Apple would need to give consumers the ability to run iOS apps on their Macs would be to provide them with the emulator (or, more likely, integrate it into the OSX desktop. I think end-users would find the picture of an iPhone or iPad that the emulator draws around the "screen" cute for a couple of days, but then quickly tire of it...), and add an additional target for developers.
What we've seen certainly seems to suggest that's what this is. HOWEVER:
1. For a single app to be compatible with both ARM and x86, they would need to introduce a "fat binary" similar to what they did with the transition from PowerPC to x86. This would bloat apps that are compatible with both to double their current download size. Current Universal (iPhone/iPad) apps are NOT fat binaries. They have multiple sets of resources (images, screen layouts, etc.) and the code needs to have multiple behaviors depending on the device. i.e. the code has to check "is this an iPad? If so do this...
Currently, developers have to create separate binaries for use on the emulator or the actual device.
2. Several developers have checked-in here to say that their apps are listed this way. None have offered that they had any advance knowledge of this, or did anything to make it happen. If this is about ARM/x86 fat binaries, the developer would have had to build their app that way. And even if it didn't require a re-build, I think it's highly unlikely that Apple would start selling apps on a new platform without letting the developers know!
3. Apple is *reasonably* fair about giving all developers access to new technology at the same time. They also generally make a public announcement at the same time as making beta SDKs available to developers. (Though the public announcement may be limited in scope and vague.) There are so many developers, that despite confidentiality agreements, most of the details get out to the public pretty quickly, though perhaps in muddled form. While Apple DOES hand-pick developers for early-early access, it's typically not THAT early. A few weeks, max.
I do think that an x86 target for iOS apps is inevitable. Just not imminent.
My best guess is that this was a screw-up by the web-site developers. Perhaps they did a mockup of the app store for the marketing people, selected some apps or app categories that seemed likely candidates, and slipped-up and it went live on the real app store.
There's no need to emulate ARM instructions, though. And they already do emulate all of the complete iOS devices, at least sufficiently to run iOS apps on OSX.
Apple provides developers with a complete emulation package for testing their iOS apps on OSX. Apps are cross-compiled to x86 code. They also provide the complete set of iOS SDKs, cross-compiled to X86 code.
An emulator handles the device hardware - touchscreen, display, sound system, GPS (REALLY simple emulation - it's always sunny in Mountain View...), etc. If an iPhone or iPad are attached via USB cable, the emulator can even use the accelerometer and gyroscope in the device. Obviously, this could be easily changed to use some new peripheral device.
Other than device emulation, the apps suffer no loss of speed, since they are running native x86 code. In fact, they run considerably faster (ignoring, for this discussion, device emulation) than then do on an actual iOS device.
All Apple would need to give consumers the ability to run iOS apps on their Macs would be to provide them with the emulator (or, more likely, integrate it into the OSX desktop. I think end-users would find the picture of an iPhone or iPad that the emulator draws around the "screen" cute for a couple of days, but then quickly tire of it...), and add an additional target for developers.
What we've seen certainly seems to suggest that's what this is. HOWEVER:
1. For a single app to be compatible with both ARM and x86, they would need to introduce a "fat binary" similar to what they did with the transition from PowerPC to x86. This would bloat apps that are compatible with both to double their current download size. Current Universal (iPhone/iPad) apps are NOT fat binaries. They have multiple sets of resources (images, screen layouts, etc.) and the code needs to have multiple behaviors depending on the device. i.e. the code has to check "is this an iPad? If so do this...
Currently, developers have to create separate binaries for use on the emulator or the actual device.
2. Several developers have checked-in here to say that their apps are listed this way. None have offered that they had any advance knowledge of this, or did anything to make it happen. If this is about ARM/x86 fat binaries, the developer would have had to build their app that way. And even if it didn't require a re-build, I think it's highly unlikely that Apple would start selling apps on a new platform without letting the developers know!
3. Apple is *reasonably* fair about giving all developers access to new technology at the same time. They also generally make a public announcement at the same time as making beta SDKs available to developers. (Though the public announcement may be limited in scope and vague.) There are so many developers, that despite confidentiality agreements, most of the details get out to the public pretty quickly, though perhaps in muddled form. While Apple DOES hand-pick developers for early-early access, it's typically not THAT early. A few weeks, max.
I do think that an x86 target for iOS apps is inevitable. Just not imminent.
My best guess is that this was a screw-up by the web-site developers. Perhaps they did a mockup of the app store for the marketing people, selected some apps or app categories that seemed likely candidates, and slipped-up and it went live on the real app store.
SactoGuy18
Apr 14, 06:47 AM
In the end, the iPhone 5 will probably be like this:
1. Will look like a "thicker" 4G iPod touch.
2. Display is now 4" IPS LCD touchscreen that goes almost all the way the edge of the device on the left and right side when you hold it vertically.
3. The back will now be grey color, mostly because the back is now a Liquidmetal metal back. We can rule out carbon fiber back due to normally high production costs for carbon fiber parts.
4. Will have completely redesigned antenna designed so you don't get signal loss regardless of how you hold the device.
5. Will use Apple A5 dual-core CPU/GPU.
6. Will use 512 MB system RAM (unless Apple can squeeze out another 256 MB of RAM internally).
7. Storage capacities will be 16, 32 and now 64 GB of flash memory.
8. Will use new Qualcomm or Broadcom cellphone chipset that supports GSM, CDMA and LTE so the iPhone 5 becomes a "universal" cellphone.
9. Will incorporate the latest Bluetooth 4.0 standard connectivity.
10. Will incorporate near-field communications connectivity that is at least compatible with the Sony-developed FeliCa standard (very necessary for use in Hong Kong, Japan and South Korea).
1. Will look like a "thicker" 4G iPod touch.
2. Display is now 4" IPS LCD touchscreen that goes almost all the way the edge of the device on the left and right side when you hold it vertically.
3. The back will now be grey color, mostly because the back is now a Liquidmetal metal back. We can rule out carbon fiber back due to normally high production costs for carbon fiber parts.
4. Will have completely redesigned antenna designed so you don't get signal loss regardless of how you hold the device.
5. Will use Apple A5 dual-core CPU/GPU.
6. Will use 512 MB system RAM (unless Apple can squeeze out another 256 MB of RAM internally).
7. Storage capacities will be 16, 32 and now 64 GB of flash memory.
8. Will use new Qualcomm or Broadcom cellphone chipset that supports GSM, CDMA and LTE so the iPhone 5 becomes a "universal" cellphone.
9. Will incorporate the latest Bluetooth 4.0 standard connectivity.
10. Will incorporate near-field communications connectivity that is at least compatible with the Sony-developed FeliCa standard (very necessary for use in Hong Kong, Japan and South Korea).
more...
WeegieMac
Apr 16, 01:52 AM
Folders still animate poorly in Launchpad (opening and closing) and transitions to and from full screen mode on Safari is a little choppy.
It certainly feels stable enough though.
It certainly feels stable enough though.
LagunaSol
Apr 28, 12:23 PM
No in bogo they BOTH make money. Verizon, Att, Tmobile and Sprint have already paid retail for the phone before customers recieve the contract price. Apple, Samsung, HTC etc have already made their money. Telcos now have to make their money over time with the contract. Telcos now have to make their money over time with the contract.
One must assume the carrier would prefer to sell an iPhone, where they don't have to make up the cost of a "free" Android phone over time. Carriers thus would want to sink more advertising dollars and apply more sales pressure for the more profitable iPhone.
Again, let's get the iPhone on Sprint and T-Mobile and see how it all plays out.
One must assume the carrier would prefer to sell an iPhone, where they don't have to make up the cost of a "free" Android phone over time. Carriers thus would want to sink more advertising dollars and apply more sales pressure for the more profitable iPhone.
Again, let's get the iPhone on Sprint and T-Mobile and see how it all plays out.
more...
dernhelm
Oct 19, 07:39 AM
Is there anything really innovative there? I don't think so. Yes, MacPro is an example of beautiful engineering, but there's not much innovation in there.
So what are you expecting? The computer industry hasn't been truly innovative since the first ICs were produced. I suppose you could claim the invention of the mouse was relatively innovative, but certainly not the addition of the keyboard - those had been used in typewriters for years! For the rest of it, all it is is binary mathematics - with short and long term storage - this was all stuff mathematicians had a handle on for millenia. Nothing innovative there right? The internet? Not really innovative, people had been connecting PCs together with serial and parallel cables for years before that. The internet did it better, but so what? To be truly innovative, you must come up with something that no one else has ever done, right?
In case you hadn't noticed, pretty much everything in the computer industry had been done before, or can be seen as an adaption of something else. So by your definition, there are no new ideas and therefore no innovation anywhere. Which leads me to ask, what innovative things are you looking for, that you feel you can criticize Apple for not being innovative enough?
So what are you expecting? The computer industry hasn't been truly innovative since the first ICs were produced. I suppose you could claim the invention of the mouse was relatively innovative, but certainly not the addition of the keyboard - those had been used in typewriters for years! For the rest of it, all it is is binary mathematics - with short and long term storage - this was all stuff mathematicians had a handle on for millenia. Nothing innovative there right? The internet? Not really innovative, people had been connecting PCs together with serial and parallel cables for years before that. The internet did it better, but so what? To be truly innovative, you must come up with something that no one else has ever done, right?
In case you hadn't noticed, pretty much everything in the computer industry had been done before, or can be seen as an adaption of something else. So by your definition, there are no new ideas and therefore no innovation anywhere. Which leads me to ask, what innovative things are you looking for, that you feel you can criticize Apple for not being innovative enough?
leekohler
Apr 28, 03:04 PM
lol. you have a huge boulder on your shoulder.
I find callousness, and claiming to know something as a "fact", when there is no possible way to know that, to be reprehensible. If that is a boulder on my shoulder, so be it.
I find callousness, and claiming to know something as a "fact", when there is no possible way to know that, to be reprehensible. If that is a boulder on my shoulder, so be it.
more...
charlituna
Apr 24, 02:50 AM
I don't quite understand this... as people use their iPhones on T-Mobile jailbroken all the time. How could AT&T iPhones work on T-Mobile now if they need different hardware???
People jail break their iphones to use them on T-Mobile with Edge. It is only the 3g that is on the different frequency set.
Just release a GSM/CDMA every-band iPhone 5, and sell it off contract as well. Virgin Mobile USA customers are going to orgasm for that.
I would go for that. I would even happily pay the no contract price. If it means that I can tell ATT that they have to knock $16.66 off my monthly bill because I'm not paying them back money they didn't put in and they can't refuse.
People jail break their iphones to use them on T-Mobile with Edge. It is only the 3g that is on the different frequency set.
Just release a GSM/CDMA every-band iPhone 5, and sell it off contract as well. Virgin Mobile USA customers are going to orgasm for that.
I would go for that. I would even happily pay the no contract price. If it means that I can tell ATT that they have to knock $16.66 off my monthly bill because I'm not paying them back money they didn't put in and they can't refuse.
WeegieMac
Apr 14, 12:53 PM
I agree with the animation glitches. For the 5 minutes I've had it on my iPhone (Did a restore, instead of upgrade), haven't noticed animation glitches like I did with 4.3 and 4.3.1, so I would say that it's a safe bet to upgrade it. Everything seems to be a lot more fluid this time around. Hope that helps. Enjoy!
Can you open a third party app (like a game or news app) that isn't already running in the background and let us know if the launch animation runs or whether it still just "pops" on screen like in 4.3 and 4.3.1 ...
Can you open a third party app (like a game or news app) that isn't already running in the background and let us know if the launch animation runs or whether it still just "pops" on screen like in 4.3 and 4.3.1 ...
MSUSpartan
Apr 5, 12:12 AM
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5307/5590396499_76f73281e9_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/davecsparty/5590396499/)
mrblah
Jul 27, 04:13 PM
Mr Blah, your name seems to be appropriate. No one looks at a tower and says, "Hey, that looks like a really innovative computer." However, how many people think that (maybe not in those exact words, but the idea) about the iMac? I'd venture to guess a lot more than ever thought that about a Dell. That's why Apple's viewed as the leader in the computer industry even by a lot of people who don't have or even want Macs. If Apple sacrificed that for the sake of perceived benefit on the part of the same people that go for Dells because they're "tools", they're not going to gain anything. Apple survives and flourishes by being the technology leaders, not by copying overused designs like towers.
Well go and tell that to Dell and their massive market share and we'll see if they take you seriously and change their marketing strategy. Theres ideology and then theres reality, I suggest you take a trip into reality. People may think Apple is innovative but so what? Most people buy whats cheap, not whats innovative, and since Dell isnt innovative in anything they do they can afford to be cheap. We have solid proof that innovation doesnt sell as well as affordability, what is there to argue about exactly? I think Apple is perfectly fine with having such a tiny market share especially since iPod is keeping them afloat (how many billions does Jobs need? Hes probably in no rush to make mroe money), but if Apple fans expect Apple to try and get more market share then they should expect them to lower their prices and offer things like Dell.
Well go and tell that to Dell and their massive market share and we'll see if they take you seriously and change their marketing strategy. Theres ideology and then theres reality, I suggest you take a trip into reality. People may think Apple is innovative but so what? Most people buy whats cheap, not whats innovative, and since Dell isnt innovative in anything they do they can afford to be cheap. We have solid proof that innovation doesnt sell as well as affordability, what is there to argue about exactly? I think Apple is perfectly fine with having such a tiny market share especially since iPod is keeping them afloat (how many billions does Jobs need? Hes probably in no rush to make mroe money), but if Apple fans expect Apple to try and get more market share then they should expect them to lower their prices and offer things like Dell.
Foucault
Apr 12, 11:25 AM
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5230/5593425241_5979a83335_b.jpg
AlphaBob
Jan 30, 05:12 PM
I am gambling my extra money on geopolitical actions. Bottom line is I don't mind taking a chance on my research, especially with the tensions in the middle east.
Time will tell of course. But if you think about it, the run-up in the price of gold has been post 9/11 and due to tension in the middle east. For more than six plus years the theory is that the world is coming to an end. Rightly or wrongly that theory is tightly bound to the current sitting president. When George Bush is no longer in office, things may well be different. The middle east may cool off. Betting on tension to continue seems a long bet to me.
Russia is talking of backing their currency with gold because they have been in economic crisis. They see that as a last ditch effort to short up a failing system. If you see the EU or the United States do the same, then I'd be worried.
But back to the original topic about why Apple stock is dropping. I'll say it is a gift to those that don't own the stock -- a chance to buy it for less than $200 a share! :)
Time will tell of course. But if you think about it, the run-up in the price of gold has been post 9/11 and due to tension in the middle east. For more than six plus years the theory is that the world is coming to an end. Rightly or wrongly that theory is tightly bound to the current sitting president. When George Bush is no longer in office, things may well be different. The middle east may cool off. Betting on tension to continue seems a long bet to me.
Russia is talking of backing their currency with gold because they have been in economic crisis. They see that as a last ditch effort to short up a failing system. If you see the EU or the United States do the same, then I'd be worried.
But back to the original topic about why Apple stock is dropping. I'll say it is a gift to those that don't own the stock -- a chance to buy it for less than $200 a share! :)
DrEwe
Jul 25, 12:01 AM
I think there is a hole in this argument/dream. Apple has spent considerable time and marketing money in the Made for iPod campaign that centers arounds the dock connector. They have created the Universal dock and inserts for all recent iPods, promising to keep these updated with all new iPods in the foreseeable future. Therefore, I seriously doubt these new no touch iPods wouldn't have at least a dock connector. .
The new Nike-Apple collaboration shows how Apple could get around this - simply a female dock receptacle, bluetooth (or whatever) configured to replace the physical dock connection. It would work for automobile interfaces, the iPhoto connection etc.
Apple could make a ton of cash "this simple connector - only available from Apple - allows all your iPod accessories to communicate with our new iMonolith iPod"... very 2001:)
The new Nike-Apple collaboration shows how Apple could get around this - simply a female dock receptacle, bluetooth (or whatever) configured to replace the physical dock connection. It would work for automobile interfaces, the iPhoto connection etc.
Apple could make a ton of cash "this simple connector - only available from Apple - allows all your iPod accessories to communicate with our new iMonolith iPod"... very 2001:)
Michaelgtrusa
May 3, 07:47 AM
Looks good.
No comments:
Post a Comment