p0intblank
Aug 7, 11:31 PM
Top Secret stuff? You mean like a movie download service? Or a Front Row PVR? iPhone software?
I find it interesting that he didn't say anything about Front Row and how it would be improved. He didn't say anything about iChat and how it might evolve into a phone service with an integrated iPod/iPhone. In fact, everything they did show are pretty much improvements to existing technologies, except Time Machine (way cool). They didn't add HD-DVD/Blueray to the Mac Pros. I guess what I'm getting at are things that didn't show up are most likely software technologies that have an accompaning hardware device to go with it, and since those products aren't ready they can't spill the beans just yet.
Mac World in January is going to be amazing!
I'd say chances are very good we will see Steve give another keynote before the holidays roll around. This will be an event focusing on those "Top Secret" features. Afterall, they can't just release Leopard in early 2007 without showing off these features first. They just have to time it right so Microsoft doesn't "photocopy" it. :p
By the way, I love Apple's random stabs at Microsoft and Windows Vista. I love it! :D
I find it interesting that he didn't say anything about Front Row and how it would be improved. He didn't say anything about iChat and how it might evolve into a phone service with an integrated iPod/iPhone. In fact, everything they did show are pretty much improvements to existing technologies, except Time Machine (way cool). They didn't add HD-DVD/Blueray to the Mac Pros. I guess what I'm getting at are things that didn't show up are most likely software technologies that have an accompaning hardware device to go with it, and since those products aren't ready they can't spill the beans just yet.
Mac World in January is going to be amazing!
I'd say chances are very good we will see Steve give another keynote before the holidays roll around. This will be an event focusing on those "Top Secret" features. Afterall, they can't just release Leopard in early 2007 without showing off these features first. They just have to time it right so Microsoft doesn't "photocopy" it. :p
By the way, I love Apple's random stabs at Microsoft and Windows Vista. I love it! :D
thejadedmonkey
Aug 29, 10:31 AM
Amazon (http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=sr_nr_i_16/002-8029411-1096001?ie=UTF8&keywords=Vista&rh=i%3Aaps%2Ck%3AVista%2Ci%3Asoftware&page=1) has Vista available for Preorder at the above-mentioned prices
There's only 13 versions to choose from!:eek:
There's only 13 versions to choose from!:eek:
mscriv
Apr 7, 11:53 AM
The Bible says many good things and many bad things. I was highlighting some of the bad things to show how people do pick and choose. Consider Deuteronomy 13-
6 If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which is as thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers ...
9 ... thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die; because he hath sought to thrust thee away from the LORD thy God.
This is pretty clear, and no amount of fitting in with the rest of the Bible or whatever is going to help. Thankfully, people ignore this today. In other words, people apply a moral standard when reading the Bible. The Bible doesn't lead to morality.
*bold emphasis mine
I'm sorry friend, but you aren't understanding the full context of what you are reading. The old testament, in this case Deuteronomy, does not stand alone, but is correctly interpreted in light of the new testament and the fulfillment of the law that Christ accomplished through the incarnation and his death.
God gave the law in the old testament to serve a specific purpose at a specific time to a specific people. From a theological stand point it's purpose was to show that no amount of work or good behavior can bring one to God. The law serves to highlight our separation from God in that none of us can measure up. The wages of sin are death and thus under the law death was the punishment. Under the new covenant Christ's death has paid the price of sin and we no longer need to live under the law.
So you see, you are guilty of doing what it is you are saying that others are doing. You are picking/choosing a verse out of the old testament and presenting it as if it was a universal command to all believers for all time.
It's like when you tell a child to play in the front yard but not to cross the street. You are giving them a specific command for a specific time with a specific purpose in mind (their safety). It would be silly to say that your intention was for that child to never cross a street in their life. They are forever forbidden from leaving the front yard because at one point you told them not to cross the street.
I'm not trying to pick on you or attack you personally, I'm simply trying to help you better understand. People often make the error of thinking the Bible is written like an instruction manual or a recipie book. It's not that simple. You must read it in context and it's context is the entirety of the 66 books contained within it. Additionally, the books are written in different genres of literature and thus various literary tools are used to correctly interpret them.
For you to quote Deuteronomy as evidence that the Bible "literally" tells believers today they should stone people is incorrect. It's also silly to say "thanfully people today ignore this". This statement highlights your misunderstanding of what you are quoting. Believers don't need to ignore a law/command that was never intended for them. Do you ignore horse and buggy traffic laws that were written centuries ago? You don't need to, those laws were not written for you, but for a specific people at a specific time.
Much of the old testament is narrative historical literature and it allows believers to understand how God has worked throughout history to reveal himself. To take those narratives and claim they are commands for today's people is both silly and a misrepresentation of what the Bible actually says.
@mscriv
I think that my objection to a book like this for atheists is that there is no reason to believe that the author of the book's morals or opinions are anymore important or better than anyone else's.
I'm disagreeing with barkomatic (and do understand what he is saying). I'm saying religion does not provide the basis for modern morality. I'm saying a structured moral code isn't necessary- it is already there as it is in part innate and in part social.
I understand these difference of opinion and thank you for your clarification.
6 If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which is as thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers ...
9 ... thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die; because he hath sought to thrust thee away from the LORD thy God.
This is pretty clear, and no amount of fitting in with the rest of the Bible or whatever is going to help. Thankfully, people ignore this today. In other words, people apply a moral standard when reading the Bible. The Bible doesn't lead to morality.
*bold emphasis mine
I'm sorry friend, but you aren't understanding the full context of what you are reading. The old testament, in this case Deuteronomy, does not stand alone, but is correctly interpreted in light of the new testament and the fulfillment of the law that Christ accomplished through the incarnation and his death.
God gave the law in the old testament to serve a specific purpose at a specific time to a specific people. From a theological stand point it's purpose was to show that no amount of work or good behavior can bring one to God. The law serves to highlight our separation from God in that none of us can measure up. The wages of sin are death and thus under the law death was the punishment. Under the new covenant Christ's death has paid the price of sin and we no longer need to live under the law.
So you see, you are guilty of doing what it is you are saying that others are doing. You are picking/choosing a verse out of the old testament and presenting it as if it was a universal command to all believers for all time.
It's like when you tell a child to play in the front yard but not to cross the street. You are giving them a specific command for a specific time with a specific purpose in mind (their safety). It would be silly to say that your intention was for that child to never cross a street in their life. They are forever forbidden from leaving the front yard because at one point you told them not to cross the street.
I'm not trying to pick on you or attack you personally, I'm simply trying to help you better understand. People often make the error of thinking the Bible is written like an instruction manual or a recipie book. It's not that simple. You must read it in context and it's context is the entirety of the 66 books contained within it. Additionally, the books are written in different genres of literature and thus various literary tools are used to correctly interpret them.
For you to quote Deuteronomy as evidence that the Bible "literally" tells believers today they should stone people is incorrect. It's also silly to say "thanfully people today ignore this". This statement highlights your misunderstanding of what you are quoting. Believers don't need to ignore a law/command that was never intended for them. Do you ignore horse and buggy traffic laws that were written centuries ago? You don't need to, those laws were not written for you, but for a specific people at a specific time.
Much of the old testament is narrative historical literature and it allows believers to understand how God has worked throughout history to reveal himself. To take those narratives and claim they are commands for today's people is both silly and a misrepresentation of what the Bible actually says.
@mscriv
I think that my objection to a book like this for atheists is that there is no reason to believe that the author of the book's morals or opinions are anymore important or better than anyone else's.
I'm disagreeing with barkomatic (and do understand what he is saying). I'm saying religion does not provide the basis for modern morality. I'm saying a structured moral code isn't necessary- it is already there as it is in part innate and in part social.
I understand these difference of opinion and thank you for your clarification.
Josias
Aug 24, 12:07 PM
WTF? Is this the thing about the 12" BP and 12/14" iB batteries they've had on their website for 400 years?
bushido
Apr 11, 04:18 AM
Hey MacRumors, your subscription prices are different than Adobe's site.
Adobe Photoshop is $35 per YEAR or $49 month to month.
Adobe Design Premium CS5.5 is $95 per YEAR or $139 month to month.
Adobe Creative Suite 5.5 Master Collection is $129 per YEAR or $195 month to month.
http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshop/buying-guide.displayTab4.html
actually no, its 35$ per month if u subscribe to a 1 year commitment and 49$ per month if u extens it each month ... what a ripoff
Adobe Photoshop is $35 per YEAR or $49 month to month.
Adobe Design Premium CS5.5 is $95 per YEAR or $139 month to month.
Adobe Creative Suite 5.5 Master Collection is $129 per YEAR or $195 month to month.
http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshop/buying-guide.displayTab4.html
actually no, its 35$ per month if u subscribe to a 1 year commitment and 49$ per month if u extens it each month ... what a ripoff
Small White Car
Apr 13, 03:24 PM
I am so incredibly excited about this.
nemaslov
Nov 27, 12:38 PM
Sometime I wonder if people actually use the products they talk about here.
The Rolling Stones have been in the iTunes music store for over a year. The currently have over 59 albums there and a new ep was released, I'm Free, just a couple of weeks ago.
Frank Zappa was on iTunes last summer and has since been removed. It was basically the albums that RYKODisc had re-mastered and released. There appears to be something going on with the Zappa Family Trust and RYKODisc over the rights.
Led Zepplin has never appeared on iTunes. However, Radio Head was on for a short time, but everyone who like Radio Head has already bought their one good album, The Bends.
Actually I think KID A is one of the best albums of all time and I am a first gen Beatles Fan. KID A is so original and not like much else out there...especially when it was first released. Kind of like when Revolver or Pepper was first released. Now so many other records have repeated that sound...like that British "cover" band.... OASIS!
The Rolling Stones have been in the iTunes music store for over a year. The currently have over 59 albums there and a new ep was released, I'm Free, just a couple of weeks ago.
Frank Zappa was on iTunes last summer and has since been removed. It was basically the albums that RYKODisc had re-mastered and released. There appears to be something going on with the Zappa Family Trust and RYKODisc over the rights.
Led Zepplin has never appeared on iTunes. However, Radio Head was on for a short time, but everyone who like Radio Head has already bought their one good album, The Bends.
Actually I think KID A is one of the best albums of all time and I am a first gen Beatles Fan. KID A is so original and not like much else out there...especially when it was first released. Kind of like when Revolver or Pepper was first released. Now so many other records have repeated that sound...like that British "cover" band.... OASIS!
Les Kern
Apr 12, 04:37 PM
Don't bring any %#@ factories here, nosiree, we don't need no !%$#%&# jobs. Thanks Apple. 65 Billion in the bank... rat-bastards.
cmwhitley
Mar 30, 04:40 AM
ME ME ME ME! because you want a new phone when you want it, apple sucks? geeze what are we, 12?
I never said that Apple sucks. Actually, in my last post, I said that I loved the iPhone, and that I thought it was a great product. I was merely expressing my disappointment/frustration with the possible changing of the product refresh cycles this year. Again, they have the right to release their products when they want. But my 3G just isn't really functional for me anymore, and I'm gonna need to upgrade sooner rather than later. I wish I could upgrade to another iPhone this summer, but that doesn't look like it's gonna happen. So I may have to upgrade to something else.
I never said that Apple sucks. Actually, in my last post, I said that I loved the iPhone, and that I thought it was a great product. I was merely expressing my disappointment/frustration with the possible changing of the product refresh cycles this year. Again, they have the right to release their products when they want. But my 3G just isn't really functional for me anymore, and I'm gonna need to upgrade sooner rather than later. I wish I could upgrade to another iPhone this summer, but that doesn't look like it's gonna happen. So I may have to upgrade to something else.
charlituna
Mar 28, 03:28 PM
Because getting your iToy within eye sight of a 300 Lb round-belly hillbilly or 400 Lb woman in pink stretch pants and camel toe does not make for the best experience.
Maybe not, but when you turn on the built in camera you've got some prime YouTube footage.
Maybe not, but when you turn on the built in camera you've got some prime YouTube footage.
Queso
Jan 11, 11:41 AM
It's how they get round the fingermarks on touchscreen issue. From Tuesday we'll all be using MultiBreath™
I'm just hoping it's nothing along the lines of "Welcome to the Social". That would be seriously rubbish.
I'm just hoping it's nothing along the lines of "Welcome to the Social". That would be seriously rubbish.
LaMerVipere
Sep 12, 01:53 PM
This is what the iPod nano always should have been: a radically slimmer iPod mini.
Love the colors. Love the new (old) shape. Love the new (old) aluminum scratch-free design.
I want one. ;)
Love the colors. Love the new (old) shape. Love the new (old) aluminum scratch-free design.
I want one. ;)
ipedro
Aug 29, 09:43 PM
For $500 you can buy a MacMini preinstalled with OSX Leopard which will probably (likely) come with virtualization without the need for a Windows partition.
Windows Vista looks more and more like it will totally lose the war against Leopard.
2007 is going to be the year when OSX gains huge momentum over Windows and begins to regain its throne as the most popular OS.
Windows Vista looks more and more like it will totally lose the war against Leopard.
2007 is going to be the year when OSX gains huge momentum over Windows and begins to regain its throne as the most popular OS.
hotboiled
Nov 8, 07:49 AM
belguim store is up
Verzendklaar: 3 dagen
3days :o :confused:
where is my mbp17"
Verzendklaar: 3 dagen
3days :o :confused:
where is my mbp17"
spicyapple
Oct 15, 03:12 PM
Did anyone love this quote?
Jobs was equally unconcerned about the prospect of the iPod losing its cool factor as it becomes increasingly ubiquitous.
"That's like saying you don't want to kiss your lover's lips because everyone has lips. It doesn't make any sense," said Jobs.
Jobs was equally unconcerned about the prospect of the iPod losing its cool factor as it becomes increasingly ubiquitous.
"That's like saying you don't want to kiss your lover's lips because everyone has lips. It doesn't make any sense," said Jobs.
jamesryanbell
Nov 2, 08:27 PM
It doesn't matter what anyone thinks of the technology personally. It's FACTUALLY an integrated part of the web these days. It needs support on iPhone. Period.
strwrsfrk
May 5, 07:31 AM
My two cents:
Glasses-free 3D in its current iteration seems hardly more than a gimmick. Viewing angles are bad, viewing distance is wacky, and it causes headaches after prolonged use. Not to mention the tech required increases the thickness of the panels.
For Apple to implement this type of technology, it would probably need to develop an in-house solution (or at least something after close corroboration with another company). Since few - if any - rumors to that effect have surfaced, it seems reasonable to believe that any such venture is at the very least not particularly close to fruition.
And even assuming they had the propriety tech, I agree with many others on this forum who believe the implementation would increase the price fairly dramatically. My guess is that Apple will strive to maintain their competition-bustingly low prices.
Glasses-free 3D in its current iteration seems hardly more than a gimmick. Viewing angles are bad, viewing distance is wacky, and it causes headaches after prolonged use. Not to mention the tech required increases the thickness of the panels.
For Apple to implement this type of technology, it would probably need to develop an in-house solution (or at least something after close corroboration with another company). Since few - if any - rumors to that effect have surfaced, it seems reasonable to believe that any such venture is at the very least not particularly close to fruition.
And even assuming they had the propriety tech, I agree with many others on this forum who believe the implementation would increase the price fairly dramatically. My guess is that Apple will strive to maintain their competition-bustingly low prices.
BRLawyer
Mar 11, 04:02 PM
I just bought a Macbook Pro literally 5 minutes ago. I've been waiting for months and I finally gave up. After the order was completed, I thought I'd check macrumors just for laughs and the first thing I saw was, "new macbook pros tomorrow?" :(
Relax and enjoy your machine...at most, it's gonna be a speed bump and some new ports, nothing else...not to mention that so far, only hoaxes have published around. I figure Apple is gonna take a while to launch the new MBPs this time...
Relax and enjoy your machine...at most, it's gonna be a speed bump and some new ports, nothing else...not to mention that so far, only hoaxes have published around. I figure Apple is gonna take a while to launch the new MBPs this time...
szark
Aug 7, 10:46 PM
I still wonder where the Airport and Bluetooth antennas are.
They stick out from underneath the case. I'm pretty sure you can see that at some point during the Keynote speech (look for the blue "transmission circles" next to the Mac Pro -- the antenna is at the center of the circles).
They stick out from underneath the case. I'm pretty sure you can see that at some point during the Keynote speech (look for the blue "transmission circles" next to the Mac Pro -- the antenna is at the center of the circles).
techweenie
Apr 17, 10:07 AM
I'm confused. Are iPad 2s in short supply or not? If they cannot be found at multiple Apple stores, why is Apple broadening distribution to Toys R us?
Broadening distribution -- whether new territories or new outlets in established territories -- usually follows a slow down in sales growth.
The only other possible explanation is that some initial production constraints have been overcome and the product (or particular models of it) is arriving for Apple in numbers exceeding their ability to sell. But then, iPad 2s would be in plentiful stock in Apple stores.
Don't get it.
Broadening distribution -- whether new territories or new outlets in established territories -- usually follows a slow down in sales growth.
The only other possible explanation is that some initial production constraints have been overcome and the product (or particular models of it) is arriving for Apple in numbers exceeding their ability to sell. But then, iPad 2s would be in plentiful stock in Apple stores.
Don't get it.
stoutboy1
Jan 11, 05:05 PM
Digital tv tuner built into apple tv then everyone with an older style could up grade for 2009.
Hurray for old school tv's
Hurray for old school tv's
ct2k7
Mar 14, 05:00 PM
If the specs are good enough, then maybe this will be my first mac....
Ashapalan
Sep 13, 04:07 PM
Well the looks and the battery life just led me to put in my order for a 2GB silver model :)
I can't wait for this thing to arrive and meet it's substantially larger sibling, (powerbook).
My only worry is that it won't work well in my nike+ armband, does anyone know if it does?
Anyhows, here's to the waiting game...
I can't wait for this thing to arrive and meet it's substantially larger sibling, (powerbook).
My only worry is that it won't work well in my nike+ armband, does anyone know if it does?
Anyhows, here's to the waiting game...
sPAULj
Jul 22, 11:44 PM
I think Spanish is the world's 2nd-most spoken language.
It's the fourth most behind Mandarin, English, and Hindi.
http://www.krysstal.com/spoken.html
(just in case you were wondering)
It's the fourth most behind Mandarin, English, and Hindi.
http://www.krysstal.com/spoken.html
(just in case you were wondering)
