jake4ever
Apr 1, 09:22 PM
Look at this:
http://i934.photobucket.com/albums/ad185/pegasusbsb27/ScreenShot2011-03-31at131303.png
Sometimes when I open any Finder window it does not show the Side Bar...Anyone having the same "experience"?...Any solution?;)
Having the same problem here. Dragging the bar out makes it white...
http://i934.photobucket.com/albums/ad185/pegasusbsb27/ScreenShot2011-03-31at131303.png
Sometimes when I open any Finder window it does not show the Side Bar...Anyone having the same "experience"?...Any solution?;)
Having the same problem here. Dragging the bar out makes it white...
charlituna
Apr 12, 10:03 PM
Who thinks that they'll eliminate Final Cut Express and lower the price of Final Cut Pro? iMovie seems to serve the "express crowd" while FCP would be within reach of the semi-pro demographic if the price were around $300.
I could see that. iMovie seems to be rather advanced at this point. More than enough for the hobby, hone movie etc crowd. They could drop fce and sell just fp for like $200-250 and the full suite for like $600 and the suite with server for say $900-1000. And still make bank.
I could see that. iMovie seems to be rather advanced at this point. More than enough for the hobby, hone movie etc crowd. They could drop fce and sell just fp for like $200-250 and the full suite for like $600 and the suite with server for say $900-1000. And still make bank.
macidiot
Jul 19, 04:15 PM
Wait till next quarter when the MacPro line-up comes out and new iPods etc..
soulja-boy-shirtless-1
josh peck shirtless.
rapper shirtless, drake
Drake Bell Shirtless
drake labry shirtless.
rapper shirtless, drake
drake shirtless
death drake shirtless
hi drake shirtless Rna,
lloyd goes shirtless lt
Ruff shirtless degrassi the
drake shirtless images,
drake shirtless images,
drake shirtless,
actor vijay shirtless Pictures
Chris Pine Shirtless
![]()
newagemac
May 3, 09:02 AM
But my iPhone is far more limited than my first Windows PC in that regard. Even with Windows 95 I could go from one app to another while letting the other on load in the background. iOS freezes everything. If I want a video to upload on Facebook, I have no choice but to keep the app open until it's done. On my PC, I can start the upload and then move on to other things while the process is completing.
I find moving to non-true multitasking as a step backward, not a step forward. As you said, out systems capabilites are able to do so much more. I can be playing a computer game, hit the Windows key, and open a media player and never see a drop in performance. Why limit your computer to one task at a time? Kind of defeats the point of multi-core processors.
Uh, this comment is entirely wrong. With iOS, you can download something and move to another app and it will continue downloading in the background. The multitasking APIs have all the obvious backgrounding tasks covered and will likely include more if needed. Basically the goal is to allow background tasks when needed and when not needed let the app suspend and release resources to the apps you actually need. This method in iOS has proven to work far better than traditional operating systems like Mac OS X and Windows. That's why they are bringing it "Back to the Mac OS". The best parts of what they developed in iOS are being added in Lion.
I think most people's problem is that they mistakenly viewed iOS as inferior in every way to Mac OS X but in many ways it is cutting edge and far better than OS X and Windows have ever been. The way iOS multitasking works is the reason very powerful and memory hungry apps like iMove and GarageBand for iPad work so surprisingly well on such a limited memory device. The apps get to use a much larger percentage of the CPU, GPU, and RAM than they do on traditional OSes under normal usage where you have multiple apps open.
Right now I have a bunch of tabs open in Safari on my Mac and it's consuming a little over 1GB of RAM and lots of CPU. If I switch to Photoshop, Safari is still going to be using up all that RAM and CPU I really need for Photoshop when I don't plan on using Safari again until later today. And I don't want to shut it down because I have a bunch things in these tabs that I want to get back to later today including partially typed forum replies, halfway read articles, etc. On the iPad, Safari would suspend and release the RAM and CPU to my currently used RAM/CPU hungry app. That's what they need to bring to Lion.
I find moving to non-true multitasking as a step backward, not a step forward. As you said, out systems capabilites are able to do so much more. I can be playing a computer game, hit the Windows key, and open a media player and never see a drop in performance. Why limit your computer to one task at a time? Kind of defeats the point of multi-core processors.
Uh, this comment is entirely wrong. With iOS, you can download something and move to another app and it will continue downloading in the background. The multitasking APIs have all the obvious backgrounding tasks covered and will likely include more if needed. Basically the goal is to allow background tasks when needed and when not needed let the app suspend and release resources to the apps you actually need. This method in iOS has proven to work far better than traditional operating systems like Mac OS X and Windows. That's why they are bringing it "Back to the Mac OS". The best parts of what they developed in iOS are being added in Lion.
I think most people's problem is that they mistakenly viewed iOS as inferior in every way to Mac OS X but in many ways it is cutting edge and far better than OS X and Windows have ever been. The way iOS multitasking works is the reason very powerful and memory hungry apps like iMove and GarageBand for iPad work so surprisingly well on such a limited memory device. The apps get to use a much larger percentage of the CPU, GPU, and RAM than they do on traditional OSes under normal usage where you have multiple apps open.
Right now I have a bunch of tabs open in Safari on my Mac and it's consuming a little over 1GB of RAM and lots of CPU. If I switch to Photoshop, Safari is still going to be using up all that RAM and CPU I really need for Photoshop when I don't plan on using Safari again until later today. And I don't want to shut it down because I have a bunch things in these tabs that I want to get back to later today including partially typed forum replies, halfway read articles, etc. On the iPad, Safari would suspend and release the RAM and CPU to my currently used RAM/CPU hungry app. That's what they need to bring to Lion.
andrewbecks
May 2, 08:40 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
As I'm sure others have noted, this jus seems less efficient than CMD-delete. I suppose more options are good, and I get this is a transition towards a more pervasive touch interface, but for computers with physical keyboards, this leaves me cold.
I always wanted a CMD-delete action for Dashboard; this seems like a step back.
Agreed. I prefer Command + Delete, but I suppose it's nice to have options. Personally, I'm not much of a fan of the launchpad for OS X idea, but I'm sure it appeals to some people.
As I'm sure others have noted, this jus seems less efficient than CMD-delete. I suppose more options are good, and I get this is a transition towards a more pervasive touch interface, but for computers with physical keyboards, this leaves me cold.
I always wanted a CMD-delete action for Dashboard; this seems like a step back.
Agreed. I prefer Command + Delete, but I suppose it's nice to have options. Personally, I'm not much of a fan of the launchpad for OS X idea, but I'm sure it appeals to some people.
SiliconAddict
Sep 7, 12:01 AM
Meh...I said it before and I'll say it again. I can find better deals on DVD's at Hollywood Video and Blockbuster in their used section. $12 and in some cases 2 for $20 is not uncommon. A move store only appeals to me personally in the event that I need something spur of the moment and even then. $1.99 is impulse buy territory. $9.99+? No so much. On the other hand a service where I can get 4 movies a week or something. That I would do instead of waiting for them to arrive in the mail. I think Apple is on the wrong track here. Right on the money with much. Right on the money with TV shows. (Just want something higher res.) But movies at that kinda price? thanks but I personally will pass. For those who would bite more power to you.
jettredmont
Apr 12, 10:25 PM
This all started just because I said I hope Final Cut doesn't turn into iMovie. Somehow that turned into iMovie is pro and Final Cut is the Model T of editing.
Your rebuttal has been that iMovie is not pro, but that's obvious. iMovie HD was not pro (and was significantly less capable than iMovie today is in terms of precision editing, audio work, etc).
For my hobby work (NOT pro), I went from a die-hard Final Cut Pro user (I worked for Apple and got a hell of a discount on FCStudio) to an iMovie user with the past two revs of iMovie. I tried and simply could not use iMovie HD for what I wanted to do. I hit some barriers with iMovie today, but nothing like the crap that iMovie HD and before gave me.
Your rebuttal has been that iMovie is not pro, but that's obvious. iMovie HD was not pro (and was significantly less capable than iMovie today is in terms of precision editing, audio work, etc).
For my hobby work (NOT pro), I went from a die-hard Final Cut Pro user (I worked for Apple and got a hell of a discount on FCStudio) to an iMovie user with the past two revs of iMovie. I tried and simply could not use iMovie HD for what I wanted to do. I hit some barriers with iMovie today, but nothing like the crap that iMovie HD and before gave me.
~Shard~
Sep 7, 12:25 PM
As other people have recognised..... the reference to G5 is in relation to the exterior, not the chipset.
"G5" is processor branding which refers to the 970 chipset, not the design of the machine itself, so you are using that terminology incorrectly. Do people go around saying, "Gee, that new Pentium Dell sure is nice!" :p :D It's the equivalent of saying that you like the design of the V10 BMW when in fact you mean the M5. If the current iMac design only housed G5 chips, and was changed when the Intel transition occurred, then fine, that model could be associated with the G5 chip, however this is obviously not the case.
No worries, just pointing out how you are in error. :cool:
"G5" is processor branding which refers to the 970 chipset, not the design of the machine itself, so you are using that terminology incorrectly. Do people go around saying, "Gee, that new Pentium Dell sure is nice!" :p :D It's the equivalent of saying that you like the design of the V10 BMW when in fact you mean the M5. If the current iMac design only housed G5 chips, and was changed when the Intel transition occurred, then fine, that model could be associated with the G5 chip, however this is obviously not the case.
No worries, just pointing out how you are in error. :cool:
Chris Bangle
Sep 1, 12:10 PM
Why not make a 30inch macbook pro.:cool: how hard can it be.
devman
Aug 6, 11:21 PM
Or when there are multiple threads analyzing a photograph of a banner with dozens of icons on it, and nobody notices the photo also shows (the same) two covered banners. :)
There are actually 3 covered banners on the ground floor.
There are actually 3 covered banners on the ground floor.
jace88
Jan 4, 03:12 AM
Evos are awesome cars! How fast is your model 0-60
Thanks :) Manufacturer claims it's low 5's, but I think it's closer to 5.5 (stock). Whilst I've got some mods on it (intake/exhaust), I recently detuned it because the aftermarket tune I was running was misfiring when WOT (might've been cool to teenagers watching from the side of the road but scared the heck out of me as I don't want engine trouble!).
Thanks :) Manufacturer claims it's low 5's, but I think it's closer to 5.5 (stock). Whilst I've got some mods on it (intake/exhaust), I recently detuned it because the aftermarket tune I was running was misfiring when WOT (might've been cool to teenagers watching from the side of the road but scared the heck out of me as I don't want engine trouble!).
Hans Brix
Apr 20, 04:58 PM
Yes I can drive a standard car.
I would like to clarify a few things for people who don't live in North America on why so many don't drive Standard. Most cars today can't be had with a standard and even it's available you'd be hard pressed to find one, most dealer lots don't stock them. Certain cars have them but most don't offer it in higher trim levels so your stuck with automatic if you want a nicer car ex: Lexus IS, Ford Focus, Honda Civic, Accord, many Hyundai's.
I've noticed this more and more. Hate it.
I would like to clarify a few things for people who don't live in North America on why so many don't drive Standard. Most cars today can't be had with a standard and even it's available you'd be hard pressed to find one, most dealer lots don't stock them. Certain cars have them but most don't offer it in higher trim levels so your stuck with automatic if you want a nicer car ex: Lexus IS, Ford Focus, Honda Civic, Accord, many Hyundai's.
I've noticed this more and more. Hate it.
eenu
Aug 16, 09:51 AM
Who gives a flying-you-know-what about an iPod with wireless capabilities?
What, so the transfer speeds can be even slower?
So someone can use terrible sounding, cheap bluetooth headphones?
What is the point of wireless in an iPod? These sound like rumors started by technically-inept, idiot investors who are trying to sell Apple stock to their technically-inept, idiot clients.
Macrumors: remember that part of your slogan where it says rumors "you care about"???
Next please.
or possibly so you can purchase music etc whilst out and about or even share your music between you and your friends ipods?
Those two functions alone seem attractive to me.
EDIT: Why couldn't they make ipods with mini solar cells in like calculators?
What, so the transfer speeds can be even slower?
So someone can use terrible sounding, cheap bluetooth headphones?
What is the point of wireless in an iPod? These sound like rumors started by technically-inept, idiot investors who are trying to sell Apple stock to their technically-inept, idiot clients.
Macrumors: remember that part of your slogan where it says rumors "you care about"???
Next please.
or possibly so you can purchase music etc whilst out and about or even share your music between you and your friends ipods?
Those two functions alone seem attractive to me.
EDIT: Why couldn't they make ipods with mini solar cells in like calculators?
LimeiBook86
Nov 27, 03:56 PM
A 17" LCD screen made by Apple would be a good deal for people buying Mac Minis but, the price would have to be just right in order for people to actually thing of buying an Apple LCD rather than another brand LCD that they can get cheaper. Also I don't think Apple would want to cannibalize their sales for the iMac. The Mac Mini with a 17" LCD screen (maybe a built-in iSight, although that would raise the price) is roughly the same specs as a 17" iMac ($1,199 model). Except the iMac has a dedicated ATI Graphics Chipset, a larger Hard Drive, and a few more add-ons (Keyboard, Mouse etc)
If Apple were to do this they would have to be pretty careful. I can't see Apple doing this in the near future, although I do agree a 20" LCD screen as a starting size is a bit high, and so is the price. But, don't get me wrong, I love the 20" LCD panel in my iMac. I just think Apple might see a demand for a smaller size, cheaper LCD screen. :)
If Apple were to do this they would have to be pretty careful. I can't see Apple doing this in the near future, although I do agree a 20" LCD screen as a starting size is a bit high, and so is the price. But, don't get me wrong, I love the 20" LCD panel in my iMac. I just think Apple might see a demand for a smaller size, cheaper LCD screen. :)
corywoolf
Sep 6, 03:23 P
M
M
Lowest line? The mini and macbook still both have slower processors than the MBP's.
Apple's cheapest computer= Mac Mini. Also, I was comparing that to my less then 6 month old 1.83 Ghz MBP.
Apple's cheapest computer= Mac Mini. Also, I was comparing that to my less then 6 month old 1.83 Ghz MBP.
Steven1621
Mar 18, 11:09 PM
i question the need for this since apple did make quite a bit of money last quarter.
MickyJ10
Sep 14, 06:25 PM
I've had no trouble with my phone. I'd recommend it to anyone. But CR will have a credibility issue if it backs down. If I were CR I'd not back down either.
Rodimus Prime
Apr 10, 10:56 AM
I definitely think driving a manual makes me a safer, more attentive driver.
I'm against crap that makes people lazy like adaptive cruise control, auto headlights and auto wipers and stuff like that, I suppose an automatic can fall in there too. That stuff makes drivers lazy and inattentive because they don't have to concentrate on the road.
The amount of times I see people who do not turn on their head lights at night makes me glad that a lot of cars have automatic headlights.
Way to many people refuse to turn on their headlights until they need them to to light up the road. They do not understand the fact that headlights also make a hell of a lot easier for other drivers to SEE YOU. Automatic headlights solve that issue.
As for adabptive cruise control I will admit I want that because on long drives having to mess with the cruise control settings gets annoying that or if I am following someone on long distance road trips it is hard to use the cruise unless you are the lead car.
As for me I drive a Manual but I also know manuals are a dieing bread as modern Automatics have gotten to the point they remove almost all the advantages manuals had. They can and often times do get better fuel economy due to the fact in city driving they have a computer that can shift exactly at the best point for the given power demand. Something no human can match and then at cruising speed the tranny and the engine are physically lock together just like in a manual so that advantage is gone. Hell they are not putting clutches in automatics that the car controls farther killing any plus the manuals had left.
I'm against crap that makes people lazy like adaptive cruise control, auto headlights and auto wipers and stuff like that, I suppose an automatic can fall in there too. That stuff makes drivers lazy and inattentive because they don't have to concentrate on the road.
The amount of times I see people who do not turn on their head lights at night makes me glad that a lot of cars have automatic headlights.
Way to many people refuse to turn on their headlights until they need them to to light up the road. They do not understand the fact that headlights also make a hell of a lot easier for other drivers to SEE YOU. Automatic headlights solve that issue.
As for adabptive cruise control I will admit I want that because on long drives having to mess with the cruise control settings gets annoying that or if I am following someone on long distance road trips it is hard to use the cruise unless you are the lead car.
As for me I drive a Manual but I also know manuals are a dieing bread as modern Automatics have gotten to the point they remove almost all the advantages manuals had. They can and often times do get better fuel economy due to the fact in city driving they have a computer that can shift exactly at the best point for the given power demand. Something no human can match and then at cruising speed the tranny and the engine are physically lock together just like in a manual so that advantage is gone. Hell they are not putting clutches in automatics that the car controls farther killing any plus the manuals had left.
OllyW
Mar 22, 12:49 PM
Agreed!
I think you missed the joke.
I think you missed the joke.
Turbojugend27
Aug 7, 07:06 AM
Pretty bold statement for Apple, I don't think I would use that quite yet. As for myself I am buying my first apple in a week or so and can't wait, I don't think Apple has a userbase yet to be making statements like that.
mrgreen4242
Aug 31, 07:47 AM
Yes I agree that is what you would expect as would I. But it doesn't work that way. They are more than likely to stay just where they are.
Look at how old some of that stuff is from 2005 - a few even from 2004 - there and how they are still priced as if they hadn't long ago been replaced by more powerful models. Makes no sense. But there it is to study and see. :confused: :eek:
They're still selling Quad G5's for $2799 which is rediculous.
Er... The quad G5 isn't available new anymore, so it costs what it costs (there's nothing in the regular store to compare it to - the Mac Pro is NOT a one for one replacement)... IF this rumor is true, then the current lineup is just getting shuffled down with a new top end added, then they would have to drop refurb prices or it wouldn't make any sense.
Now if they just shuffle the CPU down (so the base mini still has a Combo drive and 60gb HDD, but gets a 1.66 Core Duo) they will STILL have to drop the refurb price... A new regular price Solo with SD and 80gb HDD is currently $699, which is the current Core Duo refurb price.
If they completely revamp the lineup then they may keep the same pricing, but seems highly unlikey as noone would buy them and keeping uneeded inventory on hand is bad business.
Look at how old some of that stuff is from 2005 - a few even from 2004 - there and how they are still priced as if they hadn't long ago been replaced by more powerful models. Makes no sense. But there it is to study and see. :confused: :eek:
They're still selling Quad G5's for $2799 which is rediculous.
Er... The quad G5 isn't available new anymore, so it costs what it costs (there's nothing in the regular store to compare it to - the Mac Pro is NOT a one for one replacement)... IF this rumor is true, then the current lineup is just getting shuffled down with a new top end added, then they would have to drop refurb prices or it wouldn't make any sense.
Now if they just shuffle the CPU down (so the base mini still has a Combo drive and 60gb HDD, but gets a 1.66 Core Duo) they will STILL have to drop the refurb price... A new regular price Solo with SD and 80gb HDD is currently $699, which is the current Core Duo refurb price.
If they completely revamp the lineup then they may keep the same pricing, but seems highly unlikey as noone would buy them and keeping uneeded inventory on hand is bad business.
quagmire
Mar 4, 06:59 PM
what is really their big trainwreck is still Opel. Their "bail us out ... no wait .. yeah bail us out .. not on your conditions .. we are ready to sign the deal any minute .. except we are not" theather they played with the german government tarnished their brand for years to coem especially in the heads of workers and lower middle class
I think blame can be put on both sides. The German government was being unreasonable. It was that GM needed to find an investment partner. GM was fine with that. But, then the Germans changed it to they had to sell majority stake in Opel. GM still went along and found a company to do it with. But, then the Germans didn't like that the company would be open to selling Opel back to GM. That was BS and an EU official agreed that it was BS. What also didn't help GM's case was their Chapter 11 reorganization which setup a new board of directors. New GM's CEO Fritz Henderson( who was a carry over from Old GM) was willing to go through with the sale no matter what. The board disagreed which then caused the board to fire Henderson and put Ed Whitacre as CEO which he stopped the sale of Opel knowing Opel was important to GM's success in Europe. So obviously, the Opel mess wasn't exactly good PR.
GM is doing reasonably well in Asia, and they have placed much of their small-car design duties into the capable hands of the Koreans - a wise move in my opinion. Many Americans speak proudly about "buying American" when they own a Chevy, but most cars these days are international efforts. The diesel Cruze is a Korean design with a little Opel input and an Italian engine, assembled in the US (in the case of US-market Cruzes).
Almost everything is a global effort these days. The only product not going to see the effects of global development most likely are full size pickups. Everything else is moving to a global effort. The Buick Regal is the Opel Insignia( I love the US media. Before the Regal came out in the US, they went over to Europe and drove it and they loved it. Then they drive it on US shores, and all of a sudden they start panning it? :confused: ).
As you mentioned the Cruze is Korean developed with input from Opel and GMNA. GM's latest RWD platforms( excluding the Y-Body) can be traced back to their Holden division( Sigma, Alpha, and Zeta).
I think blame can be put on both sides. The German government was being unreasonable. It was that GM needed to find an investment partner. GM was fine with that. But, then the Germans changed it to they had to sell majority stake in Opel. GM still went along and found a company to do it with. But, then the Germans didn't like that the company would be open to selling Opel back to GM. That was BS and an EU official agreed that it was BS. What also didn't help GM's case was their Chapter 11 reorganization which setup a new board of directors. New GM's CEO Fritz Henderson( who was a carry over from Old GM) was willing to go through with the sale no matter what. The board disagreed which then caused the board to fire Henderson and put Ed Whitacre as CEO which he stopped the sale of Opel knowing Opel was important to GM's success in Europe. So obviously, the Opel mess wasn't exactly good PR.
GM is doing reasonably well in Asia, and they have placed much of their small-car design duties into the capable hands of the Koreans - a wise move in my opinion. Many Americans speak proudly about "buying American" when they own a Chevy, but most cars these days are international efforts. The diesel Cruze is a Korean design with a little Opel input and an Italian engine, assembled in the US (in the case of US-market Cruzes).
Almost everything is a global effort these days. The only product not going to see the effects of global development most likely are full size pickups. Everything else is moving to a global effort. The Buick Regal is the Opel Insignia( I love the US media. Before the Regal came out in the US, they went over to Europe and drove it and they loved it. Then they drive it on US shores, and all of a sudden they start panning it? :confused: ).
As you mentioned the Cruze is Korean developed with input from Opel and GMNA. GM's latest RWD platforms( excluding the Y-Body) can be traced back to their Holden division( Sigma, Alpha, and Zeta).
Jazwire
Apr 21, 11:25 AM
Oh save us mighty Senator Stuart Smally.
Maybe focus on Jobs, Deficit, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya.
Not if my Iphone has an internal file that shows I went to Walmart then the strip club last Tuesday night.
Maybe focus on Jobs, Deficit, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya.
Not if my Iphone has an internal file that shows I went to Walmart then the strip club last Tuesday night.
Bengt77
Aug 29, 03:58 PM
I thought the Yonah/Merom pricing 'issue' has been discussed some time ago, already. The 'conclusion' was that Intel would price the Merom the same as the Yonah, to be able to fight off AMD, which has closen in on Intel a bit too much, to Intel's liking. Intel wants everybody to switch to the Core 2 technology as soon as possible. That's the only way the Intel chips will be faster on all levels than their AMD counterparts. Because, yes, Yonah was a stopgap chip. Merom is the real New Chip�.
