bugfaceuk
Apr 16, 09:40 PM
Awesome news. Anyone test this with the old Unibody Macbook/White Macbook ? Is everything now booting into 64-bit by default ?
That's what I've heard.
That's what I've heard.
DavidLeblond
Apr 15, 02:55 PM
Apple bought OS X too. :D
I'm arguing that both were massive undertakings by both parties. My OS X example was tainted with sarcasm if you didn't catch the little :rolleyes: there.
Both OS X and Chrome OS (and Android, and iOS) borrow heavily from others, either through acquisitions or from the open source community. To claim Google is any inferior here is just trying to stir the pot, especially calling the poster Troll, that is just insulting and uncalled for.
Both companies deserve props from providing the software they do, neither deserves scorn that some posters here like to dish out.
So what ? OS X is Mach/XNU, Apple didn't make that. It's also a GNU/Berkeley userland, Apple didn't make that either. Again guys, drop the non-sense competition, this thread is about a release of OS X, not some type of Google bashing contest.
Poster wasn't stirring the pot. One person said "OMG Apple built OSX on top of Unix! They don't build ANYTHING original. Google on the other hand build Android." to which someone pointed out "Uh, no Google bought Android" and others pointed out that Android was built on top of Linux too.
Paraphrasing there.
I'm arguing that both were massive undertakings by both parties. My OS X example was tainted with sarcasm if you didn't catch the little :rolleyes: there.
Both OS X and Chrome OS (and Android, and iOS) borrow heavily from others, either through acquisitions or from the open source community. To claim Google is any inferior here is just trying to stir the pot, especially calling the poster Troll, that is just insulting and uncalled for.
Both companies deserve props from providing the software they do, neither deserves scorn that some posters here like to dish out.
So what ? OS X is Mach/XNU, Apple didn't make that. It's also a GNU/Berkeley userland, Apple didn't make that either. Again guys, drop the non-sense competition, this thread is about a release of OS X, not some type of Google bashing contest.
Poster wasn't stirring the pot. One person said "OMG Apple built OSX on top of Unix! They don't build ANYTHING original. Google on the other hand build Android." to which someone pointed out "Uh, no Google bought Android" and others pointed out that Android was built on top of Linux too.
Paraphrasing there.
southernpaws
Apr 22, 02:07 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)
ciTiger
Apr 22, 05:04 PM
I think the iphone can still loose half of it's size lol
But I find it hard to believe it is going to suffer a redesign already...
But I find it hard to believe it is going to suffer a redesign already...
more...
blackburn
Apr 29, 03:38 PM
I still like my cd's (of not very known bands). And also I wouldn't buy songs from the artists listed in the article:p
Scruff
Jul 26, 11:13 AM
I'm going to assume it doesn't mean that you actually control the thing without touching it, rather it just makes the wheel disappear when you aren't holding it. That seems to be a more useful idea.
I mean, otherwise, it's a useless feature, except to prevent screen scratching.
I mean, otherwise, it's a useless feature, except to prevent screen scratching.
more...
skunk
Apr 27, 01:07 PM
We can't have an opinion (which is shared by others) it seems. Yeah, what exactly do you know?You were stating point blank that the seizure was obviously fake, and using various random, similarly unqualified posters to back you up. Whether it was a real seizure, a panic attack, blind terror or pure acting, what does it matter? You have no way of knowing, and it is not germane to the subject. If you have seen somebody kicked hard in the head and they end up having what appears to be a seizure shortly afterwards, it is far more appropriate to offer support rather than assuming anything at all.
mrblack927
May 3, 08:02 AM
How can it be TFT and IPS?!! That makes no sense quite honestly... Pish Posh...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TFT_LCD
IPS is a type of TFT screen. Just like TN (what you're thinking of) is a type of TFT screen.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TFT_LCD
IPS is a type of TFT screen. Just like TN (what you're thinking of) is a type of TFT screen.
more...
lostforwords
Nov 8, 11:06 AM
I got my MBP early so now I would love to get a monitor to bump up the resolution. I'm really liking the HPs monitors right now, so I'd like one of those.
http://www.tech2online.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/HP-2010i-2210m-2310m-and-2710m-LCD-Displays.jpg
I won't get that though as the MBP was my Christmas present. Tempted to buy one of those monitors when I get money from my relatives, so it'll be like a joint present from them...
http://www.tech2online.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/HP-2010i-2210m-2310m-and-2710m-LCD-Displays.jpg
I won't get that though as the MBP was my Christmas present. Tempted to buy one of those monitors when I get money from my relatives, so it'll be like a joint present from them...
Andrew K.
Sep 16, 11:52 PM
Bought a new shirt :rolleyes:
Dude I've been looking for a shirt like that! Where'd you buy it???
Dude I've been looking for a shirt like that! Where'd you buy it???
more...
Peace
Jul 12, 10:54 AM
Don't think MS is after iPod ?
Read this :
http://ilounge.com/index.php/news/comments/microsoft-approaches-ipod-accessory-makers-for-zune/
Read this :
http://ilounge.com/index.php/news/comments/microsoft-approaches-ipod-accessory-makers-for-zune/
bigrobb
Jan 30, 03:05 PM
did some more shopping on amazon got a western digital scorpio blue 500gb drive for my macbook pro its on sale now for 53.99 on amazon
Kingston 8gb ram kit for macbook pro
mstand
Kingston 8gb ram kit for macbook pro
mstand
more...
BJMRamage
May 3, 07:36 AM
nice!
Gotta tell my friend who is looking to buy an iMac.
Gotta tell my friend who is looking to buy an iMac.
gLaDiAtOr73
Apr 25, 11:34 AM
Do you guys think there will there be another refresh with Lion pre-loaded this summer? Im looking to purchase my first mac but wanted to wait until Lion drops.
more...
fisty
Nov 3, 10:16 PM
i just finished installing xp sp2 on vmware works fine....
just under device manager it tells me one unregonised hardware....the video card... any1 knows how to solve this?
or is it part of the game
just under device manager it tells me one unregonised hardware....the video card... any1 knows how to solve this?
or is it part of the game
Satori
Apr 12, 09:24 AM
If enough people take a guess on the release date of the next iPhone, someone is going to be right!
more...
commander.data
May 3, 08:02 AM
It's great that Apple seems to be taking GPUs more seriously in this refresh. The base iMac has the HD6750M which is the high-end GPU option for the MacBook Pro and a solid mid-range GPU rather than being stuck with integrated or low-end discrete GPUs. An the HD6970M is the top-end mobile GPU, rather than the second-to top that Apple usually uses. It's also nice that Apple actually admits they are using mobile GPUs now to avoid confusion.
It's too bad that Apple skimped on the RAM in the mid-range models which should have 1GB. The 2GB HD6970M option is nice though.
It's too bad that Apple skimped on the RAM in the mid-range models which should have 1GB. The 2GB HD6970M option is nice though.
ToddJ
Mar 31, 08:44 PM
They ought to have a 'classic' mode for iCal so people can choose...i know it won't happen though
michael.lauden
Oct 21, 12:24 PM
yes i understand the point. but i don't find a reason.
and yes, i do have all the computers in my household contributing to my personal team.
i can't 'compete'. the whole thing is basically it's whoever has a very nice computer/folding rig, or whoever has a nice computer and doesn't use it, but leaves it on to fold. so technically it's not 'competing' because they are computers, you aren't actually doing any work besides for setting up the actual client, and having it run well on your machine.
and yes, i do have all the computers in my household contributing to my personal team.
i can't 'compete'. the whole thing is basically it's whoever has a very nice computer/folding rig, or whoever has a nice computer and doesn't use it, but leaves it on to fold. so technically it's not 'competing' because they are computers, you aren't actually doing any work besides for setting up the actual client, and having it run well on your machine.
AppleScruff1
Apr 23, 12:18 PM
You're reaching pretty hard there. Apple makes consumer electronics that I enjoy using everyday. They're creating new markets and innovating existing ones. I don't understand how you can think that enjoying that is a bad thing.
I don't think that enjoying the products is a bad thing at all. I think I provide a good analogy. I never head a non investing bragging about how much money the electric company makes or how happy they were that their health insurance company had a record year. I just find it strange.
I don't think that enjoying the products is a bad thing at all. I think I provide a good analogy. I never head a non investing bragging about how much money the electric company makes or how happy they were that their health insurance company had a record year. I just find it strange.
MagnusVonMagnum
Nov 20, 10:40 AM
If you don't address those very good reasons, your argument won't be very convincing. We do not want the CPU suck, the identity leaking, the UI inconsistencies, and the very real risk of "zero day" Adobe bugs.
Whom am I trying to convince? Illogical and irrational people who worship Steve Jobs and hate what he hates? Such people will not care or listen to any form of reason. That's why the word fanatic is in fanboy. No, I talk about an option to turn Flash on or off at will and you find it offensive to even offer an option. That is irrational at best.
Everything you fear would be avoided if someone just turned Flash OFF (or it could default to off and have to be turned on). I've said since the first post the word OPTION. You don't seem to comprehend that word or understand why those of us that would want the choice of having Flash are not asking you to give up anything in the process. You could always turn it off if it were present. We cannot turn it on if it's not present.
In other words, you are not competent to carry on a rational discussion. You're just here to vent.
No, I just don't see any point in trying to carry on a logical, rational discussion with someone whose "argument" is based purely on emotion. If it weren't, you wouldn't object to an option for those of us that don't agree with Steve Jobs point of view because an option satisfies all your arguments against having Flash because you can always just leave it OFF. It cannot do harm if it's off no matter how paranoid you may become about having it on your device.
Many millions of people have Flash installed on their Macs (let alone those using Windows and Linux) and they could remove it. They know that if they do, some web sites will cease to function properly and thus they leave it on. The security concerns you mentioned will be addressed as all security bugs are in both OSX and Windows.
Users of those 120M+ devices don't have to hope. They are already free of Flash!
Free of Flash? You say that in a tone that sounds like they're free of slavery or something. No, what they're free of is the ability to access millions of web sites that require Flash to view them or much of their content and I do not see that as a good thing. But my point of view doesn't require you to see it. I said from the first post I wanted an option to use Flash. You could still choose to turn it off if it were there. I cannot turn on what is not present nor should I have to buy some absurd 3rd party converter that requires their web site to be running to use it.
The analogy makes no sense. Nobody is forcing you to use any Apple product.
And so that makes it OK for him to behave as he does? A lot of us like Apple products, but we would like them a lot better if Steve would just stick to making the products unfettered instead of trying to force his opinions and world view on people in the process. He doesn't like Flash so he decides for everyone they should not use Flash. What if Steve decided iOS shall no longer support MP3 files, only AAC? I suppose you would accept that as OK too? Update iOS and your MP3s no longer function. Yes, that would be just wonderful if they did that. After all, AAC is superior to MP3, so why should Apple support a legacy inferior heavily pirated format? By your logic, they should not.
If you really want the "full web experience" of zero-day Adobe bugs, get an Android phone. Note: Android phones were vulnerable to the last zero-day Adobe bug. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt)
I don't want a phone period guy. I only want and use an iPod Touch. Is there an Android iPod Touch? Android didn't exist when Apple made the claims of accessing the full Internet either and it doesn't make that any less a lie.
The fact that I can't catch zero-day Adobe attacks on my iPhone is a great reason to praise Apple's decision.
You act as if Apple has no vulnerabilities to attack. That is extremely naive to the point of emotionalism once again. In fact it's just the opposite. Apple's security is rated as bad compared to Windows and only the fact that there are so few Mac users compared to Windows has saved it thus far. As the popularity of iOS devices has exploded, it's inevitable that it will start attracting malware. It's only a matter of time. Will you wish you never bought an iPhone on that day or will you recognize that companies simply have to find and patch vulnerabilities. Apple has patched numerous security flaws in OSX over the years. Should we plug our ears and say there is no such thing?
Do tell: what exact sites are you talking about? What exact legacy flash applications are running on those sites to which you can find no substitute?
A quick search (you do know how to do that don't you?) reveals offhand a few example sites that don't use HTML5 video (which could and may in the future, but that doesn't help someone today):
Gametrailers
GiantBomb
Vimeo
Playstation Blog
Stiq of Joy
Engadget
Try some of these effects on this site this with HTML5:
http://superior-web-solutions.com/
Maybe read this article on Flash. Most HTML5 is just a video player. Flash isn't just a video player and it didn't even start as one.
http://www.andrewgreig.com/2010/06/html5-is-not-a-flash-replacement-and-shouldnt-be-seen-that-way/
Perhaps you want an open standard? So when does Apple stop requiring Quicktime on their web sites? :rolleyes:
Nobody is holding a gun to your head. Nobody is holding you hostage.
If you don't like the choices that Apple made, then ditch your iOS device and get an Android. Simple.
No, they're just boring me to death with emotional arguments why everyone should either worship Steve Jobs or leave the platform and get an Android instead similar to the "love OSX or leave it" arguments the fanboys regularly produce.
This is the first little lie in your rant. The iOS users don't find it inconvenient. If Flash were so damn important to them, they would have bought some device that could run Flash.
The fact that you think my statement is a "lie" based on a subjective opinion tells me you cannot even tell fact from fiction let alone lies from opinions. Trying to see someone else's point of view is completely foreign to you. You view the world through tinted lenses. What you say is akin to if you don't like something about OSX, go buy a Windows machine, as if there aren't any compromises along the way on that platform either (not to mention having to replace possibly thousands and thousands of dollars worth of software for a given platform to do so). Not liking something about a given platform and wanting to change it doesn't mean another platform is more viable in ALL areas or that a person may wish to spend a lot of money to make that change just because of that one issue. Perhaps you'd like to send me a free Android phone to replace my aging 1st Gen iPod Touch that I bought before Android even existed? I'd happily consider such an offer. Of course I'll need replacement apps as well.
The people who bought those 120M+ devices disagree with you.
You seem to forge that I and others that actually want Flash are part of those people dude. Get over yourself. Just because you don't like Flash doesn't mean the rest of us have hatred for it. Some of us simply don't like our iPhones, iPads and iPod Touches crippled for no reason. Besides, how you try to turn my initial argument that I'd prefer to see an option to use Flash for those of us that want it rather than no option into this flipping crusade against all things Apple and Flash alike is beyond me. You are making mountains out of mole hills and lies out of opinions. For what? I can't make you see things the way I see them. I never wanted to try. That's why I said OPTION. But you would deny everyone who wants that option to have it just like Steve Jobs. Steve does it because he's a control freak (he was once ousted from Apple for this very reason). I imagine you do it because you love Apple. Sadly, I actually prefer Steve's reason.
This is the second little lie. Apple did provide a choice: they approved the SkyFire App. They didn't have to do that.
Didn't they? It doesn't violate their rules for an app so how could they not approve it without being outright liars? Oh wait. They have done that before so I can see your point. ;)
Apple has also announced they will approve Flash Apps using Adobe's cross-compiler for iOS. If there actually are crucial Flash apps -- you haven't named a single specific one so far -- the owners of those apps should be able to easily cross-compile their apps for the iOS App Store.
Apple formerly announced they would NOT support it. Why did they change their minds? Could it have something to do with the Justice Department starting an investigation into anti-trust behaviors by Apple policies? Noooo....it couldn't be that. Apple is allowed to single out companies it doesn't like and compete with to just willy-nilly throw specifically into their license agreements.
And that is the third little lie. Flash is a proprietary and legacy platform. It's on the way down now.
I say if you don't have Flash you don't have the full Internet and you call that a "lie" based on the above quote? What freaking UNIVERSE do you live in??????? ROTFLMAO. You cannot tell a statement of fact from an idea in your head that somehow says that the "full internet" doesn't include sites that use "propriety" formats. Come on man. That position not only ignore reality it even invalidiates Apple's own web site as being part of the "full Internet" !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You need to try harder. Calling someone a liar when they are obviously stating facts and/or opinions just makes you look immature.
because accusing someone of lying when it's obvious
Even Adobe has acknowledged that a Flash-only choice is a bankrupt strategy (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999). After websites start offering their content with an open standard, you've gotta ask: what exactly is the value in continuing to prop up Flash?
First of all, you are the one that is calling it a "bankrupt strategy". I see nothing in that thread by Adobe that even addresses the matter. Adobe is simply trying to sell products and if they can easily sell more products to Apple users by providing an easy way to convert their hard work Flash sites into HTML5, they are going to do so and laugh all the way to the bank. That in NO WAY invalidates the fact that there are still plenty of Flash only sites out there and plenty of flash uses (e.g. Flash games) that HTML5 is no simple substitute for regardless. Until the Internet is Flash free, there is going to be a need and a will by people to have the option to view Flash.
The mere fact that this Skyfire app has raked in over $1 MILLION in sales already shows just how big that will is. Yet you reject the desire to be able to use Flash web sites as meaningless and unnecessary while the thread title alone proves you wrong.
Whom am I trying to convince? Illogical and irrational people who worship Steve Jobs and hate what he hates? Such people will not care or listen to any form of reason. That's why the word fanatic is in fanboy. No, I talk about an option to turn Flash on or off at will and you find it offensive to even offer an option. That is irrational at best.
Everything you fear would be avoided if someone just turned Flash OFF (or it could default to off and have to be turned on). I've said since the first post the word OPTION. You don't seem to comprehend that word or understand why those of us that would want the choice of having Flash are not asking you to give up anything in the process. You could always turn it off if it were present. We cannot turn it on if it's not present.
In other words, you are not competent to carry on a rational discussion. You're just here to vent.
No, I just don't see any point in trying to carry on a logical, rational discussion with someone whose "argument" is based purely on emotion. If it weren't, you wouldn't object to an option for those of us that don't agree with Steve Jobs point of view because an option satisfies all your arguments against having Flash because you can always just leave it OFF. It cannot do harm if it's off no matter how paranoid you may become about having it on your device.
Many millions of people have Flash installed on their Macs (let alone those using Windows and Linux) and they could remove it. They know that if they do, some web sites will cease to function properly and thus they leave it on. The security concerns you mentioned will be addressed as all security bugs are in both OSX and Windows.
Users of those 120M+ devices don't have to hope. They are already free of Flash!
Free of Flash? You say that in a tone that sounds like they're free of slavery or something. No, what they're free of is the ability to access millions of web sites that require Flash to view them or much of their content and I do not see that as a good thing. But my point of view doesn't require you to see it. I said from the first post I wanted an option to use Flash. You could still choose to turn it off if it were there. I cannot turn on what is not present nor should I have to buy some absurd 3rd party converter that requires their web site to be running to use it.
The analogy makes no sense. Nobody is forcing you to use any Apple product.
And so that makes it OK for him to behave as he does? A lot of us like Apple products, but we would like them a lot better if Steve would just stick to making the products unfettered instead of trying to force his opinions and world view on people in the process. He doesn't like Flash so he decides for everyone they should not use Flash. What if Steve decided iOS shall no longer support MP3 files, only AAC? I suppose you would accept that as OK too? Update iOS and your MP3s no longer function. Yes, that would be just wonderful if they did that. After all, AAC is superior to MP3, so why should Apple support a legacy inferior heavily pirated format? By your logic, they should not.
If you really want the "full web experience" of zero-day Adobe bugs, get an Android phone. Note: Android phones were vulnerable to the last zero-day Adobe bug. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt)
I don't want a phone period guy. I only want and use an iPod Touch. Is there an Android iPod Touch? Android didn't exist when Apple made the claims of accessing the full Internet either and it doesn't make that any less a lie.
The fact that I can't catch zero-day Adobe attacks on my iPhone is a great reason to praise Apple's decision.
You act as if Apple has no vulnerabilities to attack. That is extremely naive to the point of emotionalism once again. In fact it's just the opposite. Apple's security is rated as bad compared to Windows and only the fact that there are so few Mac users compared to Windows has saved it thus far. As the popularity of iOS devices has exploded, it's inevitable that it will start attracting malware. It's only a matter of time. Will you wish you never bought an iPhone on that day or will you recognize that companies simply have to find and patch vulnerabilities. Apple has patched numerous security flaws in OSX over the years. Should we plug our ears and say there is no such thing?
Do tell: what exact sites are you talking about? What exact legacy flash applications are running on those sites to which you can find no substitute?
A quick search (you do know how to do that don't you?) reveals offhand a few example sites that don't use HTML5 video (which could and may in the future, but that doesn't help someone today):
Gametrailers
GiantBomb
Vimeo
Playstation Blog
Stiq of Joy
Engadget
Try some of these effects on this site this with HTML5:
http://superior-web-solutions.com/
Maybe read this article on Flash. Most HTML5 is just a video player. Flash isn't just a video player and it didn't even start as one.
http://www.andrewgreig.com/2010/06/html5-is-not-a-flash-replacement-and-shouldnt-be-seen-that-way/
Perhaps you want an open standard? So when does Apple stop requiring Quicktime on their web sites? :rolleyes:
Nobody is holding a gun to your head. Nobody is holding you hostage.
If you don't like the choices that Apple made, then ditch your iOS device and get an Android. Simple.
No, they're just boring me to death with emotional arguments why everyone should either worship Steve Jobs or leave the platform and get an Android instead similar to the "love OSX or leave it" arguments the fanboys regularly produce.
This is the first little lie in your rant. The iOS users don't find it inconvenient. If Flash were so damn important to them, they would have bought some device that could run Flash.
The fact that you think my statement is a "lie" based on a subjective opinion tells me you cannot even tell fact from fiction let alone lies from opinions. Trying to see someone else's point of view is completely foreign to you. You view the world through tinted lenses. What you say is akin to if you don't like something about OSX, go buy a Windows machine, as if there aren't any compromises along the way on that platform either (not to mention having to replace possibly thousands and thousands of dollars worth of software for a given platform to do so). Not liking something about a given platform and wanting to change it doesn't mean another platform is more viable in ALL areas or that a person may wish to spend a lot of money to make that change just because of that one issue. Perhaps you'd like to send me a free Android phone to replace my aging 1st Gen iPod Touch that I bought before Android even existed? I'd happily consider such an offer. Of course I'll need replacement apps as well.
The people who bought those 120M+ devices disagree with you.
You seem to forge that I and others that actually want Flash are part of those people dude. Get over yourself. Just because you don't like Flash doesn't mean the rest of us have hatred for it. Some of us simply don't like our iPhones, iPads and iPod Touches crippled for no reason. Besides, how you try to turn my initial argument that I'd prefer to see an option to use Flash for those of us that want it rather than no option into this flipping crusade against all things Apple and Flash alike is beyond me. You are making mountains out of mole hills and lies out of opinions. For what? I can't make you see things the way I see them. I never wanted to try. That's why I said OPTION. But you would deny everyone who wants that option to have it just like Steve Jobs. Steve does it because he's a control freak (he was once ousted from Apple for this very reason). I imagine you do it because you love Apple. Sadly, I actually prefer Steve's reason.
This is the second little lie. Apple did provide a choice: they approved the SkyFire App. They didn't have to do that.
Didn't they? It doesn't violate their rules for an app so how could they not approve it without being outright liars? Oh wait. They have done that before so I can see your point. ;)
Apple has also announced they will approve Flash Apps using Adobe's cross-compiler for iOS. If there actually are crucial Flash apps -- you haven't named a single specific one so far -- the owners of those apps should be able to easily cross-compile their apps for the iOS App Store.
Apple formerly announced they would NOT support it. Why did they change their minds? Could it have something to do with the Justice Department starting an investigation into anti-trust behaviors by Apple policies? Noooo....it couldn't be that. Apple is allowed to single out companies it doesn't like and compete with to just willy-nilly throw specifically into their license agreements.
And that is the third little lie. Flash is a proprietary and legacy platform. It's on the way down now.
I say if you don't have Flash you don't have the full Internet and you call that a "lie" based on the above quote? What freaking UNIVERSE do you live in??????? ROTFLMAO. You cannot tell a statement of fact from an idea in your head that somehow says that the "full internet" doesn't include sites that use "propriety" formats. Come on man. That position not only ignore reality it even invalidiates Apple's own web site as being part of the "full Internet" !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You need to try harder. Calling someone a liar when they are obviously stating facts and/or opinions just makes you look immature.
because accusing someone of lying when it's obvious
Even Adobe has acknowledged that a Flash-only choice is a bankrupt strategy (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999). After websites start offering their content with an open standard, you've gotta ask: what exactly is the value in continuing to prop up Flash?
First of all, you are the one that is calling it a "bankrupt strategy". I see nothing in that thread by Adobe that even addresses the matter. Adobe is simply trying to sell products and if they can easily sell more products to Apple users by providing an easy way to convert their hard work Flash sites into HTML5, they are going to do so and laugh all the way to the bank. That in NO WAY invalidates the fact that there are still plenty of Flash only sites out there and plenty of flash uses (e.g. Flash games) that HTML5 is no simple substitute for regardless. Until the Internet is Flash free, there is going to be a need and a will by people to have the option to view Flash.
The mere fact that this Skyfire app has raked in over $1 MILLION in sales already shows just how big that will is. Yet you reject the desire to be able to use Flash web sites as meaningless and unnecessary while the thread title alone proves you wrong.
Queso
Jul 21, 10:18 AM
Finally Apple are back from those awful tanking sales G4 years, though will they ever break through that 5% glass ceiling?
Egomaniac
Nov 6, 09:13 AM
To be honest, I've had more application crashes and restarts on OSX than I have under XP/Windows in the past 3 years. So much for "crash resistant" - and yes, I've had 4 kernel panics since I got this iMac home; that's more than the number of BSODs I've had under XP in 4 years.
Which means -- as everyone is saying -- that there is something wrong with your computer. I have a MacBook, two Intel iMacs, and a Mac Pro in my house, and they do not crash despite heavy daily use. My poor Mac Pro is running three different operating systems right now using Parallels, with nary a complaint. If you are getting unexplained kernel panics on a clean install of Mac OS X, then you have a hardware problem.
Hardware problems can affect any OS -- I've seen Windows systems that get daily BSODs. It's not because "Windows sucks", it's because there was a sub-par memory chip or somesuch in the system. Likewise Mac OS X crashes, when nobody else is experiencing a problem, are not an indication of the stability of the OS but rather of your hardware.
Which means -- as everyone is saying -- that there is something wrong with your computer. I have a MacBook, two Intel iMacs, and a Mac Pro in my house, and they do not crash despite heavy daily use. My poor Mac Pro is running three different operating systems right now using Parallels, with nary a complaint. If you are getting unexplained kernel panics on a clean install of Mac OS X, then you have a hardware problem.
Hardware problems can affect any OS -- I've seen Windows systems that get daily BSODs. It's not because "Windows sucks", it's because there was a sub-par memory chip or somesuch in the system. Likewise Mac OS X crashes, when nobody else is experiencing a problem, are not an indication of the stability of the OS but rather of your hardware.
witness
Nov 21, 03:27 AM
I am a VS2005 c# developer (Compact Framework) and in the process of switching to Mac.
I am currently working exclusivly on a Dell PC, and toying with the idea of throwing away that ugly piece of plastic, and getting a shiny new mac book pro.
Now here is the thing : how do i keep the great performance i currently have on my Dell ? (bootcamp is out of the question since I do not want to keep booting my machine to check emails etc...)
Will VMWare cut it ? I head some discussion on the poor performace Parallels has when it comes to disk access (compiling is disk intensive).
Any thoughts ? did any one here try it ?
I've been doing full time C# development on Intel Macs (iMac, MacBook and MacBook Pro) for about 6 months now. I use Parallels (only because vmware is not available yet) and have no performance problems. Visual studio is not graphically intensive, which is probably the only area where virtual environments suffer these days.
There are a few quirks that you'll have to work around, such as the F9-F12 keys being mapped in OS X, so if you use these keys for debugging then you'll probably want to remap them, but that's not a big deal, but generally the experience is very good. And of course you can tab between Windows and OS X so that you can have your email and other stuff where it works best and only development stuff in Windows.
I am currently working exclusivly on a Dell PC, and toying with the idea of throwing away that ugly piece of plastic, and getting a shiny new mac book pro.
Now here is the thing : how do i keep the great performance i currently have on my Dell ? (bootcamp is out of the question since I do not want to keep booting my machine to check emails etc...)
Will VMWare cut it ? I head some discussion on the poor performace Parallels has when it comes to disk access (compiling is disk intensive).
Any thoughts ? did any one here try it ?
I've been doing full time C# development on Intel Macs (iMac, MacBook and MacBook Pro) for about 6 months now. I use Parallels (only because vmware is not available yet) and have no performance problems. Visual studio is not graphically intensive, which is probably the only area where virtual environments suffer these days.
There are a few quirks that you'll have to work around, such as the F9-F12 keys being mapped in OS X, so if you use these keys for debugging then you'll probably want to remap them, but that's not a big deal, but generally the experience is very good. And of course you can tab between Windows and OS X so that you can have your email and other stuff where it works best and only development stuff in Windows.
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét