Endow
Aug 27, 03:35 PM
Can someone tell me in what Santa Rosa is all about and how much of a difference it is (as far as Merom is concerned) ??:)
Silentwave
Jul 14, 06:22 PM
320 would be the standard. you could upgrade to a terabyte if there are still two HDD bays.
Heck you could have 1.5TB with the new Seagate 750GB drives!
Heck you could have 1.5TB with the new Seagate 750GB drives!
goobot
Mar 31, 07:18 PM
i heard that ios 4.3 is more open than the current android os :p
umichfan
Jun 12, 02:09 PM
So if Im getting this right....I bring my 3GS to Radio Shack on the 15th to preorder the iphone 4 and then I have to turn in my old phone in order to get the buy back gift card? But then I would be without a phone for over a week? My local Radio Shack said I could get $256 for my 3gs. But if I read right that price could go down the closer it gets to the ip4 launch?
Thanks
Thanks
daddycool
Jul 21, 07:03 AM
Kentsfield? Sounds like a Simpsons parody name (and a good one) or a cigarette. Where/how did they think this up?
SevenInchScrew
Nov 24, 01:20 PM
...I can't say how this compares to GT4 but so far it's been amazing
You have 800 cars exactly as they were in GT4, so you'll get a good idea. :p
My buddy picked this up today, so I'll be checking it out on Friday when we hang out. I'm not buying it without trying first. It will be interesting to see how well it plays. After waiting 6 years for another full Gran Turismo, I have big expectations. But hey, even if it doesn't play as well as I'm hoping, the photo mode looks excellent. I can spend a LOT of time in there.
You have 800 cars exactly as they were in GT4, so you'll get a good idea. :p
My buddy picked this up today, so I'll be checking it out on Friday when we hang out. I'm not buying it without trying first. It will be interesting to see how well it plays. After waiting 6 years for another full Gran Turismo, I have big expectations. But hey, even if it doesn't play as well as I'm hoping, the photo mode looks excellent. I can spend a LOT of time in there.
SuperCachetes
Mar 5, 07:30 PM
The same model applies to the 'church'.
They are on the wane, and need new conscripts.
Gays are less likely to give them that.
That's (sadly) believable. See, now you're talking. I knew you didn't always pop round just to throw a cheeky non sequitur into the works. ;)
They are on the wane, and need new conscripts.
Gays are less likely to give them that.
That's (sadly) believable. See, now you're talking. I knew you didn't always pop round just to throw a cheeky non sequitur into the works. ;)
BlizzardBomb
Aug 27, 09:49 AM
Well for one thing, Apple doesn't pay street prices. iMacs will only have 2 cores until Kentsfield. So I think it's fair to expct aggressive Conroe speed in the iMac due to the 2 core limitation. iMacs need to be about the same speed as Mac Pros because they only have 2 cores.
All pricing of chips are quoted in bulks of 1000s. And does it matter whether its street pricing or not because Apple still has to fork out an extra 30% for the CPU (+ logic board redesign costs).
All pricing of chips are quoted in bulks of 1000s. And does it matter whether its street pricing or not because Apple still has to fork out an extra 30% for the CPU (+ logic board redesign costs).
ezekielrage_99
Aug 27, 06:59 PM
i like the powerbook g5 jokes and have been around for a long time if that helps
I like them as well, but I think it's been replaced with Merom next tuesday, G6 Video iPod next next tuesday and the good old iPhone next tuesday rumors.
Still good for a laugh ;)
I like them as well, but I think it's been replaced with Merom next tuesday, G6 Video iPod next next tuesday and the good old iPhone next tuesday rumors.
Still good for a laugh ;)
opinioncircle
Mar 19, 03:38 PM
When will you people realize that Obama is not in charge? You're not in charge either. Corporate interest rules the USA, Libya has 2% of the world's oil supply and a lot of companies have interests there. No one intervened militarily in Rwanda or East Timor. You guys can continue to have your little left vs right, conservative vs. liberal distraction of a debate, meanwhile the real people running the show don't give a rat's ass about any of it.
I do agree with you to a certain extent. I still feel there is room to make things happen, but the trio money/power/interests is the big factor in decisions made.
I am openly disappointed with President Obama. It seems he's chasing something that he can't have, i.e. appreciation from each and every American (left and right included).
He's gone soft on several issues, and instead of taking advantage of the position the Dems were in DC, they tried to find a false consensus. Sad is the only word coming to my mind when talking about President Obama 1st term.
I do agree with you to a certain extent. I still feel there is room to make things happen, but the trio money/power/interests is the big factor in decisions made.
I am openly disappointed with President Obama. It seems he's chasing something that he can't have, i.e. appreciation from each and every American (left and right included).
He's gone soft on several issues, and instead of taking advantage of the position the Dems were in DC, they tried to find a false consensus. Sad is the only word coming to my mind when talking about President Obama 1st term.
bamerican
Apr 25, 03:19 PM
"Federal Marshals need a warrant. . . . . "
Duh, the police always have to jump over a higher bar . . . I, personally, can come into your home, take your bag of cocaine, and go give it to the police and it will be admissible, even though the cops need a warrant. (I can be sued for breaking and entering, etc., but the drugs are still admissible.
You are absolutely right. This lawyer is a complete idiot. The reason that federal marshals or any other goverment actor needs a warrant is because they are government actors. The Fourth Amendment protects people from the government, not private parties. Purely private searches are not protected by the Fourth Amendment.
Apple is not a government actor and, unless they are acting in coordination or on behalf of the government, under the Fourth Amendment they don't require a warrant for a damn thing.
Did this guy miss the day they taught law in law school?
Duh, the police always have to jump over a higher bar . . . I, personally, can come into your home, take your bag of cocaine, and go give it to the police and it will be admissible, even though the cops need a warrant. (I can be sued for breaking and entering, etc., but the drugs are still admissible.
You are absolutely right. This lawyer is a complete idiot. The reason that federal marshals or any other goverment actor needs a warrant is because they are government actors. The Fourth Amendment protects people from the government, not private parties. Purely private searches are not protected by the Fourth Amendment.
Apple is not a government actor and, unless they are acting in coordination or on behalf of the government, under the Fourth Amendment they don't require a warrant for a damn thing.
Did this guy miss the day they taught law in law school?
skunk
Mar 3, 11:57 AM
Many people ignore the difference between homosexuality and homosexual acts. Many Christians insist that homosexuality is immoral. But homosexuality is a property, not an action. Nor is it a sin of omission. Homosexuality the property is morally indifferent. Homosexual acts are, I think, immoral. An action can be immoral, even if someone doesn't deserve any blame for doing it.On the other hand, people can live without morality, which is prescribed by outside influences, and live ethically, which is according to one's own lights.
I mentioned the Catholic Church's homosexual-abuse because skunk seems to think my opinions about sexual morality are feelings, not beliefs that are either true or false. Even psychotherapists I've talked with have agreed that feelings are neither truths nor falsehoods. Feelings are neither of those, but there are truths about feelings and there are falsehoods about them. If I only feel that homosexual acts are immoral, should some government outlaw feeling that way?Why would any government - how could any government - legislate your feelings? You can feel what you like, just do not dress up your personal feelings as "truths" which others should acquiesce in.
In another sense of the phrase "absolute truth," a truth is absolute when it's true whether anyone believes it or not. Even if I'm mistaken when I believe that homosexual sex is gravely immoral, it's still true that either they're moral or not moral.You may think they are "immoral", but your "morality" is yours, not anyone else's.
Some moral relativists even insist that if you believe that homosexual acts are morally acceptable, and I believe they're immoral, then we're both right. A moral relativist might say the same about the morality or immorality of gay-bashing. But someone is right when he thinks that gay-bashing is morally right, should a court punish him for gay-bashing someone?What do you think?
I mentioned the Catholic Church's homosexual-abuse because skunk seems to think my opinions about sexual morality are feelings, not beliefs that are either true or false. Even psychotherapists I've talked with have agreed that feelings are neither truths nor falsehoods. Feelings are neither of those, but there are truths about feelings and there are falsehoods about them. If I only feel that homosexual acts are immoral, should some government outlaw feeling that way?Why would any government - how could any government - legislate your feelings? You can feel what you like, just do not dress up your personal feelings as "truths" which others should acquiesce in.
In another sense of the phrase "absolute truth," a truth is absolute when it's true whether anyone believes it or not. Even if I'm mistaken when I believe that homosexual sex is gravely immoral, it's still true that either they're moral or not moral.You may think they are "immoral", but your "morality" is yours, not anyone else's.
Some moral relativists even insist that if you believe that homosexual acts are morally acceptable, and I believe they're immoral, then we're both right. A moral relativist might say the same about the morality or immorality of gay-bashing. But someone is right when he thinks that gay-bashing is morally right, should a court punish him for gay-bashing someone?What do you think?
Liebo11
Aug 7, 07:49 PM
does upgrading to leopard cost money for tiger users?
iMikeT
Aug 25, 03:48 PM
I tell you, I've had nothing but trouble with Apple. I'm young, I'm a medical student (so relatively affluent), and I'm a "switcher." That switching part, that was a mistake. Mac OS X is beautiful software, I love it. Unfortunately I've had a lot of problems with the hardware. These days it's enough I wish I still had my IBM/Lenovo laptop--that never gave me problems.
Rapid Repair - iPod Touch 2G
ipod touch 2g back. rotobadger
017-ipod-touch-2g-
ipod touch 2g back plate.
ipod touch 2g back plate. ipod
brianus
Sep 14, 10:23 PM
AnandTech is putting a lot of emphasis on this FB-DIMM issue. Their Conroe vs Xeon comparisons are poor given that they maximize the FB-DIMM latency "problem" by using a Mac Pro with only two RAM slots occupied. Seems as though they have an agenda to exaggerate the importance of this technical issue.
I have noticed this emphasis as well; not being an expert on this issue myself though, would you care to shed light on how their coverage is an exaggeration and why we shouldn't be worried about it?
The comments about separate platforms in the NT era I took to refer to NT3.x/4 vs Win9x.
Yes, this is what I was getting at. ("arse about face"? What is that, Swedish? :rolleyes: ). Noone other than a vintage Windows IT person would know there were further differences between versions of NT itself. Also when making comparisons I never mentioned Server 2003 (about which I know almost nothing); I was talking about XP and 2000 being relatively similar whereas, for example NT and 98 were not.
New micro-arch -- Nehalem is due 2008.
Really, completely new? As in, to Core 2 what the G5 was to G4? In just two years?? I guess they're really ramping things up... Core 3 Hexa Mac Pros, anyone?
I have noticed this emphasis as well; not being an expert on this issue myself though, would you care to shed light on how their coverage is an exaggeration and why we shouldn't be worried about it?
The comments about separate platforms in the NT era I took to refer to NT3.x/4 vs Win9x.
Yes, this is what I was getting at. ("arse about face"? What is that, Swedish? :rolleyes: ). Noone other than a vintage Windows IT person would know there were further differences between versions of NT itself. Also when making comparisons I never mentioned Server 2003 (about which I know almost nothing); I was talking about XP and 2000 being relatively similar whereas, for example NT and 98 were not.
New micro-arch -- Nehalem is due 2008.
Really, completely new? As in, to Core 2 what the G5 was to G4? In just two years?? I guess they're really ramping things up... Core 3 Hexa Mac Pros, anyone?
Benjamins
Mar 31, 06:14 PM
I completely agree, but let's be honest, Apple and Microsoft fans are no different.
true, but the smugness and self righteousness of Google fanboys are so much worse.
true, but the smugness and self righteousness of Google fanboys are so much worse.
lyngo
Apr 7, 10:19 PM
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)
Wow. This is pretty huge.
Wow. This is pretty huge.
nilk
Apr 6, 03:07 PM
For a programmer dealing with Terminal, Xcode, Netbeans, Eclipse, etc (not graphic intensive softwares), would this macbook air be a better deal than the 13/15" Macbook pro?
Anyone?
The main thing keeping me from wanting a MBA for software development is the 4GB RAM limit. If you're not running any virtual machines you'd probably do just fine with 4GB, but as soon as you need to run a Windows VM things will get painful (especially if you're running Visual Studio in it).
If could get a MBA with 8GB of RAM and Thunderbolt I would get it instead of a MBP for my next machine, at least if the MBP stays the way it is (16GB of RAM option on a MBP would change things for me; I'll take all the RAM I can get).
Edit: One minor thing to note is that the 13" MBA has the 13" MBP beat on screen resolution. That's completely silly considering the MBP updates came well after the MBA updates.
Anyone?
The main thing keeping me from wanting a MBA for software development is the 4GB RAM limit. If you're not running any virtual machines you'd probably do just fine with 4GB, but as soon as you need to run a Windows VM things will get painful (especially if you're running Visual Studio in it).
If could get a MBA with 8GB of RAM and Thunderbolt I would get it instead of a MBP for my next machine, at least if the MBP stays the way it is (16GB of RAM option on a MBP would change things for me; I'll take all the RAM I can get).
Edit: One minor thing to note is that the 13" MBA has the 13" MBP beat on screen resolution. That's completely silly considering the MBP updates came well after the MBA updates.
skunk
Feb 28, 07:12 PM
2) okay, they can pretend to get marriedNo, you are absolutely wrong., They can get married like any other couple where the laws allow. Marriage is not a special preserve of any religion. You cannot just commandeer it.
No, I'm not kidding. To the Catholic Church sex outside of a valid sacramental marriage is fornicationWho cares what Catholic dogma claims? It's an irrelevance.
Last time I checked when the vast majority of people did such behavior it was with the opposite gender not the same.So what is the problem? Are you against variation?
Do you have proof that Plato was a repressed homosexual?No, not proof
"Homosexuality," Plato wrote, "is regarded as shameful by barbarians and by those who live under despotic governments just as philosophy is regarded as shameful by them, because it is apparently not in the interest of such rulers to have great ideas engendered in their subjects, or powerful friendships or passionate love-all of which homosexuality is particularly apt to produce." This attitude of Plato's was characteristic of the ancient world, and I want to begin my discussion of the attitudes of the Church and of Western Christianity toward homosexuality by commenting on comparable attitudes among the ancients.
To a very large extent, Western attitudes toward law, religion, literature and government are dependent upon Roman attitudes. This makes it particularly striking that our attitudes toward homosexuality in particular and sexual tolerance in general are so remarkably different from those of the Romans. It is very difficult to convey to modern audiences the indifference of the Romans to questions of gender and gender orientation. The difficulty is due both to the fact that the evidence has been largely consciously obliterated by historians prior to very recent decades, and to the diffusion of the relevant material.
Romans did not consider sexuality or sexual preference a matter of much interest, nor did they treat either in an analytical way. An historian has to gather together thousands of little bits and pieces to demonstrate the general acceptance of homosexuality among the Romans.
One of the few imperial writers who does appear to make some sort of comment on the subject in a general way wrote, "Zeus came as an eagle to god like Ganymede and as a swan to the fair haired mother of Helen. One person prefers one gender, another the other, I like both." Plutarch wrote at about the same time, "No sensible person can imagine that the sexes differ in matters of love as they do in matters of clothing. The intelligent lover of beauty will be attracted to beauty in whichever gender he finds it." Roman law and social strictures made absolutely no restrictions on the basis of gender. It has sometimes been claimed that there were laws against homosexual relations in Rome, but it is easy to prove that this was not the case. On the other hand, it is a mistake to imagine that anarchic hedonism ruled at Rome. In fact, Romans did have a complex set of moral strictures designed to protect children from abuse or any citizen from force or duress in sexual relations. Romans were, like other people, sensitive to issues of love and caring, but individual sexual (i.e. gender) choice was completely unlimited. Male prostitution (directed toward other males), for instance, was so common that the taxes on it constituted a major source of revenue for the imperial treasury. It was so profitable that even in later periods when a certain intolerance crept in, the emperors could not bring themselves to end the practice and its attendant revenue.
Gay marriages were also legal and frequent in Rome for both males and females. Even emperors often married other males. There was total acceptance on the part of the populace, as far as it can be determined, of this sort of homosexual attitude and behavior. This total acceptance was not limited to the ruling elite; there is also much popular Roman literature containing gay love stories. The real point I want to make is that there is absolutely no conscious effort on anyone's part in the Roman world, the world in which Christianity was born, to claim that homosexuality was abnormal or undesirable. There is in fact no word for "homosexual" in Latin. "Homosexual" sounds like Latin, but was coined by a German psychologist in the late 1 9th century. No one in the early Roman world seemed to feel that the fact that someone preferred his or her own gender was any more significant than the fact that someone preferred blue eyes or short people. Neither gay nor straight people seemed to associate certain characteristics with sexual preference. Gay men were not thought to be less masculine than straight men and lesbian women were not thought of as less feminine than straight women. Gay people were not thought to be any better or worse than straight people-an attitude which differed both from that of the society that preceded it, since many Greeks thought gay people were inherently better than straight people, and from that of the society which followed it, in which gay people were often thought to be inferior to others.
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/pwh/1979boswell.html
The most celebrated account of homosexual love comes in Plato's Symposium, in which homosexual love is discussed as a more ideal, more perfect kind of relationship than the more prosaic heterosexual variety. This is a highly biased account, because Plato himself was homosexual and wrote very beautiful epigrams to boys expressing his devotion. Platonic homosexuality had very little to do with sex; Plato believed ideally that love and reason should be fused together, while concern over the body and the material world of particulars should be annihilated. Even today, "Platonic love" refers to non-sexual love between two adults.
Behind Plato's contempt for heterosexual desire lay an aesthetic, highly intellectual aversion to the female body. Plato would have agreed with Schopenhauer's opinion that "only a male intellect clouded by the sexual drive could call the stunted, narrow-shouldered, broad-hipped and short-legged sex the fair sex".
http://www.newstatesman.com/199908230009
No, I'm not kidding. To the Catholic Church sex outside of a valid sacramental marriage is fornicationWho cares what Catholic dogma claims? It's an irrelevance.
Last time I checked when the vast majority of people did such behavior it was with the opposite gender not the same.So what is the problem? Are you against variation?
Do you have proof that Plato was a repressed homosexual?No, not proof
"Homosexuality," Plato wrote, "is regarded as shameful by barbarians and by those who live under despotic governments just as philosophy is regarded as shameful by them, because it is apparently not in the interest of such rulers to have great ideas engendered in their subjects, or powerful friendships or passionate love-all of which homosexuality is particularly apt to produce." This attitude of Plato's was characteristic of the ancient world, and I want to begin my discussion of the attitudes of the Church and of Western Christianity toward homosexuality by commenting on comparable attitudes among the ancients.
To a very large extent, Western attitudes toward law, religion, literature and government are dependent upon Roman attitudes. This makes it particularly striking that our attitudes toward homosexuality in particular and sexual tolerance in general are so remarkably different from those of the Romans. It is very difficult to convey to modern audiences the indifference of the Romans to questions of gender and gender orientation. The difficulty is due both to the fact that the evidence has been largely consciously obliterated by historians prior to very recent decades, and to the diffusion of the relevant material.
Romans did not consider sexuality or sexual preference a matter of much interest, nor did they treat either in an analytical way. An historian has to gather together thousands of little bits and pieces to demonstrate the general acceptance of homosexuality among the Romans.
One of the few imperial writers who does appear to make some sort of comment on the subject in a general way wrote, "Zeus came as an eagle to god like Ganymede and as a swan to the fair haired mother of Helen. One person prefers one gender, another the other, I like both." Plutarch wrote at about the same time, "No sensible person can imagine that the sexes differ in matters of love as they do in matters of clothing. The intelligent lover of beauty will be attracted to beauty in whichever gender he finds it." Roman law and social strictures made absolutely no restrictions on the basis of gender. It has sometimes been claimed that there were laws against homosexual relations in Rome, but it is easy to prove that this was not the case. On the other hand, it is a mistake to imagine that anarchic hedonism ruled at Rome. In fact, Romans did have a complex set of moral strictures designed to protect children from abuse or any citizen from force or duress in sexual relations. Romans were, like other people, sensitive to issues of love and caring, but individual sexual (i.e. gender) choice was completely unlimited. Male prostitution (directed toward other males), for instance, was so common that the taxes on it constituted a major source of revenue for the imperial treasury. It was so profitable that even in later periods when a certain intolerance crept in, the emperors could not bring themselves to end the practice and its attendant revenue.
Gay marriages were also legal and frequent in Rome for both males and females. Even emperors often married other males. There was total acceptance on the part of the populace, as far as it can be determined, of this sort of homosexual attitude and behavior. This total acceptance was not limited to the ruling elite; there is also much popular Roman literature containing gay love stories. The real point I want to make is that there is absolutely no conscious effort on anyone's part in the Roman world, the world in which Christianity was born, to claim that homosexuality was abnormal or undesirable. There is in fact no word for "homosexual" in Latin. "Homosexual" sounds like Latin, but was coined by a German psychologist in the late 1 9th century. No one in the early Roman world seemed to feel that the fact that someone preferred his or her own gender was any more significant than the fact that someone preferred blue eyes or short people. Neither gay nor straight people seemed to associate certain characteristics with sexual preference. Gay men were not thought to be less masculine than straight men and lesbian women were not thought of as less feminine than straight women. Gay people were not thought to be any better or worse than straight people-an attitude which differed both from that of the society that preceded it, since many Greeks thought gay people were inherently better than straight people, and from that of the society which followed it, in which gay people were often thought to be inferior to others.
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/pwh/1979boswell.html
The most celebrated account of homosexual love comes in Plato's Symposium, in which homosexual love is discussed as a more ideal, more perfect kind of relationship than the more prosaic heterosexual variety. This is a highly biased account, because Plato himself was homosexual and wrote very beautiful epigrams to boys expressing his devotion. Platonic homosexuality had very little to do with sex; Plato believed ideally that love and reason should be fused together, while concern over the body and the material world of particulars should be annihilated. Even today, "Platonic love" refers to non-sexual love between two adults.
Behind Plato's contempt for heterosexual desire lay an aesthetic, highly intellectual aversion to the female body. Plato would have agreed with Schopenhauer's opinion that "only a male intellect clouded by the sexual drive could call the stunted, narrow-shouldered, broad-hipped and short-legged sex the fair sex".
http://www.newstatesman.com/199908230009
shamino
Jul 20, 08:18 PM
Hehe, I remember Virginia Tech having built the 3rd fastest supercomputer out of 1100 dual powermacs G5. Back then, the XServe G5 wasn't available. You can see that in the MWSF 2004 keynote (minute 25 ff). They later switched to the Xserve G5 when those came out. It had 10.28 TF for just $5.2M.
And I remember that they were very concerned about the lack of ECC memory, and were extremely eager to replace them with Xserves as soon as the G5 model came out.
And I remember that they were very concerned about the lack of ECC memory, and were extremely eager to replace them with Xserves as soon as the G5 model came out.
thevofl
Aug 7, 05:32 PM
1) When I did a system restore at work, it restored everything back on the date. I lost all my work since the date.
2) Something tells me that the Super Duper top secret stuff has more to do with multimedia integration: a skype-type feature for calling a phone number using iChat, expansion of bonjour, a multimedia hub similar to tivo.
3) For those at the conference, what was under the black sheet covered banners?
2) Something tells me that the Super Duper top secret stuff has more to do with multimedia integration: a skype-type feature for calling a phone number using iChat, expansion of bonjour, a multimedia hub similar to tivo.
3) For those at the conference, what was under the black sheet covered banners?
shawnce
Jul 20, 11:55 AM
He was referring to my post in which I was referring to MWSF '07, not the WWDC.
Ah I see ... thought it was about WWDC 2006 my bad.
I still don't think we'll se a full release at MWSF but I think the date will be announced.
Yeah I don't think we will see 10.5 released at MWSF '07 (thinking CQ2 2007) but after I get back from WWDC I may have a different understanding of the current state of 10.5.
Ah I see ... thought it was about WWDC 2006 my bad.
I still don't think we'll se a full release at MWSF but I think the date will be announced.
Yeah I don't think we will see 10.5 released at MWSF '07 (thinking CQ2 2007) but after I get back from WWDC I may have a different understanding of the current state of 10.5.
rye9
Aug 7, 03:18 PM
Personally.. I wasnt too thrilled with the features shown.. some i liked tho.. but some i didnt care for.. time machine is amazing however.. and spaces is nice too. All in all i cant wait to get my hands on it next year.
TeamMojo
Apr 6, 01:29 PM
Wow, that's success that only a Ballmer could love.
Apple does need some competition. I hope these competitors focus on some of the Apple shortcomings like the religious adherence to the Cocoa Touch UI. Ideally there would be a more hybrid iOS/MacOS functionality in an iPad such that it could morph up to a more desktop like experience when docked. And conversely, it seems like MacBook Air/ Mac OS X Lion is getting a more iOS like feel. There's a middle ground there that Apple needs to get to. I suspect they will. But as with tethering, and allowing re-duplication of core apps by third parties, it will take Apple a while to let go here and allow the iPad to become that perfect combo.
They still seem to ultimately strike this balance better than any other vendor.
Apple does need some competition. I hope these competitors focus on some of the Apple shortcomings like the religious adherence to the Cocoa Touch UI. Ideally there would be a more hybrid iOS/MacOS functionality in an iPad such that it could morph up to a more desktop like experience when docked. And conversely, it seems like MacBook Air/ Mac OS X Lion is getting a more iOS like feel. There's a middle ground there that Apple needs to get to. I suspect they will. But as with tethering, and allowing re-duplication of core apps by third parties, it will take Apple a while to let go here and allow the iPad to become that perfect combo.
They still seem to ultimately strike this balance better than any other vendor.
No comments:
Post a Comment