AFPoster
Apr 4, 06:59 PM
I finally got all of the updates, apparently they were downloading in the background even though it was showing 0%. I just needed to shut-down instead of always restarting like I normally do they the updates installed.
iMeowbot
Oct 30, 03:34 AM
I know the recording industry are a resistant and mercenary group of individuals, but how much $$$ would they want for just the lyrics, considering you have bought the song already?
That is right where it gets messy. The labels generally don't hold the rights to the lyrics, and the rights needed to get lyrics and sheet music aren't quite the same ones needed to use a song in a recording. :(
That is right where it gets messy. The labels generally don't hold the rights to the lyrics, and the rights needed to get lyrics and sheet music aren't quite the same ones needed to use a song in a recording. :(
gauchogolfer
Oct 12, 04:56 PM
And if you need to use those pages or keynote projects at work or in school?
I used Keynote in school and currently use it at work, giving scientific presentations on a monthly basis at the least. There is not a huge need for it to be interoperable with PPT for me, although I can import what I need from colleagues and make it look much nicer in my Keynote talk. From what I've seen, Office needs to become interoperable within itself before people whine too much about compatibility between iWork and Office.
I used Keynote in school and currently use it at work, giving scientific presentations on a monthly basis at the least. There is not a huge need for it to be interoperable with PPT for me, although I can import what I need from colleagues and make it look much nicer in my Keynote talk. From what I've seen, Office needs to become interoperable within itself before people whine too much about compatibility between iWork and Office.
mad jew
Dec 13, 11:33 PM
Is this a contest to make a 'tar or a virus? :)
themyst
Mar 30, 09:19 AM
4.3.0 sucks bad. Gyroscope isn't recognized by apps that need it, which is a huge bug. Also crap battery life, facetime issues, and other assorted annoyances. I'll take a 4.3.0 jb, but id much prefer 4.3.1.
matchoow
Nov 16, 06:49 PM
Hey, can anyone give any recommendations on a Bluetooth mouse? Can I use a Bluetooth mouse for both a Mac and PC? What is the distance you can use a mouse? Anybody know of any future products coming out that use Bluetooth?
RosieO
Mar 11, 05:57 PM
Well I waited with about 100 people in front of me and then the Apple people started passing out those tickets. When they got to me they said they didn't get any AT & T ones in. That seemed strange. At least I found out before I waited all that time.
notthebesttech
Mar 2, 03:04 AM
lol 1 last question is is it 1 cable or do i have to buy the adapter? i looked online for just one cable but i keep getting the adapter instead of 1 cord. but my guess is that you have a regular optical cord then plug the 1 end into the adapter? :S
Transporteur
Apr 14, 05:28 AM
Funny thing, as I am running ZFS as we speak on my Mac Pro and several servers.
If you clicked the link I provided you could even download it and install it in Mac OS X ;)
Also ZFS is returning big time for Mac OS X come June/July with a full up-to-date implementation of ZFS, called ZFS-410 by Ten's Complement LLC (http://tenscomplement.com/).
Didn't know of that one. How does it run? Any problems?
I'm always a little careful when it comes to third party things on OS X as you never know what Apple might do in their next OS update.
That being said, I'm running ZFS systems (BSD/Solaris) for years now and absolutely like the system, never on OS X, though.
If you clicked the link I provided you could even download it and install it in Mac OS X ;)
Also ZFS is returning big time for Mac OS X come June/July with a full up-to-date implementation of ZFS, called ZFS-410 by Ten's Complement LLC (http://tenscomplement.com/).
Didn't know of that one. How does it run? Any problems?
I'm always a little careful when it comes to third party things on OS X as you never know what Apple might do in their next OS update.
That being said, I'm running ZFS systems (BSD/Solaris) for years now and absolutely like the system, never on OS X, though.
Doctor Q
Oct 19, 04:47 PM
You could make a Tetris-themed one the same way.
ocu-master
Aug 8, 12:40 AM
If I were an MS shareholder, I would be OUTRAGED.
How much did they pay for that? To be fair, I don't recall if MS bought just VPC or all of Connectix, but it hardly matters!
That's got to be a giant pile of shareholder wealth pissed away in a half-assed attempt at being part of (read: smothering) the increasing popularity and utility of Apple.
I would really love to see the numbers on that boondogle.
:rolleyes:
The connectix deal wasn't a 'boondogle' at all - connectix had other products than VPC. MS Virtual Server is based on the code they got from connectix. The server virtualization market is absolutely huge compared to VPC's potential market. I'm sure to Microsoft, VPC was a drop in the bucket in terms of revenue, and if I were a shareholder, I'd be happy as hell that they dropped it.
How much did they pay for that? To be fair, I don't recall if MS bought just VPC or all of Connectix, but it hardly matters!
That's got to be a giant pile of shareholder wealth pissed away in a half-assed attempt at being part of (read: smothering) the increasing popularity and utility of Apple.
I would really love to see the numbers on that boondogle.
:rolleyes:
The connectix deal wasn't a 'boondogle' at all - connectix had other products than VPC. MS Virtual Server is based on the code they got from connectix. The server virtualization market is absolutely huge compared to VPC's potential market. I'm sure to Microsoft, VPC was a drop in the bucket in terms of revenue, and if I were a shareholder, I'd be happy as hell that they dropped it.
John88
Apr 27, 08:25 AM
They apologized, and sent me a new order yesterday.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
jusacruiser
May 2, 12:35 AM
Thanks everybody for all your suggestions. I am thinking that I am going to stick with Numbers for a while.
If I was going to try something other than Numbers it would make sense to at that point at least go with MS Office. Having said that, I think I am going to stay with Numbers.
If I was going to try something other than Numbers it would make sense to at that point at least go with MS Office. Having said that, I think I am going to stay with Numbers.
Patmian212
Dec 6, 05:23 PM
Double post sorry
floatingspirit
Dec 22, 12:50 PM
i got mine recently for around 75 bucks on ebay, and there were a alot to bid on at that time. As others noted though, the "demand" for them will only go down if you wait. It's just not associated with computers that are recent enough to warrant keeping or upgrading.
harpster
Apr 14, 05:43 AM
Don't think a template will be a piece of cake either... to modify the template you will probably need some knowledge of html/flash coding/css/php/javascript/. You can also check out some Wordpress Themes like these:
http://themeforest.net/item/awake-powerful-professional-wordpress-theme/full_screen_preview/111267?ref=wpcrowd
http://themeforest.net/item/display-3-in-1-business-portfolio-wordpress-/full_screen_preview/74542
http://themeforest.net/item/awake-powerful-professional-wordpress-theme/full_screen_preview/111267?ref=wpcrowd
http://themeforest.net/item/display-3-in-1-business-portfolio-wordpress-/full_screen_preview/74542
-hh
Mar 16, 08:15 AM
Storage is truly a subjective matter. From a long term perspective, it will all depend on your needs & how many images you shoot/ expect to shoot. Anything you do, should have a redundancy back-up, whether it be a duplicate HDD, DVD's or storage online. However, as has also been pointed out, there is no need for Black's/ 7200 drives, when it comes to archiving. Green's/ 5900's are quite sufficient.
Agreed. What I find to be more resource intensive are the steps taken for redundancy to prevent total data loss.
And I thought I read that someone claimed that OS X has built-in RAID? I don't think that that's quite correct: the system can support a software-based RAID 1, but it still requires having two physical disk drives to be thus set up .. it isn't automatic.
The following is my own experience with how I needed to adjust for future growth:
When I switched to Digital SLR's in I invested in a pair of 500GB Seagate Free Agent External HDD's, to back up my images to. In I added a pair of 1TB Seagates in an External Enclosure, and configured them in RAID 1. This device is connected via FW800, and is blazing fast, where as the USB driven Free Agent's, seem to move at a snails pace, though they are USB 2. Up to this point my DSLR's only shot on avg an 8-10MB Raw File, so I wasn't burning through storage, all that fast. However, as newer tech has come out, larger files were inevitable.
"wasn't burning through ... all that fast." Well said :D.
I moved from a 4MP digital p&S to a dSLR in 2005/6 (8MP Canon 20D) which was what started my bit-burning. Retrospectively, the ~4000 images (RAW/JPG) from my first Africa trip was what I'd now consider a "mere" 40GB.
FWIW, I had a Seagate FreeAgent 750GB with the FW upgrade card from roughly this same time period as a backup; just had it go bad last month...ironically, not the HDD itself but somewhere in the electronic controller boards.
I also had two older 250GB PATA drives sitting around, which I made into an external FW800 RAID1 to use as a redundant backup to the Seagate 750.
Severe hemorrhagic herpes
herpes simplex virus 1 on
Agreed. What I find to be more resource intensive are the steps taken for redundancy to prevent total data loss.
And I thought I read that someone claimed that OS X has built-in RAID? I don't think that that's quite correct: the system can support a software-based RAID 1, but it still requires having two physical disk drives to be thus set up .. it isn't automatic.
The following is my own experience with how I needed to adjust for future growth:
When I switched to Digital SLR's in I invested in a pair of 500GB Seagate Free Agent External HDD's, to back up my images to. In I added a pair of 1TB Seagates in an External Enclosure, and configured them in RAID 1. This device is connected via FW800, and is blazing fast, where as the USB driven Free Agent's, seem to move at a snails pace, though they are USB 2. Up to this point my DSLR's only shot on avg an 8-10MB Raw File, so I wasn't burning through storage, all that fast. However, as newer tech has come out, larger files were inevitable.
"wasn't burning through ... all that fast." Well said :D.
I moved from a 4MP digital p&S to a dSLR in 2005/6 (8MP Canon 20D) which was what started my bit-burning. Retrospectively, the ~4000 images (RAW/JPG) from my first Africa trip was what I'd now consider a "mere" 40GB.
FWIW, I had a Seagate FreeAgent 750GB with the FW upgrade card from roughly this same time period as a backup; just had it go bad last month...ironically, not the HDD itself but somewhere in the electronic controller boards.
I also had two older 250GB PATA drives sitting around, which I made into an external FW800 RAID1 to use as a redundant backup to the Seagate 750.
simeezee
Apr 15, 11:10 PM
Came across this article today.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4275/apple-now-using-samsung-ssds-in-macbook-air
There's a big difference in both read and write speeds.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4275/apple-now-using-samsung-ssds-in-macbook-air
There's a big difference in both read and write speeds.
Claude626
Nov 11, 10:58 AM
Hello MacRumors,
I'm very surprised that you had removed(or was it never there?) the breadcrumbs at the bottom of any forum page. I find this very counter intuitive.
By the time the user reach the bottom of a long thread page, I think the most common actions would be to either want to move to a different page of the same thread or to go back to the section page with listings of all the thread titles. In my case, I ALWAYS want to go back to the section page so I can select another thread to view. Currently... there is no breadcrumb at the bottom that I can quickly jump back out of the thread.
There's always the back button on the browser... However, that's practical only if the thread is single page(or I can even stand 2-3 pages, just a few more back clicks, right?). What if I've dwelved a good 10 or so pages into a long thread? Or I'm jumping around a REALLY long thread to try to find something? I would have to scroll all the way up just to find the breadcrumb at the top. Very annoying...
It may seem like a trivial thing and I'm nit picky... but imagine that this repeated annoyance happens nearly every time you view a multi-page thread... I realize that there is the "Forum Jump" menu, but that either requires 2 clicks or you must scroll... Why can't we have both? Jumping else where with "Forum Jump" or simply single click to jump back up a tree.
Also on a side note... your breadcrumb at the top of the forum page is broken in FireFox. The "trigger box" for the "MacRumors Forums" link is a huge box that overlays the next few items in the breadcrumb. Essentially, making the neighboring links useless because it would fire the "MacRumors Forums" link instead.
Please bring back the bottom breadcrumb... It's the most logical place to offer navigational links since the user is most likely done with reading and would like to browse else where.
Please fix the top breadcrumb when viewed in FireFox...
Thanks!
I'm very surprised that you had removed(or was it never there?) the breadcrumbs at the bottom of any forum page. I find this very counter intuitive.
By the time the user reach the bottom of a long thread page, I think the most common actions would be to either want to move to a different page of the same thread or to go back to the section page with listings of all the thread titles. In my case, I ALWAYS want to go back to the section page so I can select another thread to view. Currently... there is no breadcrumb at the bottom that I can quickly jump back out of the thread.
There's always the back button on the browser... However, that's practical only if the thread is single page(or I can even stand 2-3 pages, just a few more back clicks, right?). What if I've dwelved a good 10 or so pages into a long thread? Or I'm jumping around a REALLY long thread to try to find something? I would have to scroll all the way up just to find the breadcrumb at the top. Very annoying...
It may seem like a trivial thing and I'm nit picky... but imagine that this repeated annoyance happens nearly every time you view a multi-page thread... I realize that there is the "Forum Jump" menu, but that either requires 2 clicks or you must scroll... Why can't we have both? Jumping else where with "Forum Jump" or simply single click to jump back up a tree.
Also on a side note... your breadcrumb at the top of the forum page is broken in FireFox. The "trigger box" for the "MacRumors Forums" link is a huge box that overlays the next few items in the breadcrumb. Essentially, making the neighboring links useless because it would fire the "MacRumors Forums" link instead.
Please bring back the bottom breadcrumb... It's the most logical place to offer navigational links since the user is most likely done with reading and would like to browse else where.
Please fix the top breadcrumb when viewed in FireFox...
Thanks!
Westside guy
Aug 8, 04:46 PM
Funny how the folks at EMC (VMWare) didn't seem to think so...
Well, I'd think there are a couple important distinctions. VMware's product will almost certainly be for Intel Macs only, so it's not going to be universal. Also, while MS has in-house expertise already on developing VPC on x86... those people aren't in the MacBU. Occasionally MS will "lend" people from one division to another, but it only seems to happen when the company as a whole sees the end result as being critical to MS's future (e.g. the XBox folks being shifted over to Zune).
I don't particularly like Microsoft, but I don't think they've been going out of their way to hurt Apple lately. Business is business. When there's a good business case for maintaining a product - such as Office - they continue to do so. If at some point the MacBU is not a moneymaker, it will go away.
Well, I'd think there are a couple important distinctions. VMware's product will almost certainly be for Intel Macs only, so it's not going to be universal. Also, while MS has in-house expertise already on developing VPC on x86... those people aren't in the MacBU. Occasionally MS will "lend" people from one division to another, but it only seems to happen when the company as a whole sees the end result as being critical to MS's future (e.g. the XBox folks being shifted over to Zune).
I don't particularly like Microsoft, but I don't think they've been going out of their way to hurt Apple lately. Business is business. When there's a good business case for maintaining a product - such as Office - they continue to do so. If at some point the MacBU is not a moneymaker, it will go away.
evanrousso
Oct 24, 05:50 PM
I am with everyone else who is saying that 10.5 will come out in January with Vista. It would make more sense.
I am surprisingly not upset about the upgrades that came out today (i bought a macbook 2 months ago) I am in love with my machine and cant wait to save up some cash and buy an Imac with the Santa Rosa chip.
I am surprisingly not upset about the upgrades that came out today (i bought a macbook 2 months ago) I am in love with my machine and cant wait to save up some cash and buy an Imac with the Santa Rosa chip.
job
Jun 6, 12:05 AM
Originally posted by vniow
It was about the G5 and it was made by a moderator..
Ah. Got it. ;) :p
I just wasn't sure if that was the one.
It was about the G5 and it was made by a moderator..
Ah. Got it. ;) :p
I just wasn't sure if that was the one.
Carmageddon
Mar 2, 11:51 AM
AWESOME thanks for those sounds. I knew I'd come to the right place!
I should get out my old MacAddict CD's that have all the old demos on them and re-live my obsession with Marathon and Escape Velocity... ahh those were the days...
I should get out my old MacAddict CD's that have all the old demos on them and re-live my obsession with Marathon and Escape Velocity... ahh those were the days...
bobobenobi
Apr 4, 03:56 PM
Isn't the graph misleading? Is it 400 thousand units or 400 million units?
It's actually 400 *zillion* units.
It's actually 400 *zillion* units.