Best Trend Tattoos Design

So let me understand this. You pay to buy your music, you pay to store it 'in the cloud' and you pay data charges (with ever decreasing unlimited data plans) to listen to it.

This has got to be the stupidest thing I've ever heard of.

Obviously you do not consider all possibilities. Some people have unlimited data plans (or do not have time to listen to music to often so even the limited plan could suffice). Combined with free 5GB space, people have to pay nothing. Then there are people for whom hundred bucks is not an issue but convenience is. This World (outside Apple ecosystem) is all about choices. And if not enough people will find this service to be attractive, Amazon will close it. Without your telling them.

I've got cash money if they get around to upgrading this.

Personally I'd like for them to keep the same manly size they have now and add a smaller "headless iMac" (or whatever you want to call it) to the line. However, market direction of Apple means we will be lucky if they keep the MacPro line.

Wrong... Apple didn't invent the concept of the touch UI, they bought most of what they have and own very little rights to it.

The whole point of "buying" is that after you buy something, you own it. Yes, Apple bought a lot of touch ui technology, and now they _do_ own it.

I doubt this, but here's why it could happen:

1. It's very likely that Apple is maintaining OS X (at a certain baseline of functionallity) on alternative CPUs -- including ARM. They clearly have a history of this and it has proven to be very valuable when they've had to switch.

2. ARM processors of 2013 or 2014 might be significantly more competative with intel than the ones being used in phones and tablets today. I think a lot of the disbelief on the idea of this switch is focusing on the idea that current ARM processors running full OS X, but that's not how it would be.

3. Apple has proven several times that they are willing and able to pull off this kind of architecture switch smoothly. When 68000 CPUs stagnated they moved to PPC. When PPC processors stagnated and intel CPUs jumped ahead they moved almost seamlessly to Intel. If any company can figure out how to do this without a hitch, it's Apple.

4. Cocoa-based apps will move over fairly easily. They're aren't too many important Carbon-based apps left, with some major exceptions. I think Office & iTunes will be Cocoa by then; Apple doesn't care about Adobe.


But realistically, Apple will only do this if there is a significant long-term win.

And I don't see it what that could be... certainly not by 2013.

If there is *anything* to this rumor (which I doubt -- how do a bunch of barely literate idiots get inside info on Apple's long term plans?), it's just Apple keeping their options open as usual.

You do realize everything you said is untrue, right?

Not entirely...Apple does have a "wad to flash":D

The best option is to cover both ends.


Free

Syncing
Contacts, Calendar, Bookmarks
Small iDisk
Find my iDevice
Web Gallery
Web Page

Paid

iTunes Cloud (Lala music streaming)
More Sync options
Larger iDisk Pro (Dropbox like speed)
Larger Web space and Gallery
Online Backup
iWork.com Pro (Collaboration and editing)

I'm ready to go Google Free. I just need to know Mobileme is worth investing in more.

I totally agree with this, and would be happy if it worked out like this.

I can understand Apple's concern here it could give the impression to an uneducated user that it is OK to jailbreak their phone since they are being encouraged to by what would seem like a legitimate source.

But it is okay to jailbrake your device.

And no, I've never done a jailbrake on my personal device. But I have the option should I want it.

2

Apple had other prototype tablets as well: e.g. PenLite

http://www.theapplemuseum.com/index.php?id=45

So if I want a mid-range tower, I can configured it to have less RAM, a smaller HD and a completely useless graphics card, and still come in $200-300 more than a comparable machine from Dell/Gateway/etc.? Why can't Apple sell me a desktop with 2GB RAM stock and a 250GB HD for less than two grand?

Yes, the Apple is a quad instead of a dual - but exactly which apps does that matter on? Is a quad really going to be a vast improvement for Photoshop through Rosetta over, say, a single Xeon or 2.4 Conroe?

All I ask for is a moderately priced OS X desktop that isn't crippled in any way (still paying for 802.11g! $350 to get a usable graphics card!).

If using Windows didn't make my eyes bleed, I'd turn and run from Apple hardware in a heartbeat. (And that, of course, is why fanboy dreams of a retail OS X package for any computer would never happen - you'd have to be a fool to use Apple hardware.)

Your logic completely defeats my ability to understand it. I use Apple hardware and do not like being called a fool by a 'user of a lesser God'.

There does seem to be a market for a mid-range tower/desktop, user-configurable Apple computer. I am sure that if Apple can make the manufacturing and numbers come out, they will do this.

But, the rest of your post seems to be useless, irrational grandstanding. Dell does not offer any decent video card standard, nor do they offer 2 GB of RAM. You say the graphics card is useless, but it is fine for a high-end file-server. Those wanting high-end graphics have two solid options.

If you need to be schooled in "..but exactly which apps does that matter on?", this machine is definitely NOT for you. If you cannot find an Apple computer that fits your requirements, that is sad. But, you should have to walk away reluctantly, not "..turn and run from Apple hardware in a heartbeat."

It's bootable (the, ahem, pirated versions of Lion are distributed as dmgs.)

That doesn't mean the App Store version is. Only that the "pirated" versions are. They could have been made bootable after the fact.

At this point I think a good question is what could RIM had done differently?

Wow you are either unintentionally or intentionally sounding very ignorant and naive. The cloud is the future and even Apple knows that as I'm sure they'll announce something similar soon. There are many advantages. For me the main is mobility and convenience.

Last night I uploaded 15GB of music to Amazon Cloud while I slept. This morning I have the Android app on my phone my Xoom and the web player anywhere else. I now have a single repository that is always in sync across all my devices and I can stream music from anytime. Best of all you can download your music again to any devices too. So it also serves as a great backup tool for your music or your favorite tracks.

Also whenever I buy an MP3 from Amazon (on phone or computer) it saves to the Cloud and is automatically available on all my devices. If I want I can have it download automatically to my computer and sync with iTunes as well - transparent.

Finally, the Amazon app for android doubles as a legit music player that can also play music from your local storage as well so it's a one stop shop (with widget of course).

Just because Apple didn't do it first doesn't mean it's not a game changer.

I'm not rooting for MS' demise -- far from it.

I am. Microsoft was the biggest barrier to technological innovation over the past couple of decades. I would be happy to see them absent from the new mobile computing OS world. Let them make apps. :)

AnandTech to the rescue!

2012 Honda Civic Coupe Spy

---

2012 Honda Civic Coupe

---

2012 Honda Civic Wallpapers

---

2012 Honda Civic Coupe

---

---

---

---

---

---