YoNeX
Nov 4, 11:07 AM
I'm on a PPC but plan to go MacTel next year when Adobe releases Universal versions of Creative Suite. I have some questions about VMware & Parallels if you don't mind me adding it to the thread:
1. Do they require Windows partitions, and if so how much disk space is needed?
2. If a partition is needed, can you run the partition on an external drive so as to free up space on your internal? (I'll be using a MacBook Pro so that's why I ask).
3. Can anyone tell me anything about syncing a Palm device with Parallels or VMware? In particular I'm wondering how easily (if at all) I could sync my Treo with Windows apps as well as OS X apps. This would be huge to me.
thx.
1. Currently VMware fusion only allows you to do to create a VMware image. This acts as like a virtual hard drive, so you would then have to partition accordingly. There is a network install, but VMware has not enabled the feature (to my knowledge).
2. See above
3. You should be able to sync with it, because like Parallels and VMware it allows you to connect it to the XP just by checking a tab to tell it to connect to it. So no issues here.
The main feature it is lacking for me right now is the shared folder. This would be very uself for some of the stuff that I would be doing.
1. Do they require Windows partitions, and if so how much disk space is needed?
2. If a partition is needed, can you run the partition on an external drive so as to free up space on your internal? (I'll be using a MacBook Pro so that's why I ask).
3. Can anyone tell me anything about syncing a Palm device with Parallels or VMware? In particular I'm wondering how easily (if at all) I could sync my Treo with Windows apps as well as OS X apps. This would be huge to me.
thx.
1. Currently VMware fusion only allows you to do to create a VMware image. This acts as like a virtual hard drive, so you would then have to partition accordingly. There is a network install, but VMware has not enabled the feature (to my knowledge).
2. See above
3. You should be able to sync with it, because like Parallels and VMware it allows you to connect it to the XP just by checking a tab to tell it to connect to it. So no issues here.
The main feature it is lacking for me right now is the shared folder. This would be very uself for some of the stuff that I would be doing.
guzhogi
Jul 23, 10:03 PM
Furthermore, I have issues with the comments about marketshare increase alone as a primary contributor to getting Macs back into schools. The reason I have a problem with that is that school boards and school superintendants are typically in the back pocket of the IT staffs of the district, and so many of those staffs out there are all MS-heads. Until you can replace those folks (not convert, not convince, but replace) you're hardly likely to see much penetration into the educational market.
I'm the techie guy at an elementary school and 99.9% of all the computers in the district (not just my school, the entire district) are Macs. The last director of technology was really pro-Mac, along w/ a lot of the other schools' techies, which was a good thing. However, the kindergarten teacher @ my school has some peecees which she got on a grant to run some Windows only software (but didn't get them set-up since, according to the last director of technology, didn't fit into the district's technology plans). Also, each techie is getting a MacBook w/ dual boot because we're going to a new program that rates how well the kids to in reading & math where you can see the progress online, but the only way you can upload the results is on Windows. Boo!!! :mad: That's one reason why Macs still have low marketshare: no programs. It's a chicken & the egg problem. Mac marketshare won't go significantly up until more software is ported, but not very much software will be ported until mac marketshare is up.
One problem with increased market share is that there will be more attacks on them. One of the Mac's sources of security is security through obscurity. So, why go after an OS that only has 5% marketshare while another OS has 90%? I don't know whether Windows or Macs are more secure in terms of actual bugs and security holes, but we probably would if Windows & Macs get equal marketshare.
There are two main reasons that I know of to hack into computers, write viruses, or something: (1) to gain entry to a computer to get files, damage the company's infrastructure or (2) to be a jackass. The first one is probably for personal gain and Macs may be a target, the second to make yourself feel good at other people's expense and would probably be Windows-based to inflict the most damage. Anyone want to add something, be my guest.
I'm the techie guy at an elementary school and 99.9% of all the computers in the district (not just my school, the entire district) are Macs. The last director of technology was really pro-Mac, along w/ a lot of the other schools' techies, which was a good thing. However, the kindergarten teacher @ my school has some peecees which she got on a grant to run some Windows only software (but didn't get them set-up since, according to the last director of technology, didn't fit into the district's technology plans). Also, each techie is getting a MacBook w/ dual boot because we're going to a new program that rates how well the kids to in reading & math where you can see the progress online, but the only way you can upload the results is on Windows. Boo!!! :mad: That's one reason why Macs still have low marketshare: no programs. It's a chicken & the egg problem. Mac marketshare won't go significantly up until more software is ported, but not very much software will be ported until mac marketshare is up.
One problem with increased market share is that there will be more attacks on them. One of the Mac's sources of security is security through obscurity. So, why go after an OS that only has 5% marketshare while another OS has 90%? I don't know whether Windows or Macs are more secure in terms of actual bugs and security holes, but we probably would if Windows & Macs get equal marketshare.
There are two main reasons that I know of to hack into computers, write viruses, or something: (1) to gain entry to a computer to get files, damage the company's infrastructure or (2) to be a jackass. The first one is probably for personal gain and Macs may be a target, the second to make yourself feel good at other people's expense and would probably be Windows-based to inflict the most damage. Anyone want to add something, be my guest.
SnowLeopard2008
Apr 19, 12:41 AM
I think (most) of us are prejudiced about Intel graphics. When I saw the Intel HD 3000 graphics in the new 13" MBPs, I first thought of the X3100 in my first Late 2007 white MacBook and how much it sucked. Intel's track record with integrated graphics isn't great, but it's improving over time. A lot has changed since those X3100 times.
However, both the NVIDIA 320M and SB Intel graphics are an upgrade to my current 15" MBP's NVIDIA 9400M. I seldom switch to the discrete and I plan on buying a MBA this summer. So for me, either graphics will be an upgrade over the one I currently use.
As long as it's better/faster than my current, the new Core iX CPUs are worth waiting for. Intel IGP isn't better than the NVIDIA 320M but the processor is a lot faster/better. So the slight tradeoff in graphics performance isn't too bad. The Intel HD 3000 is on par with the current graphics. I've looked at Anandtech, Macworld and a whole bunch of other benchmarks. Intel IGP either performs slightly worse or slightly better than the NVIDIA 320M.
However, both the NVIDIA 320M and SB Intel graphics are an upgrade to my current 15" MBP's NVIDIA 9400M. I seldom switch to the discrete and I plan on buying a MBA this summer. So for me, either graphics will be an upgrade over the one I currently use.
As long as it's better/faster than my current, the new Core iX CPUs are worth waiting for. Intel IGP isn't better than the NVIDIA 320M but the processor is a lot faster/better. So the slight tradeoff in graphics performance isn't too bad. The Intel HD 3000 is on par with the current graphics. I've looked at Anandtech, Macworld and a whole bunch of other benchmarks. Intel IGP either performs slightly worse or slightly better than the NVIDIA 320M.
benjayman2
Nov 24, 06:57 PM
TUCH Satchel. I have the iPhone 4 case he makes and it's amazing.
If you ever get it please do a review.
If you ever get it please do a review.
Abstract
Feb 28, 06:04 AM
It does seem like he is serious about staying sober though.
At least Sheen's acting managed to fool one person.
At least Sheen's acting managed to fool one person.
maclaptop
Apr 12, 11:26 PM
The only possible way Apple could announce it at WWDC, is if they already have all parts in stock.
emwgradstudent
Apr 23, 06:53 PM
Wouldn't it be nice for you guys if iPhone 5 came out on every carrier?
YES! I would love a iPhone on Sprint's everything plan. I know several people with Sprint smart phones and the service they provide is great for only $70! Choice is a good thing for the customer and if the iPhone 5 does have a global chipset, then wider availability would be the best way to go.
YES! I would love a iPhone on Sprint's everything plan. I know several people with Sprint smart phones and the service they provide is great for only $70! Choice is a good thing for the customer and if the iPhone 5 does have a global chipset, then wider availability would be the best way to go.
firestarter
Apr 26, 08:52 PM
transphobia That's a new one. It's almost as funny as the visual I got with a dude at the urinal with D cups.
Almost as funny as your daughters face when she discovers that her dad is a brutal bigot who waits outside toilet doors to beat people up (http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=12453464&postcount=56).
Almost as funny as your daughters face when she discovers that her dad is a brutal bigot who waits outside toilet doors to beat people up (http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=12453464&postcount=56).
Zunjine
Apr 28, 11:49 AM
I think the idea of winning and losing here is far more subtle than can be expressed in terms of market share or sales figures. The mobile OS arena is likely to mature into a three player game; Android and WinMob will take the largest user bases - I don't think any analyst would disagree with this. There is no way that Apple's model can compete on absolute sales to the multi-device approach of their competition. But that's only a tiny part of the picture.
Look at the personal computer space. See how much money Apple makes with a fraction of the worldwide install base of Windows? If Apple can hold onto 15-20% of the mobile OS market (which I think they will) they will be the most profitable of any of the players in the game by a massive margin. What's more they are likely to hold on to the upper end of the demographic, just as they do in personal computers. Their customers will be high earners who will buy music and apps and other content. They'll be invested in the ecosystem in a way which Android users will not be.
Right now Apple is a huge player in the smartphone business, the only player worth talking about in the tablet game and makes more money from selling personal computers than anyone out there. They own the OS and the hardware and they have placed themselves at the centre of the software ecosystem. This is an integrated approach which no one else offers. This makes them unique. No one competes with Apple because no one else does what Apple does. I don't think Jobs and co. will be weeping into their skinny lattes at the growth of Android or their market share dipping. They'll be too busy counting the money - same as their software partners who are making more from iOS development than all the other platforms put together.
The future is bright. We consumers now have three top notch mobile OS options and dozens of great pieces of hardware. RIM will go bye-bye soon I fear - WinMob will kill them off. But we're the winners and we have a lot to thank Apple for. I worked in the mobile industry for years and I remember what passed for a smartphone before iPhone. We're living in a future dreamland compared to the crap that came before and that's massively down to Apple raising the bar. Apple wins, Android wins, MS wins and we win. Be happy people.
Look at the personal computer space. See how much money Apple makes with a fraction of the worldwide install base of Windows? If Apple can hold onto 15-20% of the mobile OS market (which I think they will) they will be the most profitable of any of the players in the game by a massive margin. What's more they are likely to hold on to the upper end of the demographic, just as they do in personal computers. Their customers will be high earners who will buy music and apps and other content. They'll be invested in the ecosystem in a way which Android users will not be.
Right now Apple is a huge player in the smartphone business, the only player worth talking about in the tablet game and makes more money from selling personal computers than anyone out there. They own the OS and the hardware and they have placed themselves at the centre of the software ecosystem. This is an integrated approach which no one else offers. This makes them unique. No one competes with Apple because no one else does what Apple does. I don't think Jobs and co. will be weeping into their skinny lattes at the growth of Android or their market share dipping. They'll be too busy counting the money - same as their software partners who are making more from iOS development than all the other platforms put together.
The future is bright. We consumers now have three top notch mobile OS options and dozens of great pieces of hardware. RIM will go bye-bye soon I fear - WinMob will kill them off. But we're the winners and we have a lot to thank Apple for. I worked in the mobile industry for years and I remember what passed for a smartphone before iPhone. We're living in a future dreamland compared to the crap that came before and that's massively down to Apple raising the bar. Apple wins, Android wins, MS wins and we win. Be happy people.
mc68k
Oct 29, 12:24 PM
guess what came into work yesterday
http://img255.imageshack.us/img255/9518/screenshot20091029at102.th.png (http://img255.imageshack.us/i/screenshot20091029at102.png/)
http://img255.imageshack.us/img255/9518/screenshot20091029at102.th.png (http://img255.imageshack.us/i/screenshot20091029at102.png/)
SandynJosh
Jun 6, 05:28 PM
It didn't take my 10 year old son long to figure out that he could continue to download apps after asking me to download one for him. Now, if he wants a free app, I wait for it to finish downloading and then i log out of my account before i hand his touch back to him! :mad:
OMG! You have a budding lawyer on your hands!
OMG! You have a budding lawyer on your hands!
dashiel
Apr 23, 06:18 PM
Why?
I thought AT&T's buyout means T-Mobile is going bye-bye?
408 area code, that means cali. is that steve jobs' personal number? :P
The T-Mobile deal isn't a for sure thing. Likely, but the FTC could block it. Also, as the article states T-Mobile's towers use a different frequencies.
I thought AT&T's buyout means T-Mobile is going bye-bye?
408 area code, that means cali. is that steve jobs' personal number? :P
The T-Mobile deal isn't a for sure thing. Likely, but the FTC could block it. Also, as the article states T-Mobile's towers use a different frequencies.
fresno30
Oct 23, 08:52 AM
Why would they make such a stupid move? I can tell you this much, they have just lost my support as a vendor! How do they expect me to to sell a $300 copy of windows to a home user just so he can use Microsoft's O/S on his Mac? Oh well I'm sure they know what they are doing or do they?!?!?
:confused:
:confused:
seanpholman
Mar 12, 01:23 AM
Bummer to hear, I was hoping I would get mine Saturday. I'l be down in SD in the AM, so maybe I will try down there.
--Sean
--Sean
Luba
Sep 30, 09:41 PM
Is Verizon and the competition any better? I don't think so, and that's why AT&T can get away with not investing in additional towers.
AT&T is collecting our money, but not spending the money needed to provide the service we are paying for. I suppose it's great on paper for them and their bottom line, but at some point will this catch up with them?? We are at least a generation behind the rest of the world but AT&T can get away with it because the rest of the competition is doing the same.
I wonder what is pushing the other countries into 4G, and at this rate we may soon be 2 generations behind. A similar situation exists with internet broadband where the rest of the world gets faster internet than us. :(
AT&T is collecting our money, but not spending the money needed to provide the service we are paying for. I suppose it's great on paper for them and their bottom line, but at some point will this catch up with them?? We are at least a generation behind the rest of the world but AT&T can get away with it because the rest of the competition is doing the same.
I wonder what is pushing the other countries into 4G, and at this rate we may soon be 2 generations behind. A similar situation exists with internet broadband where the rest of the world gets faster internet than us. :(
deus_ex_machina
Apr 26, 12:42 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
Seriously, can you do anything without Apple getting their cut? It seems odd that you would buy music from them then have to pay to store it. It's like earning your paycheck after income and state tax are taken out and then buying something with the money and getting charged sales tax on it.
Isn't that the way US commerce works now?!?!?
and this isn't something you're obligated to do - this is an optional service of convenience. :rolleyes:
Seriously, can you do anything without Apple getting their cut? It seems odd that you would buy music from them then have to pay to store it. It's like earning your paycheck after income and state tax are taken out and then buying something with the money and getting charged sales tax on it.
Isn't that the way US commerce works now?!?!?
and this isn't something you're obligated to do - this is an optional service of convenience. :rolleyes:
Ygn
Oct 31, 12:12 PM
http://storeimages.apple.com/1451/store.apple.com/Catalog/uk/Images/iphone/img/product-hero-iphone4.jpg
Hopefully. :p
Hopefully. :p
flopticalcube
Apr 12, 08:25 PM
Thanks, just saw it.
Kind of surprised it's such a late thing... doesn't Apple tend to do events at 10 AM, not 10 PM? (I guess it's still only 7 PM on their coast... still, isn't it time to go home by now for their employees?)
This is Vegas, baby! Most people probably just woke up...
Kind of surprised it's such a late thing... doesn't Apple tend to do events at 10 AM, not 10 PM? (I guess it's still only 7 PM on their coast... still, isn't it time to go home by now for their employees?)
This is Vegas, baby! Most people probably just woke up...
840quadra
Dec 2, 02:15 PM
Perhaps you missed me saying "Now, certainly, these issues should be looked at with all due diligence"? Again, I agree that Apple needs to keep on top of these vulnerabilities. With a little luck, we'll see a new security update within the next week or two that will patch most, if not all, of these. My objection was not to wanting Apple to fix these vulnerabilities. My objection was to the tone that suggested that if we didn't mount a public outcry, Apple would ignore these altogether, and by January 1st there'd be as many viruses on OS X as on Windows. It's the alarmist nature of so many of the posts here that I found objectionable. Give Apple the credit it's due, and trust that they are working on patching all of these vulnerabilities right now. How hard it is to patch them will determine how long we'll have to wait for the security updates.
I now understand what you are saying and agree.
I now understand what you are saying and agree.
hexor
Apr 21, 10:41 PM
Even more entertaining is the fact that Apple is so arrogant they fail to realize how stupid they look.
Suing their biggest vendor.
It doesn't get any more stupid than that.
So by this logic you should just give away any work you did to figure out what sells in the market free to all your competitors.. yeah.. that's a great system.. and for your specific criticism, Apple has already prepared to switch manufacturers for some if not all the Samsung parts.
Suing their biggest vendor.
It doesn't get any more stupid than that.
So by this logic you should just give away any work you did to figure out what sells in the market free to all your competitors.. yeah.. that's a great system.. and for your specific criticism, Apple has already prepared to switch manufacturers for some if not all the Samsung parts.
SnowLeopard2008
Jun 6, 01:31 AM
You can opt to not enter in a password right? One click shopping cart thing. IDK.
chrmjenkins
May 1, 09:15 PM
If ucfgrad isn't the wolf, I figure jav must be. I was undecided between the two, so not.voting was essentially the same as voting.
nilk
Apr 13, 02:29 PM
man how much would this thing cost? the 27" display is already 1000 bucks, and this would have to be at lease 42" for people to put it in their living rooms.
Apple 27" display is 2560x1440 resolution. A 1080P TV is 1920x1080. There is a big difference in cost of the panel. Any 2560x1440 display is going to cost in the ball park that Apple's 27" is in. I paid about $1150 for my Dell U3011 (30" 2560x1600) and I am perfectly happy having paid that for the number of pixels I get. 1080P panels are a lot cheaper due to being easier to manufacturer and the fact that they sell much higher quantities than high-res panels like those in the Apple 27" or a 2560x1600 30" (economies of scale).
Though I don't think Apple is making a TV, but if they do, it better be a plasma (better picture quality than LCD).
Apple 27" display is 2560x1440 resolution. A 1080P TV is 1920x1080. There is a big difference in cost of the panel. Any 2560x1440 display is going to cost in the ball park that Apple's 27" is in. I paid about $1150 for my Dell U3011 (30" 2560x1600) and I am perfectly happy having paid that for the number of pixels I get. 1080P panels are a lot cheaper due to being easier to manufacturer and the fact that they sell much higher quantities than high-res panels like those in the Apple 27" or a 2560x1600 30" (economies of scale).
Though I don't think Apple is making a TV, but if they do, it better be a plasma (better picture quality than LCD).
Chundles
Oct 24, 08:42 AM
The last round of iMacs are supposed to have new airport extremes that can be firmware upgraded to 802.11N. This is based upon a finding whilst using bootcamp and windowsXP/Vista(?). With Apples special TV thingy coming out next year (Steve Jobs announced at WWDC) all Macs really need wireless faster than G so it makes sense to upgrade them all to "n". So I strongly suspect the latest macbok pros have it - and it will be enabled next year.
Well, they don't really need wireless faster than G as G has enough raw throughput to handle media streaming. What they need is a G network protocol that would be robust enough to avoid interference and prioritise media streaming. This can be added in a firmware update to ALL Airport Extreme enabled Macs - much better than limiting iTV to only the newest of the new.
Well, they don't really need wireless faster than G as G has enough raw throughput to handle media streaming. What they need is a G network protocol that would be robust enough to avoid interference and prioritise media streaming. This can be added in a firmware update to ALL Airport Extreme enabled Macs - much better than limiting iTV to only the newest of the new.
No comments:
Post a Comment