MikeTheC
Nov 25, 09:19 PM
They sold out to MS because the idiots at Palm couldn't find their butt with a flashlight and both hands. Seriously in 2001 the CEO of Palm stood infront of a crowd at CES and stated our users don't want color, sound etc. It was the beginning of the end because by the time they figured out that yes. Not only do users want color and sound they also want the ability to multitask. Something that POS (Notice that Palm OS and Peice of **** share the same acronym.) STILL to this day doesn't really do. Well it sort of does it in a craptacular manner. My point is Palm doomed them selves because they had management who didn't have a clue or simply didn't have the resources to really revamp the OS from the ground up. I'm willing to bet there is legacy code in POS that dates back to v1. Because POS never had its OS X its Windows 2000. It never had its rewrite. All Palm has been doing is slapping on a new addition to the house and calling it NEW and improved!
It isn't. It sucks and the Pocket PC or Windows Mobile (ick I hate that name.) kicks the living snot out of POS right now in pretty much every way imaginable. Heck Palm is so lost that they are trying to pull an Apple. they purchased some *nix company in China that has experience with mobile versions of *nix and right now is trying to migrate POS over to a *nix flavor of OS.
Unfortunately unlike Apple its too little, too late.
Palm went to Windows because they didn't want to stay stuck in the mobile equivalent of DOS.
This is one of those times where, if MacRumors.com had a Karma Points system (and if I, in turn, had some Karma points) I would Karma-bump the heck outta this post. It's so true, and it's so absolutely dead-on in it's critical analysis of the situation that there's little, if anything, to be added to it.
Apple went to "something else", starting with the Copeland project, because they realized even way back then in the B.S. (that is, Before Steve -- hey, lookie, another awesome acronym!) that Mac OS Classic was a technological cul-de-sac. It was exactly as SilliconAddict has described PalmOS -- er, I mean POS. (You know, I really, really, really have to remember that one. God, I'm still laughing over it as I write this.)
Even Microsoft went to "something else", although unlike Apple they chose to go with their own in-house-developed successor, since DOS 8bit, Win8, Win16, and Win9x code was essentially an obsolete OS technology.
So here we have Palm, arguably one of the greatest innovators (though not really a pioneer, as the kudos and credit for that goes to Apple's Newton development group) of PDAs ever, going down the same hole into the same quagmire that plagued the likes of Commodore, Sony's BetaMax, etc. You'd think with all the MBAs and other college-educated people they've hired over the years that this would be abundantly obvious *and* fundamentally core to their business operational mindset. However, it's quite clear that it isn't.
Thus go the way of all who do not study history and learn from it.
It isn't. It sucks and the Pocket PC or Windows Mobile (ick I hate that name.) kicks the living snot out of POS right now in pretty much every way imaginable. Heck Palm is so lost that they are trying to pull an Apple. they purchased some *nix company in China that has experience with mobile versions of *nix and right now is trying to migrate POS over to a *nix flavor of OS.
Unfortunately unlike Apple its too little, too late.
Palm went to Windows because they didn't want to stay stuck in the mobile equivalent of DOS.
This is one of those times where, if MacRumors.com had a Karma Points system (and if I, in turn, had some Karma points) I would Karma-bump the heck outta this post. It's so true, and it's so absolutely dead-on in it's critical analysis of the situation that there's little, if anything, to be added to it.
Apple went to "something else", starting with the Copeland project, because they realized even way back then in the B.S. (that is, Before Steve -- hey, lookie, another awesome acronym!) that Mac OS Classic was a technological cul-de-sac. It was exactly as SilliconAddict has described PalmOS -- er, I mean POS. (You know, I really, really, really have to remember that one. God, I'm still laughing over it as I write this.)
Even Microsoft went to "something else", although unlike Apple they chose to go with their own in-house-developed successor, since DOS 8bit, Win8, Win16, and Win9x code was essentially an obsolete OS technology.
So here we have Palm, arguably one of the greatest innovators (though not really a pioneer, as the kudos and credit for that goes to Apple's Newton development group) of PDAs ever, going down the same hole into the same quagmire that plagued the likes of Commodore, Sony's BetaMax, etc. You'd think with all the MBAs and other college-educated people they've hired over the years that this would be abundantly obvious *and* fundamentally core to their business operational mindset. However, it's quite clear that it isn't.
Thus go the way of all who do not study history and learn from it.
motulist
Aug 7, 04:54 PM
Jobs finally delivered on his 3 Ghz promise! ;) :D :D
Full of Win
Apr 23, 05:08 PM
anyone remember when screens were 1024x768? who would have imagined that now icons are 1024x1024... that icon is bigger than the total resolution of my first computer's display
What do you mean? 13 Inch MacBook/MBP screen resolution is still s 1280 x 800, which only ~20% more pixels than the resolution you mentioned.
What do you mean? 13 Inch MacBook/MBP screen resolution is still s 1280 x 800, which only ~20% more pixels than the resolution you mentioned.
iStudentUK
Apr 10, 12:55 PM
Who said that this an equation? What is the variable that is unknown?
2 is still winning!
Means nothing. Either answer would be correct- it is ambiguous. Using "/" notation is poor practice. I believe, for the reasons I stated a few posts ago (post 146), the author would intend an interpretation leading to 288.
2 is still winning!
Means nothing. Either answer would be correct- it is ambiguous. Using "/" notation is poor practice. I believe, for the reasons I stated a few posts ago (post 146), the author would intend an interpretation leading to 288.
iansilv
May 7, 10:14 AM
I get the feeling they are not really making any money on it, so it would make sense to give it away as a benefit of "using a mac."
-aggie-
May 4, 11:59 AM
Ah!
If i remember right, last time you tried we had to take you to the White Witch of Cupertino Mountains to get rid of your tail...
Your insolence grows tiresome. :)
What does the OP mean we found a healing treasure and it has no effect? I thought we'd get an extra 5 HP for that.
If i remember right, last time you tried we had to take you to the White Witch of Cupertino Mountains to get rid of your tail...
Your insolence grows tiresome. :)
What does the OP mean we found a healing treasure and it has no effect? I thought we'd get an extra 5 HP for that.
Gottis
Apr 26, 02:13 PM
inevitable as android devices are available everywhere and in every price segment. remember, half of all American workers earn $505 or less per week.
-aggie-
May 4, 11:46 AM
Has anyone noticed this is the prefect game for mscriv, since he never has to post? :D
BTW, DP serves at the discretion of the Wizard.
BTW, DP serves at the discretion of the Wizard.
Rayday
Mar 27, 01:22 PM
You really don't seem to do shades of grey well. My iPad continues to show my calendar just fine when away from my WiFi. When it's in range of my WiFi however, it just has the ability to auto sync changes. Given that, what exactly are you ranting about here?
I guess he was focusing more on the rumor of cloud "storage". Storage doesn't mean syncing of calendars. Storage, to the average person, means steaming audio/video/documents/etc to your device.
I guess he was focusing more on the rumor of cloud "storage". Storage doesn't mean syncing of calendars. Storage, to the average person, means steaming audio/video/documents/etc to your device.
AppleScruff1
May 6, 01:49 AM
I welcome this idea. Intel is a disgusting anti-competitive company that cannot play fair. Apple is forced to use Intel's chipset and IGP instead of Nvidia which may have lead Apple to a decision like this. ARM is the future as is iOS, so like it or lump it. The low end Macs would probably have ARM and others both ARM and Intel. I would also welcome a switch to AMD.
Kind of like Apple. And you would welcome a switch to AMD? That would be three steps backwards.
Kind of like Apple. And you would welcome a switch to AMD? That would be three steps backwards.
Tones2
Apr 26, 03:13 PM
Now all this is based on the assumption that your motivation is to have your company make billions and billions of dollars. Maybe Steve Jobs motivation is just to make the best darn tech gadgets in the world.
Boy, you are sniffing a serious amount of glue.:rolleyes: His motivation is to make brainwashed fanboys BELIEVE Apple is making the best darn tech gadgets in the world, such that Apple can make the most darn profits and he can get the biggest darn bonus. And with THAT, he is a genious.
Tony
Boy, you are sniffing a serious amount of glue.:rolleyes: His motivation is to make brainwashed fanboys BELIEVE Apple is making the best darn tech gadgets in the world, such that Apple can make the most darn profits and he can get the biggest darn bonus. And with THAT, he is a genious.
Tony
IntelliUser
Nov 4, 11:49 AM
Sophos is terrible on Windows
Says who?
Says who?
tokevino
Aug 7, 03:46 PM
That's what I'm saying, $400x2=$800-$300=$500 profit for Apple, That's wonderful for Apple.
On the other hand, internal pricing from Intel can be VERY different. So don't let it get too much into your head.
Bottom line, these quads are truly wonderful machines to buy.
On the other hand, internal pricing from Intel can be VERY different. So don't let it get too much into your head.
Bottom line, these quads are truly wonderful machines to buy.
3N16MA
Mar 28, 11:59 AM
If this is true and Apple decided to hold off until later in the year I'm expecting a big change for the iPhone 5. If it's going to be a 3G --->3Gs type of upgrade (same design/form facor, new internals) I don't see why they would not be ready this June.
bedifferent
Apr 23, 04:30 PM
If this is true, I'd be a little pissed lol. I just traded up from my two 23" ACD's for two 24" LED LCD's.
Hopefully this means with the Mac Pro rumors refresh and Final Cut release that Apple is refocusing on their neglected pro-line. Maybe we'll see a full line of dedicated displays instead of one stripped down iMac panel.
Hopefully this means with the Mac Pro rumors refresh and Final Cut release that Apple is refocusing on their neglected pro-line. Maybe we'll see a full line of dedicated displays instead of one stripped down iMac panel.
MacSA
Jul 22, 06:22 PM
I'm with Multimedia i don't see why Apple would intentionally cripple the Macbook with yonah when they coast exactly the same and are just a drop in upgrade.
But this is Apple we're talking about lol
But this is Apple we're talking about lol
abrown2
Nov 24, 12:49 AM
I think the iPhone is going to be awesome! Since when can apple not jump in? Where did iTunes come from? That was almost instant! The iPhone should be equipt with similar programs such as iTunes and iPhoto. What I want to see is a 35" HD Television come out by Apple!
amanset
Aug 2, 12:09 PM
Why not? I have one in excellent condition that I don't need anymore seeing I moved over to the MacTel iMac. I'm across the pond so can I sell it to you?
Due to hazardous substances contained within.
http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1830
Due to hazardous substances contained within.
http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1830
damienvfx
Sep 15, 07:56 PM
I sure hope so in the form of a 1GB stick wiht the other slot empty. :cool:
I just went to configure one (makes me happy while I'm waiting) and 1 GIG ram stick was what came with the laptop as the standard option.
I just went to configure one (makes me happy while I'm waiting) and 1 GIG ram stick was what came with the laptop as the standard option.
Luph67
Mar 30, 07:52 PM
iCal has been visually overhauled to look like the iPad version
It looks so much worse. :(
It looks so much worse. :(
paul4339
Apr 7, 11:19 PM
...Sad thing, there doesn't seem to be anyone else on the horizon to fill that void when he is gone. ...
no, but I sometimes think that Andy Rubin believes he's the next Jobs ... at least he dresses similar to Jobs:
no, but I sometimes think that Andy Rubin believes he's the next Jobs ... at least he dresses similar to Jobs:
ChazUK
Apr 18, 03:35 PM
I'm reading that this includes the Nexus S (which has no samsung touchwiz "optimisations" at all).
Why doesn't Apple simply go for the jugular and hit Google with an Android lawsuit?
Why doesn't Apple simply go for the jugular and hit Google with an Android lawsuit?
Lord Bodak
Mar 28, 10:56 AM
Not as far as 95% of users are concerned. Most users don't utilize half of what the current device can do.
That might be true, but most people I know walk in to their cell phone stores every 2 years and buy whatever is new. Many of them will choose a new Android or WP7 phone over a year-old iPhone, simply because the guy at the store says "this just came out."
As long as Apple is in bed with carriers on the standard two-year contract, they have to stick to a 12 or 24 month product cycle. 24 months is too long, which leaves the current 12 month cycle.
Personally I think this is all FUD. iPhone 5 will be an incremental upgrade, like the 3GS was, and it will be announced at WWDC. Because it's a fairly small upgrade compared to the other big items of the year (Lion, iOS 5, and likely new Macs with more of a focus on SSD), there will be less talk about it in advance of the event.
That might be true, but most people I know walk in to their cell phone stores every 2 years and buy whatever is new. Many of them will choose a new Android or WP7 phone over a year-old iPhone, simply because the guy at the store says "this just came out."
As long as Apple is in bed with carriers on the standard two-year contract, they have to stick to a 12 or 24 month product cycle. 24 months is too long, which leaves the current 12 month cycle.
Personally I think this is all FUD. iPhone 5 will be an incremental upgrade, like the 3GS was, and it will be announced at WWDC. Because it's a fairly small upgrade compared to the other big items of the year (Lion, iOS 5, and likely new Macs with more of a focus on SSD), there will be less talk about it in advance of the event.
regandarcy
Mar 27, 06:52 AM
I'm all for cloud computing as an added feature....but not as a replacement for traditional storage of media and data.
I mean, I hope Apple doesn't force people to be connected to the cloud. I think that would be a mistake. Mainly because it would force you to either have access to a wifi signal, or pay for an expensive data plan just to gain access to your media.
As it is, all the telecom companies are dropping their unlimited plans and switching to tiered pricing. I think this creates a problem for the user to freely use their content without constant fear of exceeding their data plans.
And what of people with iPod touches or wifi only ipads...who are not within range of a wifi signal....and cannot access their content as a result. That would be very frustrating and limiting. It would make their devices nothing more than expensive paper weights.
It also creates a problem for those with 3G ipads or iPhones trying to access large video or media files in their cloud I think. I mean have you ever tried to watch a YouTube video over 3G? It SUCKS! So you'd be using up tons of bandwidth on a tiered data plan for crappy quality. How is that good?
And if the iPhone 5 is the first apple device to use 4G speeds....won't that eat up even more bandwidth? Running an even greater risk of you going over your limit and being charged outrageous fees by your service provider? Be it ATT or Verizon?
I understand that the concept of the cloud is freedom at it's core....the ability to have access to your media across multiple devices without having to store it on just one...but then you become a slave to the telecom companies and their tiered data plans...thus defeating that freedom.
Plus it forces you to chose a 3G iPad or put 3G into iPod touches to make it useful.
So I get it, and I don't get it.
The original concept of the iPod was to be able to carry all your music with you. Total freedom. And that's what helped make it such a huge success. Then came the iPhone and iPad. Both equally cool for music and video. You could store all your data on them and listen or watch them at your leisure on the go.
But if you then force people to store their data on a cloud...and pay for an expensive tiered data plan to access that data...to me it becomes not so free anymore. In fact, it becomes downright restrictive and suffocating IMHO.
As long as Apple doesn't abandon the ability to store your media ON your device, I'm cool with this move. The cloud would just become an added bonus which you could use or not use at your discretion.
I just think having to be connected to the cloud via wifi or 3G to access your data is kind of annoying....not to mention potentially EXPENSIVE!
Once in awhile...ok. But not as ones main means of access. I much rather have the bulk of my music and data actually stored ON my device. Much more convenient if you ask me.
Flash drives are big enough to carry most if not all the music and video you need. Why store it all on apple servers on some big farm in North Carolina that you need to be connected to wifi or an expensive tiered data plan just to access it? Don't see the point.
Is it just me? :-)
I mean, I hope Apple doesn't force people to be connected to the cloud. I think that would be a mistake. Mainly because it would force you to either have access to a wifi signal, or pay for an expensive data plan just to gain access to your media.
As it is, all the telecom companies are dropping their unlimited plans and switching to tiered pricing. I think this creates a problem for the user to freely use their content without constant fear of exceeding their data plans.
And what of people with iPod touches or wifi only ipads...who are not within range of a wifi signal....and cannot access their content as a result. That would be very frustrating and limiting. It would make their devices nothing more than expensive paper weights.
It also creates a problem for those with 3G ipads or iPhones trying to access large video or media files in their cloud I think. I mean have you ever tried to watch a YouTube video over 3G? It SUCKS! So you'd be using up tons of bandwidth on a tiered data plan for crappy quality. How is that good?
And if the iPhone 5 is the first apple device to use 4G speeds....won't that eat up even more bandwidth? Running an even greater risk of you going over your limit and being charged outrageous fees by your service provider? Be it ATT or Verizon?
I understand that the concept of the cloud is freedom at it's core....the ability to have access to your media across multiple devices without having to store it on just one...but then you become a slave to the telecom companies and their tiered data plans...thus defeating that freedom.
Plus it forces you to chose a 3G iPad or put 3G into iPod touches to make it useful.
So I get it, and I don't get it.
The original concept of the iPod was to be able to carry all your music with you. Total freedom. And that's what helped make it such a huge success. Then came the iPhone and iPad. Both equally cool for music and video. You could store all your data on them and listen or watch them at your leisure on the go.
But if you then force people to store their data on a cloud...and pay for an expensive tiered data plan to access that data...to me it becomes not so free anymore. In fact, it becomes downright restrictive and suffocating IMHO.
As long as Apple doesn't abandon the ability to store your media ON your device, I'm cool with this move. The cloud would just become an added bonus which you could use or not use at your discretion.
I just think having to be connected to the cloud via wifi or 3G to access your data is kind of annoying....not to mention potentially EXPENSIVE!
Once in awhile...ok. But not as ones main means of access. I much rather have the bulk of my music and data actually stored ON my device. Much more convenient if you ask me.
Flash drives are big enough to carry most if not all the music and video you need. Why store it all on apple servers on some big farm in North Carolina that you need to be connected to wifi or an expensive tiered data plan just to access it? Don't see the point.
Is it just me? :-)
