MacBoobsPro
Jul 20, 09:22 AM
But as some already pointed out, many applications can't use multiple cores, therefore you won't get any performance improvements with multi cores.
Im not talking about performance, more about energy usage. I thought maybe they are using more cores as it is more energy efficient than using less cores or one big one. But as someone has pointed out its more likely a case of not having to squeeze more transistor thingies on a chip, they may as well just add another chip. :)
Im not talking about performance, more about energy usage. I thought maybe they are using more cores as it is more energy efficient than using less cores or one big one. But as someone has pointed out its more likely a case of not having to squeeze more transistor thingies on a chip, they may as well just add another chip. :)
The ArchAngel
Mar 26, 08:22 AM
I'm shocked at how many people are so willing to just wave away all the nice under-the-hood changes and improvements that Lion offers just because there aren't any super-radical UI changes... really disappointing to be honest. Does it really have to be all flashy to be of interest to you? What, the functional side of things doesn't matter any more?
As an amateur OS X developer, I really hate this attitude because it will end up slowing Lion adoption. That really sucks, because there are a ton of awesome changes in 10.6 that I (and many, many other developers) would love to take advantage of to make their software even greater, but it's not going to be viable to go Lion-only for said features until Lion is installed on the majority of Macs out there.
I hear what you're saying, and agree in large part, but since when did most consumers select products on grounds other than primarily looks?
As an amateur OS X developer, I really hate this attitude because it will end up slowing Lion adoption. That really sucks, because there are a ton of awesome changes in 10.6 that I (and many, many other developers) would love to take advantage of to make their software even greater, but it's not going to be viable to go Lion-only for said features until Lion is installed on the majority of Macs out there.
I hear what you're saying, and agree in large part, but since when did most consumers select products on grounds other than primarily looks?
Heilage
Mar 1, 12:01 AM
Heterosexual couples need to reserve sex for opposite-sex monogamous marriage. If I had a girlfriend, I might kiss her. But I wouldn't do that to deliberately arouse either of us. If either of us felt tempted to have sex with each other, the kissing would stop right away. I know of a woman who gave an excellent answer when men asked her why saved sex for marriage. She said, "I"m worth waiting for." She lived by her Catholic convictions, and she wouldn't risk letting any man use her as a mere object, as a mere tool.
n.
You can condemn me to Hell if you want to, I'm still gonna bump uglies with my girlfriend.
On another note, please join us in the 21st century. Why is it so important to you what other people do? Wouldn't it be very crowded in Heaven if everyone did as you said?
n.
You can condemn me to Hell if you want to, I'm still gonna bump uglies with my girlfriend.
On another note, please join us in the 21st century. Why is it so important to you what other people do? Wouldn't it be very crowded in Heaven if everyone did as you said?
geerlingguy
Aug 16, 11:24 PM
When rendering in FCP, it's all about the CPU.
Fast hard drives contribute to real-time effects, but do NOT contribute to rendering.
Ram helps a little bit.
However, depending on what kind of rendering you're doing, the hard drive can be a limiting factor.
Say you're just rendering ten minutes worth of a blur effect on video�the CPU says 'gimme all you got' and goes to town on the frames, blurring each one quickly. But the hard drive may have a hard time keeping up with the CPU, because 10 minutes of footage needs to be read, then re-written to the drive. For HD-resolution video, that can be a couple gigs of data. And that data also has to pass through the RAM (which acts like a high-speed buffer).
However, in the case of these benchmarks, one would think the testers would choose some more CPU-intense rendering, which would allow the hard drive to take it's time while the CPU is overloaded with work.
But, to anyone configuring a graphics or video workstation: Everything�CPU, Hard Drives, RAM, and even the GPU for some tasks�should be as fast and ample as possible. "A chain is only as good as it's weakest link." If you pair up a Quad 3.0 GHz Xeon with a 5400 rpm USB 2.0 drive, you will be disappointed.
Fast hard drives contribute to real-time effects, but do NOT contribute to rendering.
Ram helps a little bit.
However, depending on what kind of rendering you're doing, the hard drive can be a limiting factor.
Say you're just rendering ten minutes worth of a blur effect on video�the CPU says 'gimme all you got' and goes to town on the frames, blurring each one quickly. But the hard drive may have a hard time keeping up with the CPU, because 10 minutes of footage needs to be read, then re-written to the drive. For HD-resolution video, that can be a couple gigs of data. And that data also has to pass through the RAM (which acts like a high-speed buffer).
However, in the case of these benchmarks, one would think the testers would choose some more CPU-intense rendering, which would allow the hard drive to take it's time while the CPU is overloaded with work.
But, to anyone configuring a graphics or video workstation: Everything�CPU, Hard Drives, RAM, and even the GPU for some tasks�should be as fast and ample as possible. "A chain is only as good as it's weakest link." If you pair up a Quad 3.0 GHz Xeon with a 5400 rpm USB 2.0 drive, you will be disappointed.
Cheerwino
Apr 19, 08:02 PM
Me, Urg, first caveman to make rock round! Michelin and Firestone steal idea!
63dot
Aug 18, 09:21 AM
and if you guys have old powermac g5 dualcore sitting around because you got a new mac pro. i'll help you dispose of it no problem. i'll even do it for free. ;)
hey bokdol, you and i can start a business and help all the intel mac pro users dispose of their old G5 power macs
we can go into business :)
hey bokdol, you and i can start a business and help all the intel mac pro users dispose of their old G5 power macs
we can go into business :)
boringName
Nov 29, 10:14 AM
The only thing this royalty grants you is a tacit guarantee that Universal will continue to provide digital content.
Yes, that's the irritating part - Universal isn't providing anyone with anything, here. It seems much more like blackmail to continue offering their music library on iTunes (should this "deal" go through) and the Zune store.
To address another item - I'd like to point out that, while not an angel, I "ripped" far more of my friends' music back in the old-days of cassette tapes.
Yes, that's the irritating part - Universal isn't providing anyone with anything, here. It seems much more like blackmail to continue offering their music library on iTunes (should this "deal" go through) and the Zune store.
To address another item - I'd like to point out that, while not an angel, I "ripped" far more of my friends' music back in the old-days of cassette tapes.
cloudnine
Jul 14, 04:08 PM
To charge $1800 for a system that only has 512MB is a real disappoitment. 1GB RAM oughta be standard, especially with Leopard being on the horizon.
Unless the Xeon is that expensive (which I can't see how it would be), I don't see that as anything except creating some seperation between the configurations.
I agree... my buddy got a macbook pro and it came standard with 512mb of ram. For the first 3 or 4 days, he thought he purchased a defective notebook, it ran so badly. Opening MS Office applications literally took minutes, and that was with nothing else open. He took it back into the Apple store and the rep told him that his problem was his ram, so he purchased another 1gb (1.5gb total), and now it runs perfectly. You'd think that with all of these intel machines being released and a huge selection of software not being Universal yet, that 1 gig of ram would be standard...
kinda a$$h0lish if you ask me. :mad:
Unless the Xeon is that expensive (which I can't see how it would be), I don't see that as anything except creating some seperation between the configurations.
I agree... my buddy got a macbook pro and it came standard with 512mb of ram. For the first 3 or 4 days, he thought he purchased a defective notebook, it ran so badly. Opening MS Office applications literally took minutes, and that was with nothing else open. He took it back into the Apple store and the rep told him that his problem was his ram, so he purchased another 1gb (1.5gb total), and now it runs perfectly. You'd think that with all of these intel machines being released and a huge selection of software not being Universal yet, that 1 gig of ram would be standard...
kinda a$$h0lish if you ask me. :mad:
Tomaz
Aug 7, 05:34 PM
Time Machine won't mean much when the HD fails. Back that azz up!
Also a very good point, so I need a bigger main HD for my MacBookPro (the new Seagate 160GB becomes interesting) for Time Machine, but i still need to back the hole thing up to an external HD in case of a HD crash (I had 2 in the last 8 months!). So Tine Machine doesn't make Backups obsolete, I didn't even think of that up to now. Hmmm..
Also a very good point, so I need a bigger main HD for my MacBookPro (the new Seagate 160GB becomes interesting) for Time Machine, but i still need to back the hole thing up to an external HD in case of a HD crash (I had 2 in the last 8 months!). So Tine Machine doesn't make Backups obsolete, I didn't even think of that up to now. Hmmm..
twoodcc
Nov 12, 06:09 PM
Here's the official release notice from Sony.
http://blog.us.playstation.com/2010/11/12/gran-turismo-5-release-date-confirmed-for-november-24th-2010/
as well as the car list and the track list.
http://www.gran-turismo.com/local/jp/data1/products/gt5/carlist_en.html
http://www.gran-turismo.com/local/jp/data1/products/gt5/courselist_en.html
I'm disappointed the Bugatti Veyron is standard only, and not surprised there's no Porsches, since I believe the license to use Porsches are exclusive to EA, no other game from any company really has them. But, I am hoping that GT5 will be released on the 24th, for real this time, instead of being pushed back for the 40,000,001st time.
thanks for the links! now i gotta decide if i wanna preorder or not
http://blog.us.playstation.com/2010/11/12/gran-turismo-5-release-date-confirmed-for-november-24th-2010/
as well as the car list and the track list.
http://www.gran-turismo.com/local/jp/data1/products/gt5/carlist_en.html
http://www.gran-turismo.com/local/jp/data1/products/gt5/courselist_en.html
I'm disappointed the Bugatti Veyron is standard only, and not surprised there's no Porsches, since I believe the license to use Porsches are exclusive to EA, no other game from any company really has them. But, I am hoping that GT5 will be released on the 24th, for real this time, instead of being pushed back for the 40,000,001st time.
thanks for the links! now i gotta decide if i wanna preorder or not
obeygiant
Apr 27, 01:43 PM
Hey! The birth issue is closed! End of story! I am yelling this!
boo-hoo my all-caps was undid. :(
boo-hoo my all-caps was undid. :(
dadoftwogirls
Apr 6, 04:07 PM
Like someone an early poster said, you want a little competition to keep Apple moving forward. But 100k in two months? Apple's motto seems to be defeat, crush and humiliate your opponents then dominate. It's going to be hard for competition facing that.
SevenInchScrew
Dec 10, 11:51 AM
It says right on the front of the box "The real DRIVING simulator" not "the real racing simulator"
Hmm, I must not have leveled up far enough yet then. I haven't unlocked the "Drive to work" and "Pick up the kids from school" events yet. All I've done in the game so far is compete against a field of other cars in timed events where beating them to the finish is the objective (otherwise known as RACING). :rolleyes:
Did you take those yourself?
No, those are from a different gaming forum I frequent. They have a huge thread going for GT5 screenshots and videos. Some really amazing stuff. One of the guys that took a couple of those GT5 pics was doing the same in the Forza 3 thread over there as well. He can somehow make the photo mode in games do magical things.
I've played with the photo mode a decent amount, but since I don't own the game, I'm only getting to mess with it occasionally when I'm at my friend's place. All the pics I've taken are still on his PS3. They are decent, but nowhere near that quality. I only wish I had that kind of talent with a camera, both in photo mode and real life.
Hmm, I must not have leveled up far enough yet then. I haven't unlocked the "Drive to work" and "Pick up the kids from school" events yet. All I've done in the game so far is compete against a field of other cars in timed events where beating them to the finish is the objective (otherwise known as RACING). :rolleyes:
Did you take those yourself?
No, those are from a different gaming forum I frequent. They have a huge thread going for GT5 screenshots and videos. Some really amazing stuff. One of the guys that took a couple of those GT5 pics was doing the same in the Forza 3 thread over there as well. He can somehow make the photo mode in games do magical things.
I've played with the photo mode a decent amount, but since I don't own the game, I'm only getting to mess with it occasionally when I'm at my friend's place. All the pics I've taken are still on his PS3. They are decent, but nowhere near that quality. I only wish I had that kind of talent with a camera, both in photo mode and real life.
Silentwave
Jul 14, 05:34 PM
It's worth noting that Intel has shipped P4-series chips at 3.4GHz. But the new chips (Woodcrest and Conroe) aren't being sold at speeds above 3GHz.
Pay attention. The answer is "sooner than you think".
Quarter 4 this year will see the X6900 conroe extreme at 3.2GHz.
So when will we start seeing 8 chips in a computer? Perhaps this will become the new measurement...not processor speeds, but the number of processors (or cores).
There have already been technology briefings from Intel that talk about 4-core chips in early and 32-core chips by 2010. Similar offerings are expected from AMD.
And the Xeon-MP series processors (which will, of course, eventually get all this tech) are designed with 8-way SMP in mind. A theoretical Xeon-MP based on this 32-core tech would produce a system with 256 cores. Of course, it is doubtful that anything other than a large server would be able to take proper advantage of this, so I wouldn't ever expect to find one on a desktop.
8 core should be out sometime between end of 2006 and beginning of 2007 with the quad core Clovertown processors (based on woodcrest) available in dual chip configurations. And it'll only get better from there.
Which reminds me, though slightly OT... this is a good reason why iMac may well get Conroe now or perhaps get Merom now but transition to a desktop chip by the time Santa Rosa comes out. The new chipset/socket means new logic board, and by the time that comes out the Kenstfield quad core chips on the consumer desktop end will start arriving. I don't yet know how far kentsfield will be scaling either up or down as far as clock speed/heat, but if quad core starts moving into the consumer dekstop market, they will need a very powerful processor: either Conroe or Kentsfield.
Pay attention. The answer is "sooner than you think".
Quarter 4 this year will see the X6900 conroe extreme at 3.2GHz.
So when will we start seeing 8 chips in a computer? Perhaps this will become the new measurement...not processor speeds, but the number of processors (or cores).
There have already been technology briefings from Intel that talk about 4-core chips in early and 32-core chips by 2010. Similar offerings are expected from AMD.
And the Xeon-MP series processors (which will, of course, eventually get all this tech) are designed with 8-way SMP in mind. A theoretical Xeon-MP based on this 32-core tech would produce a system with 256 cores. Of course, it is doubtful that anything other than a large server would be able to take proper advantage of this, so I wouldn't ever expect to find one on a desktop.
8 core should be out sometime between end of 2006 and beginning of 2007 with the quad core Clovertown processors (based on woodcrest) available in dual chip configurations. And it'll only get better from there.
Which reminds me, though slightly OT... this is a good reason why iMac may well get Conroe now or perhaps get Merom now but transition to a desktop chip by the time Santa Rosa comes out. The new chipset/socket means new logic board, and by the time that comes out the Kenstfield quad core chips on the consumer desktop end will start arriving. I don't yet know how far kentsfield will be scaling either up or down as far as clock speed/heat, but if quad core starts moving into the consumer dekstop market, they will need a very powerful processor: either Conroe or Kentsfield.
skunk
Aug 6, 01:48 PM
good catch - I still think it won't matter...But it would be impossibly risky to give the machines a name which might be disallowed.
Multimedia
Jul 29, 12:24 AM
I recall someone here recently reiterating the point that Merom should not use less power than Yonah, but accomplish 20% more work. That was my understanding.
Now the claim is being made that a Core 2 Duo Notebook can get longer battery life than a "previous model" notebook, up to 5 hours.
Video: Long-lasting Intel Core 2 Duo notebooks (http://news.com.com/1606-2_3-6100051.html?part=rss&tag=6100051&subj=news)Love this news. Just what I was expecting and one of the main reasons to have waited for Core 2 Duo mobile Macs. :)
Now the claim is being made that a Core 2 Duo Notebook can get longer battery life than a "previous model" notebook, up to 5 hours.
Video: Long-lasting Intel Core 2 Duo notebooks (http://news.com.com/1606-2_3-6100051.html?part=rss&tag=6100051&subj=news)Love this news. Just what I was expecting and one of the main reasons to have waited for Core 2 Duo mobile Macs. :)
jeanlain
Apr 11, 02:21 AM
Yes, its crap. The first version followed the basic principles of NLE but the new version is pathetic.
However, Randy came up with FCP for Macromedia so he has what it takes if Jobs and other consumer oriented guys can keep their ***** away from the mix.
Except he rewrote iMovie all my himself before showing it to Apple. Jobs then chose to adopt the new interface.
So if anything, what you find crap in iMovie was Ubilos' ideas.
However, Randy came up with FCP for Macromedia so he has what it takes if Jobs and other consumer oriented guys can keep their ***** away from the mix.
Except he rewrote iMovie all my himself before showing it to Apple. Jobs then chose to adopt the new interface.
So if anything, what you find crap in iMovie was Ubilos' ideas.
matznentosh
Jul 27, 02:54 PM
Don't ask! Hahahaha, the G5's run hot, I'd hate to know how much they're sucking but with a 600W power supply...it's a lot;)
Reminds me of the time I borrowed my brother's very old Volkswagon Beetle, the air cooled kind. I noticed there was no temperature gage and asked him how hot it gets - he laughed and said "you don't want to know... think cherry red hot metal".
Reminds me of the time I borrowed my brother's very old Volkswagon Beetle, the air cooled kind. I noticed there was no temperature gage and asked him how hot it gets - he laughed and said "you don't want to know... think cherry red hot metal".
PeterQVenkman
Apr 27, 09:03 AM
Encrypting the existing database and giving us the option to get rid of it. Sounds fine to me.
kdarling
Apr 20, 09:49 AM
No they wouldn't. They have to prove likelihood of confusion, not actual confusion. Actual confusion is evidence of likelihood of confusion, but it's not necessary.
Yes sir, that's why I explicitly said "could" have to provide proof, because I read of cases where evidence of actual confusion ended up being one of the methods used.
Thank you, as always, for making the clarification in any case.
Yes sir, that's why I explicitly said "could" have to provide proof, because I read of cases where evidence of actual confusion ended up being one of the methods used.
Thank you, as always, for making the clarification in any case.
gregorsamsa
Aug 27, 08:27 AM
You are talking crap. It is only about industrial quality. Nothing else.
There are simply too many individual issues with the new MB and MBP here, and I do not want to repeat them. Mostly hardware, but some are related to using OSX and MSOS. You can read, so do that.
APPLE has been 'second to none' in the eyes of APPLE users, compared to who? I think MAC OS is fantastic, but it does not mean, that all those who switch now to APPLE have to accept hardware lemons to get this OS... Absolutely no excuse for over 25% crap products delivered to the customers...
Everybody knows that APPLE could have had a 40+ market share, but decided not to license out. We all would be happier now, but JOBS decided against that years back. So now we are talking about a less than 5% market share... JUst do your math: If they had a 40% share WW, we would hear millions screaming about their lemons...
It seems there's too much luck involved when buying an APPLE product right now.
When they finally get their QC act together I will gladly buy their product.
Cheers, and no hard feelings.
Yes, people have every right to complain when they receive faulty products, particularly so when they're paying good money, as they do when buying Apple. But whether Apple's QC has suffered significantly as they try to keep costs down due to the market pressures of increasingly feasible like-with-like comparisons with PCs, as well as meeting an increasing consumer demand, is debatable? Though there certainly seems to be a worrying increase in complaints about the new Intel Macs, I wonder how much of that is down to perception as more people use the internet as a channel to vent their complaints? Regarding the new Intel Macs, the jury here is still very much out (& will remain so for at least another 6 months). Not least because...
Recent surveys continue to give Apple an excellent rating for overall quality when compared to other brands. (Only Sony's computers get similar ratings). Talking about "25% crap products" may feel good as a rhetorical release, but it doesn't really help the debate here.
Good point, however, about how Apple's market share could've been so much greater if only SJ had licensed out OS X. A great opportunity missed.
There are simply too many individual issues with the new MB and MBP here, and I do not want to repeat them. Mostly hardware, but some are related to using OSX and MSOS. You can read, so do that.
APPLE has been 'second to none' in the eyes of APPLE users, compared to who? I think MAC OS is fantastic, but it does not mean, that all those who switch now to APPLE have to accept hardware lemons to get this OS... Absolutely no excuse for over 25% crap products delivered to the customers...
Everybody knows that APPLE could have had a 40+ market share, but decided not to license out. We all would be happier now, but JOBS decided against that years back. So now we are talking about a less than 5% market share... JUst do your math: If they had a 40% share WW, we would hear millions screaming about their lemons...
It seems there's too much luck involved when buying an APPLE product right now.
When they finally get their QC act together I will gladly buy their product.
Cheers, and no hard feelings.
Yes, people have every right to complain when they receive faulty products, particularly so when they're paying good money, as they do when buying Apple. But whether Apple's QC has suffered significantly as they try to keep costs down due to the market pressures of increasingly feasible like-with-like comparisons with PCs, as well as meeting an increasing consumer demand, is debatable? Though there certainly seems to be a worrying increase in complaints about the new Intel Macs, I wonder how much of that is down to perception as more people use the internet as a channel to vent their complaints? Regarding the new Intel Macs, the jury here is still very much out (& will remain so for at least another 6 months). Not least because...
Recent surveys continue to give Apple an excellent rating for overall quality when compared to other brands. (Only Sony's computers get similar ratings). Talking about "25% crap products" may feel good as a rhetorical release, but it doesn't really help the debate here.
Good point, however, about how Apple's market share could've been so much greater if only SJ had licensed out OS X. A great opportunity missed.
Dr.Gargoyle
Aug 11, 12:26 PM
CDMA is the only practical option for those of us who travel.
Travel within US perhaps. Still, you might be correct, even though I have seen posts that claims the opposite. Vz reluctance to give GSM a chance is big roadblock for you guys to get decent roaming. I use my european triband (900,1800,1900) when I fly over. I spend about 2 months per year in US. So far I havent had any problems getting connection. OK, you have some dropped calls when you drive in less populated areas. But that is reallly nothing to get upset about. Better to just redial the number than popping a vein in vain. :p
Still, life would be so much simpler for you if you at least tried to agree on one standard within your own country. Free enterprise has few, but really really annoying drawbacks.
Travel within US perhaps. Still, you might be correct, even though I have seen posts that claims the opposite. Vz reluctance to give GSM a chance is big roadblock for you guys to get decent roaming. I use my european triband (900,1800,1900) when I fly over. I spend about 2 months per year in US. So far I havent had any problems getting connection. OK, you have some dropped calls when you drive in less populated areas. But that is reallly nothing to get upset about. Better to just redial the number than popping a vein in vain. :p
Still, life would be so much simpler for you if you at least tried to agree on one standard within your own country. Free enterprise has few, but really really annoying drawbacks.
gnasher729
Apr 27, 08:35 AM
A "bug" right? ;)
I thought they said that there was not any concerns?
There was never anything to worry about. However, paranoia strikes, everyone goes mad without any reason, so what is Apple supposed to do? Note that the same paranoia has been striking against Windows phones as well now (look at theregister.com), with dozens and dozens of clueless idiots complaining that Windows is even worse than Apple, or equally bad as Apple, or almost as bad as Apple, based on the fact that Windows is using the same crowd sourcing that Apple (and Google) uses, and a general misunderstanding of what is actually happening.
The only actual _real_ privacy problem that I have seen so far is that Google's database (they have a database of WiFi locations, just as Apple, Windows, Skyhook, and I think Nokia) is not secured enough and lets anyone get access to lookup the location of any WiFi base station (my home network is located within about 100 meters or about 20 homes; the centre of the circle is quite exactly where I live). Which means if for some reason you want to go into hiding, you better don't take your WiFi router with you. (People got all paranoid about the iPhone, but anyone trying to find you first has to find your iPhone, and usually that means they've found you as well, whether there is any data on the phone or not). This problem with Google's database affects _anyone_ with a WiFi router in the whole world, whether they have any phone or not.
How much is it costing me to send the data to apple so they can crowdsource locations for everyone? I doubt AT&T isn't counting this towards data use.
Apple sends this preferably over WiFi, in which case it costs you almost nothing. But you have benefits: Your GPS works immediately when turned on instead of taking up to several minutes (like the bloody TomTom in my car does, which is pretty annoying at times), and you can find yourself quite precisely on a map in the middle of London where GPS just doesn't work because of all the tall buildings; New Yorkers probably appreciate it just as much.
I thought they said that there was not any concerns?
There was never anything to worry about. However, paranoia strikes, everyone goes mad without any reason, so what is Apple supposed to do? Note that the same paranoia has been striking against Windows phones as well now (look at theregister.com), with dozens and dozens of clueless idiots complaining that Windows is even worse than Apple, or equally bad as Apple, or almost as bad as Apple, based on the fact that Windows is using the same crowd sourcing that Apple (and Google) uses, and a general misunderstanding of what is actually happening.
The only actual _real_ privacy problem that I have seen so far is that Google's database (they have a database of WiFi locations, just as Apple, Windows, Skyhook, and I think Nokia) is not secured enough and lets anyone get access to lookup the location of any WiFi base station (my home network is located within about 100 meters or about 20 homes; the centre of the circle is quite exactly where I live). Which means if for some reason you want to go into hiding, you better don't take your WiFi router with you. (People got all paranoid about the iPhone, but anyone trying to find you first has to find your iPhone, and usually that means they've found you as well, whether there is any data on the phone or not). This problem with Google's database affects _anyone_ with a WiFi router in the whole world, whether they have any phone or not.
How much is it costing me to send the data to apple so they can crowdsource locations for everyone? I doubt AT&T isn't counting this towards data use.
Apple sends this preferably over WiFi, in which case it costs you almost nothing. But you have benefits: Your GPS works immediately when turned on instead of taking up to several minutes (like the bloody TomTom in my car does, which is pretty annoying at times), and you can find yourself quite precisely on a map in the middle of London where GPS just doesn't work because of all the tall buildings; New Yorkers probably appreciate it just as much.
fatfish
Aug 7, 09:18 PM
I had hoped for the ability to link files and folders with contacts in my address book, I can only hope this is one of those top secret items.
I would also have liked some way of sharing my appointments in ical with the windows people I am meeting, to date ical will send them an email with an ical attachment, but they are unable to do anything with it.
Someone please tell me I can already do these things or that I have a chance of doing them in X.5
I would also have liked some way of sharing my appointments in ical with the windows people I am meeting, to date ical will send them an email with an ical attachment, but they are unable to do anything with it.
Someone please tell me I can already do these things or that I have a chance of doing them in X.5
No comments:
Post a Comment