snebes
Apr 15, 02:44 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?
Stay positive!! iMacs should get an update soon with a free Lion upgrade. At least I hope.
I think iMac overhaul is in the fall right after the back to school deals are over......
Basically all systems besides MBA and MBP are overdue for an update. iMac and Mac Pro especially.
Stay positive!! iMacs should get an update soon with a free Lion upgrade. At least I hope.
I think iMac overhaul is in the fall right after the back to school deals are over......
Basically all systems besides MBA and MBP are overdue for an update. iMac and Mac Pro especially.
kiljoy616
Apr 26, 12:26 PM
Can you point me to were you are getting your 2TB hard drives for free? :cool:
Oh look smart remarks without substance must be a fanboy. :p
Oh look smart remarks without substance must be a fanboy. :p
dethmaShine
Apr 13, 07:12 AM
You sound like I am against it.
Yes. You sounded like one. But apologies if you weren't.
In my opinion, dashboard is coming with iOS 5.0.
Apple did incorporate dashboard in iPhone OS 1.0 with the first iPhone but due to issues with performance they had to remove it.
This can be verified by debugging and going through iPhoneOS 1.0; navigating to /Library/Widgets folder. It was empty though.
Personalization is good. But the way its done on Android is ridiculous.
+ Widgets should always be sandboxed, the way they are in Dashboard.
[Both Google & MS failed to understand that btw]
I think personalization is good till the time it hinders the brand and brand quality. Folders/Wallpaper[:p] were one way to achieve that. There 'might' be more in the future but I highly doubt that.
All I can vouch for is that dashboard is coming in iOS 5.0.
Personalization in its entirety? Never in iOS 5.0.
Yes. You sounded like one. But apologies if you weren't.
In my opinion, dashboard is coming with iOS 5.0.
Apple did incorporate dashboard in iPhone OS 1.0 with the first iPhone but due to issues with performance they had to remove it.
This can be verified by debugging and going through iPhoneOS 1.0; navigating to /Library/Widgets folder. It was empty though.
Personalization is good. But the way its done on Android is ridiculous.
+ Widgets should always be sandboxed, the way they are in Dashboard.
[Both Google & MS failed to understand that btw]
I think personalization is good till the time it hinders the brand and brand quality. Folders/Wallpaper[:p] were one way to achieve that. There 'might' be more in the future but I highly doubt that.
All I can vouch for is that dashboard is coming in iOS 5.0.
Personalization in its entirety? Never in iOS 5.0.
TimUSCA
Apr 13, 03:21 PM
Id love to see a new standard for "HD". 1440p would be nice...but current media would have to catch up. That said, I dont think Apple could make a cost effective television. Sorry, but theyd sell a 42inch TV for 2000.000 easy.
The reason the cinema display is so expensive is due to the insanely high pixel density and it being LED backlit. It's max resolution is 2560 by 1440.
An Apple Television would only need to be 1080 across and LCD/Plasma.
HUGE difference in price.
The reason the cinema display is so expensive is due to the insanely high pixel density and it being LED backlit. It's max resolution is 2560 by 1440.
An Apple Television would only need to be 1080 across and LCD/Plasma.
HUGE difference in price.
more...
tjcampbell
Jun 6, 08:59 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_1_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7E18 Safari/528.16)
What's the big deal! Imagine if he downloaded the app, learned everything, passed the exam. Wonderboy Lawyer!!!!!!
What's the big deal! Imagine if he downloaded the app, learned everything, passed the exam. Wonderboy Lawyer!!!!!!
PlipPlop
Apr 12, 03:11 PM
I heard the iphone 5 is delayed because the HTC Sensation has sent Apple back to the drawing board.
more...
TurtleDragon
Mar 31, 11:26 AM
way to go prioritizing cartoony graphics to chew up my valuable screen real estate instead of giving me something useful like a to-do list.
seriously...why does apple insist on making me use clunky-ass Outlook just to have an integrated email/calendar/to-do workflow? it's the simplest and most obvious feature hole to fill!
does anyone here actually find their "task" implementation useful at all?
seriously...why does apple insist on making me use clunky-ass Outlook just to have an integrated email/calendar/to-do workflow? it's the simplest and most obvious feature hole to fill!
does anyone here actually find their "task" implementation useful at all?
GilGrissom
Jul 25, 05:35 AM
Arrrh I've been waiting for one of these for ages! I gave up and got a standard Apple Wireless Mouse a few months back! Arrgh!
I hope they have improved some of the small glitches people have with them, making it generally a nicer product, as I know some people totally hate its guts!
Different colour variations might be interesting, but the laser technology seems a step in the right direction at least, showing they have at least put a bit of thought into it and not just made the standard one with a bluetooth transceiver and batteries.
Heres to hoping its a top notch product!
I'm gonna guess it's gonna be very much a premium mouse on price too!
I hope they have improved some of the small glitches people have with them, making it generally a nicer product, as I know some people totally hate its guts!
Different colour variations might be interesting, but the laser technology seems a step in the right direction at least, showing they have at least put a bit of thought into it and not just made the standard one with a bluetooth transceiver and batteries.
Heres to hoping its a top notch product!
I'm gonna guess it's gonna be very much a premium mouse on price too!
more...
lordonuthin
Nov 29, 05:31 PM
I now have 2 gpu's running which should put up some additional points. I have stopped the cpu folding on that machine, it wasn't doing nearly as many ppd in windows as it was in linux. Hopefully I can push over the 400k ppw mark but we shall see.
I am used to win xp at work but win 7 has been a challenge to figure out, so many things have changed...
I am used to win xp at work but win 7 has been a challenge to figure out, so many things have changed...
ten-oak-druid
Apr 13, 04:06 PM
And, let's not forget that Apple tries to appease DRM owners.
So, you most likely couldn't play anything you don't own outright on such a TV.
I don't understand this comment.
So, you most likely couldn't play anything you don't own outright on such a TV.
I don't understand this comment.
more...
Michael Scrip
May 4, 06:37 PM
I said "iPhone dominate smartphone market". What you mentioned is iOS vs Android. They're completely different.
If Apple did not have VZ iPhone, they will have 0 share outside GSM phone. Apple want the market share to translate into profit.
Apple is a company who's profit comes, mostly, from selling hardware. So market share of product matters to Apple. Google, on the other side, cares more on OS market share. As long as iPhone still win the "phone market", not the OS market share, Apple will do well.
Maybe you misunderstood me... I don't care about market share... either hardware share or software share. I don't think it matters how much of one thing there are against another thing.
You're right... Apple cares about profit... mostly from selling hardware. Which they do... lots of hardware. I think that's more important for a company.
Apple is, and has always been, a hardware company.
Google went down the route of putting their software on any device that wanted it... which is why I hate when people compare Android vs the iPhone.
If Apple did not have VZ iPhone, they will have 0 share outside GSM phone. Apple want the market share to translate into profit.
Apple is a company who's profit comes, mostly, from selling hardware. So market share of product matters to Apple. Google, on the other side, cares more on OS market share. As long as iPhone still win the "phone market", not the OS market share, Apple will do well.
Maybe you misunderstood me... I don't care about market share... either hardware share or software share. I don't think it matters how much of one thing there are against another thing.
You're right... Apple cares about profit... mostly from selling hardware. Which they do... lots of hardware. I think that's more important for a company.
Apple is, and has always been, a hardware company.
Google went down the route of putting their software on any device that wanted it... which is why I hate when people compare Android vs the iPhone.
fatboyslick
May 4, 05:07 AM
Even if Apple and Google both make money from ads and apps... Apple still gets $600 per phone.
Apple has the right idea :D
"Android" can have their marketshare... I don't think it bothers Apple in the least.
That's the point though - to compensate for the lack of profits from hardware sales, Google flood the market with their OS to make up their margins through ads and apps.
Apple are bothered and hence tried to make it more attractive for developers to use Apple over Android through Ad-Sense, thus reducing the attractiveness of Googles OS
In the end they'll probably make similar amounts of money but through slightly different routes
Apple has the right idea :D
"Android" can have their marketshare... I don't think it bothers Apple in the least.
That's the point though - to compensate for the lack of profits from hardware sales, Google flood the market with their OS to make up their margins through ads and apps.
Apple are bothered and hence tried to make it more attractive for developers to use Apple over Android through Ad-Sense, thus reducing the attractiveness of Googles OS
In the end they'll probably make similar amounts of money but through slightly different routes
more...
manu chao
Apr 13, 08:31 PM
At this point, waiting another 3 - 5 months for an iPhone 5 would be more prudent than being locked into something so soon before a new device comes out.
That is why iPhone (4) sales will remain close to zero until the iPhone 5 introduction. A white iPhone 4 will not change that very much. :rolleyes:
That is why iPhone (4) sales will remain close to zero until the iPhone 5 introduction. A white iPhone 4 will not change that very much. :rolleyes:
Snowy_River
Jul 13, 12:52 AM
Those of you who have used both versions of Pages, do you find the '06 version to be significantly quicker? Someone a few pages ago commented on its sluggish performance. I have to admit that I've had sort of a delayed reaction (in terms of the time it takes for a sentence to appear after I've finished typing it) in my limited Pages experience. (Mind you, I do have an older machine.) A performance increase alone would be a worthy upgrade in my book.
-Squire
I've used Pages from day one. I'd say that Pages 2 seems just as quick if not quicker than Pages 1. I never really thought about it, so I can't say that I did any kind of comparison, and I no longer have Pages 1 on my computer to try to do a comparison with.
Before we finish on the bookfold tangent, I found a couple of useful sites that Snowy_River might want to peruse for his "booklet" style printing. This one (http://www.macosxhints.com/article.php?story=2005021608303265) sets up a PDF Services script. This one (http://word.mvps.org/Mac/BookletsFold.html#BookletPrograms) looks at three programs that take a pdf (printed from Pages, or for that matter Word) and print in booklet form.
Back on topic, I am a heavy user of Pages (and other tools when they suit) and will certainly welcome the Charts and WP mode. Along with general usability tweaks.
I said it already, but let me reiterate: Thank you!
I downloaded the free application CocoaBooklet, and it works great! It even adds an option under the PDF menu to "print" directly to a PDF booklet. And it only reduces pages as far as they need to be reduced. (In one of my earlier attempts I tried using the layout option to print 2 pages on a PDF page, but it reduced each page as if it was 8-1/2 x 11 even though they were 5-1/2 x 8-1/2, so things were way too small.)
So I'm now ecstatic with this solution! I may still bring just the basic PDF file to the printer, but, then again, I may hand them this. Who knows?
So, yet again, thank you!
-Squire
I've used Pages from day one. I'd say that Pages 2 seems just as quick if not quicker than Pages 1. I never really thought about it, so I can't say that I did any kind of comparison, and I no longer have Pages 1 on my computer to try to do a comparison with.
Before we finish on the bookfold tangent, I found a couple of useful sites that Snowy_River might want to peruse for his "booklet" style printing. This one (http://www.macosxhints.com/article.php?story=2005021608303265) sets up a PDF Services script. This one (http://word.mvps.org/Mac/BookletsFold.html#BookletPrograms) looks at three programs that take a pdf (printed from Pages, or for that matter Word) and print in booklet form.
Back on topic, I am a heavy user of Pages (and other tools when they suit) and will certainly welcome the Charts and WP mode. Along with general usability tweaks.
I said it already, but let me reiterate: Thank you!
I downloaded the free application CocoaBooklet, and it works great! It even adds an option under the PDF menu to "print" directly to a PDF booklet. And it only reduces pages as far as they need to be reduced. (In one of my earlier attempts I tried using the layout option to print 2 pages on a PDF page, but it reduced each page as if it was 8-1/2 x 11 even though they were 5-1/2 x 8-1/2, so things were way too small.)
So I'm now ecstatic with this solution! I may still bring just the basic PDF file to the printer, but, then again, I may hand them this. Who knows?
So, yet again, thank you!
more...
citi
Jul 25, 02:58 AM
Everyone keeps talking about the fact that their logitech and other mice have lasers but those are all RF mice. Correct me I am wrong, but I have NEVER seen a stand alone BT mouse with laser, (except for the DiNovo combo - but you can't buy them seperatel only optical. If it's true, than apple has another hit on their hands. Still don't know if I would buy one though.
alexf
Oct 18, 07:20 PM
To wit, the iPod is not Apple's "cash cow". By definition, if there is something that gains more revenue/profit than the iPod, then the iPod cannot be the cash cow. 58% of Apple's revenue still came from sales of Macs. Gross margins for both Macs and iPods has always been similar (hovering a bit below 30%), so the Mac also generates the majority of the profit for Apple.
Why, my friend, do you think that a "cash cow" has to be the thing that gains the most revenue/profit? Not sure what dictionary you're using; please let me know.
Why, my friend, do you think that a "cash cow" has to be the thing that gains the most revenue/profit? Not sure what dictionary you're using; please let me know.
more...
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.
Moyank24
Apr 25, 09:46 PM
Hey Hey Hey, what gives? :confused::p
Moyank24's vote for me especially hurts me- you cut me deeply :( When people were voting for you and momentum was gaining against you, I made sure to mention that YOU were a cleared Villager in the last game when I was Seer.
NathanMuir, I understand. When I was WW in the game two games back, I think I killed you off. Sorry about that. I guess you carry a grudge, lol!
* Never mind, questions deleted- I just re-read the OP *
Just to be spiteful, I'm going to vote for NathanMuir, simply because he is voting for me. Neener Neener!!
The pain will go away. And I promise that if the seer ever clears you, I won't vote for you.
Moyank24's vote for me especially hurts me- you cut me deeply :( When people were voting for you and momentum was gaining against you, I made sure to mention that YOU were a cleared Villager in the last game when I was Seer.
NathanMuir, I understand. When I was WW in the game two games back, I think I killed you off. Sorry about that. I guess you carry a grudge, lol!
* Never mind, questions deleted- I just re-read the OP *
Just to be spiteful, I'm going to vote for NathanMuir, simply because he is voting for me. Neener Neener!!
The pain will go away. And I promise that if the seer ever clears you, I won't vote for you.
KnightWRX
Dec 30, 10:43 PM
Under normal circumstances, you're more or less right.
No, I'm 100% right. Weight control is about calories. End of story. Calories in < Calories out and you lose weight. Opposite and you gain weight. There's no more or less here, that is the very basic premise. You want to discuss specifics that affect calories in/calories out, but that's flawed. Teach people the base first, and let them balance themselves out. You can very easily test your metabolic rate.
However, many supersize people have participated in crash diets, drugs and other questionable regimens over the years in search of quick-fix thinness. Doing so can, after a while, sabotage the body's normal metabolic rate and endocrine output, making it much harder for these people to find the balance in their caloric equation without depriving themselves of needed micronutrients (vitamins, minerals).
So you're saying these people have abnormally low "Calories out". It still comes down to that very simple equation. These people first have to fix their calories out, get their metabolism back straight, then they can fix their calories in.
It is that easy to lose weight. People don't know this very simple and basic concept, they think "Fat/Sugar" has to do with weight, which is completely false. "Low Saturated Fat!" on a box of cookies means squat if the cookies are 170 calories for 3 vs 180 calories for 3 of the same cookies with normal saturated fat. You still can't eat the whole box in one sitting and think "hey, it's low fat, I can't gain weight from this".
You'd be surprised how many people think this way.
I don't have a dog in this fight, but the question that runs through my mind is: if it's so easy, why do people struggle with it? Why are there entire industries built around people that struggle with losing weight on their own?
People struggle because like someone pointed out, they lack willpower and I'll add that they lack education. Calorie control is the only way to lose weight. There's seriously no other way, since weight is based off of calories and calories alone. To lose weight, you need a calorie deficiency. To be more precise, 3500 calories = 1 lbs, each way. So you need to create a calorie deficiency of 3500 calories before you lose 1 lbs. My metabolic rate is around 1740, that's what I burn each day without lifting a finger. Add in my normal routine, and I'm around the magic 2000 calorie diet. Let's not add in my gym routine. So to lose 1 lbs in 7 days, I need to go on a 1500 calorie diet per day. That's going to give me a deficiency of 500 per day, times 7 days, 1 lbs lost.
There's entire industries because they profit from it. Some people like to buy "instant" solutions. 1 lbs in 7 days ? Bah humbug, too long, I have 100 to lose! There's no instant solutions to weight loss, quite the contrary, the entire weight loss industry makes money by keeping people fat and coming back for miracle cures. Their proposed plans of "1 shake/bar for breakfeast, same for lunch and a balanced diner" is awful. First, it should be the opposite, a good breakfeast and then their bars/shakes for lunch and diner. Breakfeast is where you get your day's energy. Second, that's not calorie control since it doesn't explain that it is trying to create a calorie deficit. So people just still overeat, they compensate the calories they didn't eat at breakfeast/lunch with a huge "balanced" diner.
I'm going to just assume you are young and have time on your hands. Because when I was young and had time staying trim was quite easy., Let's talk when you're in your 30's and are a busy professional :rolleyes:
I'm 32, work 35 hours per week in IT (sitting down on my ass), am on call with tons of pages coming in once every 2 weeks. I have a girlfriend, a mortgage and a dog.
Again, staying trim has nothing to do with having time or being busy or not. If you spend less calories, eat less calories. Balance your calories in to your calories out and you'll stay trim. Sure it means doing a bit more research into what you're eating, but that's not impossible. It also means listening to your body. Feeling "stuffed" means you overate. You should never feel full or stuffed. A donut is not faster to mow down than an Apple. It's not more filling either. It's tons more calories though.
You made an assumption about me and you were wrong. You should look at yourself and what you are or aren't doing that is making you fat, not make up excuses.
look. I'm not trying to make excuses. I'm not THAT out of shape. I do bikram yoga 4 times per week and walk a lot. I just can't be as extensive about it as I was in my youthful years. I'm very healthy but I do need to drop 20ish lbs. per doctors orders. I've completely cut out any sugar drinks other than water and a few organic smoothies and an occaional glass of wine here and there. But at my age and with my busy schedule it's just not as easy as it was when I was 25. Not an excuse, just a simple fact.
But again, it's just because you don't understand your caloric need for a day and you either overeat or eat just the right amount to maintain your weight. You don't even need to exercise to create a calorie deficiency. I think you're the perfect example of what I'm talking about, you don't understand the very basic concept, which has nothing to do with time spent, but rather food ingested.
People need to get it out of their heads that it is about exercise. It's 10% working out, 90% food. Get your nutrition right and you won't need to exercise a day in your life. If you want to get fit however, make sure to balance your nutrition around your added caloric need to not drop weight too fast or at all if your goal is maintaining.
No, I'm 100% right. Weight control is about calories. End of story. Calories in < Calories out and you lose weight. Opposite and you gain weight. There's no more or less here, that is the very basic premise. You want to discuss specifics that affect calories in/calories out, but that's flawed. Teach people the base first, and let them balance themselves out. You can very easily test your metabolic rate.
However, many supersize people have participated in crash diets, drugs and other questionable regimens over the years in search of quick-fix thinness. Doing so can, after a while, sabotage the body's normal metabolic rate and endocrine output, making it much harder for these people to find the balance in their caloric equation without depriving themselves of needed micronutrients (vitamins, minerals).
So you're saying these people have abnormally low "Calories out". It still comes down to that very simple equation. These people first have to fix their calories out, get their metabolism back straight, then they can fix their calories in.
It is that easy to lose weight. People don't know this very simple and basic concept, they think "Fat/Sugar" has to do with weight, which is completely false. "Low Saturated Fat!" on a box of cookies means squat if the cookies are 170 calories for 3 vs 180 calories for 3 of the same cookies with normal saturated fat. You still can't eat the whole box in one sitting and think "hey, it's low fat, I can't gain weight from this".
You'd be surprised how many people think this way.
I don't have a dog in this fight, but the question that runs through my mind is: if it's so easy, why do people struggle with it? Why are there entire industries built around people that struggle with losing weight on their own?
People struggle because like someone pointed out, they lack willpower and I'll add that they lack education. Calorie control is the only way to lose weight. There's seriously no other way, since weight is based off of calories and calories alone. To lose weight, you need a calorie deficiency. To be more precise, 3500 calories = 1 lbs, each way. So you need to create a calorie deficiency of 3500 calories before you lose 1 lbs. My metabolic rate is around 1740, that's what I burn each day without lifting a finger. Add in my normal routine, and I'm around the magic 2000 calorie diet. Let's not add in my gym routine. So to lose 1 lbs in 7 days, I need to go on a 1500 calorie diet per day. That's going to give me a deficiency of 500 per day, times 7 days, 1 lbs lost.
There's entire industries because they profit from it. Some people like to buy "instant" solutions. 1 lbs in 7 days ? Bah humbug, too long, I have 100 to lose! There's no instant solutions to weight loss, quite the contrary, the entire weight loss industry makes money by keeping people fat and coming back for miracle cures. Their proposed plans of "1 shake/bar for breakfeast, same for lunch and a balanced diner" is awful. First, it should be the opposite, a good breakfeast and then their bars/shakes for lunch and diner. Breakfeast is where you get your day's energy. Second, that's not calorie control since it doesn't explain that it is trying to create a calorie deficit. So people just still overeat, they compensate the calories they didn't eat at breakfeast/lunch with a huge "balanced" diner.
I'm going to just assume you are young and have time on your hands. Because when I was young and had time staying trim was quite easy., Let's talk when you're in your 30's and are a busy professional :rolleyes:
I'm 32, work 35 hours per week in IT (sitting down on my ass), am on call with tons of pages coming in once every 2 weeks. I have a girlfriend, a mortgage and a dog.
Again, staying trim has nothing to do with having time or being busy or not. If you spend less calories, eat less calories. Balance your calories in to your calories out and you'll stay trim. Sure it means doing a bit more research into what you're eating, but that's not impossible. It also means listening to your body. Feeling "stuffed" means you overate. You should never feel full or stuffed. A donut is not faster to mow down than an Apple. It's not more filling either. It's tons more calories though.
You made an assumption about me and you were wrong. You should look at yourself and what you are or aren't doing that is making you fat, not make up excuses.
look. I'm not trying to make excuses. I'm not THAT out of shape. I do bikram yoga 4 times per week and walk a lot. I just can't be as extensive about it as I was in my youthful years. I'm very healthy but I do need to drop 20ish lbs. per doctors orders. I've completely cut out any sugar drinks other than water and a few organic smoothies and an occaional glass of wine here and there. But at my age and with my busy schedule it's just not as easy as it was when I was 25. Not an excuse, just a simple fact.
But again, it's just because you don't understand your caloric need for a day and you either overeat or eat just the right amount to maintain your weight. You don't even need to exercise to create a calorie deficiency. I think you're the perfect example of what I'm talking about, you don't understand the very basic concept, which has nothing to do with time spent, but rather food ingested.
People need to get it out of their heads that it is about exercise. It's 10% working out, 90% food. Get your nutrition right and you won't need to exercise a day in your life. If you want to get fit however, make sure to balance your nutrition around your added caloric need to not drop weight too fast or at all if your goal is maintaining.
BenK01
Aug 15, 02:41 PM
But I stand by Apple for now, that they do have some "bigger" features they just aren't showing us....
What's the next logical step in a computer interface? I used to say "Computer, show me the money" to open Quicken back in pre-OS X days. More of a gimmick than anything else, but imagine if the Finder and maybe even other apps became "speakable."
Me: "Check mail"
Computer: "You have nine new messages. Would you like me to read them?"
Me: "No, thanks."
(clicks on an email, reads message)
Me: "Reply to this message"
Computer: "Type or speak?
Me: "Type"
type-type-type
Me: "Computer, I'd like to add a photo of the kids to this email."
Computer: "iphoto has 6,813 pictures of the kids, which one would you like?"
Me: "One from the birthday party last week."
Computer: (a strip from iphoto appears) "Here are 23 from last week. I've highlighted the one where your wife fixed the red eye. Is that the one you want?"
Me: "Yes, that will be fine."
Computer adds the picture to stationery in the email, other pictures go away.
Me: "Send the email"
Me: "...and order me a pizza."
This kind of thing can't be too far off. A 75 mhz Performa could do it in a rudimentary way. Imagine what a modern Mac may be able to do. "Speakeasy" has a nice ring to it.
What's the next logical step in a computer interface? I used to say "Computer, show me the money" to open Quicken back in pre-OS X days. More of a gimmick than anything else, but imagine if the Finder and maybe even other apps became "speakable."
Me: "Check mail"
Computer: "You have nine new messages. Would you like me to read them?"
Me: "No, thanks."
(clicks on an email, reads message)
Me: "Reply to this message"
Computer: "Type or speak?
Me: "Type"
type-type-type
Me: "Computer, I'd like to add a photo of the kids to this email."
Computer: "iphoto has 6,813 pictures of the kids, which one would you like?"
Me: "One from the birthday party last week."
Computer: (a strip from iphoto appears) "Here are 23 from last week. I've highlighted the one where your wife fixed the red eye. Is that the one you want?"
Me: "Yes, that will be fine."
Computer adds the picture to stationery in the email, other pictures go away.
Me: "Send the email"
Me: "...and order me a pizza."
This kind of thing can't be too far off. A 75 mhz Performa could do it in a rudimentary way. Imagine what a modern Mac may be able to do. "Speakeasy" has a nice ring to it.
stevegmu
Jan 30, 05:36 PM
Let me correct myself... I didn't mean to say occupy, I meant that we have troops in US bases in over 200 countries.
Interesting, considering there are only 194 recognized countries on Earth. Which planet are the other 6 countries located on?
Interesting, considering there are only 194 recognized countries on Earth. Which planet are the other 6 countries located on?
gkhaldi
Oct 24, 08:23 AM
MacBook Pro 15-inch Glossy Widescreen Display
2GB 667 DDR2 SDRAM - 2x1GB
2.33GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
Apple USB Modem
Backlit Keyboard/Mac OS - U.S. English
160GB Serial ATA Drive @ 5400 rpm
Accessory Kit
SuperDrive 6x (DVD+R DL/DVD�RW/CD-RW)
Soon, the little lady can use the PB12" full time.
:D
I just ordered it with 3 GB. I hope the system is not "out of balance" because of the non-even distribution of the memory banks.
2GB 667 DDR2 SDRAM - 2x1GB
2.33GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
Apple USB Modem
Backlit Keyboard/Mac OS - U.S. English
160GB Serial ATA Drive @ 5400 rpm
Accessory Kit
SuperDrive 6x (DVD+R DL/DVD�RW/CD-RW)
Soon, the little lady can use the PB12" full time.
:D
I just ordered it with 3 GB. I hope the system is not "out of balance" because of the non-even distribution of the memory banks.
Swarmlord
Oct 23, 09:25 AM
I've got a question for you guys. Any of you Mac users that also run Windows on a box somewhere:
Are any of you really going to upgrade to Vista when it comes out? or are you going to wait at least a year?
I run Windows on several computers at home and use one at work. Supporting all types of computers is my line of work so I can't avoid it. I use my Mac to accomplish anything where I want reliable, predictable results though especially when it comes to video and graphics.
I NEVER upgrade any of my personal computers to the latest Windows products until several months have passed. I have to install the product at work primarily to evaluate when it's ready to deploy.
I used Windows 2000 until service pack 1 on XP came out and will probably do the same thing for Vista. Microsoft basically has to stop supporting a version of their OS before I feel compelled to upgrade though. It's only been about 6 months where the lack of updates on Windows 2000 has been a concern to me.
Are any of you really going to upgrade to Vista when it comes out? or are you going to wait at least a year?
I run Windows on several computers at home and use one at work. Supporting all types of computers is my line of work so I can't avoid it. I use my Mac to accomplish anything where I want reliable, predictable results though especially when it comes to video and graphics.
I NEVER upgrade any of my personal computers to the latest Windows products until several months have passed. I have to install the product at work primarily to evaluate when it's ready to deploy.
I used Windows 2000 until service pack 1 on XP came out and will probably do the same thing for Vista. Microsoft basically has to stop supporting a version of their OS before I feel compelled to upgrade though. It's only been about 6 months where the lack of updates on Windows 2000 has been a concern to me.
sinser
Apr 26, 10:16 AM
Give me a non glossy display option and I'll buy it!
Non glossy + 24" would be simply perfect.
Non glossy + 24" would be simply perfect.
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét