iansilv
Mar 29, 12:44 PM
Great move by amazon to bring out a service that competes legitimates with Apple in this space. In fact, on paper at least it destroys it.
Really, really stupid move to not let iOS devices connect. that is an idiot move.
Really, really stupid move to not let iOS devices connect. that is an idiot move.
LightSpeed1
Apr 22, 12:40 AM
Not gonna happen And I hope it doesn't.
Jason Beck
May 6, 07:03 AM
AMD is currently a bang for buck chip maker, I doubt you'll see them CPUs in Apple products. Plus until Fusion develops some more the thermal envelope isn't too good.
Yep. That's the truth :(
Yep. That's the truth :(
ECUpirate44
Mar 28, 10:29 AM
If no new iPhone until 2012, then this further exemplifies Android = WINNING!
This makes no sense and thus hope it's just another BS rumor.
I agree. If theres no iPhone in that mean Android wins the smartphone market for the year. Apple would also lose many of the customers to Android whose contracts are up in the summer and they would be locked into 2 year deals with their droids meaning no iPhone in 2012 for them either.
This makes no sense and thus hope it's just another BS rumor.
I agree. If theres no iPhone in that mean Android wins the smartphone market for the year. Apple would also lose many of the customers to Android whose contracts are up in the summer and they would be locked into 2 year deals with their droids meaning no iPhone in 2012 for them either.
JoshH
Aug 2, 02:23 PM
I wouldn't be surprised if all that happens is Leopard previews, Mac Pros and Steve rips his shirt off and crowd surfs.
No, I think this is the closest so far :)
No, I think this is the closest so far :)
Isair
Apr 5, 06:38 PM
0 x 2 = 0
Win.
Win.
netdog
Sep 11, 09:05 AM
beatles
guzhogi
Aug 4, 01:47 PM
Yes - both AMD 64 and Intel EM64T are 64 bit extensions to the 32 bit x86 processor.
From what I understand the registers are still 32 bit, but the chips have a 64 bit address space and more registers.
No-one has the need for a truly 64 bit machine at this point - just machines that can address more RAM. The 4GB RAM limit on 32 bit processors is beginning to be an issue for pro users.
I think the vector extensions (AltiVec and SSE) have very large registers - 128 bit? This is what's used when there is a need for a specific optimisation.
Just my layman's understanding. Ready to be corrected!
Thanks. Anyone know what the advantage of having a 64-bit processor vs. a 32-bit (other than bigger address bus)? I know the CPU has 2 basic kinds of buses: the address bus (where it can see 4 GB of RAM in 32-bit, 16 ?(i don't know the prefix)bytes in 64-bit) and an instruction bus that actually computes.
From what I understand the registers are still 32 bit, but the chips have a 64 bit address space and more registers.
No-one has the need for a truly 64 bit machine at this point - just machines that can address more RAM. The 4GB RAM limit on 32 bit processors is beginning to be an issue for pro users.
I think the vector extensions (AltiVec and SSE) have very large registers - 128 bit? This is what's used when there is a need for a specific optimisation.
Just my layman's understanding. Ready to be corrected!
Thanks. Anyone know what the advantage of having a 64-bit processor vs. a 32-bit (other than bigger address bus)? I know the CPU has 2 basic kinds of buses: the address bus (where it can see 4 GB of RAM in 32-bit, 16 ?(i don't know the prefix)bytes in 64-bit) and an instruction bus that actually computes.
ivladster
Apr 23, 04:27 PM
Wish Apple did something towards resolution independence and not make images bigger and bigger. :confused:
ug.mac
Jul 29, 10:40 PM
This is bad, I mean BAD if it's ture:mad:
I just finished with Fido and got a Razr V3c from Telus, I'm happy with it so far but if Apple really get into cell phone business I may let my GF get one of that if they won't make CDMA version and available to Canda.:p :p
I just finished with Fido and got a Razr V3c from Telus, I'm happy with it so far but if Apple really get into cell phone business I may let my GF get one of that if they won't make CDMA version and available to Canda.:p :p
itcheroni
Apr 16, 01:12 PM
To some extent I can because I looked it up last night. Now I'm an expert. ;)
The simplified version ...
You're buying and selling options which have a set value and an expiration date. If the set value doesn't meet the market value by the expiration date then those options are worthless. Options that have more time before their expiration date have more value than options near that date because there is more time for the market to go up and reach that value. The value of these options decay as they approach their expiration date, with the greatest rate of decay occurring in the few weeks before that date arrives.
So now that I have a bit of an understanding about what you do, here are a few thoughts ...
"Siphoning" was a poor choice of words. And for that I apologize. "Wagering" would more accurately describe what is happening here. The option has been given a value and if the market reaches that value then the option is worth something, if not, it is worthless. Value can also be achieved by selling the option to someone before the expiration date. So you are betting on, buying and/or selling a financial product.
Anyway, the principle (there's that word again) point that I'd like to express is that your chosen way of making an income effects your perspective on the issue of capital gains. The money you make in these transactions is considered a capital gain, so it's no wonder that you would be against a capital gains tax and cast it in a negative light.
I'm really not trying to get personal here. I don't know you. You might be the nicest person in the world. But when it comes to the issue of taxing capital gains you have a huge vested interest that is bound to color your views and leave me to question your objectivity on this matter.
It's not wagering any more than you're wagering when you work on a graphic design project. I've tried my best to explain the reasons why I believe taxes effect the economy negatively. Instead, if you would like to consider the way I make money (even though my trades are all short term, less than 1 year, so they are all already taxed at the ordinary income level) and choose that as a reason to keep believing what you want to believe, what can I really say? You win.
The simplified version ...
You're buying and selling options which have a set value and an expiration date. If the set value doesn't meet the market value by the expiration date then those options are worthless. Options that have more time before their expiration date have more value than options near that date because there is more time for the market to go up and reach that value. The value of these options decay as they approach their expiration date, with the greatest rate of decay occurring in the few weeks before that date arrives.
So now that I have a bit of an understanding about what you do, here are a few thoughts ...
"Siphoning" was a poor choice of words. And for that I apologize. "Wagering" would more accurately describe what is happening here. The option has been given a value and if the market reaches that value then the option is worth something, if not, it is worthless. Value can also be achieved by selling the option to someone before the expiration date. So you are betting on, buying and/or selling a financial product.
Anyway, the principle (there's that word again) point that I'd like to express is that your chosen way of making an income effects your perspective on the issue of capital gains. The money you make in these transactions is considered a capital gain, so it's no wonder that you would be against a capital gains tax and cast it in a negative light.
I'm really not trying to get personal here. I don't know you. You might be the nicest person in the world. But when it comes to the issue of taxing capital gains you have a huge vested interest that is bound to color your views and leave me to question your objectivity on this matter.
It's not wagering any more than you're wagering when you work on a graphic design project. I've tried my best to explain the reasons why I believe taxes effect the economy negatively. Instead, if you would like to consider the way I make money (even though my trades are all short term, less than 1 year, so they are all already taxed at the ordinary income level) and choose that as a reason to keep believing what you want to believe, what can I really say? You win.
JRM PowerPod
Aug 5, 09:49 AM
Whats the normal run of events?
3 split up segments and then one more thing
Here is what i reckon
1) Intel transition
blah blah blah, it has been quick, painless developers, developers developers. Everyone has been receptive except $#%#@@! Adobe
Intel keep giving us the chips
today we update MBP and iMac to core 2 duo
2)Talking about tranistion there are 2 products which haven't yet been transistioned
PowerMac > Mac Pro
Xserve > Xserve? Mac Serve?
Mac Pro has 3 configs
Best - Dual Xeon, 1GB 500GB 256X1800 $3299
Better - Core 2 Duo 2.93ghz 1GB 500gb 256mb X1600 $2499
Good - Core 2 Duo 2.6 1GB 250gb 256mb X1600 $1999
Xserves - All Xeons, dah
3) Leopard talk
4) One more thing
Candidates: iPhone, iPod, New Screens (may be intro'd with Mac Pro's) what ever else there could be
3 split up segments and then one more thing
Here is what i reckon
1) Intel transition
blah blah blah, it has been quick, painless developers, developers developers. Everyone has been receptive except $#%#@@! Adobe
Intel keep giving us the chips
today we update MBP and iMac to core 2 duo
2)Talking about tranistion there are 2 products which haven't yet been transistioned
PowerMac > Mac Pro
Xserve > Xserve? Mac Serve?
Mac Pro has 3 configs
Best - Dual Xeon, 1GB 500GB 256X1800 $3299
Better - Core 2 Duo 2.93ghz 1GB 500gb 256mb X1600 $2499
Good - Core 2 Duo 2.6 1GB 250gb 256mb X1600 $1999
Xserves - All Xeons, dah
3) Leopard talk
4) One more thing
Candidates: iPhone, iPod, New Screens (may be intro'd with Mac Pro's) what ever else there could be
Benjy91
Mar 27, 05:56 AM
Going to be fun on my 500MB data limit.
amac4me
Jul 30, 01:15 PM
Perhaps we'll see it intro'd at WWDC when Steve says:
"One More Thing"
Who knows, considering that WWDC is developer centric, what if Apple releases an API to allow either software to be ported to the device's OS and to allow third-party developers to write applications for the phone. I'm really looking forward to this year's WWDC more than I have past event. It's getting exciting.
"One More Thing"
Who knows, considering that WWDC is developer centric, what if Apple releases an API to allow either software to be ported to the device's OS and to allow third-party developers to write applications for the phone. I'm really looking forward to this year's WWDC more than I have past event. It's getting exciting.
Mousse
May 3, 10:00 AM
And people sound less obese when stating their weight in kilograms. ;)
No need for Enzyte. Just switch to centimeters and guys will brag to no end.;)
No need for Enzyte. Just switch to centimeters and guys will brag to no end.;)
MacNut
May 3, 01:36 AM
I prefer my summer temperatures getting out of the 30's.:p
mcrain
Apr 15, 09:02 AM
Do you think there are any negative consequences to this? If I were starting a business and seeking investors, it would sure be a lot harder to get investors when the capital gains rate is 35% rather than 15%. That business would never materialize. Nobody's going to complain about it though because no one can see what could have been.
No.
Capital gains do NOT stand in the way of investment in business. Why? Because capital gains ONLY apply to the gains realized upon the SALE of the shares or ownership interest in the company. That sale has ZERO effect on the business' profit, capitalization, available resources, etc... That sale ONLY might have an effect on the value of the shares of the company in the hands of other investors. That's what is called the secondary market.
What you are talking about is the initial offering of the shares by the company in which the company is looking to exchange ownership, and everything that goes with it, for capital investment.
One of the things that goes with ownership, and one of the two primary reasons people invest, is a share of profits. If a potential business has a good business plan, a good product and will make money, people will invest in it. When it makes money, that income is taxed as ordinary income when distributed, or if kept without re-investment, as business income. This money is NOT taxed as capital gain!
The second profit motive for investment is the idea that the success of the business will generate demand for ownership, thus increasing the value of ownership on the secondary market. This could lead to capital gains if you choose to sell your ownership interest.
Higher taxes result in businesses that choose to reinvest and increase their operations rather than distributing money to its owners. This causes increases in value, increases in operations, increases in hiring, increases in economic impact, etc...
Higher taxes result in investors choosing businesses that are increasing in value, generating higher income rates, operating in riskier, but higher yield, fields, etc...
Capital gains don't prevent investment, they merely affect how much tax is paid on the sale of an investment you have held for over one year.
No.
Capital gains do NOT stand in the way of investment in business. Why? Because capital gains ONLY apply to the gains realized upon the SALE of the shares or ownership interest in the company. That sale has ZERO effect on the business' profit, capitalization, available resources, etc... That sale ONLY might have an effect on the value of the shares of the company in the hands of other investors. That's what is called the secondary market.
What you are talking about is the initial offering of the shares by the company in which the company is looking to exchange ownership, and everything that goes with it, for capital investment.
One of the things that goes with ownership, and one of the two primary reasons people invest, is a share of profits. If a potential business has a good business plan, a good product and will make money, people will invest in it. When it makes money, that income is taxed as ordinary income when distributed, or if kept without re-investment, as business income. This money is NOT taxed as capital gain!
The second profit motive for investment is the idea that the success of the business will generate demand for ownership, thus increasing the value of ownership on the secondary market. This could lead to capital gains if you choose to sell your ownership interest.
Higher taxes result in businesses that choose to reinvest and increase their operations rather than distributing money to its owners. This causes increases in value, increases in operations, increases in hiring, increases in economic impact, etc...
Higher taxes result in investors choosing businesses that are increasing in value, generating higher income rates, operating in riskier, but higher yield, fields, etc...
Capital gains don't prevent investment, they merely affect how much tax is paid on the sale of an investment you have held for over one year.
Howdr
Apr 5, 02:29 PM
Yes they can. There is no protection under law for making money off the ineptitude of other companies. Apple is entitled, and expected to fix bugs. When those bugs get fixed, an avenue for jail breaking gets closed. Companies that see their revenue stream dry up are just screwed. That's life.
Jail breaking happens because Apple screwed the pooch on security. That's all.
Thats the problem you missed
restraint of trade,
Apple would take Microsoft or any other company to court in o.0005 seconds if restraint of trade was against them.
Jail breaking is ruled legal by the federal government
Cydia and theme it require Jailbreaking to sell the apps they have.
Cydia and theme it are legally selling apps
Apple then goes after Jailbreaking and restrains Cydia and theme it from doing legal trade
This is not a legal act by Apple, so they say its patching for security reasons ( A lie)
You call it security yet the doorway used to jailbreak the Iphone or Ipad has never been used for anything else then Jailbreaking.
Your using an Apple company tactic of telling us its unsafe, you work for apple or believe the unsupported claims by Apple.
Apple believes it looses money from Jailbreaking because these people now buy from other sources than Apple's app store.
I find it sad that so many believe what ever Apple says is the truth.
Apple is a multi billion dollar company that needs to make money all the time off of you. they need your money and undying loyalty. :apple:
( I know people will not agree with my take on this, its fine, I hate big corporations and how they lie to us, look at the Japanese and the lies from the power company, it happens again and again everyday)
Jail breaking happens because Apple screwed the pooch on security. That's all.
Thats the problem you missed
restraint of trade,
Apple would take Microsoft or any other company to court in o.0005 seconds if restraint of trade was against them.
Jail breaking is ruled legal by the federal government
Cydia and theme it require Jailbreaking to sell the apps they have.
Cydia and theme it are legally selling apps
Apple then goes after Jailbreaking and restrains Cydia and theme it from doing legal trade
This is not a legal act by Apple, so they say its patching for security reasons ( A lie)
You call it security yet the doorway used to jailbreak the Iphone or Ipad has never been used for anything else then Jailbreaking.
Your using an Apple company tactic of telling us its unsafe, you work for apple or believe the unsupported claims by Apple.
Apple believes it looses money from Jailbreaking because these people now buy from other sources than Apple's app store.
I find it sad that so many believe what ever Apple says is the truth.
Apple is a multi billion dollar company that needs to make money all the time off of you. they need your money and undying loyalty. :apple:
( I know people will not agree with my take on this, its fine, I hate big corporations and how they lie to us, look at the Japanese and the lies from the power company, it happens again and again everyday)
adbe
Apr 5, 02:11 PM
You talk about security, but it's not a security threat to have a jailbroken user?
Of course it's a security threat. How do you think the device got jail broken in the first place?
Of course it's a security threat. How do you think the device got jail broken in the first place?
darrens
Aug 5, 03:04 AM
First, Apple's apps were easier to port because they were already XCode. So it was fairly easy for Apple to just recompile with the new compiler.
Are you sure that's true for all of them? They haven't owned Logic very long, and some of the others started life outside of Apple. I'm sure they had a few issues there.
Second, Adobe was using a lot of CodeWarrior code and it would be far more difficult to convert. Also having X86 code compiled using MS VStudio doesn't help Adobe to be ahead in generating X86 code under XCode because they run under a completely different GUI and access different libraries.
They have the MacOS X GUI code - that doesn't change for Intel - the OS is the same. The core logic endianness doesn't depend on the compiler - the code would be cross-platform and compile on GCC and Visual Studio anyway. Sure they have to deal with a few Codewarrior issues - but they have to do that for the new version anyway. It's not like they'd have to do it twice.
Third, even Apple released the UB code with a new updated version of their pro apps. Adobe's CS3 was not due for a year and a half.
True - but not all Apple's pro apps had a significant level of new features - they were just an interim release.
Fourth, Adobe announced their plans early on so that everyone would know what to expect.
Yes - don't expect us to be as pro-active as we've been in the past. I can remember when Apple went PPC - Adobe had an accelerator out for Photoshop close to the release date of the PPC Macs, and the fully PPC version followed shortly after.
My point about intuit is that Apple announced the transition before Intuit even began work on Quicken 2007. Quicken hardly relies on any graphics code, is mostly text, and number based. Yet they chose to ignore converting to UB code even though now would be perfect timing to do so. In addition they have not announced any plans to create UB's in the future.
This is also the sort of app that gets the least advantage from conversion. It's still a fair amount of work to change development environments when there's no real advantage to it. Especially when Intuit is really given token support to the Mac anyway.
Sure quicken will run with Rosetta, but is that what we want from developers. Forget about modernizing their code because they can make it run in an artificial emulated environment.
With that logic Intuit should have stuck with OS9 versions of quicken as it could always be run fine in classic.
It's hardly the same - you have to boot a second copy of MacOS to run a classic app (which is really slow) and it doesn't integrate seamlessly. You can hardly tell an app is running in Rosetta - there's no visual difference.
Are you sure that's true for all of them? They haven't owned Logic very long, and some of the others started life outside of Apple. I'm sure they had a few issues there.
Second, Adobe was using a lot of CodeWarrior code and it would be far more difficult to convert. Also having X86 code compiled using MS VStudio doesn't help Adobe to be ahead in generating X86 code under XCode because they run under a completely different GUI and access different libraries.
They have the MacOS X GUI code - that doesn't change for Intel - the OS is the same. The core logic endianness doesn't depend on the compiler - the code would be cross-platform and compile on GCC and Visual Studio anyway. Sure they have to deal with a few Codewarrior issues - but they have to do that for the new version anyway. It's not like they'd have to do it twice.
Third, even Apple released the UB code with a new updated version of their pro apps. Adobe's CS3 was not due for a year and a half.
True - but not all Apple's pro apps had a significant level of new features - they were just an interim release.
Fourth, Adobe announced their plans early on so that everyone would know what to expect.
Yes - don't expect us to be as pro-active as we've been in the past. I can remember when Apple went PPC - Adobe had an accelerator out for Photoshop close to the release date of the PPC Macs, and the fully PPC version followed shortly after.
My point about intuit is that Apple announced the transition before Intuit even began work on Quicken 2007. Quicken hardly relies on any graphics code, is mostly text, and number based. Yet they chose to ignore converting to UB code even though now would be perfect timing to do so. In addition they have not announced any plans to create UB's in the future.
This is also the sort of app that gets the least advantage from conversion. It's still a fair amount of work to change development environments when there's no real advantage to it. Especially when Intuit is really given token support to the Mac anyway.
Sure quicken will run with Rosetta, but is that what we want from developers. Forget about modernizing their code because they can make it run in an artificial emulated environment.
With that logic Intuit should have stuck with OS9 versions of quicken as it could always be run fine in classic.
It's hardly the same - you have to boot a second copy of MacOS to run a classic app (which is really slow) and it doesn't integrate seamlessly. You can hardly tell an app is running in Rosetta - there's no visual difference.
Elijahg
Apr 23, 06:45 PM
Instead of pixel based images that are just bigger, why not simply ship vector based icons/wallpapers ?
KDE supported SVG as a format for wallpapers and icons something like 10 years ago... That way, it doesn't matter what the display resolution is, the icon always looks sharp and non-pixelated.
I'd rather Apple work on making SVG the standard graphics format for graphics ressources than just bumping up the pixel count (and the file size!).
Heck, if they don't like SVG (which is just a bunch of XML), they could go with one of the other vector based image formats or come up with one of their own.
Translating a photo to a vector based format would be completely pointless and would end up massive. Take for example the Snow Leopard Prowl JPEG. It's 1.2MB, and converting to BMP or TIFF (both describe each pixel individually, i.e. lossless) makes it 12mb, 10 times the size. Converting it to the much less efficient SVG, makes it insanely massive; 225mb or 187.5 times bigger to be exact.
Computer generated imagery can be converted to a vector format more efficiently, as long as the source is available. The computer knows that for example, there is a gradient starting at X,Y and ending at X,Y with colour RGB at the start, and colour RGB at the end. Thus eliminating the need to keep detail about each pixel individually. This is great for things such as icons and certain web images, but for images with lots of detail, it quickly becomes much less efficient than even the highest quality JPEG. For real photos, it's pointless to vectorize. You'd just end up pixellating the image when scaled over it's original size anyway. So in other words, it's unlikely we'll see vector graphics for most icons and most certainly not for desktop backgrounds.
I agree with others about Apple needing to beef up the GPUs if they want retina displays in their Macs. They always seem to put last-generation cards into them... I'm sure it wouldn't keep them away from iOS development for [i]too[/] long to add the latest, even as BTO. Valve has really helped gaming on the Mac, bringing great new releases like Left 4 Dead 2 and Portal 2 at the same time as Windows. At least it seems Apple have had a kick up their ass from Valve pointing out the inefficiencies in OpenGL. Maybe that's what's made them hire a few gaming-type developers...? C'mon Apple!
KDE supported SVG as a format for wallpapers and icons something like 10 years ago... That way, it doesn't matter what the display resolution is, the icon always looks sharp and non-pixelated.
I'd rather Apple work on making SVG the standard graphics format for graphics ressources than just bumping up the pixel count (and the file size!).
Heck, if they don't like SVG (which is just a bunch of XML), they could go with one of the other vector based image formats or come up with one of their own.
Translating a photo to a vector based format would be completely pointless and would end up massive. Take for example the Snow Leopard Prowl JPEG. It's 1.2MB, and converting to BMP or TIFF (both describe each pixel individually, i.e. lossless) makes it 12mb, 10 times the size. Converting it to the much less efficient SVG, makes it insanely massive; 225mb or 187.5 times bigger to be exact.
Computer generated imagery can be converted to a vector format more efficiently, as long as the source is available. The computer knows that for example, there is a gradient starting at X,Y and ending at X,Y with colour RGB at the start, and colour RGB at the end. Thus eliminating the need to keep detail about each pixel individually. This is great for things such as icons and certain web images, but for images with lots of detail, it quickly becomes much less efficient than even the highest quality JPEG. For real photos, it's pointless to vectorize. You'd just end up pixellating the image when scaled over it's original size anyway. So in other words, it's unlikely we'll see vector graphics for most icons and most certainly not for desktop backgrounds.
I agree with others about Apple needing to beef up the GPUs if they want retina displays in their Macs. They always seem to put last-generation cards into them... I'm sure it wouldn't keep them away from iOS development for [i]too[/] long to add the latest, even as BTO. Valve has really helped gaming on the Mac, bringing great new releases like Left 4 Dead 2 and Portal 2 at the same time as Windows. At least it seems Apple have had a kick up their ass from Valve pointing out the inefficiencies in OpenGL. Maybe that's what's made them hire a few gaming-type developers...? C'mon Apple!
fyre57lp
Nov 3, 10:01 AM
Yes, Since the gps/speaker are connected via bluetooth, they work independently from the tom tom app. Even google maps is faster.
tom5304
May 7, 04:44 PM
Oh and a two letter email address is priceless.
Yes, because typing "gmail.com" is so exhausting. :D
Yes, because typing "gmail.com" is so exhausting. :D
Wolfpup
Nov 5, 08:26 AM
Sophos provides solutions mainly for large corporations. Its as legitimate as it can get. Whats good about is the small foot print their software takes. So its all business and no nonsense "turbo meters" etc. like with Intego Virus Barrier. Honestly I have no idea why they are giving away Home version for free. The business solutions are expensive. Then again if you really want to sell to corporations it makes sense to give people free home versions to gain presence and goodwill. After all those free Home version using people work in corporations...
From this comment I can tell you have had absolute NO EXPERIENCE with the product.
We have had it in our company for 10 years and it's absolutely non-intrusive and hassle free.
Please don't generate noise if you don't have any relevant experience.
Patrick
Nice! Thanks for the info...so I take it this is better than Symantec's product? I used to like their corporate product for Windows, but it got AWFUL as of version 11, so I'm hesitant to install the OS X version (we've got a site license) so it's nice to have an alternative finally!
From this comment I can tell you have had absolute NO EXPERIENCE with the product.
We have had it in our company for 10 years and it's absolutely non-intrusive and hassle free.
Please don't generate noise if you don't have any relevant experience.
Patrick
Nice! Thanks for the info...so I take it this is better than Symantec's product? I used to like their corporate product for Windows, but it got AWFUL as of version 11, so I'm hesitant to install the OS X version (we've got a site license) so it's nice to have an alternative finally!
