RBR2
Apr 12, 02:15 PM
The Thunderbolt Wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thunderbolt_(interface)) has a diagram showing the TB controller's access to things. The accompanying description ("Thunderbolt can be implemented on graphics cards, which have access to DisplayPort data and PCI express connectivity, or on the motherboard of new devices, such as the MacBook Pro.[5][17][22]") implies that a TB compatible PCIe graphics card could bring older systems up-to-date. That would be interesting.
Gosh
Oct 23, 03:23 PM
I have a legit version of XP running in Parallels whilst I make the compete switch and then - why the hell would I but Vista anyway?
Ow yeah for the gadgets - of course - silly me!:rolleyes:
Ow yeah for the gadgets - of course - silly me!:rolleyes:
mrial
Apr 14, 05:45 PM
I have the iPad 2 running 4.3.1 and I have no such setting available.
You have to activate it using XCode 3 or better ... here's how:
http://downloadsquad.switched.com/2011/03/14/enable-ios-4-3-gesture-controls-on-your-ipad-with-free-xcode-3-d/
You have to activate it using XCode 3 or better ... here's how:
http://downloadsquad.switched.com/2011/03/14/enable-ios-4-3-gesture-controls-on-your-ipad-with-free-xcode-3-d/
twoodcc
Jul 24, 08:33 PM
seems interesting. i don't know if i would use it that much, but this could be a good thing.
more...
Gasu E.
Apr 26, 02:48 PM
Well they won't be charging me.
I'm sure Apple will be heartbroken that you won't be gobbling resources without paying.
If it's worth anything, it's worth $20/year.
I'm sure Apple will be heartbroken that you won't be gobbling resources without paying.
If it's worth anything, it's worth $20/year.
chris1184
May 2, 12:14 PM
I am amazed as to why we have not seen a single "imac 2011 leak" ... pics of the new imac .. pics of the box ? etc like with the iphones lol .... i'm going to be seriously depressed if i go to apple.com/uk tomorrow and still see that white iphone on there ... seriously
ps - i just noticed i am no longer a macrumor newbie - I am a regular now .. woo hoo
that is exactly what I am wondering...why are there no leaked pics of boxes etc! like with the MBP
ps - i just noticed i am no longer a macrumor newbie - I am a regular now .. woo hoo
that is exactly what I am wondering...why are there no leaked pics of boxes etc! like with the MBP
more...
wordoflife
May 1, 09:55 PM
Looks like he had an iPhone.
Chris Blount
May 3, 07:52 AM
Still only 500GB hard drive on the low end. Ug! Hasn't apple realized it's 2011 and 1TB should now be the minimum?
more...
Joe The Dragon
Apr 11, 09:05 PM
I wonder how Thunderbolt will interact with the graphics card.
I expect that the video signals (DisplayPort) go from the graphics card back through the PCI bus to the TB chip and then out through the TB ports to the monitor. So when you upgrade the graphics card, it works (thinking of computers with replaceable PCI cards here, e.g. a Mac Pro with TB). But this will likely require the support of the graphics card manufacturers, so we have cards that are "compatible" with TB...?
Presumably one can still use the graphics cards' own video-out ports too.
Guess we'll see.
well TB seems to be add on to DP port. So VIDEO may work with a added in card and a voodoo 1 like loop back cable. But you don't TB tied to on board video and what about AMD / sever / upper mid - high end intel boards / other boards that don't have chipset / cpu based video. Some sever boards have on board pci based video.
I expect that the video signals (DisplayPort) go from the graphics card back through the PCI bus to the TB chip and then out through the TB ports to the monitor. So when you upgrade the graphics card, it works (thinking of computers with replaceable PCI cards here, e.g. a Mac Pro with TB). But this will likely require the support of the graphics card manufacturers, so we have cards that are "compatible" with TB...?
Presumably one can still use the graphics cards' own video-out ports too.
Guess we'll see.
well TB seems to be add on to DP port. So VIDEO may work with a added in card and a voodoo 1 like loop back cable. But you don't TB tied to on board video and what about AMD / sever / upper mid - high end intel boards / other boards that don't have chipset / cpu based video. Some sever boards have on board pci based video.
cult hero
Apr 24, 12:58 PM
One of my first thoughts when Verizon got an iPhone out of sync with the normal production order was the the iPhone 5 (or 4S) was going to be unlocked and Verizon wanted to capitalize on a few months of their own form of exclusivity.
I hope this means I'm right.
I'm currently sporting a Nexus One which, since its OTA update to 2.3 is a phone that has all the stability and responsiveness of Windows ME. (I have not found this to be generally true of the Android platform, but the Nexus One hasn't done the platform any favors for me personally.)
I've been eyeing the G2X (so far as I can tell it's just a rebranded LG Optimus 2X) as my next phone, but I think I'm gonna just wait and see what June - September has in store.
I hope this means I'm right.
I'm currently sporting a Nexus One which, since its OTA update to 2.3 is a phone that has all the stability and responsiveness of Windows ME. (I have not found this to be generally true of the Android platform, but the Nexus One hasn't done the platform any favors for me personally.)
I've been eyeing the G2X (so far as I can tell it's just a rebranded LG Optimus 2X) as my next phone, but I think I'm gonna just wait and see what June - September has in store.
more...
inlovewithi
Apr 13, 02:58 PM
I don't mind as long as the pricing is competitive, if its over-priced no way I'll be getting one..
Apple would be smart to just start making regular TVs and charging extra for it. As a (can't think of a word) they are in a really sweet position where if they do start making TVs and charge a couple of hundred dollars extra compared to similar TV, they'll will still be able to sell plenty of them and make an insane profit from people who will buy their products no matter what. As long as it has that Apple logo.
Apple would be smart to just start making regular TVs and charging extra for it. As a (can't think of a word) they are in a really sweet position where if they do start making TVs and charge a couple of hundred dollars extra compared to similar TV, they'll will still be able to sell plenty of them and make an insane profit from people who will buy their products no matter what. As long as it has that Apple logo.
Thomas Veil
Feb 28, 08:23 PM
Others have touched on this as well, but here's what Charlie said in one of his latest interviews (http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/41824830/ns/today-entertainment/):
...�I�m not angry, I�m passionate,� Sheen told Rossen. �It�s everybody thinks I should be begging for my job back, and I�m just going to forewarn them that it�s everybody else that�s going to be begging me for their job back.�...
In the interview with Rossen, which was taped Sunday in Sheen�s Beverly Hills home, the actor accused Lorre of �trying to destroy my family.� He also again took aim at Alcoholics Anonymous, calling it a failed system developed by a �broken-down fool that was a plagiarist.� He claimed he has conquered his own drug and alcohol problems by the sheer force of his will: �I closed my eyes and made it so.�
After checking himself out of rehab, Sheen set up his own home rehab facility called �Sober Valley Lodge,� from which the principles of A.A. had been banned. �I will not believe that if I do something then I have to follow a certain path, because it was written nice,� he said. �It was written for normal people, people that aren�t special. People that don�t have tiger blood, you know, Adonis DNA.�
He dismissed the idea that he has anything in common with addicts and alcoholics, who he says lack his strength of character, describing them as �fools, trolls. Weak. Defeated. They allowed defeat to be an option. I will not.
�I�m tired of pretending like I�m not special,� Sheen continued. �I�m tired of pretending like I�m not bitching, a total fricking rock star from Mars, and people can�t figure me out; they can�t process me. I don�t expect them to. You can�t process me with a normal brain.�..
Sheen accused his producers, Lorre in particular, of trying to destroy him and his family by �trying to take all my money, and leave me with no means to support my family. It�s not rocket science, you know?�...
Rather than apologizing, Sheen said it was he who was owed an apology, by CBS: �A big one. While licking my feet.�Okay, this is past the point where it's funny. This man has some very serious mental issues. He's starting to out-crazy Gadhafi -- and that's not easy.
...�I�m not angry, I�m passionate,� Sheen told Rossen. �It�s everybody thinks I should be begging for my job back, and I�m just going to forewarn them that it�s everybody else that�s going to be begging me for their job back.�...
In the interview with Rossen, which was taped Sunday in Sheen�s Beverly Hills home, the actor accused Lorre of �trying to destroy my family.� He also again took aim at Alcoholics Anonymous, calling it a failed system developed by a �broken-down fool that was a plagiarist.� He claimed he has conquered his own drug and alcohol problems by the sheer force of his will: �I closed my eyes and made it so.�
After checking himself out of rehab, Sheen set up his own home rehab facility called �Sober Valley Lodge,� from which the principles of A.A. had been banned. �I will not believe that if I do something then I have to follow a certain path, because it was written nice,� he said. �It was written for normal people, people that aren�t special. People that don�t have tiger blood, you know, Adonis DNA.�
He dismissed the idea that he has anything in common with addicts and alcoholics, who he says lack his strength of character, describing them as �fools, trolls. Weak. Defeated. They allowed defeat to be an option. I will not.
�I�m tired of pretending like I�m not special,� Sheen continued. �I�m tired of pretending like I�m not bitching, a total fricking rock star from Mars, and people can�t figure me out; they can�t process me. I don�t expect them to. You can�t process me with a normal brain.�..
Sheen accused his producers, Lorre in particular, of trying to destroy him and his family by �trying to take all my money, and leave me with no means to support my family. It�s not rocket science, you know?�...
Rather than apologizing, Sheen said it was he who was owed an apology, by CBS: �A big one. While licking my feet.�Okay, this is past the point where it's funny. This man has some very serious mental issues. He's starting to out-crazy Gadhafi -- and that's not easy.
more...
ECUpirate44
Apr 14, 12:28 PM
I'm not touching this. I'm perfectly fine on my jailbroken 4.2.6 :D
MacNut
May 1, 10:18 PM
Obama was trying to make this a big surprise and Congress let the cat out early.
more...
Eriden
Mar 15, 09:22 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_6 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8E200 Safari/6533.18.5)
Folks - get your asses to Fashion Island - no confirmation on anything, but there's a good feeling here
Around 9 or so in line, as of 7 am
Spectrum does not have anything. Just broke the bad news to everyone in line.
Folks - get your asses to Fashion Island - no confirmation on anything, but there's a good feeling here
Around 9 or so in line, as of 7 am
Spectrum does not have anything. Just broke the bad news to everyone in line.
Starbuckfsd
Apr 23, 06:42 PM
Good news finally a carrier in the US with lower prices.
Don't bet on it. IF AT&T gets them...trust me...the rates will go up.
Don't bet on it. IF AT&T gets them...trust me...the rates will go up.
more...
twoodcc
Sep 18, 03:35 PM
I used to fold with Macrumors a few years ago, as I remember it we had a pretty powerful team, seems now things are waning, and this board has cooled off. I suppose I'm guilty of leaving as well (jumped ship for Penny Arcade, great comic BTW), am I just glossing over old memories or have things actually slowed down?
well, i really can't say since i haven't been folding for that long. but i have noticed a lot of teams pass us while i've been on the team.
i really think the ones that do still fold need to try and get more involved on this forum to get more people to join and stuff.
well, i really can't say since i haven't been folding for that long. but i have noticed a lot of teams pass us while i've been on the team.
i really think the ones that do still fold need to try and get more involved on this forum to get more people to join and stuff.
swingerofbirch
Dec 1, 02:03 PM
I'll say it before, and I'll say it again, this is a critical time for Apple and it's no time to be an Apple apologist. It's time to hold Apple's feet to the fire. Being soft on them isn't helping them. It's just enabling them not to realize their full potential.
haruhiko
Apr 13, 07:59 PM
Okay, we know that, it will come eventually.
It's really annoying.
It's really annoying.
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.
zync
Aug 1, 10:20 AM
Yep. I got that; I was saying that the reason you don't see it is not because they've hidden it; it's because XP is actually a lot more stable. Crashes these days are pretty rare, and are usually caused by attempts to access strange areas of memory, or driver problems. I have an XP box running a couple of web containers, and a few app servers; aside from a driver hiccup, never had a crash or secret reboot (and I would know, because I would still need to log back in when I got back from the water cooler).
... and it took Apple just as long to create a stable version of OSX; the only real difference was that MS didn't charge for the interim versions. Again, just additional info.
I only clarified because it didn't seem like you got it. If you did, then my apologies.
As for the time it took Apple to create a stable version I disagree...the first desktop version that was available came out in March 2001. I would say that Jaguar was the first completely stable version, which came out in August 2002. Even if you disagree my PowerBook has been completely stable since I got it (it shipped with 10.2.7) in September 2003. Just over two years. My XP boxes have been far less stable.
Also, Apple charges because they offer new things to the operating system, not just stability fixes. OS X updates are also cheaper.
Timepass,
It's still called the Blue Screen of Death. If OS X had one, it'd be called the same thing. The point is that it's Blue, not that it's caused by .dll errors or incorrect memory addressing.
... and it took Apple just as long to create a stable version of OSX; the only real difference was that MS didn't charge for the interim versions. Again, just additional info.
I only clarified because it didn't seem like you got it. If you did, then my apologies.
As for the time it took Apple to create a stable version I disagree...the first desktop version that was available came out in March 2001. I would say that Jaguar was the first completely stable version, which came out in August 2002. Even if you disagree my PowerBook has been completely stable since I got it (it shipped with 10.2.7) in September 2003. Just over two years. My XP boxes have been far less stable.
Also, Apple charges because they offer new things to the operating system, not just stability fixes. OS X updates are also cheaper.
Timepass,
It's still called the Blue Screen of Death. If OS X had one, it'd be called the same thing. The point is that it's Blue, not that it's caused by .dll errors or incorrect memory addressing.
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.
lofight
Jan 30, 09:32 AM
How does one buy stock anyway? (from the UK)
I have absolutely no idea on the subject, is it just a matter of buying a share at a couple of hundred dollars, watching Apple go through one of its "win" moments then selling it for a little profit ($50 or whatever) just as a starter? What about tax?
You can do this via your bank our internet, but i'm also a noob in this..
I have absolutely no idea on the subject, is it just a matter of buying a share at a couple of hundred dollars, watching Apple go through one of its "win" moments then selling it for a little profit ($50 or whatever) just as a starter? What about tax?
You can do this via your bank our internet, but i'm also a noob in this..
Genetheninja
Apr 28, 11:01 AM
.....About the the mentality of the people who buy a two year old phone just so they can say they have an iPhone.
False! It speaks volumes about how consumers react to the most innovative original and popular smartphone in history being only $50 with a contract.
False! It speaks volumes about how consumers react to the most innovative original and popular smartphone in history being only $50 with a contract.
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий