koruki
May 6, 02:17 AM
ROFL this one made my friday
Riemann Zeta
Mar 27, 11:40 AM
Yay let us all surrender our privacy to the cloud... Sometimes I feel like the only one that understands the long term implications cloud based computer has when we allow our content and log files on others' servers. Thankfully I know I'm not the only one though.
Nope, not the only one. Boo to the cloud and everything related to it. I'd rather not have all of my data on a massive public server, available to Apple, advertisers and any government agency at all times. Those claiming that "it's encrypted" are not fully appreciating the security implications of not having control over the implementation of said encryption. For example, SSL/HTTPS is "encrypted" as well, but since Certificate Authorities give signed master-key certificates to all government intelligence and law enforcement agencies, it isn't technically 100% secure (despite mathematically unbreakable encryption).
Taking off the tin-foil hat and simply thinking about economics: I still don't understand how cloud computing is actually going to become a dominant market force. There are now only 3 wireless providers in the US, forming a tight oligopoly, and all of them are incredibly stingy with data caps and limitations. Moreover, there are only a handful of unique internet providers in the US and all are cutting client bandwidth, raising prices and instituting throttling or monthly data caps. So it would seem that big software companies like Apple, Microsoft and Google are pushing the idea of streaming everything; but internet providers only want to supply bandwidth for their own cable TV services. Something just doesn't add up. How is one supposed to have no local storage and just stream music and video when their wireless connection only allows for 2GB/month and their home ISP throttles everything other than its own cable TV service?
Nope, not the only one. Boo to the cloud and everything related to it. I'd rather not have all of my data on a massive public server, available to Apple, advertisers and any government agency at all times. Those claiming that "it's encrypted" are not fully appreciating the security implications of not having control over the implementation of said encryption. For example, SSL/HTTPS is "encrypted" as well, but since Certificate Authorities give signed master-key certificates to all government intelligence and law enforcement agencies, it isn't technically 100% secure (despite mathematically unbreakable encryption).
Taking off the tin-foil hat and simply thinking about economics: I still don't understand how cloud computing is actually going to become a dominant market force. There are now only 3 wireless providers in the US, forming a tight oligopoly, and all of them are incredibly stingy with data caps and limitations. Moreover, there are only a handful of unique internet providers in the US and all are cutting client bandwidth, raising prices and instituting throttling or monthly data caps. So it would seem that big software companies like Apple, Microsoft and Google are pushing the idea of streaming everything; but internet providers only want to supply bandwidth for their own cable TV services. Something just doesn't add up. How is one supposed to have no local storage and just stream music and video when their wireless connection only allows for 2GB/month and their home ISP throttles everything other than its own cable TV service?
AndroidfoLife
Apr 5, 04:12 PM
The problem is that people want to think of an iPhone as a PC. They apply PC analogies and logic. However the reality is that the cell industry has more in common with appliances or consoles. It's traditionally a heavily curated environment.
Apple: Start with a "restricted" system and open it up to allow for PC like advantages. (The App Store is an example of this)
Google: Start with an "open" system and lock it down to meet carrier needs and leverage the advantages of curation. (The Google Market place is an example of this)
Android is still open... They are just going to be much more tighter on what Products qualify to get the google Logo and the android name.
Apple: Start with a "restricted" system and open it up to allow for PC like advantages. (The App Store is an example of this)
Google: Start with an "open" system and lock it down to meet carrier needs and leverage the advantages of curation. (The Google Market place is an example of this)
Android is still open... They are just going to be much more tighter on what Products qualify to get the google Logo and the android name.
beangibbs
Apr 22, 01:01 AM
Pros and cons to both.m
On desktop, you don't risk kicking it...but it takes up space that can be used for other stuff...speakers, screen, scanner, printer, wacom...
On the floor, it's out of the way, but more risk to kicking it, or, if you have a cup of coffee or something on the desk, you risk it spilling and going in the tower.
I'd put mine on my desk if I had one just because that's how one of the desktop design labs is set up at the college, and I'm just used to that.
On desktop, you don't risk kicking it...but it takes up space that can be used for other stuff...speakers, screen, scanner, printer, wacom...
On the floor, it's out of the way, but more risk to kicking it, or, if you have a cup of coffee or something on the desk, you risk it spilling and going in the tower.
I'd put mine on my desk if I had one just because that's how one of the desktop design labs is set up at the college, and I'm just used to that.
daneoni
Aug 2, 11:27 AM
Realistically we're only gonna get Leopard preview (lots of it) and they'll be previewed using the new MacPros sporting woodcrest processors. We'll also get new Cinema Displays probably a new 40" version as well....powered by some SLI type graphics
MAYBE we'll see the MacBook Pros/iMac get the Core 2 Duos as well although i think these will be silently released at the end of August or we see the MacBooks sporting 2.0Ghz core duos as standard with the 15" MBP coming with 2.16 Ghz as standard and the 17" moving up to 2.33 GHz. That is it, no iPods, no iPhones. Those will happen in Apple expo and MWSF respectively.
MAYBE we'll see the MacBook Pros/iMac get the Core 2 Duos as well although i think these will be silently released at the end of August or we see the MacBooks sporting 2.0Ghz core duos as standard with the 15" MBP coming with 2.16 Ghz as standard and the 17" moving up to 2.33 GHz. That is it, no iPods, no iPhones. Those will happen in Apple expo and MWSF respectively.
danielwsmithee
Aug 4, 08:16 AM
It is a new game after PPC->x86.
Apple is now competing directly with all other PC manufacturers. You can easily compare the hardware between different computers.
Hence, I am sure Apple will upgrade all MBs to Merom as soon as they have made sure they will get enough Meroms to satisfy the need of MBP.
Besides since both the iBook and 12'' PB seems to have merged into the 13'' MB, it is vital to keep this line updated for demanding users with a need for a smaller form factor.I think quick updates to the latest technology at a reasonable price is a good strategy for Apple right now. Many computer manufacturers have not switched over to even the Core Duo on their laptops yet, the ones that have charge a premium for them. The same is true for the Core 2 Duo desktops and Woodcrest. There is an 8 month lag in the main manufacturers (Dell, HP, Gateway etc) between the time that a new intel processor is available and they have cleared out their inventory and start offering the newer technology. HP is better then the others. Dell it is almost impossible to find a computer on their website with Core 2 Duo and the ones that are (XPS) can not be configured for anything less the $2500. They really charge a premium for the latest and greatest. Apple could go a long way by keeping their inventory short and getting customers the latest technology quickly.
Apple is now competing directly with all other PC manufacturers. You can easily compare the hardware between different computers.
Hence, I am sure Apple will upgrade all MBs to Merom as soon as they have made sure they will get enough Meroms to satisfy the need of MBP.
Besides since both the iBook and 12'' PB seems to have merged into the 13'' MB, it is vital to keep this line updated for demanding users with a need for a smaller form factor.I think quick updates to the latest technology at a reasonable price is a good strategy for Apple right now. Many computer manufacturers have not switched over to even the Core Duo on their laptops yet, the ones that have charge a premium for them. The same is true for the Core 2 Duo desktops and Woodcrest. There is an 8 month lag in the main manufacturers (Dell, HP, Gateway etc) between the time that a new intel processor is available and they have cleared out their inventory and start offering the newer technology. HP is better then the others. Dell it is almost impossible to find a computer on their website with Core 2 Duo and the ones that are (XPS) can not be configured for anything less the $2500. They really charge a premium for the latest and greatest. Apple could go a long way by keeping their inventory short and getting customers the latest technology quickly.
Turbojugend27
Aug 2, 12:28 PM
Meh to the Mac Cinema displays, just buy an LG (since they make them for Apple) it will be 500 dollars cheaper and have more features on it. I hope they put the new chips into the Imacs, I need a new one ASAP.
Rocketman
Aug 7, 01:58 PM
Suppose it'd be a bit heretic to buy one of these solely for Windows, right?
I'd not get a quad Xeon Woodcrest anywhere else for less, and my Athlon 64 just doesn't cut it...
I do believe that is the entire point of this WWDC06 keynote presentation. Note if you get the chaeaper, faster, nicer MacPro computer you get OSX and bundled apps "for free".
Rocketman
I'd not get a quad Xeon Woodcrest anywhere else for less, and my Athlon 64 just doesn't cut it...
I do believe that is the entire point of this WWDC06 keynote presentation. Note if you get the chaeaper, faster, nicer MacPro computer you get OSX and bundled apps "for free".
Rocketman
smulji
Mar 30, 10:53 PM
WOW. In my years of OS X development and beta releases, this is the first time I believe Apple has released a developer preview with little to no beta releases, and pushed right into a half arsed possible GM build without the numerous beta's for 10.X refinements. For developers and companies who have been accustomed to Apple pushing bi-weekly beta's as the GM release approaches. This may not bold well for developers and companies transitioning their products/applications in time and with little "bumps" in the road.
This also makes me believe Apple has certainly, finally, officially drawn a line with regard to their main focus: iOS. It truly is about mobile devices for Cupertino, with iPhones and iPads and numerous iOS beta releases that have pushed OS X off center stage since Leopard. Gone are the excellent days of a dedicated LCD display line with three size variants, gone are the days when desktop PowerPC towers were affordable, and soon the professionals who spent thousands of dollars and hours investing in Mac products for their work will be pushed out the door for the general mass consumer. This is a sad sign for us, for those that supported a struggling yet profitable Apple dedicated to professionals, consumers, quality products and improved operating systems.
That could be what Steve Jobs was alluding to when during the iPad 1 release in 2010 he said that Apple was the world's largest mobile devices company. Then later that same year during one of the financial conference calls Tim Cooke said people should refer to Apple as a mobile company. Just a theory.
This also makes me believe Apple has certainly, finally, officially drawn a line with regard to their main focus: iOS. It truly is about mobile devices for Cupertino, with iPhones and iPads and numerous iOS beta releases that have pushed OS X off center stage since Leopard. Gone are the excellent days of a dedicated LCD display line with three size variants, gone are the days when desktop PowerPC towers were affordable, and soon the professionals who spent thousands of dollars and hours investing in Mac products for their work will be pushed out the door for the general mass consumer. This is a sad sign for us, for those that supported a struggling yet profitable Apple dedicated to professionals, consumers, quality products and improved operating systems.
That could be what Steve Jobs was alluding to when during the iPad 1 release in 2010 he said that Apple was the world's largest mobile devices company. Then later that same year during one of the financial conference calls Tim Cooke said people should refer to Apple as a mobile company. Just a theory.
miles01110
May 7, 10:06 AM
Mobileme is certainly worth more than free. Apple doesn't scrape your emails and other data to target adds at you a la Google.
It's naive to assume that Apple won't use MobileMe data in the future to serve you ads.
Then roll out Mobileme Pro
Make iDisk more like Drop Box.
Enhance the sync
Online Backup
Cloud Music (Lala style)
iWork.com Pro (adds collaborative editing)
Whatever other cool stuff they can deliver
Given the [lack of acceptable] performance of the current service, all of these things are just going to be painful to use. If they can devote some more bandwidth to them, I could see it being a hit.
It's naive to assume that Apple won't use MobileMe data in the future to serve you ads.
Then roll out Mobileme Pro
Make iDisk more like Drop Box.
Enhance the sync
Online Backup
Cloud Music (Lala style)
iWork.com Pro (adds collaborative editing)
Whatever other cool stuff they can deliver
Given the [lack of acceptable] performance of the current service, all of these things are just going to be painful to use. If they can devote some more bandwidth to them, I could see it being a hit.
Mac'nCheese
Apr 9, 09:39 PM
So if the parentheses are solved first why not just put them in front? Why go through all the semantics? Do scientists purposely make it this hard when solving equations?
So people can learn how to do math properly. If teachers quized students with the "easy" version of questions, they would never really learn anything but the basics. The harder something is to do, the more you learn how to reason, how to think, how to work through problems and solve them. It's like asking why kids learn more and more vocabulary words when, in the end, they probably will just use the most common ones.
So people can learn how to do math properly. If teachers quized students with the "easy" version of questions, they would never really learn anything but the basics. The harder something is to do, the more you learn how to reason, how to think, how to work through problems and solve them. It's like asking why kids learn more and more vocabulary words when, in the end, they probably will just use the most common ones.
HiVolt
Apr 21, 05:22 PM
It would be nice. As I'm forced to use a Mac Pro with no redundancy at work to run some Mac specific software. At least my rack is wide enough, I slide in thru the side and on a shelf.
A 3U-4U Mac Pro with optional redundant PSU and hardware RAID5 would be great. We would certainly buy one at work.
A 3U-4U Mac Pro with optional redundant PSU and hardware RAID5 would be great. We would certainly buy one at work.
Manic Mouse
Sep 11, 08:51 AM
I really think they should have a seperate app for the movies/tv shows, or rename and overhaul iTunes. Making things too complicated and hard to use is something Apple strives against and by incorperating too much functionality into a MUSIC player will make it hard to use and confusing for customers. iTunes, strangely, should be for "tunes". It makes no sense, at least from the name, to think that there would be movies/tv shows in there.
Why not take the DVD-player app in OSX and turn that into the new TV show/Movie player (as well as DVDs) while iTunes plays MP3/CDs. That makes much more sense. You should also be able to rip DVD's though this new app as you would CDs in iTunes.
Why not take the DVD-player app in OSX and turn that into the new TV show/Movie player (as well as DVDs) while iTunes plays MP3/CDs. That makes much more sense. You should also be able to rip DVD's though this new app as you would CDs in iTunes.
manu chao
Jul 30, 12:20 PM
It's true...but I don't see it changing anytime soon. Americans are used to getting free or cheap phones when they sign up for a carrier contract. The carriers subsidize the cost so that expensive phones can be had for <$200. They RARELY pay full retail price ($300-$700) on a phone...mainly only when they break theirs and still have time on their contract. The way I understand it, the rest of the world pays full retail everytime they want a new phone. Is this right?
In Europe, it is pretty much the same as in the US, most people get their cell phone with a contract.
In Europe, it is pretty much the same as in the US, most people get their cell phone with a contract.
cherrypop
Nov 22, 09:15 AM
Herein will lie yet another concrete example of the difference between Steve Jobs and everyone else.
I'm not saying that the iPhone will be a sure-fire hit. In fact, I fully expect a lot of Apple fans to be disappointed with the first revision.
But Apple gets IT and won't have a failure on its hands simply by combining a phone and an iPod. Hell, that's why I use my Sony Ericsson W810i over my iPods: one device in my pocket.
I'm not saying that the iPhone will be a sure-fire hit. In fact, I fully expect a lot of Apple fans to be disappointed with the first revision.
But Apple gets IT and won't have a failure on its hands simply by combining a phone and an iPod. Hell, that's why I use my Sony Ericsson W810i over my iPods: one device in my pocket.
callmemike20
Apr 19, 01:16 PM
Everyone does pay taxes. The statement that 40+% of the population paid no taxes is a lie. They may have paid no Federal Income Taxes, but that does NOT mean they paid no taxes.
My examples were based solely on the federal income tax (with some tidbits of sales tax).
As we discussed before, everyone pays something. There are so many taxes out there that aren't even called taxes. But, since we are trying to simplify the code, maybe those other sources can be eliminated.
My examples were based solely on the federal income tax (with some tidbits of sales tax).
As we discussed before, everyone pays something. There are so many taxes out there that aren't even called taxes. But, since we are trying to simplify the code, maybe those other sources can be eliminated.
Mackan
Apr 20, 03:49 AM
So, how many more times are various sources gonna reiterate that iPhone 5 is to come out in Fall? :rolleyes:
As many as it takes to make you come here and read and comment the junk. Because it's all what this site is about.
As many as it takes to make you come here and read and comment the junk. Because it's all what this site is about.
Eraserhead
Nov 26, 11:02 AM
I suspect the MacTablet is the "True Video iPod" if you want to watch films on the go you need a decent screen size, though maybe it will be the "True Video iPod Pro" and cost about $500, as I doubt they could do it for $300.
-aggie-
May 5, 07:37 AM
BTW, searching a room disarms traps, so we should get to a point where our last move is search instead of move, if I understand the rules.
aptar
Sep 16, 07:36 PM
I am curious tho, if people placed their orders now and lets say the new mbp comes out on the 19th, then how will they adjust the specs and price for the one you ordered and the one that ships? Will they contact you ahead of time or just send you a similar spec based on your price?
Any ideas? :o
I ordered my iPod literally the day before the changeover. They then emailed me with the option of keeping original order (with new pricing) or changing to new one (and lose student rebate option). They have a 'transition' page and everything to make your decision, so I would assume they'd do the same with active MBP orders.
Any ideas? :o
I ordered my iPod literally the day before the changeover. They then emailed me with the option of keeping original order (with new pricing) or changing to new one (and lose student rebate option). They have a 'transition' page and everything to make your decision, so I would assume they'd do the same with active MBP orders.
MikeTheC
Nov 25, 10:46 PM
All this talk about Palm needing to modernize their OS, or it is outdated, or needing to re-write is absolutely hilarious.
On a phone, I want to use its features quickly and easily. When I have to schedule an appointment, I want to enter that appointment as easily as possible. When I want to add something to my to-do list, I want to do it easily and quickly. And first and foremost, I want to be able to look up a contact and dial it as quickly as possible.
A phone is not a personal computer. I couldn't care less about multitasking, rewriting, "modern" OSes (whatever "modern" means). "Modern" features and look is just eye candy and/or toys. A mobile phone is a gadget of convenience, and it should be convenient to use. Even PalmOS 1.0 was convenient. It was just as easy to use its contact and calendar features as any so-called "modern" OS is today.
I would really like to know how "modernizing" the OS on my phone would help me look up contacts, dial contacts, enter to-do list entries, and entering calendar entries any better that I could today.
Again, I repeat: a phone is not a personal computer. There's no point in treating it as such.
The same point could largely be made about cars, but I don't think either of us would want to be driving a Model T or Model A Ford these days, would we?
The term "Modern" as applied to operating systems has little to do with the interface per se. It primarily concerns the underpinnings of the OS and how forward-looking and/or open-ended it is. Older operating systems, if you want to look at it in this way, were very geared to the hardware of their times, and every time you added a new hardware feature or some new kind of technology came out, you wound up making this big patchwork of an OS, in which you had either an out-dated or obsolete "core" around which was stuck, somewhat unglamorously, lots of crap to allow it to do stuff it wasn't really designed for. Then, you wound up having to write patches for the patches, etc., ad infinitum.
Apple tried to go the internal development route, but that didn't work because their departmental infrastructure was eating them from the inside out at the time and basically poisoned all of their new projects. They considered BeOS because it was an incredibly modern OS at the time that was very capable, unbelievably good at multitasking, memory protection, multimedia tasks, etc. However, that company was so shaky that when Apple decided not to go with them, they collapsed. One of the products which was introduced and sold and almost immediately recalled that used a version of BeOS was Sony's eVilla (you just have to love that name -- try pronouncing it out loud to get the full effect).
Ultimately, they went with NeXT's BSD- and Mach-Kernel-based NeXTStep (which after a bunch of time and effort and -- since lots of it is based on Open Source software, there were a healthy amount of community contributions to) and hence we now have Mac OS X.
I'll leave it to actual developers and/or coders here to better explain and refine (and/or correct) what I've said here, should you wish greater detail beyond what I am able to -- and therefore have -- provided above.
The whole point of going with a modern OS implemented for an imbedded market (i.e. "Mac OS X Mobile") is it gives you much more direct (and probably better implemented and/or better-grounded) access to modern technologies. Everything from basic I/O tasks that reside in the Kernel to audio processing to doing H.264 decoding to having access to IPv4 or IPv6, are all examples of things which a modern OS could do a better job of providing and/or backing.
From what I understand, PalmOS is something that was designed to first and foremost give you basic notepad and daily organizer functionality. When they wrote, as you say, PalmOS 1.0, they happened to implement a way for third parties to write software that could run on it. This has been both a benefit and a bane of PalmOS's existence. First off, they now have the same issues of backwards-compatibility and storage space and memory use/abuse that a regular computer OS has. I said it was both a benefit and a bane; but there's actually two parts to the "bane" side. The first I've already mentioned, but the second is the fact that since apps have been written which can do darn near any conceivable task, people keep wanting more and more and more. And this then goes back to the "patchwork" I described earlier in talking about "older" computer OSs.
Then people want multimedia, and color screens, and apps to take advantage of it, and they want Palm to incorporate DSPs so they can play music, and of course that brings along with it all of the extra patching to then allow for the existence of, and permit the use of, an on-board DSP. And now you want WiFi? Well, shoot, now we gotta have IPv4 as well, and support for TCP/IP, none of which was ever a part of the original concept of PalmOS.
And even if you don't want or need any of those features in your own PDA, I'm sorry but that's really just too bad. Go live in a cave if you like, but if you buy a new PDA, guess what: you're gonna get all that stuff.
And at some point, all of this stretches an "older" OS just a bit too far, or it becomes a bit absurd with all the hoops and turns and wiggling that PalmOne's coders have to go through, so then they say, "Aw **** it, let's just re-write the thing."
Apple comes to this without any of *that* sort of legacy. Doubtless there will be no Newton code on this thing anywhere, but what Apple's got is Mac OS X, which means they also have the power (albeit somewhat indirectly) of an Open Source OS -- Linux. And in case you weren't aware, there are already numerous "imbedded" implementations of Linux -- phones, PDAs, game systems, kiosks, etc. -- all of which are data points and collective experience opportunities which ALREADY EXIST that Apple can exploit.
So no, having a "modern" OS is not a bad thing. It's actually a supremely awesome thing. What you're concerned about is having something that is intuitive AND efficient AND appropriate to the world of telephone interfaces for the user interface on the device you'd go and buy yourself.
All I can say, based on past performance, is give Apple a chance.
Now, here's a larger picture thought to ponder...
If Apple goes to market with the iPhone, then this is going to open up (to some extent) the viability of a F/OSS community cell phone. And this is a really good thing as well because it represents a non-commercial, enthusiast entrance into what up until now has been a totally proprietary, locked-down OS-based product world. It has the potential to do to cell phones what Linux has inspired in Mac OS X.
On a phone, I want to use its features quickly and easily. When I have to schedule an appointment, I want to enter that appointment as easily as possible. When I want to add something to my to-do list, I want to do it easily and quickly. And first and foremost, I want to be able to look up a contact and dial it as quickly as possible.
A phone is not a personal computer. I couldn't care less about multitasking, rewriting, "modern" OSes (whatever "modern" means). "Modern" features and look is just eye candy and/or toys. A mobile phone is a gadget of convenience, and it should be convenient to use. Even PalmOS 1.0 was convenient. It was just as easy to use its contact and calendar features as any so-called "modern" OS is today.
I would really like to know how "modernizing" the OS on my phone would help me look up contacts, dial contacts, enter to-do list entries, and entering calendar entries any better that I could today.
Again, I repeat: a phone is not a personal computer. There's no point in treating it as such.
The same point could largely be made about cars, but I don't think either of us would want to be driving a Model T or Model A Ford these days, would we?
The term "Modern" as applied to operating systems has little to do with the interface per se. It primarily concerns the underpinnings of the OS and how forward-looking and/or open-ended it is. Older operating systems, if you want to look at it in this way, were very geared to the hardware of their times, and every time you added a new hardware feature or some new kind of technology came out, you wound up making this big patchwork of an OS, in which you had either an out-dated or obsolete "core" around which was stuck, somewhat unglamorously, lots of crap to allow it to do stuff it wasn't really designed for. Then, you wound up having to write patches for the patches, etc., ad infinitum.
Apple tried to go the internal development route, but that didn't work because their departmental infrastructure was eating them from the inside out at the time and basically poisoned all of their new projects. They considered BeOS because it was an incredibly modern OS at the time that was very capable, unbelievably good at multitasking, memory protection, multimedia tasks, etc. However, that company was so shaky that when Apple decided not to go with them, they collapsed. One of the products which was introduced and sold and almost immediately recalled that used a version of BeOS was Sony's eVilla (you just have to love that name -- try pronouncing it out loud to get the full effect).
Ultimately, they went with NeXT's BSD- and Mach-Kernel-based NeXTStep (which after a bunch of time and effort and -- since lots of it is based on Open Source software, there were a healthy amount of community contributions to) and hence we now have Mac OS X.
I'll leave it to actual developers and/or coders here to better explain and refine (and/or correct) what I've said here, should you wish greater detail beyond what I am able to -- and therefore have -- provided above.
The whole point of going with a modern OS implemented for an imbedded market (i.e. "Mac OS X Mobile") is it gives you much more direct (and probably better implemented and/or better-grounded) access to modern technologies. Everything from basic I/O tasks that reside in the Kernel to audio processing to doing H.264 decoding to having access to IPv4 or IPv6, are all examples of things which a modern OS could do a better job of providing and/or backing.
From what I understand, PalmOS is something that was designed to first and foremost give you basic notepad and daily organizer functionality. When they wrote, as you say, PalmOS 1.0, they happened to implement a way for third parties to write software that could run on it. This has been both a benefit and a bane of PalmOS's existence. First off, they now have the same issues of backwards-compatibility and storage space and memory use/abuse that a regular computer OS has. I said it was both a benefit and a bane; but there's actually two parts to the "bane" side. The first I've already mentioned, but the second is the fact that since apps have been written which can do darn near any conceivable task, people keep wanting more and more and more. And this then goes back to the "patchwork" I described earlier in talking about "older" computer OSs.
Then people want multimedia, and color screens, and apps to take advantage of it, and they want Palm to incorporate DSPs so they can play music, and of course that brings along with it all of the extra patching to then allow for the existence of, and permit the use of, an on-board DSP. And now you want WiFi? Well, shoot, now we gotta have IPv4 as well, and support for TCP/IP, none of which was ever a part of the original concept of PalmOS.
And even if you don't want or need any of those features in your own PDA, I'm sorry but that's really just too bad. Go live in a cave if you like, but if you buy a new PDA, guess what: you're gonna get all that stuff.
And at some point, all of this stretches an "older" OS just a bit too far, or it becomes a bit absurd with all the hoops and turns and wiggling that PalmOne's coders have to go through, so then they say, "Aw **** it, let's just re-write the thing."
Apple comes to this without any of *that* sort of legacy. Doubtless there will be no Newton code on this thing anywhere, but what Apple's got is Mac OS X, which means they also have the power (albeit somewhat indirectly) of an Open Source OS -- Linux. And in case you weren't aware, there are already numerous "imbedded" implementations of Linux -- phones, PDAs, game systems, kiosks, etc. -- all of which are data points and collective experience opportunities which ALREADY EXIST that Apple can exploit.
So no, having a "modern" OS is not a bad thing. It's actually a supremely awesome thing. What you're concerned about is having something that is intuitive AND efficient AND appropriate to the world of telephone interfaces for the user interface on the device you'd go and buy yourself.
All I can say, based on past performance, is give Apple a chance.
Now, here's a larger picture thought to ponder...
If Apple goes to market with the iPhone, then this is going to open up (to some extent) the viability of a F/OSS community cell phone. And this is a really good thing as well because it represents a non-commercial, enthusiast entrance into what up until now has been a totally proprietary, locked-down OS-based product world. It has the potential to do to cell phones what Linux has inspired in Mac OS X.
Tomorrow
May 4, 02:50 PM
"If you have a stick that is 3' 7 13/16" and need to divide it into 3 equal sections, what is the length of the each section to the nearest 1/64 inch?" as opposed to "If you have a stick that 1233 mm long....." - and no, I didn't check to see if they are the same -
I'd use a calculator in either example, so it's a moot point.
2) Same idea as above.... "If you have a tank filled with 450 cubic yards of water, and it is flowing out at a rate of 3 gallons a minute, how long does it take to empty?" as opposed to the metric system where 1000 litres of water is 1 cubic meter which is 1 tonne (approximately - since altitudes and temperatures affect the density of water).... but it's close enough for horseshoes....
I've never seen a tank meant for holding liquid that wasn't rated in gallons - and I'm talking about up to 5 million gallons. But still, I'd be using a calculator in either event. But to illustrate my earlier point, 1 cubic yard = 27 cubic feet, 1 cubic foot = 7.48 gallons. Simple math.
I'd use a calculator in either example, so it's a moot point.
2) Same idea as above.... "If you have a tank filled with 450 cubic yards of water, and it is flowing out at a rate of 3 gallons a minute, how long does it take to empty?" as opposed to the metric system where 1000 litres of water is 1 cubic meter which is 1 tonne (approximately - since altitudes and temperatures affect the density of water).... but it's close enough for horseshoes....
I've never seen a tank meant for holding liquid that wasn't rated in gallons - and I'm talking about up to 5 million gallons. But still, I'd be using a calculator in either event. But to illustrate my earlier point, 1 cubic yard = 27 cubic feet, 1 cubic foot = 7.48 gallons. Simple math.
ikir
Apr 20, 04:47 AM
Apple copying the power of the HTC Sensation. They should also concentrate on the IOS because its a joke compared to other new smartphone operating systems.
Troll time? Calling iOS a joke is a joke itself. Feel free to spam here, nice signature lol!
Troll time? Calling iOS a joke is a joke itself. Feel free to spam here, nice signature lol!
Gasu E.
Apr 25, 08:31 AM
Well, I think the previous commenter's point has some validity. A great example of this "form over function" is the iMac. Mobile graphics (and poor ones at that), horrendous thermal management, limited stand orientation...but one damn fine looking computer:D Dont get me wrong, Apple does amazing things with their products. (Im obviously a fan :D) But I do think design is paramount to their efforts (not that function ever takes backseat, it just can be slightly lessoned on some releases). Now, IMO...they knocked both form and function out of the park with the iPad 2, iPhone 4, and 2010 MBA. Bravo
I have to respectfully disagree. Having a large monitor in a small compact desktop form factor was important to me. I have very limited deskspace, even less floorspace, and a variety of needs for the large monitor. You may call this "form", but as far as I am concerned, this is "functionality", since a larger package forces me to make other compromise in my life.
I have to respectfully disagree. Having a large monitor in a small compact desktop form factor was important to me. I have very limited deskspace, even less floorspace, and a variety of needs for the large monitor. You may call this "form", but as far as I am concerned, this is "functionality", since a larger package forces me to make other compromise in my life.
0 comments:
Post a Comment