Slashdot Mirror

Different people have different wants and needs.

I want the opposite. I want all that plus the ability to check e-mail, look at a map, watch a movie, play music, and maybe play a game or two without lugging my laptop for a day trip. I want to be able to dump images from my camera to see if I need to re shoot anything. The list goes on. I don't want to have to carry separate devices for these tasks.

I won't be getting one immediately, but if the iPhone OS 4.0 multitasking rumors turn out to be true I'll get one immediately.

http://www.macrumors.com/2010/01/27/ipad-sdk-3-2-details-external-display-file-sharing-system-no-multitasking/

Apple has unleashed iPhone OS 3.2 SDK to developers today to prepare for the launch of the Apple iPad. The new iPhone OS 3.2 only runs on the iPad device and will not run on the iPhone or iPod Touch.

- No Multitasking. Only one application runs at a time according to official documentation.

I suspect a fairly substantial library of games will become available, probably fairly swiftly. Someone's already compiled a list of Steam games that already have Mac ports. There's ... quite a lot.

Probably a lot of people have already seen the lovely series of pictures that Valve released last week to hint at this announcement in advance, but in case you haven't, here's a compilation, in the correct sequence (and note the iPhone motif at the bottom of each image):
image 1 (1980s Mac classic theme)
image 2 (Gordon Freeman with shiny Mac hazard suit)
image 3 (turrets)
image 4 (Team Fortress 2 -- "take a bite out of the ... sandwich")
image 5 (Left 4 Dead -- "I hate different")
image 6 (HL2 + 1984 Mac commercial)

I suspect a fairly substantial library of games will become available, probably fairly swiftly. Someone's already compiled a list of Steam games that already have Mac ports. There's ... quite a lot.

Probably a lot of people have already seen the lovely series of pictures that Valve released last week to hint at this announcement in advance, but in case you haven't, here's a compilation, in the correct sequence (and note the iPhone motif at the bottom of each image):
image 1 (1980s Mac classic theme)
image 2 (Gordon Freeman with shiny Mac hazard suit)
image 3 (turrets)
image 4 (Team Fortress 2 -- "take a bite out of the ... sandwich")
image 5 (Left 4 Dead -- "I hate different")
image 6 (HL2 + 1984 Mac commercial)

I suspect a fairly substantial library of games will become available, probably fairly swiftly. Someone's already compiled a list of Steam games that already have Mac ports. There's ... quite a lot.

Probably a lot of people have already seen the lovely series of pictures that Valve released last week to hint at this announcement in advance, but in case you haven't, here's a compilation, in the correct sequence (and note the iPhone motif at the bottom of each image):
image 1 (1980s Mac classic theme)
image 2 (Gordon Freeman with shiny Mac hazard suit)
image 3 (turrets)
image 4 (Team Fortress 2 -- "take a bite out of the ... sandwich")
image 5 (Left 4 Dead -- "I hate different")
image 6 (HL2 + 1984 Mac commercial)

I suspect a fairly substantial library of games will become available, probably fairly swiftly. Someone's already compiled a list of Steam games that already have Mac ports. There's ... quite a lot.

Probably a lot of people have already seen the lovely series of pictures that Valve released last week to hint at this announcement in advance, but in case you haven't, here's a compilation, in the correct sequence (and note the iPhone motif at the bottom of each image):
image 1 (1980s Mac classic theme)
image 2 (Gordon Freeman with shiny Mac hazard suit)
image 3 (turrets)
image 4 (Team Fortress 2 -- "take a bite out of the ... sandwich")
image 5 (Left 4 Dead -- "I hate different")
image 6 (HL2 + 1984 Mac commercial)

I suspect a fairly substantial library of games will become available, probably fairly swiftly. Someone's already compiled a list of Steam games that already have Mac ports. There's ... quite a lot.

Probably a lot of people have already seen the lovely series of pictures that Valve released last week to hint at this announcement in advance, but in case you haven't, here's a compilation, in the correct sequence (and note the iPhone motif at the bottom of each image):
image 1 (1980s Mac classic theme)
image 2 (Gordon Freeman with shiny Mac hazard suit)
image 3 (turrets)
image 4 (Team Fortress 2 -- "take a bite out of the ... sandwich")
image 5 (Left 4 Dead -- "I hate different")
image 6 (HL2 + 1984 Mac commercial)

I suspect a fairly substantial library of games will become available, probably fairly swiftly. Someone's already compiled a list of Steam games that already have Mac ports. There's ... quite a lot.

Probably a lot of people have already seen the lovely series of pictures that Valve released last week to hint at this announcement in advance, but in case you haven't, here's a compilation, in the correct sequence (and note the iPhone motif at the bottom of each image):
image 1 (1980s Mac classic theme)
image 2 (Gordon Freeman with shiny Mac hazard suit)
image 3 (turrets)
image 4 (Team Fortress 2 -- "take a bite out of the ... sandwich")
image 5 (Left 4 Dead -- "I hate different")
image 6 (HL2 + 1984 Mac commercial)

At this point, I'm far more interested in Vavle's Mac development that they seem to be doing. I'd love to know if I can finally ditch my Windows partition. I'd love to see Steam and the Source Engine on OS X.

Given their solid Direct3D stance, I'm a little worried... but a gamer can dream, right?

Still, Portal 2. Going to have to play that.

If they port it to Mac then I'd be willing to buy a Mac just for that. Then I can stop using crossover games for my steam gaming needs.

Better if it works under linux IMO but can't be choosy I guess

At this point, I'm far more interested in Vavle's Mac development that they seem to be doing. I'd love to know if I can finally ditch my Windows partition. I'd love to see Steam and the Source Engine on OS X.

Given their solid Direct3D stance, I'm a little worried... but a gamer can dream, right?

Still, Portal 2. Going to have to play that.

This may be closer than you think:

http://www.macrumors.com/2010/03/05/apple-seeking-to-stimulate-mac-development-with-99-mac-dev-program/

Though this is just a first step toward an iPhone-like developer model,

By which I presume you mean "a model where they only charge you $99/year, don't have multiple tiers of developer, and perhaps don't offer hardware discounts". There are a number of ways in which the Mac OS X and iPhone OS developer programs differ; the fact that they're getting rid of one of them (higher price) does not ipso facto mean that the long-term plan is to make the Mac OS X developer program exactly like the iPhone OS program, down to the app store and restrictions.

What scares me about this though is that Apple are gradually being sucked into their own hype; that only end-to-end control of the experience by Apple is the way to ensure quality. This in spite of the obvious failure in quality control in their store and the many inconsistencies in applying their policy.

Which is inexcusable, as Apple have had over 10 years worth of iPhone experience and should know how to do the app checking by now. Oh, wait....

(Yes, it should've been better from the start. I suspect it'll get better over time.

And, yes, I think there should be an option to allow installation of non-App Store apps, with a big pop-up warning that "IF YOU FLIP THIS SWITCH, AND YOUR PHONE TURNS INTO A BRICK OR GETS BROKEN INTO OR SOME APP STOPS WORKING AFTER A SOFTWARE UPDATE OR..., AND YOU BRING IT TO THE GENIUS BAR TO GET IT FIXED, WE WILL TAKE GREAT DELIGHT IN YOUR MISERY AND LAUGH YOU OUT OF THE STORE", so that you're not stuck with approved apps and they're not stuck with supporting apps that haven't gone through the approval process or devices running those apps. I like contracts that bind both parties, like API contracts - "you use only the documented routines, and use them only in the documented fashion, and we won't change them so that they stop working that way"; as somebody who's designed and implemented various program interfaces, I like them a lot better than, say, "I get to do what I want with your libraries and you have to support me".)

Twenty years from now Mac's will only be able to get applications from Apple's approved store?

This may be closer than you think:

http://www.macrumors.com/2010/03/05/apple-seeking-to-stimulate-mac-development-with-99-mac-dev-program/

Though this is just a first step toward an iPhone-like developer model, and I suspect they'll just introduce a mac store as an add-on first of all, and allow apps to be released in other ways, at least at first.

What scares me about this though is that Apple are gradually being sucked into their own hype; that only end-to-end control of the experience by Apple is the way to ensure quality. This in spite of the obvious failure in quality control in their store and the many inconsistencies in applying their policy. If there were some other option for getting apps onto the platform it wouldn't matter as much, but of course there isn't on iPhone.

This particular example probably isn't a good one, as the apps in question did use private APIs knowingly, which frankly they should not have done and is explicitly disallowed in the developer agreement. However it does bring into focus Apple's lacklustre quality control, ad-hoc and arbitrary approval process, and abuse of their powerful position as platform makers.

With the banning of some porn apps but not others, abuse of their power as arbiters on the app store to force out competitors (Google Voice), their casual indifference to the plight of pulled third party app developers, while leaving all sorts of crap on the app store, and their lawsuit against HTC for bullshit software patents (which makes them look like a fearful monopolist), Apple is in danger of becoming the next evil empire.

The hypocrisy is astounding, and is starting to make long-term Mac users rethink their commitment to both platforms, which are headed in a direction which is anti ethical to user and developer interests. A certain amount of control-freakery is good for the platform in that it keeps the hardware supported tight and the software selection high quality, but Apple have consistently overstepped the mark on iPhone OS and are now starting to abuse their power over the platform to their own ends. Jobs seems to be genuinely affronted that other platforms have 'stolen' their ideas, though of course he lives by the credo of 'great artists steal' himself and is not afraid to lift ideas from other sources.

As an iPhone/Mac user and developer, Android is looking a lot more interesting by the day, in spite of all its warts.

Anyone remember the "iPhone Girl" ?

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=547777

Clearly unhappy, overworked, and exploited :D

Are you talking phones or smartphones?

Apple's iPhone Continues to Outpace Smartphone Industry Growth - while proving your point in one sense, regarding Nokia, also demonstrates a counterpoint to your 'marginal' comment - 3rd worldwide in volume and market share with over 10% is anything but marginal. With a growth rate of > 90% there is every reason to believe iPhones will over take RIM in the near future. If you were to look at "Consumer" phone usage/market share I'd be willing to bet iPhones are already #2 and fast closing on Nokia.

How in the world did you get +5 Insightful? And while making a claim for rationality at that! Let's break apart your comment, most of which is patently incorrect.

USB stick: You're kinda correct. Apple offers an adapter that provides USB. Source.

Office software: iWork (source) was announced and demonstrated at the keynote speech where they introduced the iPad and will be out on day one. Microsoft has indicated that they are considering the Office Suite for it (source). As others said, Omni Group is developing their software as well (source). The fact that you missed all of this doesn't speak well for your personal knowledge on the subject, since it's been covered quite a bit.

IDE: You're probably correct. Apple doesn't like interpreted code running on the iPhone (and presumably the iPad), so it'd be pretty hard to have an IDE that did anything useful. Then again, it wasn't exactly made for that sort of purpose (it's essentially a media consumption device, not a full-fledged media creation device). Also, IDEs are extremely niche. Not important to about 99% of the people buying it.

Flash and Java: You're right. Java I'm personally iffy on, but good riddance to Flash, I say. With YouTube already serving up h.264 videos with HTML5 and Hulu rumored to be prepping the same (source), I don't see this is an issue. And if you're a Flash application developer who doesn't want to learn Objective-C, Adobe put out a Flash-to-iPhone compiler months ago which should work with the iPad.

Price: $499 for the base iPad model, vs. $489 for the Kindle DX, which was about half the price the analysts were predicting, yet it does much more than the DX. Besides the obvious and numerous software advantages, the hardware is better (3.3GB vs. ~15.5GB usable space, better CPU, 3G only vs. 802.11a/b/g/n and 3G), with the DX's only redeeming factor being its eInk display (which is only useful for B&W text display). I fail to see how the iPad compares unfavorably in terms of price. I'd say it lands somewhere between "great bargain" and "perfectly reasonable".

Battery Life: The iPad gets 10 hours of actual use when watching video, which is the worst-case. It also gets "140-something" hours when just listening to music (source), and it can be in standby for about a month. That compares very well against a laptop, and decently against the DX, given the DX's different needs.

Connectivity: Seriously? It's got better connectivity than the Kindle and better than most laptops out there. 802.11a/b/g/n, EDGE, and 3G for the iPad. You're talking out of your ass if you say it lacks connectivity.

Usability: I don't know what you mean by "test editor", but if you mean a simulator for use on a dev machine, there is one, and it's already out for developers. As for usability in general, you're kidding, right? Even though there are always some that disagree, general consensus is that the iPhone is extremely usable (You've actually held one at some point, right? As a geek, it's worth handling and studying simply because of what it accomplishes).

Multitasking: You're kinda correct. The iPhone and iPad do multitasking, but it isn't available to third-parties, just first-party software (e.g. my mail gets checked and text messages get received while I'm playing games). Regardless, it's basically a straw man since push notifications meet the needs for most third party apps, while improved speed on

If you read the forums after the iPod came out, you'd find Apple fans didn't like that either.

At the time, we noted that Apple had not pursued an "iPad" trademark in the United States, ostensibly due to existing claims on the name by Fujitsu for an electronic retail inventory device. While Fujitsu initially filed its trademark application for "iPad" in March 2003, the trademark has yet to be officially accepted, and was in fact classified by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) as "abandoned" in April 2009 after Fujitsu failed to respond to a request for additional information. In June 2009, Fujitsu applied to have the application revived and, after amendment, was published for public comment and opposition on September 1, 2009.

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=851523

This episode reminds me of a Microsoft claim made seven years ago:

http://forums.macrumors.com/archive/index.php/t-21643.html/
March 06, 2003

According to its own testimony at its anti-trust trial last year, Microsoft Corporation, purveyor of the omnipresent Office and Windows product lines, has betrayed the United States of America.

Microsoft has been struggling over the past year to slow the loss of international market share to cheaper, Linux-based alternatives. To that end, it recently began sharing the source code of its Windows operating system with various foreign governments. The problem is that this initiative comes just months after Jim Allchin, Microsoft's head of Windows development, claimed under oath that releasing such code to its competitors would be a major risk to American national security.

The disconnect between the software giant's actions and claims became even more striking last week when Microsoft announced that the second major nation to receive a tour of Windows' plumbing will be the People's Republic of China.

China is not America's ally. China is not our friend. At best, our two nations tolerate each other. At worst, we are on a cultural collision course that could dwarf the Cold War. And now Microsoft is planning to give China information that it has claimed could seriously compromise American security. Thanks a lot, Mr. Gates.

While people can and do read eBooks on LCD/OLED screens, your forget that one of the main benefits of e-ink that LCD/OLED does not have is very low power consumption.

The power consumption cannot make up for the fact that current e-ink displays are too slow for video or the sort of animation needed by an iPhone/Android-esque GUI. Its conceivable that Apple might go for a compromise "transflective" LCD like this though (its still an LCD, though not truly bistable like e-ink).

Presumably the people that had faults with Apple power adapters and iBook logic (and thermal paste jizzing) were merely imagining the issues as well, right up to the point where Apple admitted them, at which time they became real.

Actually, I refuse to believe Jobs is that short-sighted or stupid. That hoopla over web apps was Jobs telling you what you had while he had the team feverishly working on the SDK in the background.

He couldn't say nothing. And he couldn't say it was coming later, because if he did, no one would have touched the iPhone for the first year.

There was more to it than that. I think there was a debate between a native SDK and using a web-based SDK (like what Palm did with WebOS). Apple was clearly working on both tracks, but WebKit was just not ready fast enough. There was evidence of this.

One of the complaints about the web SDK approach was the lack of local storage for offline use. A SQL interface had been proposed for HTML5, but hadn't been implemented by anyone yet. Apple announced the iPhone native SDK on Oct 17. That weekend (on Oct 19th), quietly on the WebKit Blog, HTML5 client-side SQL storage was quietly checked in. Coincidence? No way.

The other thing is for certain, the iPhone native SDK was not ready in time for iPhone 1.0. The jailbreakers had to deal with regular app breakage due to Apple changing APIs. Apple wasn't screwing with the jailbreakers, they were refining the SDK. That is much easier to do if you only have a dozen in-house applications to work on. Once it was declared final for iPhone 2.0, Apple had to support it fully. There have been few changes to the public API since, though there were some for iPhone 3.0.

Oddly enough, I think the people who wish the iPhone to be more open would have been happier if the webSDK approach had won out. It would have made it easy for other companies to support iPhone apps by including a WebKit-based browser.

If you are exceptionally violent with the machine, I suppose it's possible to damage or dislodge the flap, which would cause red light to shine out the audio jack whenever the sound card is on.

No violence necessary. And there's no flap. It's a microswitch that detects whether the longer connector is there or not. If that switch gets knocked into the wrong position, the computer assumes there's a digital connector in place and enables that hardware.

This happens occasionally to people. The fix is to take a bobby pin (rubber coated, please) and push it beyond the switch, then pull the switch back towards you, then pull it out. Either that or put in a real 1/8" TOSLINK connector and pull it out.

Sorry but you are wrong. The iPhone has 17% of the mobile share globally, 50% of the global app usage, and an insane 65% of the mobile HTML request. Unlike you I did the research instead of making shit up. Want the source? Here

Sorry, but the MorganStanley slide is talking about 'smartphone' share - and not even market share but _shipment_ share. I am very sure that my current phone along with hundreds of millions of other SonyEricsson or Nokia phones didn't count in their survey, although they've been dealing with GMail or Google Maps just fine years before the iPhone was a glimmer in Steve's eye.

In short: GP is very likely closer to the truth than you are.

Sorry but you are wrong. The iPhone has 17% of the mobile share globally, 50% of the global app usage, and an insane 65% of the mobile HTML request. Unlike you I did the research instead of making shit up. Want the source? Here

Is this at all related to Apple selling the same model Cinema Displays since April, 2007? 982 days without a refresh, following an average of 230.

Maybe, only because Apple is only able to sell displays based on demand but were paying prices on the supply side that were artificially higher than demand. If the price-fixing stops (and this is a good sign that it has or will), presumably there will be more profits for Apple, Dell, HP, etc in LCD displays and we may therefore look forward to refreshed product lines. Price fixing can have far-reaching consequences in a global market.

Is this at all related to Apple selling the same model Cinema Displays since April, 2007? 982 days without a refresh, following an average of 230. What's going on there?

...at MacRumors. Relevant quote:

References to "iPhone3,1" was first discovered in the iPhone firmware files back in August, but this seems to be the first time that it has been spotted "in the wild". Apple similarly began testing the iPhone 3GS (iPhone2,1) back in October of 2008 about 8 months ahead of its launch. At the time, the usage was similarly focused in the San Francisco Bay Area where Apple is located.

So, if history repeats itself, the actual product will be released sometime in April or May.

Why not force the carriers to offer official unlocks for all currently locked phones?

I've been making some humble efforts on behalf of my fellow Canadians with Fido and the CRTC.

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=817293

I was able to get as far as getting a phone call from the office of the president of my carrier Fido. If enough people did the same with their carriers and their country's regulatory body, we might actually get somewhere.

Power issues? Don't ask this guy...

Googling for these mysterious keys turned up nothing.

Is Apple lying to the court?

You're just looking in the wrong places. There are two 128-bit constants stored in the System Management Controller chip (alongside fan speeds and temperature info) in the keys "OSK0" and "OSK1"; the first time someone accidentally dumped these seems to have been in this forum post. The scheme is documented a bit further in a couple of artictles: "TPM DRM" In Mac OS X: A Myth That Won't Die and Darwin/x86: Mac OS X Binary Protection. I'll leave it to you to manually decode the keys into ASCII, but will point out that they are normally retrieved from the hardware by a kext called "Dont Steal Mac OS X.kext". The reason your "special bootloader" works on vanilla hardware is that it replaces that kext with a version that contains the keys hardcoded into it; it will never install on any machine without replacing or patching that kext, EFI or not. (All of the bootloaders that can use unmodified installation media patch or inject this kext before passing control to the loaded XNU kernel.)

If you've gotten to the point where you're patching that kext, there's not much else that can be done to stop you, which is why they gave the kext its name and included the following plain-text string in the binary:

Your karma check for today:
There once was was a user that whined
his existing OS was so blind,
he'd do better to pirate
an OS that ran great
but found his hardware declined.
Please don't steal Mac OS!
Really, that's way uncool.
(C) Apple Computer, Inc.

Apple deliberately disabled Atom support. Due to bad PR, they reversed their position.

According to this MacRumors article, the developer who complained about lack of Atom support was in Build 10C531 which was a week before Oct 27, when build 10C535 came out which works fine with Atom. The developer who complained about lack of Atom support posted his complaint a day before. We're at 10C540 now - which was released yesterday or today.

So to release the complaint a day before Apple releases a new build? In the few hours it takes to pick it up, Apple would then have to see all the "bad PR" and have time to fix it before the next build? (I suspect most of the "bad PR" happened after 10C535 came out.

At best, it would be they broke Atom support accidentally, at worst, some guy just couldn't update his Hackintosh properly.

This is an old thread by now, but I did a bit of searching.

I see several people make the same claim as you, that GPSR's can calc instantaneous speeds from doppler shifts.

So I emailed Garmin to ask about the ETrex series, they emailed back (actually surprisingly),

Thank you for contacting Garmin International. I'd be happy to help you with your Legend.

The unit determines speed by using the track log data and calculating time/distance between those points.

Please let me know if there's anything else I can assist you with.

I found a thread where iPhone devs were talking about it....turns out they have to use position changes too: http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=526261

And here's some code for it in c++: http://www.geoframeworks.com/articles/WritingApps1_6.aspx

So we are both right. ):

Apple has undergone a pretty exponential growth in market recently

Ofuckungreally? Because if I had to guess without calculating and yes I do know how to, I'd say that the best fit for this is linear.

Check out Mac Buyer's Guide, it's excellent at tracking when the last time a given product was upgraded, and when it is likely to be upgraded again.

http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/

Yes, apparently, Apple will not charge.

A docking port! I've run into the same issue... it really, really gets annoying plugging in DVI, keyboard, mouse, network when I want to take my Macbook to work!

Jeez Apple 1999 called they want their already solved problem back

(see here for thread started in 2006... http://forums.macrumors.com/archive/index.php/t-244340.html )

Maybe that should be the focus for kernel version 2.8 -- use 2.7 as a test bed for what can be safely thrown out or streamlined and 2.8 as the finished product. There's precedence for this, Apple just released OS 10.6 that only included minor "new" features but instead focused on streamlining and throwing out old code (in this case, the PPC software). As for their success at doing this, it's too soon to tell, but there are indications that it is turning out to be quite successful.

Absolute nonsense.

Steve Jobs got on a stage in front of an audience of millions and could not have made it any clearer.

"And boy have we patented it!"

Oh oh look at all the "tinfoil hat" loonies who think Apple might actually sue someone. NO WAI. That's just a crazy conspiracy theory. It's not like they go on earnings calls and promise their shareholders they will sue anyone who...

Oh wait. NM!

Well, maybe we're still crazy and paranoid. Why wouldn't Apple just license one of their UI crown jewels to a competing smartphone maker? I'm sure they do that all the time.

Google and/or HTC has licensed multitouch, right?

Right?

Funny, when you google that, all you get are articles where Google team members contradict this guy.

Here. And here.

But no, this is crazy. He must still be right. The Android team was just so goddamn busy that they couldn't possibly find the time to do multitouch. I mean, sure, they ship phones with multitouch hardware. And have a kernel with a device driver that supports it. That sort of thing is happening by accident all the time.

I mean, it's practically any phone where a lone hacker can reenable multitouch in the APIs _and_ get it working with a few of the apps in a few weekends.

Google was just so busy, who had a few weekends to spare?

After all, it's not like anyone really cares about multitouch... right?

Right?

Hello? Is this thing on?

The guy's ridiculous. Why defend them? Google was chicken on this, and they caved. They didn't want a feud with Apple - that's bad for business. Google could come out of safari. Out of the iphone. Oh the humanity. Maybe it was even a smart business decision. Who knows.

Now Palm, I respect.

Yeah, they intentionally violated Apple's patent. They probably sent Steve a free Pre just to taunt him.

Oh Apple and their sacred patents. We sometimes forget that by making any smartphone at all, you intentionally violate about 4,000 Palm patents. Doh!

Apple has been down that road, with Microsoft for instance. It ends up with a lot of fat 2nd, 3rd and 4th homes occupied by the children and wives and girlfriends of patent lawyers. And Palm has much less to lose in a feud with Apple. So, cest la vie.

And who wants to use their phone like a controller anyway? Controllers take a lot of abuse, would it be a good idea to use your $300 iPhone with no insurance as a video game controller?

This is not surprising, and now that it's confirmed, we can expect Apple to release an 802.11n enabler for iPod touch in the future and charge $.9.95 for it. They're so predictable these days...

What's more interesting than this is that the new iPod touch, while almost identicial to the old one aside from a faster processor and some other things, is almost the exact same inside except for one small change: a space big enough to fit the same camera found on the iPod nano (in previous generations there was an antenna cable socket, which has been moved and, in its absence is now just plastic spacer).

There were rumors of an iPod touch camera before it came out, even rumors that pinpointed the camera to this exact location in the device, and there was also a recent rumor that they pulled it due to some problems at the last minute. Looks like this confirms that, and I'm sure we can expect an updated iPod touch in the future with a camera. That, in my opinion, is far more interesting.

I was trying to find out myself... http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=775966 That thread seemed to have the most information but I'm still left wondering what the heck it is. Some kind of command queue system that can prioritize?

Here's the link: http://www.macrumors.com/2009/08/26/photoshop-project-manager-clarifies-position-on-creative-suite-3-compatibility-with-snow-leopard/ Earlier today, we reported on comments from Adobe Principal Product Manager for Photoshop John Nack pointing to a new FAQ document noting that only Creative Suite 4 will be officially supported on Apple's forthcoming Snow Leopard operating system, with Creative Suite 3 and earlier versions reportedly not having been tested on Snow Leopard. Nack has now posted an update after investigating the CS3 situation in which he reveals that Adobe and Apple actually did do extensive testing of at least Photoshop CS3 on Snow Leopard and found that it is in fact compatible with the new operating system. It turns out that the Photoshop team has tested Photoshop CS3 on Snow Leopard, and to the best of our knowledge, PS CS3 works fine on Snow Leopard. Now I will crawl back into my hole

I find it particularly surprising that a company with as much control over their system as apple don't limit reviews to app purchasers

Apparently they started doing that in Feb 2009.

The official App Catalog is stagnant, but there are new apps every day at the PreCentral.net forums

Care to provide any proof for the first part of that? Apple reported 65.000 apps on their store in July. That was up from 50,000 one month previous. That math would come out to 15,000 per month, but every indication has been that the Apple store is in fact accelerating. Sorry, not fanboi here, just citing links found in Wikipedia article on iPhone OS... and contesting a blatant fabrication.

So how many thousand apps are added to the Pre store each month? (Note the links I provided. Yours?)

It is one thing to hope for a reality, but another to just claim it in the face of actual proof.

There has been some recent discussion on Macrumors about Apple's discontinuation of their video composting software Shake. And several of the posters point out that Apple's "cloud of secrecy" around products and their roadmaps is one of the major contributing factors in people migrating away from Shake. In the consumer space, such secrecy is allowable and even generates hype. But in a business where production software needs to be STABLE, both in the technical and support sense, the idea that "we can't tell you what will happen next" simply doesn't fly.

Palm is complaining that Apple updated their app:
http://www.macrumors.com/2009/07/24/palm-reports-apple-to-usb-compliance-organization-over-itunes-syncing-issues/

I guess you conveniently left that one out.

Because nothing says dignity and respect like working in a sweatshop and being paid pennies an hour...

I don't know. Maybe it's just me, but the iPhone girl seemed happy enough (at least until we Westerners uploaded her pictures to the Net). Would you be able to take a picture with a smiling face working in a sweatshop and being paid pennies an hour?

Also, I disagree with the notion that sweatshops are bad. Sweatshops may seem bad from our point of view, but the presence of the sweatshop improves the local living standards, by presumably offering better wage than any other local employers—why would anyone work there voluntarily otherwise? Do you really think all those people will be in a better situation if all those shops just packed up and left?

Seriously. The people who say that it's Apple's property or that consoles are similarly locked down are missing the point. Consoles etc. were never projected to be a computing platform. We already have people hailing the iPhone as the mobile computing platform and the iTouch as Apple's version of the netbook. It is just Apple trying to get greedy by triple dipping into the jar by charging first for the phone, then taking a nice chunk of the users' monthly phone/data plan fee through AT&T, and then skimming 30% off the cost of a application in the App Store from the user/developer.

And applications cannot use 'undocumented APIs'(determined inconsistently by arbitrary lackeys), contain political undertones, or any hint of non PG 13 content or compete in anyway with Apple's builtin programs. http://www.macrumors.com/iphone/2008/09/04/apple-rejecting-applications-based-on-limited-utility/ This would be okay if there was alternate means to get applications, but the only way to get widespread distribution is through the App Store. http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/09/21/122225 MS bundled a browser with it's OS, but Apple gets away with banning any browser from being developed at all, not allowing any VM(like Java) and gets a free pass because it's not a monopoly(yet)?

For example, there was a app for a countdown clock for second term of Bush in Nov 2008. When it was rejected, the author emailed Apple, and Jobs himself replied: http://www.juggleware.com/blog/2008/09/steve-jobs-writes-back/

Mr. Jobs replied : Even though my personal political leanings are democratic, I think this app will be offensive to roughly half our customers. Whatâ(TM)s the point? Steve

So, before you develop the application, you might want to brush up on what Jobs MIGHT think about any political overtones in your application. There are no clear guidelines or rules. Some Apps are allowed, and other Apps with similar type of content or using similar development tools rejected.

There's another case of Apple rejecting an application for duplicate functionality and then filing a patent for a similar app. Details are here http://www.ikaraokeapp.com/node/18 and here http://www.tuaw.com/2009/07/02/app-store-rejections-apple-rejects-ikaraoke-app-then-files-a-p/

They say that when restrictions come, they come wrapped in a sweet looking package. That may well be the iPhone to condition people to the world of restrictive applications on machines billed as general computing devices.

Won't google lattitude achieve exactly the same thing? I have it installed on my BB and I can get the location of half a dozen of my friends that have added me to their "friends" list on their devices (both BB and iPhones). There is also a google maps gadget you can use to check the location from your PC.

What advantages do you get from using MobileMe and Find My iPhone ?

What? Google just wants to own all your information and provide The Man with the means to track your entire life and show you diabolically targeted advertisements that are horrifically targeted to your needs.

The iPhone, on the other hand, gives you unique style and coolness, and frees you from the fear that someone might be tracking your every move.

Strangely enough, MacRumors ran a story on the possible Mac tablet device earlier today. There's one key difference between their reporting and the summary here though: they actually cited sources so that they didn't pull ideas straight from thin air.