HasanDaddy
Mar 15, 03:41 AM
and btw - I mentioned in another thread, but Fashion Island will be opening early at 9 AM, according to their sales people
Surely
Sep 13, 08:22 PM
Do you ever leave your basement? How will you know if it is a hit? :p
This website?:
http://www.daclubs.com/
:p
This website?:
http://www.daclubs.com/
:p
snap58
Jul 25, 07:32 PM
sounds interesting, though i have a feeling many people will just ignore the feature and end up touching the screen anyway, lol.
I am not going to read all 110 replies, so this may have already been put out there.
Remember the other patent with the LCD with the built in little photo cells, think these would know when something was above them?
The screen will have a clear scratch proof cover over it that you could touch if you wanted too.
I can't see people Not touching the screen, just hovering mm above it, no way.
I am not going to read all 110 replies, so this may have already been put out there.
Remember the other patent with the LCD with the built in little photo cells, think these would know when something was above them?
The screen will have a clear scratch proof cover over it that you could touch if you wanted too.
I can't see people Not touching the screen, just hovering mm above it, no way.
Lloyd Christmas
Nov 25, 04:55 PM
gonna be getting this for myself
http://www.nitrorcx.com/51c812-firewhite-24ghz.html
Is this your first rc car? i clicked on the link and thinking about buying something. seems like a decent car but im not to sure about it. Thanks Lloyd
http://www.nitrorcx.com/51c812-firewhite-24ghz.html
Is this your first rc car? i clicked on the link and thinking about buying something. seems like a decent car but im not to sure about it. Thanks Lloyd
more...
SciFrog
Oct 13, 01:58 PM
Console client, no third party items...
notjustjay
Oct 21, 10:55 AM
I do not have $879 to spend on a chair and if I did I would not. It's a chair! :D
The Herman Miller Aeron isn't just a chair... it's an experience! :eek:
Seriously, I probably wouldn't spend $879 of my own money to buy one, but my previous workplace had those and it was THE most comfortable office chair I have ever used.
As for a Christmas wishlist... I've already bought way too many tech gadgets this year already, so I'm asking friends and family for cash or gift cards to help offset those purchases instead of having them struggle to think of even more stuff to give me.
I bought an iPad in May,
http://www.tipb.com/images/stories/2010/01/ipad.png
and a VitaMix blender last month (which I like, but dang, it was expensive).
http://www.gitelectronics.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/Vita-Mix-5200.jpg
(There was also the KitchenAid food processor, the home theatre system, ... yeah, I've bought enough "stuff" for myself this year already.)
The Herman Miller Aeron isn't just a chair... it's an experience! :eek:
Seriously, I probably wouldn't spend $879 of my own money to buy one, but my previous workplace had those and it was THE most comfortable office chair I have ever used.
As for a Christmas wishlist... I've already bought way too many tech gadgets this year already, so I'm asking friends and family for cash or gift cards to help offset those purchases instead of having them struggle to think of even more stuff to give me.
I bought an iPad in May,
http://www.tipb.com/images/stories/2010/01/ipad.png
and a VitaMix blender last month (which I like, but dang, it was expensive).
http://www.gitelectronics.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/Vita-Mix-5200.jpg
(There was also the KitchenAid food processor, the home theatre system, ... yeah, I've bought enough "stuff" for myself this year already.)
more...
godkorg
Mar 29, 09:31 AM
The iPad 2 scalpers are going after the developers now! Have they no shame!
:apple::apple::o:o:):)
oh... non transferable... nevermind :)
:apple::apple::o:o:):)
oh... non transferable... nevermind :)
Hardtimes
Mar 31, 10:35 AM
Perhaps they should give away some crayons and a colouring book to everyone who buys a new mac aswell?
more...
aardwolf
Apr 15, 03:50 PM
And dropbox now works without the plist hack
The Dropbox forum build has been working without the plist hack for over a week. Check out http://www.dropbox.com/forums to get it.
The Dropbox forum build has been working without the plist hack for over a week. Check out http://www.dropbox.com/forums to get it.
Phat Elvis
Jul 25, 12:31 PM
Why is everyone assuming that you would use your fingers for these controls. Sounds like there could be lots of uses - clean and dirty.
Clean: you could flick your head to a side to forward to the next song.
Dirty: you could (beep) your (beep) to get to the next song. :D
Clean: you could flick your head to a side to forward to the next song.
Dirty: you could (beep) your (beep) to get to the next song. :D
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.
Skika
Apr 15, 01:44 PM
I notice more overall smoothness with my iPad 1 :eek: . Maybe its just perception, but im pretty shure its better.
more...
ebow
Aug 16, 07:22 AM
But at least the sidebar is improved in a useful way. I hate how the text on the current sidebar hangs to the side of the images, taking up valuable width.
So instead, the new sidebar pushes into the image, reducing it in size, and requiring you to expand the width ( :eek: ) of the window if you want to keep the image the same size. I don't really see the overall difference. I suppose it comes down to whether you prefer the images to get slightly smaller, or the tray to suddenly cover over other things.
So instead, the new sidebar pushes into the image, reducing it in size, and requiring you to expand the width ( :eek: ) of the window if you want to keep the image the same size. I don't really see the overall difference. I suppose it comes down to whether you prefer the images to get slightly smaller, or the tray to suddenly cover over other things.
Parkin Pig
Apr 3, 04:37 AM
Crimple Viaduct, Harrogate
more...
lordonuthin
Nov 26, 02:28 AM
i hope they do. we'll see.
in the meantime, i'm thinking about putting a few video cards in my 2006 mac pro to fold with - since it's only getting like 3500 ppd running the smp client. i know i'll have to run windows to do the GPU2 client for now, but it might be worth it.
does anyone know if this (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814133304) card will work? and could i put 2 or 3 or 4 in there?
The GeForce 9800 will work from what I have seen, thy this thread for more info. (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=461892) and here (http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1322096) google "gpu folding" to find all kinds of info
Let us know how it goes if you do get one to try.
in the meantime, i'm thinking about putting a few video cards in my 2006 mac pro to fold with - since it's only getting like 3500 ppd running the smp client. i know i'll have to run windows to do the GPU2 client for now, but it might be worth it.
does anyone know if this (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814133304) card will work? and could i put 2 or 3 or 4 in there?
The GeForce 9800 will work from what I have seen, thy this thread for more info. (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=461892) and here (http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1322096) google "gpu folding" to find all kinds of info
Let us know how it goes if you do get one to try.
CorvusCamenarum
Apr 24, 01:13 PM
That is a dude not a girl.
We disagree.
Polis, who said she had a sex-change operation to become a woman
I'm going to ask a dumb question here: if the victim had already undergone the surgery, then how could the perpetrators know the victim was genetically male? I'm not trying to be snarky, but there's a logical disconnect, unless I'm missing something.
We disagree.
Polis, who said she had a sex-change operation to become a woman
I'm going to ask a dumb question here: if the victim had already undergone the surgery, then how could the perpetrators know the victim was genetically male? I'm not trying to be snarky, but there's a logical disconnect, unless I'm missing something.
more...
Cheerwino
Apr 14, 07:44 AM
Guys, which one should I get?
I've been trying to score an iPad2 and now here comes the new ix.Mac.MarketingName, which sounds awesome! So between this and iPad2, ATV2, Air, MBP, iPhone, Mac Pro, Nano and iMac, what should I get?
Mostly I would use this for web surfing and light photo editing, but it also needs to dry laundry and serve as daily transportation for my 8 mile commute. But, I'm worried the new ix.Mac.MarketingName requires Z-rated tires, which are quite expensive. I'm also curious whether, with the right apps, the ix.Mac.MarketingName can serve as a prophylactic or if it's better to have a dedicated device for that.
So, whaddya think? What other ix.Mac.MarketingName rumors have you heard? :apple:
I've been trying to score an iPad2 and now here comes the new ix.Mac.MarketingName, which sounds awesome! So between this and iPad2, ATV2, Air, MBP, iPhone, Mac Pro, Nano and iMac, what should I get?
Mostly I would use this for web surfing and light photo editing, but it also needs to dry laundry and serve as daily transportation for my 8 mile commute. But, I'm worried the new ix.Mac.MarketingName requires Z-rated tires, which are quite expensive. I'm also curious whether, with the right apps, the ix.Mac.MarketingName can serve as a prophylactic or if it's better to have a dedicated device for that.
So, whaddya think? What other ix.Mac.MarketingName rumors have you heard? :apple:
playaj82
Jul 26, 01:20 PM
Has anybody thought these might all just be preventative filings?
Apple is smart to file a patent on something that might be "similar" to technology they have developed just to maintain their exclusivity of the technology.
Apple might be filing this just so they can say, haha, Microsoft, you can't produce this because we invented it first....and then Apple moves on to the next big thing without ever producing a product based on the patent.
As far as the trademark stuff goes, it is the same logic. Apple needs to protect as many derivations of the "*Pod" mark in order to make their Pod trademarks even stronger. Apple will probably never produce something with the "doPod" trademark, but any other company thinking about naming their product the "doPod" will think twice before getting into a legal battle with Apple, who has one of the most recognized digital entertainment trademarks in the world.
You can show me Patent and Trademark filings all day long and I will simply reply with a "prove it"
Apple is smart to file a patent on something that might be "similar" to technology they have developed just to maintain their exclusivity of the technology.
Apple might be filing this just so they can say, haha, Microsoft, you can't produce this because we invented it first....and then Apple moves on to the next big thing without ever producing a product based on the patent.
As far as the trademark stuff goes, it is the same logic. Apple needs to protect as many derivations of the "*Pod" mark in order to make their Pod trademarks even stronger. Apple will probably never produce something with the "doPod" trademark, but any other company thinking about naming their product the "doPod" will think twice before getting into a legal battle with Apple, who has one of the most recognized digital entertainment trademarks in the world.
You can show me Patent and Trademark filings all day long and I will simply reply with a "prove it"
lafemmme
Feb 1, 01:20 AM
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhRH7Wln3Y3dfDRxziOmOoJtup2XV_vPWg0d05CjEI1mR6Klt67UcKLiNVMCqLiAVdM0vGPTCguYlMRBZpDglaPW-aHaObUL16oiSfdFBZy7h3ESgyefGd06Yi5n-jUqIHe5X71EyyHI7E/s400/24HourFitnessApprovedLogo.jpg
Back to being a gym rat, just signed up with 24.
Back to being a gym rat, just signed up with 24.
ivladster
Mar 31, 08:27 PM
More and more references to iOS design means that apple is slowly transitioning to touch user interface. It's pretty clear that next version of Mac OS X will be touch based.
CPngN
Mar 31, 02:57 PM
I am not too keen on this "cartoony" 3D effect Apple seem to be going for.
Torn off pages� faux-leather binding� I mean doesn't anyone else think it is a bit corny?
It really does seems as if the cutesyeness of the iOS is spreading over to OSX.
I'd prefer a clean modern OS with usability first and foremost.
Screw the gratuitous eyecandy�
Remind anyone of OS/2 and their cheesy waste-of-screen-realestate spiral binder stuff?
As a theming option, sure, cool, welcome to last decade Apple. If they're going to force these silly looks randomly per app, booo! But the Mac apps looking like iOS apps is inevitable.. in a few years they will probably all be 1 in the same.
Torn off pages� faux-leather binding� I mean doesn't anyone else think it is a bit corny?
It really does seems as if the cutesyeness of the iOS is spreading over to OSX.
I'd prefer a clean modern OS with usability first and foremost.
Screw the gratuitous eyecandy�
Remind anyone of OS/2 and their cheesy waste-of-screen-realestate spiral binder stuff?
As a theming option, sure, cool, welcome to last decade Apple. If they're going to force these silly looks randomly per app, booo! But the Mac apps looking like iOS apps is inevitable.. in a few years they will probably all be 1 in the same.
kiiso
May 3, 08:59 AM
WTF!
The top 3.1 Ghz 27" iMac has a cheaper i5-2400 CPU, than the low-end 27" and high-end 21.5", with both have i5-2500S processors!
(The i5-2400 is 184$ (http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=52207) and the i5-2500S is 216$ (http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=52211))
:confused:
+ the 2500S can do 3.7 Ghz in turbo, and the 2400 can only 3.4 Ghz in Turbo Mode!!!??? :eek::confused:
Am I wrong?:confused:
The top 3.1 Ghz 27" iMac has a cheaper i5-2400 CPU, than the low-end 27" and high-end 21.5", with both have i5-2500S processors!
(The i5-2400 is 184$ (http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=52207) and the i5-2500S is 216$ (http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=52211))
:confused:
+ the 2500S can do 3.7 Ghz in turbo, and the 2400 can only 3.4 Ghz in Turbo Mode!!!??? :eek::confused:
Am I wrong?:confused:
cmaier
Apr 21, 10:53 PM
How so? (not saying you're wrong, I'm genuinely curious)
Several reasons. It's very fast - Mannheim is about a year, and Dusseldorf about two. You can't raise invalidity of the patent as a defense. You have to very early in the case explain your theory of non-infringement, etc. The system works very differently than the U.S.
Several reasons. It's very fast - Mannheim is about a year, and Dusseldorf about two. You can't raise invalidity of the patent as a defense. You have to very early in the case explain your theory of non-infringement, etc. The system works very differently than the U.S.
DCJ001
Apr 15, 01:52 PM
With the update notice officially stating When Lion ships this summer What are the chances the iMac refresh will happen at the same time? or will it be in the Fall instead?
http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/#iMac
http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/#iMac
No comments:
Post a Comment