dont24
Apr 19, 05:26 PM
Would be nice to see a 24" iMac back in the line up. 27" is just too big for my space.
I may look into a new mini with a 24" monitor, to replace my 2007 24" 2.4 iMac.
I may look into a new mini with a 24" monitor, to replace my 2007 24" 2.4 iMac.
Lollypop
Aug 25, 12:29 AM
IF the mini do get refreshed it will be minor speedbump, maybe a faster CPU, maybe bigger HDD, hopefully a better GPU (or a real GPU for that matter) :rolleyes: personally hoping for price decreases, besides a mid range, apple does need a lower costing machine as well! :D
Rt&Dzine
Mar 22, 12:49 PM
No, no one is forced to do anything. Apple is more extreme with what they will and will not allow. Others follow suit b/c they know Apple changes the world. Android market allows practically everything.
So Apple should have the choice what they allow and don't allow?
So Apple should have the choice what they allow and don't allow?
Gem�tlichkeit
Apr 19, 11:27 AM
the 256gb drive is pushing it for my needs. A 320gb flash drive or better yet, a 500gb flash drive in one of these babies would have me drooling. If they can get the prices down is the big question. Might need another couple years for that to happen.
256 should be perfect. If you need more space I'd say invest in a NAT or just external drive.
I do a ton of iMovie editing of trips n such and with itunes + movies + TV show's i'm only pushing 150gb right now on my MBP.
256 should be perfect. If you need more space I'd say invest in a NAT or just external drive.
I do a ton of iMovie editing of trips n such and with itunes + movies + TV show's i'm only pushing 150gb right now on my MBP.
whooleytoo
Mar 24, 02:11 PM
I wonder if support is really there or just the ability to identify the cards.
It's possible, though I can't imagine why Apple would do it. Apart from offering marginally more friendly errors ("Oh, I see you have a new AMD Radeon HD 6970. Sorry, we don't support that") - which of course you couldn't see anyway since the screen probably wouldn't work.. ;)
The only need for device identifiers that I can see is for devices which are supported, or are soon to be.
It's possible, though I can't imagine why Apple would do it. Apart from offering marginally more friendly errors ("Oh, I see you have a new AMD Radeon HD 6970. Sorry, we don't support that") - which of course you couldn't see anyway since the screen probably wouldn't work.. ;)
The only need for device identifiers that I can see is for devices which are supported, or are soon to be.
alakazzam
Jun 22, 01:57 PM
would be interesting to see it in action. I'm not sure I'd like touching my iMac screen, in fact right now I HATE fingers near my iMac's screen let alone a fingerprint. I'll have to see it before I completely bash it though :)
iJawn108
Sep 1, 12:54 PM
20 is fine, just make it higher res.
stolen credit card numbers
card numbers to be stolen
credit card numbers were
41 million credit card numbers
Inside a stolen credit card
2011Montblanc credit card
Stolen_identity.jpg
credit card numbers were
credit card numbers.
credit card numbers stolen
and credit card numbers.
likely credit card numbers
Trauma1
Apr 21, 11:24 AM
The people who are truly concerned about their privacy, for whatever reason that may be, know that this issue pales in comparison to everything else.
Macula
Oct 23, 10:47 PM
There is no way I am buying a MBP without NAND.
Raska
Mar 31, 07:26 PM
Is Safari still buggy as feck? Can you drag images out and not have them be .weblocs? Is google maps working properly without tile distortions/not loading?
Google Maps looks fine, so do dragging images. There is something strange I noticed trying to refresh a page. The best is to just post the pictures to show the bug.
http://img96.imageshack.us/img96/5367/safaribug1.png
The first is the popover that slide into view when I tried to refresh the page.
http://img638.imageshack.us/img638/1071/safaribug2.png
The second is the address bar glitching once the popover is dismissed.
Google Maps looks fine, so do dragging images. There is something strange I noticed trying to refresh a page. The best is to just post the pictures to show the bug.
http://img96.imageshack.us/img96/5367/safaribug1.png
The first is the popover that slide into view when I tried to refresh the page.
http://img638.imageshack.us/img638/1071/safaribug2.png
The second is the address bar glitching once the popover is dismissed.
Stella
Mar 19, 04:31 PM
All about the oil... "protect the citizens" is a perfect excuse. Sadly, because this is what it should be about.
PurrBall
Apr 1, 03:06 PM
Anyone else unable to print?
CdnBook
Apr 12, 10:19 PM
Super stoked!! Very much looking forward to this!
mrblack927
Apr 4, 05:40 PM
I don't know about this whole fullscreen mode thing. The more "features" they add, the less I like it. I like to see pertinent information at a glance. I don't understand why the menu bar has to be hidden. I lose the ability to see my battery %, wifi status, even the time of day at a glance. All for what? to save 20 pixels of space? I'm sorry but if you need screen space that badly you should invest in a bigger monitor. Even the iOS devices leave the information bar at the top... :o
Just my thoughts...
Just my thoughts...
JoeG4
Feb 27, 02:06 AM
You can always tell the 22" because they have the power LCD below the bezel instead of on it. Three buttons too! Power, and brightness up/down. Even stranger, the buttons are mechanical clear pieces of plastic (and the power light is this big pill-shaped thing that hangs inside the power button).
It was such a neat design! And then there was the translucent black frame (The backlight sorta bleeds through em too, also cool). The DVI 22" had a GREEN (amber pulsing while sleeping) power light and had a UFO-shaped breakout box at the end of its cable for the USB/power/DVI. Very cool.
The sucky part about the 22" LCD was that it had a really high defect rate. However, it was introduced at a time when 15" LCDs were a luxury item, so it was more like the Ferrari of LCDs of its time. :D
I recall paying the same price for mine as the Mac Pro currently costs. Sheesh! Stupid me. I should've put that money into Apple stock! If I had put the $7k I blew on my Dual 800/22" into Apple shares I could afford a Ferrari right now :(
Being 14 and stupid FTW?
It was such a neat design! And then there was the translucent black frame (The backlight sorta bleeds through em too, also cool). The DVI 22" had a GREEN (amber pulsing while sleeping) power light and had a UFO-shaped breakout box at the end of its cable for the USB/power/DVI. Very cool.
The sucky part about the 22" LCD was that it had a really high defect rate. However, it was introduced at a time when 15" LCDs were a luxury item, so it was more like the Ferrari of LCDs of its time. :D
I recall paying the same price for mine as the Mac Pro currently costs. Sheesh! Stupid me. I should've put that money into Apple stock! If I had put the $7k I blew on my Dual 800/22" into Apple shares I could afford a Ferrari right now :(
Being 14 and stupid FTW?
~Shard~
Sep 6, 08:58 AM
Any thoughts - why no Merom?
Apple probably wants to keep the costs of the Mini down, and until prices drop in October on the Core 2 Duos, we likely won't see them in the Mini. Plus, going from Core Solo to Core Duo is a decent enough upgrade for now. Lasty, Apple probably would not update the Mini to Core 2 Duo before the MacBooks/MacBook Pros. :cool:
Apple probably wants to keep the costs of the Mini down, and until prices drop in October on the Core 2 Duos, we likely won't see them in the Mini. Plus, going from Core Solo to Core Duo is a decent enough upgrade for now. Lasty, Apple probably would not update the Mini to Core 2 Duo before the MacBooks/MacBook Pros. :cool:
roadbloc
Apr 1, 10:13 AM
Guess why they are the only two removable apps?
http://cl.ly/5gbA/img.png
Were them two apps downloaded via the Mac App Store by any chance?
http://cl.ly/5gbA/img.png
Were them two apps downloaded via the Mac App Store by any chance?
Kashchei
Aug 27, 05:36 PM
finally a rumor!
after weeks of speculation on the forums, a front page rumor feels fact!
holding my thumbs for a conroe imac! (a swedish expression...i think?)
"Hold your thumbs" is a French expression as well. I had no ideas the Swedes held their thumbs as well, but I'll be doing the same thing since I can't wait to see the new minis as well.
after weeks of speculation on the forums, a front page rumor feels fact!
holding my thumbs for a conroe imac! (a swedish expression...i think?)
"Hold your thumbs" is a French expression as well. I had no ideas the Swedes held their thumbs as well, but I'll be doing the same thing since I can't wait to see the new minis as well.
MagnusVonMagnum
Oct 20, 03:33 PM
Consumer Reports has always been corrupt and in it to tear down companies.
What a crock of nonsense. :rolleyes:
Apparently, your idea of "corrupt" is to tell the truth about products instead of letting unsafe, Chinese garbage get pushed on the world with millions in advertising, but not a useful word in the bunch. Do you think Apple is going to advertise their antenna problem or Suzuki is going to brag that their vehicle is more likely to roll over than most other vehicles on the road? Heck no. Most magazines take money directly from the manufacturers that advertise in their magazines and thus have a total conflict of interests. Here's a magazine that doesn't take a dime from advertisers and thus has no reason to pick on anyone or lie about anything. But YOU call that "corruption." That's like Republicans saying they will create jobs (and leave out the "in China" part).
What a crock of nonsense. :rolleyes:
Apparently, your idea of "corrupt" is to tell the truth about products instead of letting unsafe, Chinese garbage get pushed on the world with millions in advertising, but not a useful word in the bunch. Do you think Apple is going to advertise their antenna problem or Suzuki is going to brag that their vehicle is more likely to roll over than most other vehicles on the road? Heck no. Most magazines take money directly from the manufacturers that advertise in their magazines and thus have a total conflict of interests. Here's a magazine that doesn't take a dime from advertisers and thus has no reason to pick on anyone or lie about anything. But YOU call that "corruption." That's like Republicans saying they will create jobs (and leave out the "in China" part).
Apple Expert
May 2, 04:44 PM
They are making it sure look alot like the iOS. I hope they can put this OS on the iPad. :D
skunk
Mar 20, 08:39 AM
The jets and rockets are there to prevent Gaddafi from killing civilians, not to prevent Gaddafi from winning.However, if his armour is destroyed and his defences shattered, and his troops are unwilling to pose as sitting ducks, the rebels will have a damned sight easier task.
boncellis
Sep 6, 01:47 PM
...Works great on my hdtv bc i have vga input on it. so i store all my music and play dvds through it to the tv.....
I sure hope you mistook the VGA input for the DVI input, otherwise you're crippling that gorgeous TV. Or you can get a DVI to HDMI cable to connect the Mini.
Sounds like a cool setup, the kind of thing I want to do too. ;)
I sure hope you mistook the VGA input for the DVI input, otherwise you're crippling that gorgeous TV. Or you can get a DVI to HDMI cable to connect the Mini.
Sounds like a cool setup, the kind of thing I want to do too. ;)
Lord Blackadder
Mar 22, 12:41 AM
Well, personally I would consider "loyalists" part of military assets. And I'm sure most generals do as well because that's the way they talk about killing soldiers. Thus inflicting "material" damage should include the people who operate the weapons via command.
And one would figure that since there are a huge number of "defectors", some of these loyalists must be pretty hard-core and you'll have to kill them to prevent them from picking up a simple AK and IED later on and blow up things from the shadows. This might seem harsh, but the reality of it is that if they pick a side, they accept their fate as a loser.
The UN mandate calls for a no-fly zone. Under current military doctrine that requires that the opponent's air defense network be degraded. Some military personnel will inevitably die when their air defense installations come under attack. Other than that, we don't have the authority to attack loyalists unless they are threatening the safety of civilians by bombarding rebel cities or some such, and then only if they can be clearly identified and attacked without risking civilian lives. Loyalist units that are simply surrounding a rebel strongholds are not legitimate targets at this stage.
However, in light of the situation, I would understand the need to leave some "real warriors" alive and hope they join the new administration because looking at these rebels, they are mostly a bunch of city slickers or something that found a gun, see smoke, run toward the front lines all exited...to come right back carrying their dead in a bedsheet. It's a real joke how they handle this rebelion. If this is how it is, we're going to need troops on the ground to get these guys in shape...if not during...then after the supplanting of Quadafi.
This is pretty much how any irregular force has behaved at any time in history (see the beginnings of the American and French revolutions for example) It's not something we can control. Some rebel units are made up of defected regular army units, they will undoubtedly form the core of any rebel advance and show better cohesion. By merely existing as a force in being the, the irregular units (or more correctly, loose bands) legitimize the opposition, and they've proven somewhat effective in defense.
As for troops on the ground - this is a Libyan civil war. The UN's mission is to prevent Gaddafi from murdering his own people in his attempt to maintain power. The Libyans must do the rest.
I honestly wouldn't be surprised if the end result of all this is not at all dissimilar to the goings-on in Iraq.
As long as we don't invade, this is unlikely to be as bad as Iraq. We are aiding a popular uprising against hated autocrat, not invading a foreign country with plans of occupation and prolonged rooting out of insurgents. There are still many potential pitfalls and I am not arguing that the situation is necessarily a good one, but it is certainly less risky than the 2003 Iraq invasion.
And one would figure that since there are a huge number of "defectors", some of these loyalists must be pretty hard-core and you'll have to kill them to prevent them from picking up a simple AK and IED later on and blow up things from the shadows. This might seem harsh, but the reality of it is that if they pick a side, they accept their fate as a loser.
The UN mandate calls for a no-fly zone. Under current military doctrine that requires that the opponent's air defense network be degraded. Some military personnel will inevitably die when their air defense installations come under attack. Other than that, we don't have the authority to attack loyalists unless they are threatening the safety of civilians by bombarding rebel cities or some such, and then only if they can be clearly identified and attacked without risking civilian lives. Loyalist units that are simply surrounding a rebel strongholds are not legitimate targets at this stage.
However, in light of the situation, I would understand the need to leave some "real warriors" alive and hope they join the new administration because looking at these rebels, they are mostly a bunch of city slickers or something that found a gun, see smoke, run toward the front lines all exited...to come right back carrying their dead in a bedsheet. It's a real joke how they handle this rebelion. If this is how it is, we're going to need troops on the ground to get these guys in shape...if not during...then after the supplanting of Quadafi.
This is pretty much how any irregular force has behaved at any time in history (see the beginnings of the American and French revolutions for example) It's not something we can control. Some rebel units are made up of defected regular army units, they will undoubtedly form the core of any rebel advance and show better cohesion. By merely existing as a force in being the, the irregular units (or more correctly, loose bands) legitimize the opposition, and they've proven somewhat effective in defense.
As for troops on the ground - this is a Libyan civil war. The UN's mission is to prevent Gaddafi from murdering his own people in his attempt to maintain power. The Libyans must do the rest.
I honestly wouldn't be surprised if the end result of all this is not at all dissimilar to the goings-on in Iraq.
As long as we don't invade, this is unlikely to be as bad as Iraq. We are aiding a popular uprising against hated autocrat, not invading a foreign country with plans of occupation and prolonged rooting out of insurgents. There are still many potential pitfalls and I am not arguing that the situation is necessarily a good one, but it is certainly less risky than the 2003 Iraq invasion.
W1MRK
Apr 21, 11:14 AM
This really is not a issue in my opinion. Smart phones have tons of data stored on them and if its really not being sent, whats the harm. If someone were to get my phone and read my info, they will be as excited as I used to be in PE class. First the DUI checkpoints now this. Is there something more important for them to look into? Like a Budget and ( insert concern here ) :)
Now if your a bad boy or girl, I can see this becoming a Court Evidence Issue in the near future. But until then, remember the NSA scans calls randomly for "our safety" Bigger issues than this in the world of privacy.
Now if your a bad boy or girl, I can see this becoming a Court Evidence Issue in the near future. But until then, remember the NSA scans calls randomly for "our safety" Bigger issues than this in the world of privacy.
No comments:
Post a Comment