Slashdot Mirror


Apple's WWDC Unveils iPhone 3.0, OpenCL, Laptop Updates, and More

Lots of big news from WWDC today including updates to almost all of Apple's laptops. They added a 13-inch version to the MacBook Pro line, updated the MacBook Air, and added a few new ports to some of the machines including an SD slot and firewire 800 port. Software updates saw Safari 4 launched, OS X updates including threading changes, Exchange support to mail, calendar, and address book, and OpenCL a new open graphics standard. The iPhone got quite a bit of love in 3.0, much of it just confirming older news. Cut, copy, and paste, shake to undo, developer APIs, Cocoa Touch support for text, landscape mode updates, spotlight, and MMS all made the bullet list. You will now also be able to rent and purchase movies directly from your iPhone. Other new features in 3.0 include the much debated tethering ability, allowing you to use your iPhone as a cellular modem (unfortunately there was no mention of AT&T actually supporting this feature, a wonder there wasn't a riot), integrated TomTom GPS navigation, and game features galore. New functionality also allows you to locate your iPhone via MobileMe, play a sound to help you locate it (regardless if it is set to silent), and even wipe your data remotely. The New iPhone hardware updates, "3GS", adds a 3 megapixel auto-focus camera, voice interfaces, twice the processing power, and hardware encryption. The 3GS comes in 16GB ($199) and 32GB ($299), pushing the 3G (which they are keeping on the market) to $99. Lots of other small updates amidst the bustle, looks like another successful WWDC.

770 comments

  1. The GS stands for... by craenor · · Score: 4, Funny

    "Get Some" which Apple execs were rumored to have yelled at rival Palm execs while squeezing their junk.

    1. Re:The GS stands for... by iluvcapra · · Score: 4, Funny

      I'm gonna buy one and put it next to my Apple II GS. :)

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
    2. Re:The GS stands for... by Bloopie · · Score: 1

      Well, it's better than, uh, squirting their junk. Bleah!!!!!! Suddenly I don't feel so well.

    3. Re:The GS stands for... by jbacon · · Score: 0, Redundant

      "Get Some" which Apple execs were rumored to have yelled at rival Palm execs while squeezing their junk.

      Best.

      Comment.

      Ever.

    4. Re:The GS stands for... by Tumbleweed · · Score: 2, Informative

      I'm gonna buy one and put it next to my Apple II GS. :)

      Was that a joke? Some of us actually HAVE working Apple IIGS machines.

      Too bad the comparatively low-res iPhone (competing phones are at WVGA resolution) is still much higher-res than an Apple IIGS.

      I'm _still_ looking for a TransWarp GS accelerator board for my GS ... I'd like to get it beyond the default max of 2.8mHz. Maybe some day I'll find one on eBay. *sigh*

    5. Re:The GS stands for... by StikyPad · · Score: 1

      For bonus points, install it all in your Lexus GS.

    6. Re:The GS stands for... by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 1

      I'm gonna buy one and put it next to my Apple II GS. :)

      Was that a joke? Some of us actually HAVE working Apple IIGS machines.

      Too bad the comparatively low-res iPhone (competing phones are at WVGA resolution) is still much higher-res than an Apple IIGS

      The ][gs - the first Apple with a color finder. I still smile when I remember telling Mac users "What, no color?"

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    7. Re:The GS stands for... by ncc74656 · · Score: 2

      I'm still looking for a TransWarp GS accelerator board for my GS ... I'd like to get it beyond the default max of 2.8mHz. Maybe some day I'll find one on eBay. *sigh*

      They tend to be kinda spendy when they do turn up. Same applies to the ZipGS as well, which is what I have in one of mine (bought mine used back in '92 or '93 for a whole lot less than they tend to fetch now).

      Speaking of which, the ZipGS tends to turn up more frequently. I think it's also supposed to be easier to upgrade (bumped mine from 16K cache to 64K...haven't been quite as successful at cranking up the clock speed, even with a 14-MHz processor installed). You might want to expand your search a bit to include it.

      --
      20 January 2017: the End of an Error.
    8. Re:The GS stands for... by bhtooefr · · Score: 1

      There's also the Zip GS, that's a decent enough option, too. Looks like Digital Dinos has some.

      Anyway, although I strongly dislike the iPhone, I did this to my GS: http://i539.photobucket.com/albums/ff354/bhtooefr/apple2gs.jpg

    9. Re:The GS stands for... by Tumbleweed · · Score: 1

      The reason I haven't been looking for a ZipGS is because there are some upcoming projects for the TransWarp GS to enable it to go even faster than it already does (which seems to be faster than the top end of the ZipGS). I'm looking to the future (for my Apple IIGS)! :)

    10. Re:The GS stands for... by NJRoadfan · · Score: 1

      the IIgs comes close, does 640x200 and 320x200 video. As for my Transwarp GS, you can pry it from my cold dead hands. I managed to score it for $30 since it was "flaky". A new CPU cable, the modern 65c816, and some crystals its cranking away at a stable 12.5Mhz now. Judging how much cards for that computer sell for now, vs. what I paid for them in the late 90s, I guess it was a pretty good return on investment. I hear the market is even hotter in Japan for vintage Apple parts.

    11. Re:The GS stands for... by Tumbleweed · · Score: 1

      As for my Transwarp GS, you can pry it from my cold dead hands.

      Your proposal is acceptable. My ROM 03 machine feels the need for speed. What's your address? :)

  2. Macbook pro by aereinha · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Gained sd card reader...lost the express card slot. I want the express card slot back.

    1. Re:Macbook pro by CrackedButter · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yeah that sucks, what the hell is wrong with Apple, why not keep the two of them as options. Now the only expansion comes from a single FW800 port. This is where Windows laptops do it better, they give you the card reading slots, and the Express slot. Apple did the right thing with the 13" but went backwards with the 15", not even bothering to update the 17" with them both, where its size would have allowed it! A CF reader would have been better for the Pro shooters. I'd rather have this than the inclusive price drop.

      But at least we know its an Apple SD card reader so it must be better! I wonder if it can read the other 3 card formats that are the same size like windows laptops, seriously sucks hard if it is just SD. Why bother.

    2. Re:Macbook pro by Fred_A · · Score: 5, Funny

      But at least we know its an Apple SD card reader so it must be better!

      Of course it is. It ejects the cards by itself with a cute little motor and a soothing chime. Not like those primitive SD readers you find on PC clones.
      Also it goes to 11.

      --

      May contain traces of nut.
      Made from the freshest electrons.
    3. Re:Macbook pro by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The 17" has room for both? How would you know that?

      You do know that there are parts *inside* the computer sometimes, and that those parts take up space?

      Oh, you're just bitching to bitch. Nevermind.

    4. Re:Macbook pro by tyrione · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Wake up. They made the changes based upon the feedback from their base. The Express slot satisfies enterprise clients and the firewire satisfies both third party hardware vendors and consumers:

      MagSafe power port

      Gigabit Ethernet port

      One FireWire 800 port (up to 800 Mbps)

      Three USB 2.0 ports (up to 480 Mbps)

      Mini DisplayPort

      Audio line in

      Audio line out

      ExpressCard/34 slot

      Kensington lock slot

      Buy a third party product for your card reading needs.My Sony Cybershot 10.3 MP Carl Zeiss model has video out and USB. I'm not complaining.

    5. Re:Macbook pro by CrackedButter · · Score: 1

      I already have a card reader, in fact i Have 2, 1 USB and 1 Firewire. But if you travel, losing every bit of weight kinda helps, losing a carder helps towards that. My 1dsmk2 shoots SD but i'm not going to buy a card for it either.

    6. Re:Macbook pro by PopeRatzo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You're telling me that an SD slot can fit on my cell phone, but not on my MacBook? That the MacBook is just so chock-full of goodness that adding an SD slot would just be "too much"?

      Who are you shitting?

      It looks to me like someone at Apple thought they could coast for another few quarters, and then there was a little bit of excitement over the Pre and suddenly Apple is trying to make it look like they're really doing something.

      If Apple wants to do something exciting, let them come out with a full-size, expandable computer that doesn't start at $5k. Better yet, let them finally catch up with the other OS manufacturers and release an OS that can be used on a machine besides the ones that Apple sells.

      Now that would be exciting.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    7. Re:Macbook pro by Reece400 · · Score: 1

      Actually, I'd be suprised if the weight of the sd reader (an ic on the logic board, a few contacts and a small tin sheild) wouldn't weigh less than the small rectangle of aluminum case they would remove where the card goes it..

    8. Re:Macbook pro by Pieroxy · · Score: 1

      11? SIGSEGV?

    9. Re:Macbook pro by catmistake · · Score: 1

      SD card slot is worthless. Waste of space. Superfluous. That's what USB is for... every SD Card device is also a usb device. Apple, wtf? The express card slot is slightly less worthless... I can think of only a single purpose for it (that is not duplicated by the firewire port, firewire does nearly everything for expansion purposes), a 3G card. Steve Jobs needs to get back to work and fire some overanxious idiots ("and it has TWO corkscrews! In case you need to open TWO bottles of wine!")

    10. Re:Macbook pro by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yawn...Exaggerated points, outright lies and incorrectness. At l

    11. Re:Macbook pro by shis-ka-bob · · Score: 1

      You can use OS/X on other machines, just Google Hackintosh

      --
      Think global, act loco
    12. Re:Macbook pro by bnenning · · Score: 2, Informative

      the express card slot is slightly less worthless... I can think of only a single purpose for it (that is not duplicated by the firewire port, firewire does nearly everything for expansion purposes), a 3G card

      eSATA is the other big one. It's faster than FireWire (even FW800) and on OS X supports SMART monitoring so you can get warnings before your drive fails.

      --
      How to solve most of our problems: 1.Lots of nuclear plants. 2.Cure aging.
    13. Re:Macbook pro by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps you should simply purchase a PC with Vista. All your problems solved!

    14. Re:Macbook pro by sheepofblue · · Score: 1

      Like Vista can be used on computers...

    15. Re:Macbook pro by Tom · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Better yet, let them finally catch up with the other OS manufacturers and release an OS that can be used on a machine besides the ones that Apple sells.

      That's not catching up, that's stepping down. Once you support generic hardware, there's nothing you can do about Cheap Chinese Chop selling the crappiest crap ever and your customers blaming you for the resulting crashes. MS knows that, and I'm pretty sure if they had a chance to dig themselves out of that hole, they would.

      Apple intends to simply stay out of the hole in the first place.

      Plus, they're still mostly a hardware company.

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    16. Re:Macbook pro by fermion · · Score: 1

      My MS Windows machine has support for may different cards, ports, etc. It make the thing look very useful. Unfortunately my DSLR us compact flash, and not a single one of my MS Windows machines come with such a thing standard. Port bloat does not mean that a particular user will have a port that he or she needs. In any case, I transfer all my shots to a dedicated hard disk with an attached CF reader for security.

      --
      "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
    17. Re:Macbook pro by moosesocks · · Score: 1

      A CF reader would have been better for the Pro shooters. I'd rather have this than the inclusive price drop.

      Only pro-grade DSLRs now use CF for storage. Any high-end consumer models (under $1200) now use SDHC. Although I'm bummed because my camera uses CF, I can totally see Apple's logic here.

      SDHC is the new standard. It's cheaper, smaller, and comes in higher capacities. I imagine that Canon and Nikon will soon take the plunge, and start supporting it on their highest-end models, especially in light of this announcement.

      --
      -- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
    18. Re:Macbook pro by Hognoxious · · Score: 3, Funny

      nothing you can do about Cheap Chinese Chop selling the crappiest crap ever

      Lacist!

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    19. Re:Macbook pro by justcauseisjustthat · · Score: 1

      Why not have an express card slot with a pre-installed SD card reader, take out the sd card reader and you still have a power user option. eSATA, another FW800 or two ports, PCI(e) expansion chasis, etc....

    20. Re:Macbook pro by RyuuzakiTetsuya · · Score: 1

      MS moving to MS-only hardware wouldn't solve the stability and usability problems Windows has.

      I'd wager than a Linux, or BSD or whatever, install would be more hardened against the kinds of internal stability and usability issues that Windows machines face. Viruses, crappy driver model(nothing can defend against crappy drivers, the OS can be hardened against having these drivers make the machine shit itself though), spyware, etc. I don't care how popular an OS is, if the software's built right, it won't buckle like Windows does.

      --
      Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
    21. Re:Macbook pro by Deanalator · · Score: 1

      More importantly, why don't more cameras (I don't know of any) support USB storage? My 8 gig USB stick is smaller than an SD card and I paid about 25 dollars for it, and it also plugs into anything with a USB port. Many new headphones are even USB. What I don't understand is why people keep coming up with new proprietary storage solutions, and vendors keep pumping laptops with new data readers for card protocols that I have never heard of. It makes more sense to me to keep it simple.

    22. Re:Macbook pro by Goaway · · Score: 1

      every SD Card device is also a usb device.

      No, they are not.

    23. Re:Macbook pro by Goaway · · Score: 1

      There's no standard USB memory form factor, so the memory would have to be external, and lots of people would not like that.

    24. Re:Macbook pro by dindae · · Score: 1

      I'd be willing to bet the reason they removed the ExpressCard slot is that the iPhone OS 3.0 supports tethering, and 3G access is by far the main reason to add a card. Most people who were likely to need the slot needed it for cell access, and now there's another (better for Apple) option. It is not perfect for every situation, but that is how Apple tends to operate.

      --
      http://gp.darkproductions.com
    25. Re:Macbook pro by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What is a windows laptop? What is your definition? If it is a laptop that runs windows then macbooks are windows laptops. It is important for consumers to understand the difference between hardware, software, and technology vendors.

    26. Re:Macbook pro by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They are with a trivial-sized, 3-gram, in-line-powered adapter. There are legitimate complaints to make about a lack of expansion options on many Apple machines -- SD-slot is not one of them on anything other than the iPhone.

    27. Re:Macbook pro by Slur · · Score: 1

      Better yet, let them finally catch up with the other OS manufacturers and release an OS that can be used on a machine besides the ones that Apple sells.

      At this time it's only true that they don't support it.

      --
      -- thinkyhead software and media
    28. Re:Macbook pro by CrackedButter · · Score: 1

      It would be nice if eSata could daisy chain and carry power and information through the one cable like firewire.

    29. Re:Macbook pro by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      driver signing could have been a step in the right direction... if they actually tested what they where signing. My touchsmart tx2 laptop has a freaking bug that whe you display an almost black bitmap fullscreen the mouse pointer goes crazy. what kind of moron permitted that shit?

    30. Re:Macbook pro by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      eSATA's extra speed is not particularly valuable when most hard drives can't saturate FW800 and eSATA doesn't allow any other kinds of device to be connected. The big advantage of FW800 is that it allows devices to be chained without needing any kind of hub. I have two external FW800 hard disks, and I can connect them both to my current MBP or my PowerBook with a single cable. With both drives, I can saturate the FW800 connection, but only just (linear reads on both at the same time).

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    31. Re:Macbook pro by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      Mini DisplayPort

      I don't know who was asking for this. Most relatively-recent monitors have DVI. Most projectors where I need to give presentations still have VGA. Most newer screens have HDMI. The only Display Port devices I've seen have been from Apple.

      My first Mac, a G4 PowerBook, came with DVI and S-video output. In the box, there was an S-video to composite adaptor, and a DVI to VGA adaptor. My next Mac didn't have an s-video output, so I needed to buy an extra DVI to s-video and composite adaptor. The new ones don't include any adaptors as standard; if you want to plug in any monitor that currently exists, with the exception of the very latest Apple products, you need to pay extra for an adaptor.

      Not only that, but Apple charges quite a lot for their adaptors; almost £20 each for something that should be standard. Especially galling when you realise that the only reason Apple went with DisplayPort was to avoid paying royalties on HDMI. In other words, they've saved money and passed an extra cost on to the consumer.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    32. Re:Macbook pro by ptudor · · Score: 1

      Eleven on the volume knob. Pop-culture reference, don't worry, you're not missing much.

    33. Re:Macbook pro by stewbacca · · Score: 1

      my card reader weighs probably 3 ounces. Add a 2 ounce usb cable, and I still have a problem with your "weight" argument.

    34. Re:Macbook pro by CrackedButter · · Score: 1

      Space and weight, i'm pedantic about these things.

    35. Re:Macbook pro by mdwh2 · · Score: 1

      Except when it doesn't Just Work, then you'll need a paperclip to eject it...

    36. Re:Macbook pro by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      17" Pro keeps the Express Card slot.

    37. Re:Macbook pro by mdwh2 · · Score: 1

      You're missing the point - it's not about what you think he should have, it's about what he wants to have. And this is the problem - Apple have made up his mind for him, and he isn't offered the choice.

    38. Re:Macbook pro by mdwh2 · · Score: 1

      Hackintosh

      Apple - it Just Works!

    39. Re:Macbook pro by catmistake · · Score: 1

      the express card slot is slightly less worthless... I can think of only a single purpose for it (that is not duplicated by the firewire port, firewire does nearly everything for expansion purposes), a 3G card

      eSATA is the other big one. It's faster than FireWire (even FW800) and on OS X supports SMART monitoring so you can get warnings before your drive fails.

      Hmm. You've sent me down thought trails, and I just heard some news, and I've altered my opinion a little. Now I'm convinced the express card slot is entirely superfluous.

      I just realized that 3G cards can connect through usb (duh) and there is zero advantage to expresscard over usb specific to 3G connectivity or network speed (speeds will never approach the limit of either).

      eSATA is great for its purpose. If you want to make a case that Apple should include an eSATA port, fine. But its ridiculous to argue (and I'm not saying you are) that Apple should include the expresscard slot just so it can have eSATA, when there really is no other specific purpose for the slot (that can't be duplicated).

      Firewire does everything expresscard can do (which isn't saying much). Firewire and USB do everything expresscard can do twice. If you need 3MBps bandwidth from your laptop and you have the sick raid to connect it to, then you need the expresscard eSATA connector. If you're just connecting it to a drive-in-a-box, you won't realize any significant real world performance difference from firewire. The reason is that a high speed single drive (that mere mortals can get their hands on) won't saturate the eSATA or the fw800 theoretical bandwidth limits.

      yeah, I dig eSATA. I'd like an eSATA port on my laptop. I'd be annoyed if I needed it and had to get a card adapter for it.

      Frankly, I never saw the reason for eSATA when SATA itself seems to be an ok connector. And if eSATA is so good... can't we just use that instead of SATA? One protocol, one connector, dammit.

      but... anyhoo... the opinion flip flop here is really ... that since discovering the SD Card slot can boot OS X off a properly formated SD card with a system installed... I don't know how I survived without it before.

    40. Re:Macbook pro by bryan1945 · · Score: 1

      Are we going to go through another round of 'Apple got rid of the floppy drive', 'Apple got rid of the serial and parallel inputs', 'Apple got rid of whatever the hell they got rid of'?

      My last computer didn't come with a cup of coffee, but I was pissed!

      --
      Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.
  3. I'm going to fire my stock broker. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    I'm going to fire my stock broker. The fucker never realized that the companies making KY Jelly and AstroGlide have huge sales increases around the time of a WWDC.

    I jest, I jest. Go Apple!

  4. Front Camera by Bicx · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Come on. Not just for video chat, but for ordinary photos. For those of you who have ever tried to take a picture of yourself with friends using an iPhone, you know my pain.

    1. Re:Front Camera by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My razr has a vid screen on the back of the phone for self photos and the like.

      Seems easier to just stick a tiny LCD on the back than move the camera around front.

    2. Re:Front Camera by Bicx · · Score: 1

      The software should not be a problem, nor should the camera. The idea is simple, and they know it. They may have just been against having two cameras, or AT&T wasn't prepared to deal with streaming video chats and Apple wasn't ready to deal with increasing the price.

    3. Re:Front Camera by CrackedButter · · Score: 1

      All the more reason for Apple to do it and get in their first. I'm not bothered either way, but Apple like to be first with things.

    4. Re:Front Camera by tyrione · · Score: 1

      No one wants to see thousands of photos of your face or your private parts.

    5. Re:Front Camera by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Uh.
      How about my Nokia N82? Or the N71 I had before that?
      What about the el-cheapo LG I had before then?

      Pretty much every 3g phone has a front facing video camera (albeit most of them are 320x200 - 640x400).

    6. Re:Front Camera by AntiRush · · Score: 2, Informative

      The Nokia N95 had a front (and rear) facing camera 2 years ago. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nokia_N95#Multimedia_Features

    7. Re:Front Camera by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LG VX7000, front-facing via rotation.

    8. Re:Front Camera by genghisjahn · · Score: 2, Informative

      The Toshiba VM-4050 had a forward facing camera. There were two screens, a small one on the outside and a larger one when you flipped it open. Res wasn't great though. http://reviews.cnet.com/cell-phones/toshiba-vm-4050-sprint/4505-6454_7-30734023.html

      --
      Sorry about the mess.
    9. Re:Front Camera by Sinning · · Score: 0

      This Phone has been around for years and has a front facing camera.

      I'm fairly sure it's not the only HTC phone with a front facing camera.

    10. Re:Front Camera by tepples · · Score: 1

      no phone in the history of the universe has had a front facing video camera

      The Nintendo DSi has a player-facing video camera. The only thing keeping it from being a SIP phone is the fact that it hasn't been cracked for homebrew yet.

    11. Re:Front Camera by Falc0n · · Score: 0

      not quite. the Samsung A610 has a camera that can be rotated both ways. Although the feature was neat, the camera is crappy and I'd trade it any day with an iPhone.

      And while candid shots of your friends might be cool, I bet 99% of people are taking pictures of OTHER things than themselves.

    12. Re:Front Camera by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The iPhone already has a camera on the back so taking pictures of your privates is NOT a problem (unless you literally are a dick-head).

    13. Re:Front Camera by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      eh? what you talking about.... we have had front facing video cameras on mobiles for years. All my phones from the past 5 years have had them, but i do live in Japan.

    14. Re:Front Camera by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no phone in the history of the universe has had a front facing video camera

      Erm... my Nokia N95 says otherwise.

    15. Re:Front Camera by cyber-vandal · · Score: 1

      My LG Viewty (KU990) has a VGA camera on the front for video calls.

    16. Re:Front Camera by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, it's hard to find friends these days

    17. Re:Front Camera by teg · · Score: 1

      no phone in the history of the universe has had a front facing video camera, and Apple itself of course doesn't have the software to utilize it.

      My Nokia N95 does, and so do many others. "Video calling" was hot when 3G was introduced here many years ago, although I've yet to see or hear of anyone using it other than for a test call when they got the phone. I just don't feel the need to hold the phone half a meter in front of me to look at another person doing the same thing.

    18. Re:Front Camera by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And my Motorola A1000 had it 5 years ago ... your point is?

    19. Re:Front Camera by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    20. Re:Front Camera by Tibor+the+Hun · · Score: 3, Funny

      Comrade, we need your documents detailing when was the last time your RDF passed inspection.

      No Phone In The Universe. EVER.

      --
      If you don't know what AltaVista is (was), get off my lawn.
    21. Re:Front Camera by teg · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The software should not be a problem, nor should the camera. The idea is simple, and they know it. They may have just been against having two cameras, or AT&T wasn't prepared to deal with streaming video chats and Apple wasn't ready to deal with increasing the price.

      Or maybe they just thought about how much it would be used.... when was the last time you did a video phone call with your cell? The whole usage scenario screams "awkward". Unlike your screen which sits in front of you, that's not where you normal have your cell phone when speaking.

    22. Re:Front Camera by mcsqueak · · Score: 1

      no phone in the history of the universe has had a front facing video camera

      My nearly 3 year old Samsung t809 has a camera on top that can be swiveled to face the front or back. It can also record video. Doh. Picture: http://www.66mobile.com/phones/samsung/Samsung-D820-T809-T-Mobile.html/

    23. Re:Front Camera by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no phone in the history of the universe has had a front facing video camera, and Apple itself of course doesn't have the software to utilize it.

      Untrue. The Samsung i700 had a swivel-mounted camera that could face either direction, and the display flipped as needed. I didn't find it especially useful, and subsequent models (i730 and i760) eliminated the feature.

      http://www.mobiletechreview.com/samsung_i700.htm

    24. Re:Front Camera by Tony+Hoyle · · Score: 3, Informative

      no phone in the history of the universe has had a front facing video camera

      Except almost every other freaking 3G phone ever made.

    25. Re:Front Camera by pohl · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I personally think that such a feature sounds great at first, but people will quickly become disenchanted with it. First and foremost, because where you hold a phone to view the screen will give you a particularly unflattering angle of yourself: up your nose. Even relatively fit people are going to look like they have a double-chin when they're looking down at their phone. Ever notice all the myspace kiddies that take pics of themselves from a high angle? People say they want video chat on a phone, but I say "be careful what you ask for; you might get it".

      --

      The "cue the foo posts in 3, 2, 1..." posts will commence with no subsequent foo posts in 3, 2, 1...

    26. Re:Front Camera by jandrese · · Score: 3, Informative

      The Nokia N79 would like to have a word with you.

      Most carriers don't want front facing cameras because then people will start asking for video conferencing and that goes against the philosophy of "If the customer buys a data plan, it must be as hard to use and crappy as possible to drive them back to the insanely profitable SMS and MMS instead". Video Conferencing doesn't qualify, it uses way too many bits unless you really work hard to make it near unusable.

      --

      I read the internet for the articles.
    27. Re:Front Camera by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no phone in the history of the universe has had a front facing video camera

      False.

      Sony Ericsson phones (that are distributed in countries other than the US) do video chat. Just google "sony ericsson video call" and it brings up:

    28. Re:Front Camera by ACalcutt · · Score: 0

      A friend of mine has a flip phone that you can change the camera from pointing out to pointing in.... I have no idea what kind of phone it is, but here is another one that the camera can be front or back facing ( http://www.mobilewhack.com/images/philip-videophone.jpg )

    29. Re:Front Camera by lucifuge31337 · · Score: 1

      no phone in the history of the universe has had a front facing video camera,

      If you close a razr (at least a v3) it works. Yes, your display screen is now the crappy little outside screen, but it does function.

      --
      Do not fold, spindle or mutilate.
    30. Re:Front Camera by rumith · · Score: 2, Informative

      no phone in the history of the universe has had a front facing video camera

      You are wrong: Nokia N82 has both a 5Mpixel camera at back and a 352x288 front cam specifically for video calls.

    31. Re:Front Camera by koiransuklaa · · Score: 2, Interesting

      no phone in the history of the universe has had a front facing video camera

      Maybe tone down the hyperbole? The Samsung z500 that I bought in 2006 had one already (and it was used already, no idea how old the model is).

      The camera was total crap of course and I still don't see the point of mobile video calls, but that's beside the point: front facing video cameras have been done for quite a while.

    32. Re:Front Camera by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      Dammit...why no tethering in the US with ATT?

      Also, just noticed when reading one of their pages...they say when listening to music, that to answer a call, you just 'pinch' your headset microphone...?!?

      Looking at the picture, looks like they're forcing you to use that same weird headset for the shuffle. So, I lose functionality if I use my better Shure SE530 earphones?

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    33. Re:Front Camera by karnal · · Score: 1

      I believe the Sprint Touch Pro has a front facing camera (HTC.) My Fuze doesn't but it's essentially the same hardware otherwise.

      --
      Karnal
    34. Re:Front Camera by linhares · · Score: 1

      Apple wasn't ready to deal with increasing the price.

      Quick somebody mod this funny

    35. Re:Front Camera by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no phone in the history of the universe has had a front facing video camera

      Except almost every other freaking 3G phone ever made.

      Nokias first 3g phone didnt have one. Apperently they "forgot" it, actually came out with this lame mirror as a workaround.

    36. Re:Front Camera by Dragon+of+the+Pants · · Score: 1

      LG Shine.

    37. Re:Front Camera by Stevecrox · · Score: 3, Informative

      Most 3G phones have front facing camera's. When 3 (a UK Mobile phone company) first started all of their LG and Motorolla phones had front facing VGA cameras so you could make video calls, interestingly the first 3G Nokia they sold didn't support video calling. Some Nokia Offeringswith a front facing camer
      Nokia N Series
      Nokia 5800, two cameras on this baby
      The Sept 2006 released Nokia N95 which has two cameras and a tilt sensor
      The 2006 E63

      Sony Ericsson
      The 2006 P990
      2006 Sony Ericsson with a full VGA Camera on the front
      CyberShot phone!

      Motorola
      The Razor

      Your right obiviously no one has put a video camera in the front of a phone along with one in the back so users can take decent phones with one and make video calls with the other. Thats crazyness! My nokia 5800 will let me choose which camera (back or front) to use to take video/photos and which camera to use for calling, its certainly a new innovative feature.

    38. Re:Front Camera by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which phones would those be? Does the Pre? Does any Blackberry? I can think of a couple of pure consumer level ones that do, but most do not. One big caveat: with my old flip phone (I don't know about others, this was a Motorola E850) you could close the phone and use the front screen to aim at yourself.

    39. Re:Front Camera by Ender_Wiggin · · Score: 1

      Pinch your microphone, or press Answer on the screen. Some non-apple vendors add the microphone on the headphone wire as well.

    40. Re:Front Camera by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wish to be a little girl.

      Fixed that for you.

    41. Re:Front Camera by E+IS+mC(Square) · · Score: 1

      There have been MANY phones with front facing camera FFS.

      Are you a douchebag or just another apple user?

      But don't worry. You are not alone. Wait till the apple army with modpoints arrive here.

    42. Re:Front Camera by SocietyoftheFist · · Score: 1

      On my old sch-670 I could flip it closed and see myself in the external screen while taking a picture.

    43. Re:Front Camera by ShecoDu · · Score: 1

      But the front camera is just a lousy VGA camera used for video calls.

      Not the kind of picture quality you'd like when taking pictures of yourself with your friends.

    44. Re:Front Camera by mgblst · · Score: 1

      Yeah,wow, my Motorola E1000 had two as well, 5 years ago.

    45. Re:Front Camera by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Impressive... you're suffering from serious *whoooosh* here.

    46. Re:Front Camera by pjr.cc · · Score: 1

      Not sure if thats sarcasm or not.. but...

      One of the first phones I remember having a front-facing camera was the NEC e606 (http://www.gsmarena.com/nec_e606-481.php) which was released when Australia first went to 3g (late 2003). It was one of 3-5 phones available at the time, all with front-facing cameras..

      Prior to that, Japan had a 2g/3g variant in about 2001 that also produced alot of front-facing camera phones.

    47. Re:Front Camera by pjr.cc · · Score: 1

      couldn't agree more.

      Back when i first signed up on a 3g network (2003), we got 30 minutes of free video talk per month and this is still a part of my plan today...

      I think i've used roughly 10 minutes (since 2003).

      Its really not that fantastic.

    48. Re:Front Camera by CoolMoDee · · Score: 1

      I dunno, my old Docomo Foma F703i had a front face camera. Could use it to do video calls etc...and this was a few years ago. Didn't really use it that often though.

      --
      Jisho - A Japanese English German Russian French Dictionary for the rest of us.
    49. Re:Front Camera by rinoid · · Score: 1

      Holy cow! First I saw a 5 digit /. user, now a 3 DIGIT USER!

      The WWDC brings them out yo.

      ----

      Both of the wise users made excellent points. The oligopoly is here to shaft you.

    50. Re:Front Camera by WCguru42 · · Score: 1

      Apple has been selling headphones with built-in microphones that can be squeezed to answer calls for a while now. Unlike the new shuffle, there's still that nifty screen so you can still use your own cans. I'm saying this under the assumption that Apple hasn't shut down the on screen answer button when you have headphones connected.

      --
      "Educate the mind but never at the expense of the soul."~Blessed Basil Moreau
    51. Re:Front Camera by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean being a dickhead and owning an iPhone aren't synonymous?

    52. Re:Front Camera by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even relatively fit people are going to look like they have a double-chin when they're looking down at their phone.

      appl is well aware of the iphone producing double chins and that is why they invented the unDoubleChin-function (pat. pending)

      in that sense appl fixed your double chin for you ... but only on the iphone, in real life you have to live w/i!

    53. Re:Front Camera by dwater · · Score: 1

      Wish I had mod points - that's hilarious :)

      --
      Max.
    54. Re:Front Camera by dwater · · Score: 1

      ...as do many Nokia phones...eg the N70...announced 27 April 2005, and the N95 too.

      --
      Max.
    55. Re:Front Camera by Vlado · · Score: 1

      no phone in the history of the universe has had a front facing video camera, and Apple itself of course doesn't have the software to utilize it.

      As it was pointed out, pretty much every 3G phone does have a front facing video camera. Primarily, since initially that was the main reason for the phones to be 3G in the first place. Videotelephony, anyone?

      But if we take things a bit more to the extreme, there have been a few phones, that actually had cameras that could twist around, so you could take a picture of something in front of you or of yourself.
      http://www.gsmarena.com/nokia_n90-pictures-1155.php

    56. Re:Front Camera by mdwh2 · · Score: 1

      We need a Poe's Law for Apple...

    57. Re:Front Camera by Moofie · · Score: 1

      Dammit...why no tethering in the US with ATT?

      Because AT&T sucks.

      So, I lose functionality if I use my better Shure SE530 earphones?

      No, you just don't get the functionality of having a button on your headphones if you don't have a button on your headphones. If you wanted headphones with a button on them, I suggest that buying headphones with a button on them would have been a good idea.

      Since your earphones don't seem to have a microphone, I'm not shure (HAH!) why you're complaining...

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    58. Re:Front Camera by Moofie · · Score: 1

      Oh, hey! And you're in luck!

      http://store.shure.com/store/shure/en_US/DisplayProductDetailsPage/productID.105498400

      Shure will sell you a mic that has a button on it for your headphones. Problem solved.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
  5. Is this the new style? by Dotren · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Posting these minute-by-minute conference updates and them appearing on the page backwards?

    It seems like I just read some E3 updates laid out in the same manner last week and now I wonder if that article was from Endgadget as well or if this is becoming a common practice.

    1. Re:Is this the new style? by sexconker · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's all the rage now.

      Gotta get that "OMG I HEARD THIS ON TWITTER 2 SECONDS AGO" reader to see it without scrolling.

    2. Re:Is this the new style? by jeffasselin · · Score: 1

      Apple keynotes have been reported this way for YEARS now.

      --
      If he explores all forms and substances Straight homeward to their symbol-essences; He shall not die.
    3. Re:Is this the new style? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      Keynote coverage is normally like that, so those of us who compulsively refresh the page every 30 seconds (even though there's a script doing that every minute anyway) don't have to scroll to see the latest updates. It's harder to read afterwards though, so I'd have thought that sites would reverse the order after the keynote finished.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    4. Re:Is this the new style? by Nicolay77 · · Score: 1

      But it's so easy to add a little javascript to make the page auto scroll.

      It could even remember the last seen message and scroll to the first unseen message.

      --
      We are Turing O-Machines. The Oracle is out there.
  6. Bashing Competitors by Bicx · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Has Apple been this abrasive to their competitors during the keynotes before? It was a little tacky IMO

    1. Re:Bashing Competitors by The+End+Of+Days · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Apple lives on cockiness and fanboy hive-mind reality isolation. Did you expect any different?

    2. Re:Bashing Competitors by Dotren · · Score: 1

      Seriously, I've only made it a quarter of the way through this thing and I've already come to the conclusion that they could have held this conference with no new product/feature announcements and it still would have been a huge success as long as they bashed Microsoft and Windows 7 for most of it.

      Apple is hip, and its hip to hate PC!

    3. Re:Bashing Competitors by Fred_A · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Seriously, I've only made it a quarter of the way through this thing and I've already come to the conclusion that they could have held this conference with no new product/feature announcements and it still would have been a huge success as long as they bashed Microsoft and Windows 7 for most of it.

      Apple is hip, and its hip to hate PC!

      The only Jobs presentation I've been to was for the unveiling of the NeXT and it already was like that (adjust for Windows/DOS versions).
      Since then I've never managed to look at one of those things in whole. It just looks too much like a cultist rally or something.

      --

      May contain traces of nut.
      Made from the freshest electrons.
    4. Re:Bashing Competitors by jeff4747 · · Score: 1

      Yes.

      Btw, Microsoft is similarly abrasive to it's competitors during their conferences. As is pretty much every company on the planet that holds it's own conference.

    5. Re:Bashing Competitors by The+End+Of+Days · · Score: 0, Troll

      Aww, the poor reality-isolated fanboys threw me a flamebait mod.

      I'm not the one who copied the Windows 7 taskbar into the Snow Leopard dock. Don't get upset with me. It wasn't me "starting my photocopier."

      Face it, fanboys - Apple thrives on the adversarial mentality. They can't promote themselves on merit because they have exactly the same shit as everyone else, give or take some details.

      And I own several Apple products. This isn't just some blind bullshit I'm throwing out here. I'm just not susceptible to the marketing. I don't believe owning a Mac makes me better than a Windows user, no matter how badly Steve Jobs wants me to feel that way.

    6. Re:Bashing Competitors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      YEAH! Fight the marketing! Speak the truth, brutha, on the intarwebs! I bet you don't even OWN a TV! Let's write a letter to AdBusters together!

    7. Re:Bashing Competitors by clf8 · · Score: 1

      No one remembers "Redmond, fire up your copiers" ???

      Yes, since Apple has had a resurgence they have been cocky. But hey, they make some pretty decent hardware, that works extremely well with their software and other accessory products. Microsoft's done the same.

      Is it 'appropriate'? Tough call, I think a lot of old school Apple die hards still feel like the underdog and so they enjoy bragging a bit. And Wall Street loves its brash, obnoxious characters in general.

    8. Re:Bashing Competitors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Couldn't they have Bourned their competitors instead?

    9. Re:Bashing Competitors by fermion · · Score: 1
      It is a little tacky, but deserved. Here is my problem with MS. They want to the user to buy a new machine, not the just the OS, they complicate the market by not artificially fracturing the software, and instead of gaining market share by lowering prices, they bitch and moan and set up corporate policy to force customers to spend money.

      I do believe that manufacturers should be able to sell their product in whatever form, at whatever price they wish. But if they choose a form and price that no one wants, and then they whine about is, I think that does make them look like little children that deserved to be called names. Vista is an example. It was a mistake, and the number of SKUs are insane, Do you know that MS maintains a website just to keep the consumer for being confused? Wouldn't it be simpler to have a home and business edition, and maybe have a separate deal for developers? Is there any reason why the home edition can't cost $100 and the business edition $200. I would have have paid $200 for vista. Instead I paid $150 for XP. I think a lot of rational agents are going to make the same decision. I bet a lot of ration agents are going to make the same decision unitl MS Windows 7 is $200 in full form.

      I have no doubt that MS Vista is an excellent OS, and that 7 is going to be even better. I think 7 is exactly what MS needs to put out to keep customers in line. I also know that Mac OS X does everything I need, and more, with free development tools, and I can upgrade all my machines for $50 to snow leopard. I can't even begin to think about upgrading my windows machines to 7. So MS wil continue to bitch that no one will pay the price to upgrade to the new OS, and Apple will continue to treat it like the whiny boy it is.

      --
      "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
    10. Re:Bashing Competitors by moosesocks · · Score: 1

      I've generally been an apple fan for the past few years. OS X is very simply a much better operating system than anything Microsoft's produced since Win2000 (XP eventually became acceptable with 2 1/2 service packs and Firefox), and Apple's laptops are frankly top-notch.

      However, I've kept a Windows/Ubuntu dual boot machine around for situations when those operating systems are more appropriate to the task at hand. Windows for gaming, Ubuntu for intense coding sessions or anything scientific.

      I recently installed Windows 7. Although Microsoft have done their (predictable) fair share of copying from Apple, they actually got it right for a change. The new taskbar plays off of the strengths of Apple's dock, and the 'classic' Win95-style taskbar.

      It runs well on old hardware, which for me is a huge indicator of the quality of an operating system. The fancy graphical effects don't seem to drain on the CPU too much, and degrade gracefully if your graphics card isn't up to the task. I tried it a few nights ago on an old 1.6GHz Celron machine I had lying around, and was pleasantly surprised to find that it was perfectly usable on that machine.

      There are also a few other cool bits of technology snuck in, including wireless virtualization.

      Apple do have a worthy competitor with Win7. Hopefully Snow Leopard will be a big step up from Leopard, which I've been increasingly frustrated with.

      --
      -- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
    11. Re:Bashing Competitors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

      Yes, and it's one of the reasons I refuse to buy Apple products: I don't like giving money to smug douchebags. I've only ever known two kinds of mac users: clueless old people, and smug douchebags. I mean seriously, all their commercials could start off, "Hi, I'm a PC." "And I'm a smug douchebag."

    12. Re:Bashing Competitors by someonehasmyname · · Score: 1

      Wow, I can'e believe nobody else got this.. Guess none of the real linux geeks are in the Mac threads.

      --
      Common sense is not so common.
    13. Re:Bashing Competitors by Slur · · Score: 1

      I love to bash Windows as much as the next guy, but their bashing was pretty lame. Apple has real strengths and they should emphasize them. Mac OS X and iPhone OS have great APIs and it sounds like they've done many improvements for Snow Leopard. We've known forever what Windows users have to contend with, and we don't need to hear it repeated again. Though a little Linux and NetBSD bashing would have been refreshing.

      --
      -- thinkyhead software and media
    14. Re:Bashing Competitors by illumin8 · · Score: 1

      The only Jobs presentation I've been to was for the unveiling of the NeXT and it already was like that (adjust for Windows/DOS versions).
      Since then I've never managed to look at one of those things in whole. It just looks too much like a cultist rally or something.

      To be fair, it's not that hard to find a whole lot of things about Vista to bash...

      --
      "When the president does it, that means it's not illegal." - Richard M. Nixon
    15. Re:Bashing Competitors by intheshelter · · Score: 1

      "Apple lives on cockiness" + " which is justifiably based on upon the superiority of their products."

      There, fixed that for you.

    16. Re:Bashing Competitors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seriously, I've only made it a quarter of the way through this thing and I've already come to the conclusion that they could have held this conference with no new product/feature announcements and it still would have been a huge success as long as they bashed Microsoft and Windows 7 for most of it.

      The only Jobs presentation I've been to was for the unveiling of the NeXT and it already was like that (adjust for Windows/DOS versions). Since then I've never managed to look at one of those things in whole. It just looks too much like a cultist rally or something.

      I've never personally been to a Steve Jobs rally, but a prior conference address that stuck out to me was his return to Apple. In it, he doesn't unashamedly bash Microsoft, in fact, he states that Apple needs all the help it can get (sounding less like a cult leader and more like a pragmatist to me). I haven't seen all of the conferences since, but I've not seen Steve stir up anti MS furor in the few I did catch. True, he did make some comparisons with products from competitors, but I wouldn't look at them as cultist rally's. Oh - here's the link to the 1997 Macworld in which for a small part of it, he has Bill Gates on the big screen addressing the crowd. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxOp5mBY9IY

      I don't necessarily doubt that in the early 90's, he may have been more into unabridged MS bashing, but times have changed since, at least in this decade from Steve himself. To be fair, I haven't seen this years Macworld, thus the current speaker could very well be taking a page from earlier history and performing needless mudslinging, and if that's the case, I don't think I'd like to see it TBH.

  7. yeh, too bad... by inerlogic · · Score: 5, Insightful

    they're still married to AT&T....

    1. Re:yeh, too bad... by Darkness404 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Not only that but it seemed like "Oh we are releasing a new feature! (not on AT&T)". I mean, just look at it MMS is going to be on every phone (but not AT&T that will be later in the summer) You also get tethering that really works (not on AT&T), etc.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    2. Re:yeh, too bad... by caerwyn · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I can't really believe that Apple is any happier about that situation than its customers are. I'm wondering if we're seeing the beginning of the end of that exclusivity.

      --
      The ringing of the division bell has begun... -PF
    3. Re:yeh, too bad... by Darkness404 · · Score: 1

      I don't really understand why they wanted exclusivity especially with as terrible of carrier as AT&T. Really, if they opened up they would lead and the rest of the cell carriers would follow with everything so long as they made the specs available such as with Visual Voicemail.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    4. Re:yeh, too bad... by MBCook · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I liked how AT&T got booed twice. Once for no tethering, once for no MMS until July (or whatever).

      I love my iPhone, but it's amazing that after basically saving AT&T from irrelevance, they still don't get it. How hard could it POSSIBLY BE to have MMS support available on day 1? Only every other phone on their network supports it.

      --
      Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
    5. Re:yeh, too bad... by caerwyn · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Before the original iPhone launched, the other carriers wouldn't make the investment for things like Visual Voicemail; only AT&T and only with exclusivity.

      Now, of course, it's an entirely different story- I'm willing to be that Sprint and Verizon would jump through hoops to get at the iPhone, and I can only imagine the AT&T stock drop the moment the end of exclusivity is announced.

      I'm also betting that Verizon has been kicking itself for the past few years...

      --
      The ringing of the division bell has begun... -PF
    6. Re:yeh, too bad... by iron-kurton · · Score: 1

      Don't forget, Apple was a newcomer to the cellphone market only two years ago, so they didn't have the clout to be "open." Exclusivity was a way to get their foot in the door and build a reputation first. The current contract expires soon (2010?), so then expect hoardes of Apple fanboys to bitch and moan about how terrible X is, or how 3G doesn't work with carrier Y, etc. (Besides, when have you ever heard the words "open" and "Apple" in the same sentence? Yeah, I got karma to burn, too)

      --
      Change is inevitable, except from a vending machine -- Robert C. Gallagher
    7. Re:yeh, too bad... by cortesoft · · Score: 1

      Well I don't think it is too difficult to figure out why they have an exclusive deal with AT&T... because AT&T pays them a bunch of money (http://apple20.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2008/06/19/what-att-pays-apple-for-the-iphone/)

      I am sure part of the agreement to get AT&T to subsidize the phone that much was to give them an exclusive deal. The question is whether it is still worth it for Apple, and it might be no now.

    8. Re:yeh, too bad... by Globe199 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Probably because AT&T offered the most money! It's all about money. Apple and AT&T are in business to MAKE MONEY. Private companies want to MAKE MONEY. Every decision they consider and every project they undertake is designed to MAKE MONEY.

      Sorry, I'm not picking on you. Just irritated -- people stamp their feet when companies do things they don't like, forgetting of course that these companies are in business to MAKE BLOODY MONEY.

      Why do you think Apple is so against replaceable batteries in their phones? Why don't they allow storage cards? It's about MONEY.

    9. Re:yeh, too bad... by afidel · · Score: 1

      MONEY, they get some (large) percentage of the monthly contract for exclusivity.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    10. Re:yeh, too bad... by Stevecrox · · Score: 1

      "MMS is going to be on every phone"????

      The £25 7210 I bought of O2 more than three years ago had MMS, that phone was bought because I'd continually dropped my O2 XDA Mini S onto concrete and it was being repaired, the Nokia 7650 (era 2002) had MMS messaging, low end phones have had MMS messaging from around 2002 onwards*.

      It's not a case of something being "up and coming" its existed on low end GSM phones as standard for more than half a decade. The fact the iPhone didn't support was unusual and amusing.

      It's like selling "cut,copy and paste" as revolutionary, the Orange m500 I purchased in 2004 (running windows Mobile 2003) had cut, copy and paste. My Nokia 7610 (not sure about my old Nokia 7650) supported cut,copy and paste.

      Don't get me wrong I like the iPhone, because of the iPhone my Nokia 5800 was designed and sold. But can we please stop using it as a reference for phone features since it has been behind (feature wise) since release.

      *I understand US phone carriers might have been disabling the features but it certainly isn't new.

    11. Re:yeh, too bad... by rsmith-mac · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Barring the fact that Verizon uses CMDA and not GSM for a moment, Verizon would still have to significantly change their operating policies to hope to get the iPhone. As it stands their favorite activity it to neuter any and every phone they offer, so that it only offers a handful of features Verizon approves of. If Verizon got the iPhone, they would be chomping at the bit to disable Bluetooth, turn-by-turn directions, app updates over cellular, etc. This is in stark contrast to how Apple likes to do things, and Apple would never stand for it.

      Sprint would probably be happy to get the iPhone, but they're consistently about 2 inches from death so I'm not sure Apple wants such a partner. That leaves T-Mobile, the only 3G provider with even worse coverage than all the rest. The iPhone would likely crush their underbuilt system in a single blow, not unlike what it did to AT&T.

      The moral of the story is that all of the carriers suck. But for what Apple wants to do, AT&T likely sucks the least.

    12. Re:yeh, too bad... by samkass · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Apple has never been about the checkbox list of features. There are a lot of other vendors willing to load a gadget full of every button, feature, and gizmo under the sun, and there is a definite market for those devices among a certain crowd. But many Apple customers definitely find value in the deliberation and design Apple puts into their products, and that takes time. I've had an iPhone 3G for almost a year and it's one of the most useful devices I've ever owned. The iPhone 3GS appears to be even better. I don't see the competition light years ahead in usability and integration into my life, so I don't see any reason to switch. Needless to say, I wouldn't switch over lack of MMS.

      Besides, why do folks take the most trivial part of the huge list of features and try to use that as a claim of how backwards the iPhone is? If you love your Android great! More power to you. I like not only the iPhone, but the iPhone ecosystem and I find a lot of utility in it.

      --
      E pluribus unum
    13. Re:yeh, too bad... by sglewis100 · · Score: 1

      I don't really understand why they wanted exclusivity especially with as terrible of carrier as AT&T. Really, if they opened up they would lead and the rest of the cell carriers would follow with everything so long as they made the specs available such as with Visual Voicemail.

      Although nobody knows the exact numbers, I've heard stories of $250 to $525 per activation paid to Apple by AT&T. It's quite possible no other carrier in the US would touch the specific amount of money. Exclusivity is a LOT of revenue to Apple. It was worth it for AT&T too, which was in danger of following Sprint down the path of huge churn, Once that cow's been milked dry, Apple will let the deal expire and then go after mass volume.

    14. Re:yeh, too bad... by saleenS281 · · Score: 1

      I would imagine they're trying to leverage it against AT&T. "You get a smaller cut of the profits, and we might be able to get that MMS working faster".

    15. Re:yeh, too bad... by BitZtream · · Score: 0

      Simple. Its not actually MMS, its some other protocol that talks to special servers that AT&T hasn't rolled out. Just like visual voice mail.

      Of course, even if it is something else, they should have had it rolled out in time unless Apple just turned over the software too them, if carriers outside the US are supporting it than we can just assume AT&T is trying to figure out how to bill more for it.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    16. Re:yeh, too bad... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >Only every other phone on their network supports it.

      So maybe, just maybe, its the phone?

    17. Re:yeh, too bad... by jocknerd · · Score: 1

      And it wasn't even AT&T. Apple signed on with Cingular before AT&T bought Cingular out.

    18. Re:yeh, too bad... by moosesocks · · Score: 1

      Verizon Wireless is the closest thing I've seen to a company that actually loathes its customers.

      It's gotten to the point where a visit to the Verizon Store to sort out a plan change, or to correct one of their many billing errors is considerably less pleasant and straightforward than a visit to the DMV. I'd go as far as to say that the quality of the customer service at my local DMV is considerably better than anything I've ever experienced from Verizon. Calling them on the phone is similarly an exercise in pain and frustration.

      But alas. Verizon is the only carrier with good reception in my area. The major wireless carriers all need to be heavily regulated or sued into oblivion by their customers. Mandatory contracts remove any and all competition from the industry.

      --
      -- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
    19. Re:yeh, too bad... by lymond01 · · Score: 1

      Tethering usually incurs an extra $30/month "tethering plan" on TOP of whatever data plan you already have. I helped faculty members on both Sprint and Verizon. Sprint didn't warn the person they would be charged an exorbitant amount for that 10 minutes of unplanned tethering. Verizon at least had the decency to display a website that stopped you unless you signed up for the $30/month plan. The first guy got nailed for $80 worth of data transfer -- for checking email.

      I can see why you'd want to tether your laptop. iPhone is a pretty nice portable computer though.

    20. Re:yeh, too bad... by SashaMan · · Score: 1

      I bought one of the original iPhones when it came out, and I would stay it is still by far the best consumer electronics device I've owned. A big reason I like it so much is that for the past two years I've been able to get the vast majority of useful new features for free due to the OS updates. I think of all the features that I actually USE on a regular basis that didn't exist when I first bought the phone, like the music store, the app store, cell triangulation, and all the functionality provided by the apps, and I'd say this is the first phone I've owned that didn't start to feel outdated right after I bought it.

      In fact, I've never even really felt that compelled to upgrade because, for me, the majority of the functionality in the new phones is in the OS vs. the hardware.

    21. Re:yeh, too bad... by caerwyn · · Score: 1

      Interestingly enough, I've actually had the exact opposite experience. I made the switch to AT&T a little bit after the iPhone 3G came out, but with some reluctance due to the carrier change- I was actually quite happy with the quality of service (both cell and support) that I received from them.

      --
      The ringing of the division bell has begun... -PF
    22. Re:yeh, too bad... by caerwyn · · Score: 1

      I wasn't aware of this. Do you have a source? (Not that I don't trust your information, I'm merely curious about additional information.)

      That must have been interesting during the buyout, then.

      --
      The ringing of the division bell has begun... -PF
    23. Re:yeh, too bad... by jonwil · · Score: 2, Interesting

      A number of people who are beta testing 3.0 (officially or unofficially) who were able to convince AT&T to turn on MMS (before AT&T and/or apple put a stop to it) and it worked perfectly fine. So the only excuse is that AT&T hasn't figured out how much they should charge iPhone customers for MMS.

      Or maybe AT&T bought the el-cheapo option when they installed their MMS kit and it cant handle all those new iPhones suddenly sending all those MMSs...

    24. Re:yeh, too bad... by SwabTheDeck · · Score: 1

      How hard could it POSSIBLY BE to have MMS support available on day 1? Only every other phone on their network supports it.

      I'd say that it's most likely the fact that AT&T is trying to find a new and unusual way to gouge people by altering their MMS price plants. They're probably just taking some extra time to optimize their rape-to-profit ratio.

    25. Re:yeh, too bad... by Justus · · Score: 1

      Apple announced its partnership with Cingular in January 2007, but Wikipedia lists the acquisition by AT&T as occurring in December 2006.

      It's likely that Apple was negotiating with Cingular before the AT&T deal was finalized; however, they were probably aware that the merger was going through, one way or another.

    26. Re:yeh, too bad... by IntlHarvester · · Score: 1

      There was no buy out. SBC bought AT&T and then rebranded Cingular to AT&T Wireless. Same management throughout.

      --
      Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.
    27. Re:yeh, too bad... by anagama · · Score: 1

      Before Apple, shared calendaring in the linux world sucked or was very expensive. Get the source for Darwin Calendar Server here:
      http://trac.calendarserver.org/
      Or the Deb:
      http://packages.debian.org/stable/python/calendarserver

      If it's on Debian, it's pretty darn open.

      --
      What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
    28. Re:yeh, too bad... by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1
      It's also not about usability anymore, it seems. I discovered last night that one of my friends with an iPhone had copied my phone number down incorrectly. No problem; I had my phone with me so I just selected my vCard and said 'send via bluetooth'. A basic feature that my last three phones have supported (and I only upgrade my phone every 2-3 years, always buying cheap ones). Only, it turns out the iPhone doesn't support Bluetooth ObEx. WTF? Desktop OS X does; I can send a vCard from my phone to my Mac and it gets added to my address book automatically (after prompting me to confirm, of course). I can use OS X's built-in Bluetooth file browser to copy files between my phone and my Mac without a cable.

      For years, I've been able to use my phone as a Bluetooth modem from OS X with almost no configuration; just run through a quick wizard and then it's one click to connect to the Internet wherever my Mac is, as long as my phone is within a few metres.

      Before the Leopard update intentionally crippled it, I could send SMS from Address Book via my phone and get SMS from the phone in the same way. I could dial my phone from Address Book too, and get an on-screen display of who was calling whenever it rang. No idea why they disabled this functionality.

      It's sad that a cheap Nokia phone integrates better with OS X than the iPhone, and used to integrate even better before they intentionally crippled OS X by removing features the iPhone didn't support.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    29. Re:yeh, too bad... by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      How do they even know that you're tethering? From the provider's perspective, it's just data. Whether it's rendered on the phone, or sent via bluetooth is something only the device knows. I've used my phone as a modem lots of times, even though my contract doesn't officially allow it. As long as I keep within the bandwidth caps, my provider has never complained (and if I go over, they just charge me more).

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    30. Re:yeh, too bad... by dintech · · Score: 1

      How hard could it POSSIBLY BE to have MMS support available on day 1?

      At up to $1000 per megabyte, you'd think they would sort it out pretty quickly...

    31. Re:yeh, too bad... by lymond01 · · Score: 1

      That's a good question, but they definitely knew. I wonder if it was the browser headers -- knowing that it's not a mobile browser for example.

  8. So no iPod Touch refresh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    So, no iPod Touch refresh?
    Just a software update?

    Very disappointing for those of use unwilling to cozy up to AT&T.
    Too expensive. No real coverage in my area.

    1. Re:So no iPod Touch refresh? by Darkness404 · · Score: 1

      Well, really there isn't anything other than the speed upgrade that the iPod Touch would have that the new iPhone has. Tethering, camera upgrades, etc. Wouldn't really work for the iPod Touch.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    2. Re:So no iPod Touch refresh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      True, you have a point.

      I was hoping for more memory/price drop [FN1] and maybe a built-in mic (voice memos, VoIP).

      [FN1]
      If the memory got bumped to 64Mb, then the 32Mb's price would drop.

    3. Re:So no iPod Touch refresh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Touch had the fastest processor of them all up to today.

    4. Re:So no iPod Touch refresh? by ohcrapitssteve · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'm smack in the middle of the Philly metro area, and apparently, AT&T isn't offering coverage enough to suit the features of this phone to me either. Or NYC metro. Or anywhere in America, for that matter, at least for a while. MMS and tethering have been around for years and years, but one won't be ready at launch, and the other was totally glanced over and for now appears delayed without mention of availability time-frame.

  9. Re:First post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    HAHAHAHAHAH! You FAIL. Second place is first loser!

    Now you will be modded redundant or overrated for NOTHING! Kick yourself immediately. Self-flagellate for imagining such a dirty thought such as the coveted frist psot, which you hamhandedly failed to grasp! It slipped through your entangled fingers like the wayward semen you try to hold so that it won't dribble down your nuts and onto the towel laid across your office chair!

    You fail. Now the entire collective consciousness of Slashdot will remember you as a chump, a sham. You will be ostracised and blacklisted with the negative karma as doled out, ladled onto you, by hordes of angry homosexuals. How dare you deface an Apple discussion with your vile excrement. See that pile above boy? Huh? I shove your face into it so that you will not poop on my forum again.

    You, sir, are banished forever. Go to Digg with your tale between your legs lest you soil this proud carpet again!

  10. OpenCL != OpenGL by adam.dorsey · · Score: 5, Informative

    FTA: and OpenCL a new open graphics standard

    Not quite.
    ...a framework for writing programs that execute across heterogeneous platforms consisting of CPUs, GPUs, and other processors.

    OpenCL is like CUDA, but supposed to be more open along the lines of OpenGL, hence the name. The same guys who manage OpenGL (Khronos) manage OpenCL as well. You could probably use it to do graphics, but that would be stupid.

    --
    You are still innocent until proven guilty. What's changed is what they do to innocent people. - notnAP, #26891325
    1. Re:OpenCL != OpenGL by jeffb+(2.718) · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      I hope they do a better job supporting this framework than they've done with Java.

    2. Re:OpenCL != OpenGL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      FTA: and OpenCL a new open graphics standard

      Not quite. ...a framework for writing programs that execute across heterogeneous platforms consisting of CPUs, GPUs, and other processors.

      OpenCL is like CUDA, but supposed to be more open along the lines of OpenGL, hence the name. The same guys who manage OpenGL (Khronos) manage OpenCL as well. You could probably use it to do graphics, but that would be stupid.

      Why would it be so stupid? OpenGL sucks for doing specialized graphics work; it's designed to be a noisy, triangle-pushing machine, not for Photoshop quality images in non-realtime. OpenCL fits the bill as the ultimate photo studio accelerator more so than any other API does at the moment.

      OpenCL might have been designed to be a generalized compute API, but 9/10 of the apps that immediately use it in the first few months will be graphical applications (Photoshop & imitators, maybe Adobe's Flash), with the 10th being someone's Big Budget sound studio app (Reason/Live/etc). It will be months before anyone has general utility of the API.

    3. Re:OpenCL != OpenGL by slyn · · Score: 1

      Though your dig against Apple for their slow to come Java updates is not unfounded, Apple won't be controlling OpenCL. You don't even need to read TFA or TFwiki, your parent poster says it.

      OpenCL is like CUDA, but supposed to be more open along the lines of OpenGL, hence the name. The same guys who manage OpenGL (Khronos) manage OpenCL as well. You could probably use it to do graphics, but that would be stupid.

      Apple may have started and pushed the standard, but they aren't in charge of it any longer.

    4. Re:OpenCL != OpenGL by adam.dorsey · · Score: 1

      That is true, I was thinking more of 3D graphics/replacement for OpenGL like the summary seemed to imply. OpenCL would be really awesome for stuff like Photoshop, video transcoding, etc, definitely.

      --
      You are still innocent until proven guilty. What's changed is what they do to innocent people. - notnAP, #26891325
    5. Re:OpenCL != OpenGL by SanityInAnarchy · · Score: 1

      From what I understand, sound studio apps really, really don't need specialized hardware -- CPUs are more than fast enough.

      Photoshop, I'll give you. Flash has sucked for performance for a long time, and I doubt it'll be able to get much out of this that it hasn't out of OpenGL or just sane programming over the last decade.

      --
      Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
    6. Re:OpenCL != OpenGL by jeffb+(2.718) · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Though your dig against Apple for their slow to come Java updates is not unfounded, Apple won't be controlling OpenCL. You don't even need to read TFA or TFwiki, your parent poster says it.

      Precisely. Remember, they didn't "control" Java, either.

      Remember when Steve said that OS X was going to be the "best Java platform on the planet"? Well, there may have been some interval in which you could make that case. But if you're trying to run JOGL on a 2008 MacBook, or Eclipse under Java 6, or anything at all under Java 7, you tell me how well it's working out for you.

      I've been a Mac user since 1985, and an OS X user since 2000. Still am. But Apple are building a pretty consistent track record of throwing their weight behind an emerging (or, in the case of Java, "established") standard, proclaiming their superior support, and then losing interest and wandering off in another direction.

      They don't always do so, of course. I particularly hope they don't pull this trick with OpenCL, for a variety of reasons.

    7. Re:OpenCL != OpenGL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's really not so much about need, as it is about convenience and availability. Newer GPUs are general enough to greatly speed up the slowest and single most important operation that most sound apps run into: the Fast Fourier Transform. Essentially, it can take your desktop audio studio application and offload the biggest chunk of its filtering load straight to the GPU's hundreds of processors.

      The guys that do still have hardware-based accelerators (ProTools, I'm looking at you) will have a very hard time justifying them with OpenCL on the playing field.

    8. Re:OpenCL != OpenGL by beelsebob · · Score: 1

      It wouldn't be stupid at all to use OpenCL for graphics. It's shaders, only much much more general. This lets you do all sorts of fun stuff with it (like for example, see the many CUDA real time ray tracers).

    9. Re:OpenCL != OpenGL by Midnight+Thunder · · Score: 2, Informative

      OpenCL is like CUDA, but supposed to be more open along the lines of OpenGL, hence the name. The same guys who manage OpenGL (Khronos) manage OpenCL as well. You could probably use it to do graphics, but that would be stupid.

      The relationship is: OpenCL is like CUDA, as it achieves the same goals. OpenCL is like OpenGL in that it is an open standard managed by the Khronos group. OpenCL is not a graphics processing language, but it could be used to implement graphics processing languages.

      OpenCL is a new technology, only having been announced at the end of 2008. So far, apart from Apple, only Nvidia is close to releasing OpenCL drivers.

      --
      Jumpstart the tartan drive.
    10. Re:OpenCL != OpenGL by mzs · · Score: 1

      Or even OpenGL for that matter.

    11. Re:OpenCL != OpenGL by tyrione · · Score: 1

      They're one of the major player on the board overseeing it's progress. They gave up autonomy to make it an open standard, You do give up control when others get to play.

    12. Re:OpenCL != OpenGL by tyrione · · Score: 2, Insightful

      AC is brain dead for not realizing that All Engineering & Science intensive application suites will leverage OpenCL, across all platforms.

    13. Re:OpenCL != OpenGL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Using OpenCL to do graphics would certainly not be stupid. In fact, I'd love to use OpenCL for rendering graphics. It would really speed up non-realtime rendering, so that a frame that takes several seconds (or even minutes) to render using just the CPU might render in less than a second using OpenCL. This would really benefit anyone who is rendering an animation.

    14. Re:OpenCL != OpenGL by iluvcapra · · Score: 1

      From what I understand, sound studio apps really, really don't need specialized hardware -- CPUs are more than fast enough.

      Well, as a practical matter, if you want to have 512 independent busses with sample-accurate sync and zero latency, and dozens of independent EQs and reverbs all running in RT, you'll generally need something, like Pro Tools cards with a dozen SHARCs on them, but most people don't do that, aside from the machine this message is being posted from. All that hardware to waste... Must get back to work.

      Of course, Pro Tools has a vendor-specific plugin arch where you write code that can be run on different classes of DSP hardware. The platform just loads your code onto the cards and then the CPU can forget about that audio filter... There's definitely room to grow this tech in the open platform space, and this OpenCL business looks like a good way of doing that.

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
    15. Re:OpenCL != OpenGL by BitZtream · · Score: 1

      Using it for graphics may be silly, but its generally used to crunch data to be displayed in a graphical way. Games use it too! If you're crunching large sets of complex math you're probably going to visualize the output in some sort of neat 3d interface, maybe not on one of the machines in a cluster but still for most people its going to make pretty graphics faster or neater in some way in the end.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    16. Re:OpenCL != OpenGL by ciroknight · · Score: 1

      I don't think so. Specifically: "It will be months before anyone has general utility of the API."

      And I agree with that. Science and Engineering require that applications are correct, that APIs have been tested and retested, formally verified where possible, etc. As much as it'd be great to see these APIs picked up quickly by Mathematica and the lot, it will probably be at least a year before we see it.

      The content production market can move faster because they don't require the same levels of precision and accuracy, and they generally have more coders actively working at any given time.

      --
      "Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is." G.W.Bush
    17. Re:OpenCL != OpenGL by loufoque · · Score: 1

      OpenCL is like CUDA, but supposed to be more open along the lines of OpenGL, hence the name. The same guys who manage OpenGL (Khronos) manage OpenCL as well. You could probably use it to do graphics, but that would be stupid.

      Stupid or very smart.
      What if you wanted to do rendering using a radically different method than the typical OpenGL stack? There are some nice vexel renderers in CUDA out there, some of which with global illumination.

    18. Re:OpenCL != OpenGL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      an opencl based raytracer wouldnt be too stupid

    19. Re:OpenCL != OpenGL by Wovel · · Score: 1

      Apple eventually realized what a horrible development environment Java was for desktop apps....I believe they decided it was a better idea to strongly support native development tools than trying and gain app support through Java.

    20. Re:OpenCL != OpenGL by SimonTheSoundMan · · Score: 1

      Yes "studio apps" do. High quality plugins and for low latency require external DSP processors, CPU's cannot compute the vast amounts of float and real-time calculations. GPU's on the other hand can.

      The industry choice of tracking software is Avid/Digidesign Pro Tools HD, which requires a Digidesign core system. The core system is a DSP card that sets you back at minimum £8,000 for the low end HD2 version.

      Now, if Apple's Logic Pro used OpenCL for some audio plugins, Pro Tools will really suffer as it would be hard to justify the £8k expense of the HD2.

    21. Re:OpenCL != OpenGL by tyrione · · Score: 1

      I don't think so. Specifically: "It will be months before anyone has general utility of the API." And I agree with that. Science and Engineering require that applications are correct, that APIs have been tested and retested, formally verified where possible, etc. As much as it'd be great to see these APIs picked up quickly by Mathematica and the lot, it will probably be at least a year before we see it. The content production market can move faster because they don't require the same levels of precision and accuracy, and they generally have more coders actively working at any given time.

      September 2009. OpenCL API for OS X 10.6 will hit the general market.

      Nvidia is testing their API like Apple as we converse.

      AMD/ATi are doing the same with Streams Clients and actually releasing GPGPUs with OpenCL ready.

      IBM is getting their structure in order as well.

      Smartphone Graphics leader, Imagination Technologies, is testing as well on Linux, WindowsCE and Symbian.

      This is a short list, but far from complete of what's happening.

  11. OS X updates by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 5, Informative

    Software updates saw Safari 4 launched, OS X updates including threading changes, Exchange support to mail, calendar, and address book, and OpenCL a new open graphics standard.

    To be clear, the updates to OS X referred to are features of OS X 10.6 (Snow Leopard) which will ship in September and cost $29. It is not an update to 10.5 and is not yet available outside of developer previews.

    1. Re:OS X updates by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To be clear, the updates to OS X referred to are features of OS X 10.6 (Snow Leopard) which will ship in September and cost $29. It is not an update to 10.5...

      Ahhh, but that brings up an interesting thing I noticed. They mentioned (and it states in the press release) that the $29 price is an upgrade price for owners of Leopard. No mention of 10.4 users. It almost makes me think it will be applied as an update to 10.5.

    2. Re:OS X updates by hattig · · Score: 5, Insightful

      $29 isn't a bad price.

      2007 : Vista and Mac OS X Leopard launch. Vista users talk about the high ongoing cost of Mac OS X upgrades because they occur every 18 months. Mac users say the trend is for longer gaps between OS launches, and that XP->Vista was uncharacteristically long.

      30 months later: Windows 7 and Snow Leopard launch at roughly the same time. Snow Leopard costs $29 to upgrade ($129 new). Windows 7 Home Premium: $260 (rumoured). Linux: Still free.

    3. Re:OS X updates by Macka · · Score: 1

      Expecting a vendor to support double major version upgrades in one leap is taking a big risk on your part: most OS vendors don't support this. OS X is currently at 10.5.7, so even if you're on the latest 10.4 build, a leap to 10.6 is skipping forward 9 OS X releases in one go. Something is almost guaranteed to break. My guess is that the upgrade patch from 10.4 will be to go to 10.5.x first and then jump to 10.6. Either that or reinstall.

    4. Re:OS X updates by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought major version upgrades were like 3.x.x.x to 4.x.x.x not 10.4 to 10.5.

      Maybe Apple doesn't like the thought of OSXI. Cause OSX with the big X on the welcome screen looks so much better the a big XI on the welcome screen.

      I know it is all marketing. They do not want to have to change the ads to the new number. XI doesn't look as good as X.

      and captcha : valued lol

    5. Re:OS X updates by MobyTurbo · · Score: 1

      Software updates saw Safari 4 launched, OS X updates including threading changes, Exchange support to mail, calendar, and address book, and OpenCL a new open graphics standard.

      To be clear, the updates to OS X referred to are features of OS X 10.6 (Snow Leopard) which will ship in September and cost $29. It is not an update to 10.5 and is not yet available outside of developer previews.

      Well, Safari 4 was indeed released. You shouldn't have quoted that. :-)

    6. Re:OS X updates by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      I've been looking to buy a used copy of OSX Tiger, so I can upgrade my old, old G3 iBook.

      Man, I'd not have thought it would be that hard to find old used copies for sale, nor would I have thought they would command such a high price?!?! People are wanting like $100+ for it...I was expecting an old version of the original cd/dvd install disks to be like $40 max...what's the deal with that I wonder?

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    7. Re:OS X updates by Macka · · Score: 1

      Not your fault, you're just not familiar with OS X version naming, which I'll admit is very strange compared to the rest of the industry and made no sense to me at all when I first saw it. They insist that Mac OS X should be pronounced Mac OS Ten, but it doesn't sound right when you say Mac OS Ten 10.6, so most people slip in a silent "version" and say Mac OS Ten, version 10.6. I guess after several years I just don't think about it any more.

      In any case, the "10" part of the version number appears to be fixed in concrete. I don't think they're ever going to change it. Consequently 10.4, 10.5 and 10.6 are all major upgrades. Think of them as 10.4.0, 10.5.0 and 10.6.0 with many sub versions in between.

      Why they don't version OS X the same way everyone else does I've no idea, but there you are.

    8. Re:OS X updates by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think the difference is MS doesn't urinate on their existing users quite the same way Apple does. I'm still getting support updates for my 2002 version of XP home. And I'm not aware of anything that doesn't run on it, that requires vista. Downside is I'm using XP

    9. Re:OS X updates by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

      Software updates saw Safari 4 launched, OS X updates including threading changes, Exchange support to mail, calendar, and address book, and OpenCL a new open graphics standard.

      To be clear, the updates to OS X referred to are features of OS X 10.6 (Snow Leopard) which will ship in September and cost $29. It is not an update to 10.5 and is not yet available outside of developer previews.

      Well, Safari 4 was indeed released. You shouldn't have quoted that. :-)

      I make a point of mentioning the "OS X updates" mentioned refer to something (to differentiate it from all the updates mentioned) and then someone goes and complains anyway. Some people are never happy.

    10. Re:OS X updates by TheBig1 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but I don't care about *how* the upgrade goes (whether it is an in place upgrade, archive and install, or full format / reinstall (which is what I always do anyway)). The question is whether I, as a 10.4 owner, can buy 10.6 for $29 and install it on my machine legally. For $30 I may seriously consider doing so; for the $130 that most upgrades are, there's not a chance. (That's why I am still at 10.4 - there are no killer features for me which would justify the $130 upgrade expense to 10.5).

      Cheers

    11. Re:OS X updates by MobyTurbo · · Score: 1

      I make a point of mentioning the "OS X updates" mentioned refer to something (to differentiate it from all the updates mentioned) and then someone goes and complains anyway. Some people are never happy.

      Why be happy when you can make someone else's life miserable? (Just kidding. ;-) )

    12. Re:OS X updates by BlueStraggler · · Score: 1

      Why they don't version OS X the same way everyone else does I've no idea, but there you are.

      It's a Unix, so it needs an X in the name so that the other Unix kids won't laugh at it. It was a happy coincidence that the upgrade to the Unix flavour also followed the switch from version 9, so that the X could cutely double as version 10.

      It all made perfect sense, until it was time to switch to version 11.

    13. Re:OS X updates by Kalriath · · Score: 1

      Actually, Microsoft's numbering is just as daft - Windows NT 4 was followed by Windows 2000 (NT 5), which was followed by Windows XP (NT 5.1), which was followed by Windows Vista (NT 6) and so on. You will note that 2000 and XP, which were pretty much light years apart, attracted only a .1 version upgrade, much like an OS X upgrade.

      --
      For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
    14. Re:OS X updates by hattig · · Score: 1

      Wow, troll for making a valid point that this upgrade price is going to look seriously good in comparison to the price of Windows 7? The vast majority of Mac users are running Leopard (25m active Mac users in 2007, 75m in 2009, therefore at least 2/3rds use Leopard) so will experience this cheap upgrade price and 4/5ths will probably bite.

      I also got the new price wrong - it's $169 but includes iWork and iLife 2009, i.e., it brings Tiger users bang up to date across the board. A good decision by Apple, and it's not a bad price.

      I still fail to see where the troll is, seriously.

    15. Re:OS X updates by Bill_the_Engineer · · Score: 2, Informative

      To be clear, the updates to OS X referred to are features of OS X 10.6 (Snow Leopard) which will ship in September and cost $29. It is not an update to 10.5 and is not yet available outside of developer previews.

      To further clarify your clarification. Safari 4 for OS X was released today for OS X 10.5. It popped up on my Software update app.

      --
      These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
    16. Re:OS X updates by DJRumpy · · Score: 1

      Apple announced that Snow Leopard will be shipped in September and will cost $29. The five-license Family Pack will cost $49. Those purchasing new Macs between June 8 and December 26, 2009 will be able to get Snow Leopard for $9.95.

      For those looking to upgrade to the latest version of Mac OS X and iLife at the same time, the Mac Box Set with Snow Leopard, iLife '09, and iWork '09 will cost $169, with a Family Pack priced at $229.

      Apple is packaging Snow Leopard as an "upgrade" for Leopard users, which explains the $29 price (previous versions of Mac OS X have retailed for $129)

      Source Link

    17. Re:OS X updates by DJRumpy · · Score: 1

      Odd that they modded the above post as a troll. It wasn't snarky at all or worded in an inflammatory way.

      I would have modded it insightful or at least informative.

    18. Re:OS X updates by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      $29 isn't a bad price.

      2007

      29 bucks for a service pack strikes me as steep, but whatever.

    19. Re:OS X updates by MojoStan · · Score: 1

      Snow Leopard costs $29 to upgrade ($129 new). Windows 7 Home Premium: $260 (rumoured).

      Wow, troll for making a valid point that this upgrade price is going to look seriously good in comparison to the price of Windows 7?

      I still fail to see where the troll is, seriously.

      I'm guessing it's where you compare Snow Leopard's $29 upgrade-from-Leopard price to your uncited, rumoured $260 price for Windows 7 Home Premium. You don't need to rediculously inflate the price of a Windows upgrade or compare a relatively small OS X update to a comparably large Windows update.

      Upgrade prices for "home" versions of Windows are typically around $100. Also, Windows upgrade pricing eligibility applies to the two previous versions of Windows. In this case, Windows XP (released 2002) users are eligible for Windows 7 upgrade pricing. OS X Tiger (released 2005) users are not eligible for Snow Leopard's $29 upgrade price.

      Also, the $29 upgrade from Leopard to Snow Leopard is more comparable to 2 free Windows Service Packs and some free API updates (e.g. DirectX, .NET Framework). The upgrade from Vista to Windows 7 is more comparable to a typical $129 upgrade between OS X point releases (Snow Leopard is much less than a typical point release). The upgrade from XP to Windows 7 (same upgrade price) is considerably bigger than a typcial OS X point release.

      --
      TO START
      PRESS ANY KEY

      Where's the 'ANY' key? I see Esk, Kitarl, and Pig-Up...

    20. Re:OS X updates by IKnwThePiecesFt · · Score: 1

      You leave out what is probably the most relevant and humorous note about that, which is that Windows 7 is in fact Windows 6.1.

    21. Re:OS X updates by hattig · · Score: 1

      I fail to see how Windows 7 isn't Vista but fixed, in the same way that Snow Leopard is Leopard, but fixed.

      What is new in Windows 7 - the screenshots all look the same to me as Vista... apparently it's leaner and runs faster. Oh wait, look, Snow Leopard is the same. Windows 7 has DirectX 11 you say? But Snow Leopard has QuicktimeX. Windows 7 has DirectX Compute? But Snow Leopard has OpenCL. Vista came out in 2007. Leopard came out in 2007. These new versions are both coming out very close to each other. Why, in your mind, is Snow Leopard comparable to a service pack whilst Windows 7 is not?

      I do actually agree that Apple should just get everyone on Intel systems up to Snow Leopard by having an upgrade option ... oh, they do, it just includes iLife and iWork so that the other major Apple applications are also brought up to date.

    22. Re:OS X updates by hattig · · Score: 1

      What about the $100 upgrade price that Windows 7 Home Premium will have? That's a lot for a service pack.

      Or maybe you can accept that sometimes there are enough tweaks and enhancements and new features to warrant a new version. There's an overload of information on the Apple website about Snow Leopard's features, so you can educate yourself.

    23. Re:OS X updates by CountBrass · · Score: 1

      OSX is only available "new" when you get it with a new Mac so i'd be interested to know where you pulled "$129 new" from.

      --
      Bad analogies are like waxing a monkey with a rainbow.
    24. Re:OS X updates by hattig · · Score: 1

      You can buy it stand-alone, you always have been able to. Sure, you need a Mac to install it on, but if you had a 10.3 Mac you could drop $129 and get Tiger or Leopard.

      As I pointed out (Slashdot has no edit function) Tiger users this time around appear to have to buy the $169 Snow Leopard + iWork + iLife bundle to bring their entire computer up to date.

    25. Re:OS X updates by Macka · · Score: 1

      Have a sniff around on ebay. I'm sure you can pick up a copy of 10.5 for a lot less than that now, and prices will drop even more when 10.6 comes out.

    26. Re:OS X updates by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

      As I pointed out (Slashdot has no edit function) Tiger users this time around appear to have to buy the $169 Snow Leopard + iWork + iLife bundle to bring their entire computer up to date.

      I don't think this is clear at all. From the presentation and the info Apple has put up, Tiger users amy be able to just buy the $29 version of Snow Leopard and install. All I've seen on the topic is speculation. Do you have a real source to assert otherwise?

    27. Re:OS X updates by MojoStan · · Score: 1
      I can't believe I'm continuing this thread. Nobody should be reading this. ;-)

      What is new in Windows 7 - the screenshots all look the same to me as Vista... apparently it's leaner and runs faster.Oh wait, look, Snow Leopard is the same.

      I can't believe a reasonable viewer would come to your conclusion. The UI changes/improvements between Vista and Windows 7 are much larger than the UI changes between Leopard and Snow Leopard. They're comparable to the UI changes between typical OS X releases like Panther and Tiger.

      Windows 7 has DirectX 11 you say? But Snow Leopard has QuicktimeX. Windows 7 has DirectX Compute? But Snow Leopard has OpenCL.

      DirectX 11 (which DirectX Compute is a part of) will be a free API update for Windows Vista and will be included with Windows 7. QuickTime X is a non-free part of Snow Leopard and will not be available for Leopard or Tiger. I haven't heard any details about Apple's implementation of OpenCL being available for Leopard or Tiger. I'll bet a spindle of Taiyo Yudens that the major GPU vendors (NVIDIA, AMD, Intel) will make OpenCL drivers available for Vista (and maybe Leopard if Apple lets them).

      Vista came out in 2007. Leopard came out in 2007. These new versions are both coming out very close to each other. Why, in your mind, is Snow Leopard comparable to a service pack whilst Windows 7 is not?

      I said Snow Leopard was comparable to 2 Service Packs and some free Windows API updates. For example, Vista Service Pack 2 was released two weeks ago and Service Pack 3 will also be free (perhaps I should have said 3 Service Packs). DirectX 11 (and maybe 12) will be a free update for Vista. Updates for .NET Framework will be available for Vista.

      I would agree that Leopard and Tiger were bigger updates than all the free updates that XP and Vista get. However, Snow Leopard is much smaller than a typical OS X upgrade and is much closer to the cumulative free Windows upgrades than the non-free Windows 7.

      I do actually agree that Apple should just get everyone on Intel systems up to Snow Leopard by having an upgrade option ... oh, they do, it just includes iLife and iWork so that the other major Apple applications are also brought up to date.

      Now we're straying off topic. I agree that Apple offers great upgrade bundles and family packs (subsidized by requiring a Mac) that no other software maker seems to match. However, I'd hardly call iLife and iWork "major." With the exception of GarageBand, the $79 iLife bundle is made up of applications that Windows users can pretty much duplicate for free with apps included with Windows (e.g. DVD Maker), free MS downloads (Live Essentials, Visual Web Developer Express), and/or free third party apps (e.g. Picasa). iWork is a nice $79 suite if that's what you're looking for, but so is Office for Mac Home & Student Edition for $108, or NeoOffice for free.

      --
      TO START
      PRESS ANY KEY

      Where's the 'ANY' key? I see Esk, Kitarl, and Pig-Up...

    28. Re:OS X updates by hattig · · Score: 1

      Same here. I'll continue anyway, but in relation to (not yours specifically) comments that SL is a "service pack" and W7 isn't.

      Anyway if DirectX 11 is given to Vista users, then that's one less new feature for Windows 7! Quicktime X and OpenCL are new features for Mac OS SL though - a strong argument in favour of SL actually being at least as much a new OS as W7.

      SL has a lot of UI changes - new Finder, Dock with better Expose support for application, etc. No new theme that was rumoured though.

      It's hard to compare the iLife applications with the free Windows ones, Picasa notwithstanding. There is a large quality and usability difference. On the other hand, I only use iPhoto, and not regularly, I don't need no iWeb. iWork is actually a very nice consumer office package that should come with new Macs for free as it doesn't really cost Apple much to add that value to their systems, and might make the higher cost look more reasonable.

      I think my main point is that SL is as much a new OS as W7 is, in my opinion, and there are many reasons for that. The cheap upgrade price means that Apple can drag most Leopard users onto SL and that's better for software developers who can use the new features sooner rather than later. If SL was $129 then it would be different.

      Also think: Apple gets 50m upgrades at $29, for $1.5b revenue (50m new active Mac OS users since Leopard launch making 75m in total). For Leopard they had (guess) 10m upgrades at $129, for $1.29b revenue, and the downside of a fragmented platform.

    29. Re:OS X updates by hattig · · Score: 1

      Apple really don't seem to care about minor piracy of Mac OS, so I wouldn't be surprised if what you says works. I actually think that would be in their best interest. People with old computers are probably less likely to buy a new OS than people with more recent systems.

    30. Re:OS X updates by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      I can't believe a reasonable viewer would come to your conclusion. The UI changes/improvements between Vista and Windows 7 are much larger than the UI changes between Leopard and Snow Leopard. They're comparable to the UI changes between typical OS X releases like Panther and Tiger.

      Makes perfect sense, once you flip it 180 degrees. Windows 7 is a fix for the shit sandwich that was Vista.

  12. Tethering lawsuit? by Culture20 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Bets on when nullriver sues over their tethering software's reasonless removal from the app store now that Apple is offering tethering.

    1. Re:Tethering lawsuit? by iluvcapra · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What would be their allegations in such a suit? What agreement has Apple broken? What law has apple violated?

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
    2. Re:Tethering lawsuit? by Culture20 · · Score: 0, Troll

      Apple agreed to the app and it was in the appstore for a day, then pulled it without word. Then they agreed to put it back up, then after waiting a long while, they finally said "no" without explanation. I would say they broke the original agreement to sell the tethering app through the app store because someone in their dev group said it was supposed to be a killer feature in iphone OS 3.0. Abuse of monopoly power. Or... They killed the nullriver app because AT&T told them to behind the scenes. Collusion and abuse of monopoly power.

    3. Re:Tethering lawsuit? by jgtg32a · · Score: 1

      Maybe argue prior work, anticompetitive practices something like that lawyers can get creative.

      They banned a product from their store and then release the same product later

    4. Re:Tethering lawsuit? by cbuskirk · · Score: 3, Informative

      It was removed from the North American App store. In North America the Iphone is exclusive to ATT. ATT does not allow tethering. You will not be able to use the Apple tethering app in North America.

    5. Re:Tethering lawsuit? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, when Apple has a monopoly on cellphones, maybe that will fly. When will Apple have a monopoly on cell phones? Never.

    6. Re:Tethering lawsuit? by jpmorgan · · Score: 1

      estoppel

    7. Re:Tethering lawsuit? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Can we sue you for impersonating (badly) a lawyer?

    8. Re:Tethering lawsuit? by iluvcapra · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Apple agreed to the app and it was in the appstore for a day, then pulled it without word.

      Under the terms of the App Store program, they can offer or retract an App at will. They're under no obligation to provide an app, or even give a logical reason for withdrawing it. No question it's bad business to not give a reason, but there's no legal issue there.

      They killed the nullriver app because AT&T told them to behind the scenes. Collusion and abuse of monopoly power.

      The App Store isn't a "monopoly" in the US legal sense. If the App store was the only way to buy an app on 90% of the phones in the US, or if Apple had colluded with Google to prevent an App to be shared on either store, then there might be a conversation to be had. In the bad analogy department, you're arguing that Gillette should be sued for a monopoly because it refuses to sell Bic blades.

      The App Store's licensing and content control model is basically identical to how console manufacturers control what games are permitted to be run on their consoles.

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
    9. Re:Tethering lawsuit? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I bought the app while it was up. It sucks. Without some heavy lifting, the stuff I need like VPN, Mail, etc., don't function. That's vastly different from the experience that Apple promised today. I'd pay $10 for the tethering app from Apple, so maybe they could put it back up and let the market decide which is better.

    10. Re:Tethering lawsuit? by Rayban · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Correction: In the USA, AT&T is the exclusive provider. In Canada, Rogers and Fido (same company basically) offer the iPhone, officially.

      --
      æeee!
    11. Re:Tethering lawsuit? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ummm!

      North America != United States of America

      In the part of North American that I live in, Canada, iPhone is on the Rogers network and in Mexico it's on the Telcel network.

    12. Re:Tethering lawsuit? by Tony+Hoyle · · Score: 1

      They removed it from *all* app stores - even in countries where tethering is perfectly OK. Basically on the word of AT&T.. Luckily I think this is changing - apple announcing things with the caveat 'but not on AT&T' means they're learning that bending over and taking it isn't a good long term strategy.

    13. Re:Tethering lawsuit? by afidel · · Score: 1

      AT&T DOES allow tethering, just not with the iPhone plan. We added tethering to our corporate BB plans recently as we are upgrading to Bold's (3G) and it's cheaper than having a bunch of laptop only contracts.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    14. Re:Tethering lawsuit? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In North America the Iphone is exclusive to ATT.

      North America != USA.

      USA is exclusive to ATT, not North America.

    15. Re:Tethering lawsuit? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Monopoly power on what? The cellphone market? Don't kid yourself.

    16. Re:Tethering lawsuit? by iluvcapra · · Score: 1

      You mean an estoppel was created when they momentarily accepted it to the App store? For that, you'd have to prove that Nullriver had received an expectation or assurance from Apple that it was going to receive revenue. I don't think being offered on the App store for a day creates that expectation, and Apple disclaims any warranty or promise of revenue. I'd cite the developer agreement but I'm not sure if it's not under an NDA...

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
    17. Re:Tethering lawsuit? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except if you're not in the USA. The rest of North America says hi!

    18. Re:Tethering lawsuit? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you sir, smoke crack. In USA the iPhone is restricted to AT&T ... We in the great white north (i.e. Canada) are beholden to Rogers (not AT&T) for our iPhone pleasure ....

      now piss off while I suckle the teat ...

    19. Re:Tethering lawsuit? by Achromatic1978 · · Score: 1

      Under the terms of the App Store program, they can offer or retract an App at will. They're under no obligation to provide an app, or even give a logical reason for withdrawing it. No question it's bad business to not give a reason, but there's no legal issue there.

      And under MS's OEM terms, they could do similar things. And yet those onerous terms were challenged, and some found to be valid, while many were found to be invalid.

    20. Re:Tethering lawsuit? by Achromatic1978 · · Score: 1

      Sucks to be an iPhone user. My phone will happily tether to my laptop via USB or BT, at 3G speeds, through AT&T. Hell, it'll even function as an infrastructure mode Wifi hotspot if I so choose and happily NAT multiple connections.

    21. Re:Tethering lawsuit? by harlows_monkeys · · Score: 1

      They banned a product from their store and then release the same product later

      No, they did not. The banned a product that allowed tethering even if it was against your contract with your carrier. Later, they release their own tethering product that takes into account the rules of the carrier. That's a quite different product.

    22. Re:Tethering lawsuit? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In North America the Iphone is exclusive to ATT.

      Nope. Rogers and Fido are the iPhone carriers in Canada. In Mexico it's Telcel. Dunno about St Pierre & Miquelon.

    23. Re:Tethering lawsuit? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Last I checked, Canada was still in North America, and Rogers, the Canadian iPhone mobile provider, was on the slide of those supporting tethering.

    24. Re:Tethering lawsuit? by iluvcapra · · Score: 1

      MS's relationship with the OEMs is a different case, because MS has an actual monopoly, and would in fact charge higher prices or simply not sell OEM licenses at all to vendors. They did this in order to protect their monopoly, and this is illegal under Sherman. Apple doesn't have a monopoly of cellphone applications, and is in fact in tight competition with competitor's app stores. A customer can always elect to write their app for the Blackberry instead. With Windows the OEMs didn't have a viable alternative.

      AND even though some of the specific practices MS engaged in with the OEMs were found to violate Sherman, MS was able to remedy the problem by simply imposing a "points" system where OEMs pay a lower price for OEM installs based on the number of points they earn by prominently displaying a "Works with Windows" logo, not offering other OSs for default install, volume etc. As long as MS didn't use bundling of other OSs as the positive single reason for not offering an OEM a low price, they were allowed to continue the practice.

      The upshot of this is if you did finally come to the court and manage to show that Apple had a monopoly and that removing the program was an illegal monopoly action, Apple's most logical remedy would be to create a point system and simply dock points from people who write tethering apps, and tie the points system to the percentage sales cut.

      In any case, AT&T finally controls tethering on their network, this is a recognized authority they have, and if Apple found itself unable legally to prevent tethering apps, ATT would just shape the traffic of people that used it, or charge them extra on their cell bill.

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
    25. Re:Tethering lawsuit? by DJRumpy · · Score: 1

      Neither the infrastructure or agreements with the carriers were in place when it was originally released. Now that it's been announced with 3.0, there is still only limited support (and still none from AT&T). I would have pulled it as well.

    26. Re:Tethering lawsuit? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Some americans have their head so far up their ass they think they own the whole continent.

    27. Re:Tethering lawsuit? by Wovel · · Score: 1

      Some of them get confused since we pay to defend the whole continent. No thanks are needed, we are happy to help.

    28. Re:Tethering lawsuit? by anethema · · Score: 1

      Not only that, but Rogers is one of the partners listed as will definitely have tethering (as it is allowed in most or all of our current data plans, including the iPhone one)

      --


      It's easier to fight for one's principles than to live up to them.
    29. Re:Tethering lawsuit? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ATT = A + TT = Apple + Crying

  13. WWDC'09 Pictures and Panorama by e133tc1pher · · Score: 1

    I took a bunch of pictures at WWDC and made a panorama of the Moscone center http://msca.me/1J . Click around it's pretty neat. I think brian lam from gizmodo might be in there on the right. The WWDC'09 has been great so far, but what is up with the matte case that was floating around previously, was that a hoax or what? I could have sworn it was for the $100 one (which ran out in all the stores I've checked).

    1. Re:WWDC'09 Pictures and Panorama by Socrates1024 · · Score: 1

      I think I see him

  14. popup alerts on the iphone by skeletor935 · · Score: 1

    Push alerts to the iPhone. Here comes the pin the tail on the donkey pop up adds on the iPhone.

    1. Re:popup alerts on the iphone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      More like thrust the dick in your ass.

    2. Re:popup alerts on the iphone by Plug · · Score: 1

      I know you're trying to come across as a joke, but the keynote said the push notifications were limited to text, a number to go on the icon on the home screen (similar to the number of unread messages icon on the Mail app), and sounds for notifications. So you can have a hee-haw, but no pictures of ass.

  15. Security on auto-locate feature? by Turken · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I hope there's good security on the auto-locate feature. Aside from the obvious "prank" of remotely wiping someone's iphone, I can also see this being abused for such things as spying on people's locations, or perhaps less invasive but more annoying... a "loved one" forcing your phone to ring when you already set it to silent for a meeting or movie.

    1. Re:Security on auto-locate feature? by chaim79 · · Score: 1

      It's tied into a MobileMe subscription, so unless you hand such your account passwords out to everyone you know it shouldn't be too bad, and I would expect a 'loved one' to have a separate MobileMe subscription so they wouldn't have access to these features, though that may depend on the situation.

      --
      DEMETRIUS: Villain, what hast thou done?
      AARON: Villain, I have done thy mother.
      Shakespeare invents 'your mom'
    2. Re:Security on auto-locate feature? by jandrese · · Score: 1

      It's apparently tied to MobileMe, so as long as you don't share your password it hopefully won't be a problem.

      For real life? We'll have to see.

      Of course this might be a good time to point out that MobileMe isn't free.

      --

      I read the internet for the articles.
    3. Re:Security on auto-locate feature? by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 1

      Hm, right, cuz nobody ever used an easily guessable password before. This is going to be the tool of choice for spurned partners everywhere .... that said, it's still a good idea. I'm just skeptical a password is going to cut it.

    4. Re:Security on auto-locate feature? by Jophiel04 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It doesn't really matter if you do wipe it. You can take the iPhone, plug it into your computer and click restore from backup. Since you have to have MobileMe to wipe, you'll also have your contacts and calendar already backed up there, and the only things you might lose are non-MobileMe pop emails, texts, or that app you just downloaded.

      As long as the partner isn't too vengeful and doesn't delete your iTunes library, you'll be fine.

    5. Re:Security on auto-locate feature? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your MobileMe creds are your security. Don't give out your pswd and don't set it as redsox or your other favorite team.

    6. Re:Security on auto-locate feature? by Ma8thew · · Score: 1

      Then it's your own damn fault for using an insecure password.

    7. Re:Security on auto-locate feature? by Turken · · Score: 1

      Sure, you're fine as long as you don't share your password or have an easily guessed one, but I'm still not completely comfortable about the idea. My wife and I know most of each others passwords, so what would keep her from using the service to send an urgent ring to interrupt whatever I'm doing for whatever she thinks is important?

      Or in the case of wiping someone else's device... consider all the kids running around these days with tricked out iphones (and what are they doing with them anyway? we didn't have any sort of cellphones when we were that age) that could easily root out their friends' credentials by one means or another.

      Yeah, I don't expect wide scale hacking of the service by strangers, but the potential for griefing among peers or interruptions from family is certainly something I'm not looking forward to.

    8. Re:Security on auto-locate feature? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It will be as secure as your mobile me password. If you share passwords with your loved one, expect to be pranked.

    9. Re:Security on auto-locate feature? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How long until someone hacks MobileMe an starts mass wiping people's iPhones... ;)

    10. Re:Security on auto-locate feature? by hab136 · · Score: 1

      Sure, you're fine as long as you don't share your password or have an easily guessed one, but I'm still not completely comfortable about the idea. My wife and I know most of each others passwords, so what would keep her from using the service to send an urgent ring to interrupt whatever I'm doing for whatever she thinks is important?

      Let me paraphrase: "I allowed someone control over my data/device. What if they use it?!?!"

      Either you allow the person to have control over your device, or don't.

      Yeah, I don't expect wide scale hacking of the service by strangers, but the potential for griefing among peers or interruptions from family is certainly something I'm not looking forward to.

      So.. change your passwords to something they wouldn't guess and then don't give your passwords out? Duh?

  16. Good update. by LWATCDR · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Not great but good. The $99 phone is the big news the rest of it is just nice. I like the voice controls, compass, and video but nothing is earth shattering. I do think Palm will provide some much needed competition for the iPhone. The difference in a two year contract runs a few hundred dollars and the Pre offers a keyboard which some people really want. If you can not tether on AT&T then it is just a big slap in the face for US customers. I hope Palm/Sprint will enable that feature on the Pre when they see how bent people are at AT&T over it. Now we need Android on some networks besides T-Mobile and we can start seeing a real three way fight.

    --
    See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    1. Re:Good update. by gEvil+(beta) · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The $99 phone is the big news the rest of it is just nice.

      Because saving a hundred bucks off the ~$1700 total is such a bargain?

      --
      This guy's the limit!
    2. Re:Good update. by Amorpheus_MMS · · Score: 1

      It might not be, but at first glance it certainly looks significant to most people.

    3. Re:Good update. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      It's good to bring up the TCO including monthly fees, but it would be good to compare that to other cell phone plans in order to be fair.

      Any other random phone might cost you $0 + $45/mo x 24 months = $1080. So even if the TCO of the iPhone is $1700-$99, it's only $521 (32%) more for the Internet access, built-in iPod everywhere you go without carrying two devices, etc. over two years. This assumes you'd have a cell phone no matter what.

    4. Re:Good update. by MobyTurbo · · Score: 1

      The $99 phone is the big news the rest of it is just nice. Because saving a hundred bucks off the ~$1700 total is such a bargain?

      Yeah, and a Palm Pre on Sprint is $480 cheaper over 2 years. But people will see "$99" and think "I'm saving half the money!"

    5. Re:Good update. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well no, but it is important. Instead of a $250 difference between iPhone+plan and random WinMo/Blackberry + Sprint, it's now only $150 difference.

      Considering that it's also taking down a chunk of the money required up-front, it makes people on the fence about which plan/phone to buy very tempted to spend that extra $150 over a 24 month period. Or for people going the ETF route, it especially helps.

    6. Re:Good update. by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      Exactly. It is very easy to over look the monthly costs and look at the cost of the phone. I see a lot of parents getting their kids the $99 iPhone to be cool without looking at the new plan.
      Sprint offers a lot of savings over AT&T which is one of the reasons my wife wants to stay with Sprint.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    7. Re:Good update. by CopaceticOpus · · Score: 1

      First of all, why did you subtract $99 rather than add it? Second, most estimates I've found online put the minimum TCO at $2000 - $2200, and it's easy to spend much more than that.

      You'll end up spending $1000 extra for a shiny toy you can play with when you're stuck waiting somewhere. If you enjoy it that much, go for it. Personally, I'm content to read a book when I have to wait somewhere, and I can listen to my $30 mp3 player at the gym. I can get online when I'm at home on a nice full sized monitor.

      I probably sound like I'm anti-technology. That's not the case, but I do think there's a sort of freedom in not always having to have a screen and an internet connection at the ready.

    8. Re:Good update. by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      In reality no. In marketing oh yeah...
      It also damages the market for used iPhones. Why buy used when you can get a new one for only $99?
      I see this really doing a job on the Nokia E71x which is also only $99. Too bad I would like to see Nokia get more traction in the US market. S60 is pretty nice.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    9. Re:Good update. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Try tethering the Palm. Sprint frowns on this without paying more for the privilege.

    10. Re:Good update. by BitZtream · · Score: 1

      Right, because you were going to buy the phone and then never buy service for it.

      I get the point, you don't like the contract with AT&T. You can probably get cheaper better service for yourself with another provider. I get that, not challenging it at all.

      But you really can't claim the entire price of AT&T service unless you're not ever going to pay a dime for service elsewhere. For most people the contract isn't that big of a deal because they are going to be paying for service anyway, which negates a large part of the price difference. Sure you could get it cheaper overall else where if AT&T and Apple weren't in bed with each other, but they are, and thats their business.

      I understand you don't like it, I got that too.

      For fucks sake quit damn whining about it and exaggerating it. You're as bad as the douchebag who posted with the iPhone pointer article. Not only is it not really that big of deal, you don't even have your facts in order.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    11. Re:Good update. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, it is, both in relative and absolute terms. Sorry that not everyone thinks the iPhone is a ripoff.

    12. Re:Good update. by SashaMan · · Score: 1

      Actually, the big news to me that seems to be somewhat lost on the slashdot crowd is how Apple is really gunning for the business market that RIM has previously owned. Remote wipe, hardware encryption, and Exchange support in Snow Leopard are HUGE for businesses. I think that lots of businesses (or at least many of the employees of those businesses) would have preferred to use iPhones and Macs in the past, but the lack of those features were deal breakers from the IT department perspective. Now there seems to be much less of a reason for IT depts. to be against Apple products.

    13. Re:Good update. by mgblst · · Score: 1

      I used to look at it that way, but people will be paying their mobile bill anyway, whoever they do with... there will be some monthly charge.

    14. Re:Good update. by WCguru42 · · Score: 1

      Because saving a hundred bucks off the ~$1700 total is such a bargain?

      Because every other phone costs nothing for two years. This is on par to news reporters bitching and moaning so much about bailed out companies wasting millions of dollars when they received tens of billions of dollars. You know when you take a bare minimum nationwide plan at AT&T and get a free phone it doesn't cost you nothing, it costs you $960. So that $1700 dollars is less than double the base plan for much more features. And $100 off of $1700 is a nice ~7%, not a bad discount.

      --
      "Educate the mind but never at the expense of the soul."~Blessed Basil Moreau
    15. Re:Good update. by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      Yes those are great enterprise features and will help to get the Mac and iPhone into more businesses. I was thinking more from an end user iphone only point of view.
      It does seem logical for Apple to target the RIM market with those iPhone features. Now if they could create an app that uses the camera to scan business cards I think that would be big for sales types.
      The lack of a camera free iPhone could be an issue.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    16. Re:Good update. by Wovel · · Score: 1

      The iphone has supported remote Wipe for exchange users since 2.0 (Or whenever exchange was added). It is nice to see it for everyone else with mobile me. I believe the iphone is the only phone that offers remote wipe as an option for non-exchange users.

    17. Re:Good update. by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      How much were they going to pay for the service though? I pay less than £5/month for my phone (pre-pay). I don't use data much, so I only pay for the days when I do use it, and because my phone has WiFi and a SIP stack I use VoIP when I am at home so I don't pay my provider for outgoing calls unless I am making them while not near a wireless access point (it happens, but I tend to make longer calls via VoIP because it's an order of magnitude cheaper). The cheapest tariff offered for the iPhone here is 24 months of lock-in and a total cost of around £720 more than I currently pay. The iPhone is nice, but it's not that nice.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    18. Re:Good update. by intheshelter · · Score: 1

      Well that's the beauty of the iPhone. All those things you mentioned I can do ANYWHERE I want now. I read books using Stanza/Kindle app, iPod, internet, email, calendar, contacts, etc. I have one tiny device that does it all. I don't like carrying a lot of crap and my iPhone has been worth every single penny. And the bonus is that in a week I will get a free software upgrade and I will have an even more functional phone. It's like getting a new phone for free because I get more functionality.

      And just for the record, my iPhone is not a shiny toy. It's a portable computer with a black rubber case. Thus not a toy and not shiny.

  17. The whole event was crap. by gcnaddict · · Score: 0, Troll

    This whole conference was crap. All Apple did was bash Windows, introduce a service pack for Leopard priced at 29USD, and introduce a phone which, well, is only evolutionary, and tell everyone in the US that tethering via AT&T isn't an option for god-knows-what-reason.

    They also took out an ExpressCard slot from their MacBook Pros, worsened the battery situation on said laptops, and generally just ripped everyone off. What a waste of time.

    What was with the Windows-bashing? They didn't even give a reason. All they said was that it's built on top of Vista... well, duh? Snow Leopard is built on top of Leopard. That's supposed to mean something? Apple is spending a good amount of effort trying to become the biggest troll on the planet... for what? What's the benefit? Too many of my friends were turned off by the unnecessary Windows-bashing; I guess if Apple was trying to win over the enterprise crowd, they did a good job of alienating them right from the start.

    --
    Viable Slashdot alternatives: https://pipedot.org/ and http://soylentnews.org/
    1. Re:The whole event was crap. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple is spending a good amount of effort trying to become the biggest troll on the planet... for what?

      I don't know. Maybe they're trying to rival you?

    2. Re:The whole event was crap. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This "whole conference" just started two hours ago, jackass.

      The lack of tethering in the US is obviously AT&T's fault, which is the point that Apple (tactfully) made clear.

      The battery situation (to the extent that you meant battery life, the only metric that matters for batteries) *improved* across the board.

      ...and referring to SL as a service pack to Leopard simply confirms that you're nothing more than a moron spouting off about things you cannot even understand.

      yeah, i fed the troll, so what?

    3. Re:The whole event was crap. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This whole conference was crap.

      The conference runs a full week, starting now and this was just the entertaining opening peptalk, geared at media as much as the developers in the room.

      They didn't mean to make Windows cry- here, have some tissues. Becoming unpopular can be a mean ride, but in the end it toughens you. Just look at how good Win 7 is turning out after Vista receiving its due share of "you suck".

    4. Re:The whole event was crap. by 0xdeadbeef · · Score: 1

      I particularly liked how they introduced third-party peripheral support, something other PDAs had over a decade ago, and all the demos failed.

    5. Re:The whole event was crap. by mcwop · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Bashing Windows is fun! Seriously, I love Apple, but must agree that the new OS X update really does not have any new incredible features I am dying for. The new iPhones look cool, and do have some new key features, that make it much more complete.
      ---- The place I think Apple is still blowing it is in the "netbook" space. I will not spend over $1,000 for an Air to just do email and surf the net. In fact I just bought a Dell Mini 12 with Ubuntu for that, and at $500 is much easier on the wallet. No entry here by Apple despite Apple having a Mobile ready OS, unlike bloated Windows (reason why netbooks run XP), which I just do not get. Just do not fully understand Apple's poo-pooing the netbook space. I see a Netbook as a supplement to my bigger system, that I prefer not to carry. The iPhone can do some basic stuff on the road, but the screen is just not big enough for "surfing" the web, and handling documents etc...

      --

      "I don't think it's selfish, to eat defenseless shellfish." -NOFX

    6. Re:The whole event was crap. by CrackedButter · · Score: 1

      *thumbs up* CrackedButter and 2 other Mac fanboys like this.

    7. Re:The whole event was crap. by Spatial · · Score: 1

      Netbooks are low margin products. Apple likes high margin stuff.

    8. Re:The whole event was crap. by MBCook · · Score: 3, Informative

      Really? The fact they seem to have seriously updated the Finder back end code is good. The faster mail is nice. The full Exchange support is going to be huge for many people.

      It's $30. You're not forced to upgrade. You're not being asked for $400 for Business Ultimate Platinum edition.

      Just because Apple isn't competing in the $200 netbook category doesn't mean they are screwing up. It means they care about the customer experience.

      When did Apple ever release "me too!" products to jump into temporarily hot markets?

      --
      Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
    9. Re:The whole event was crap. by Colonel+Korn · · Score: 2, Informative

      The place I think Apple is still blowing it is in the "netbook" space. I will not spend over $1,000 for an Air to just do email and surf the net. In fact I just bought a Dell Mini 12 with Ubuntu for that, and at $500 is much easier on the wallet. No entry here by Apple despite Apple having a Mobile ready OS, unlike bloated Windows (reason why netbooks run XP), which I just do not get. Just do not fully understand Apple's poo-pooing the netbook space. I see a Netbook as a supplement to my bigger system, that I prefer not to carry. The iPhone can do some basic stuff on the road, but the screen is just not big enough for "surfing" the web, and handling documents etc...

      Based on my experience with the Mini 9 and Windows 7 RC compared to the same machine with Ubuntu and XP, I think it's going to take a lot to beat MS in terms of performance on a netbook any time soon.

      --
      "I zero-index my hamsters" - Willtor (147206)
    10. Re:The whole event was crap. by amabbi · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Just do not fully understand Apple's poo-pooing the netbook space. I see a Netbook as a supplement to my bigger system, that I prefer not to carry.

      Netbooks don't have the profit margins that Apple desires. Simple as that.

    11. Re:The whole event was crap. by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      The place I think Apple is still blowing it is in the "netbook" space.

      I'm pretty sure that they are "blowing it" on purpose... the margins are very low in that space. This is the same reason that they don't offer a cheap tower. Maybe I'm wrong and they'll have a "iPhone plus keyboard" at some point... but I really don't think that they want to sell a $300 computer.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    12. Re:The whole event was crap. by Culture20 · · Score: 1

      Like the $99 iphone?

    13. Re:The whole event was crap. by mcwop · · Score: 1

      There are some nice new features, and the upgrade price is on target, just no total wows from my perspective.

      --

      "I don't think it's selfish, to eat defenseless shellfish." -NOFX

    14. Re:The whole event was crap. by mcwop · · Score: 1

      Actually, I think they could create one with the needed margins, and if done right they could get a premium.

      --

      "I don't think it's selfish, to eat defenseless shellfish." -NOFX

    15. Re:The whole event was crap. by mcwop · · Score: 1

      Have not seen much about Win 7 on Netbooks. Only seen Ubuntu V XP, and Ubuntu seems to do much better. I have a feeling Apple has a version of OSX that will be very snappy on slower hardware.

      --

      "I don't think it's selfish, to eat defenseless shellfish." -NOFX

    16. Re:The whole event was crap. by Teckla · · Score: 2, Interesting

      ...introduce a service pack for Leopard priced at 29USD...

      It looked like a lot more than a service pack to me.

      Apple charges an extremely fair price for OSX, in my opinion. Look at Vista Ultimate, which costs $250 retail for the full version, and $200 retail for the upgrade version.

      Apple only charging $30 for the Snow Leopard upgrade seems like an incredible bargain to me.

    17. Re:The whole event was crap. by Rycross · · Score: 1

      I know more than one geek friend who are starting to feel that the whole Apple-bashing-Microsoft thing is kind-of off-putting. Even more-so once they started going from advertising-lying to flat-out-lying in their commercials.

      And this is coming from a guy with a Macbook Pro, iPod, and iPhone.

    18. Re:The whole event was crap. by slyn · · Score: 1

      The $99 iPhone becomes a high margin product once you include a percentage of the subscription costs.

    19. Re:The whole event was crap. by Tony+Hoyle · · Score: 1

      The iphone is not $99. You have a contract with that. $99 is basically the deposit on the loan you pay back over 2 years.

    20. Re:The whole event was crap. by Macka · · Score: 1

      The Tomtom demo didn't fail, and that was the most impressive third-party peripheral of the bunch,

    21. Re:The whole event was crap. by i'm+lost · · Score: 1

      It makes more sense if Apple gets a cut of the 2-year contract revenue.

    22. Re:The whole event was crap. by tgibbs · · Score: 1

      I will not spend over $1,000 for an Air to just do email and surf the net. In fact I just bought a Dell Mini 12 with Ubuntu for that, and at $500 is much easier on the wallet. No entry here by Apple despite Apple having a Mobile ready OS, unlike bloated Windows (reason why netbooks run XP), which I just do not get. Just do not fully understand Apple's poo-pooing the netbook space.

      You answered your own question. Apple does not compete in the bargain-basement market; its strategy has always been to add sufficient value so that consumers are willing to pay a high (margin) price. So the reason that Apple is pooh-poohing the netbook is quite simple: They haven't yet figured out how to make one that is so cool that you will pay $750 for an Apple netbook instead of that $500 Dell. So far, the only way that they've figured to make a high-margin netbook at a price consumers will pay is to keep the screen real small. They call it the iPod Touch.

    23. Re:The whole event was crap. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They also took out an ExpressCard slot from their MacBook Pros, worsened the battery situation on said laptops, and generally just ripped everyone off

      Especially their non-customers. You heard me!!!

    24. Re:The whole event was crap. by mario_grgic · · Score: 1

      Well, I think of 64 bit kernel update as a bit more than a service pack. They are not charging much for the update because most average users like yourself would not know that 64 bit is and why would they want it.

      Basically, you can not market 64 kernel update to average user. On the other hand they did not have time to develop and test new UI theme as sell that as greatest and biggest update ever. So, Snow Leopard is really move to 64 bit on the Mac and they want everyone to move to it as fast as they can, hence the price.

      --
      As the island of our knowledge grows, so does the shore of our ignorance.
    25. Re:The whole event was crap. by mcwop · · Score: 1
      --

      "I don't think it's selfish, to eat defenseless shellfish." -NOFX

    26. Re:The whole event was crap. by falconwolf · · Score: 1

      They also took out an ExpressCard slot from their MacBook Pros,

      While the ExpressCard was dropped from the 15" and there's not one in the new 13" MacBook Pro, the 17" model still has the slot. That new 13 MBP only costs $1200 too.

      What was with the Windows-bashing? They didn't even give a reason. All they said was that it's built on top of Vista... well, duh? Snow Leopard is built on top of Leopard.

      Whereas Leopard is a good OS Vista sucks. Vista uptake has been slow. When it came out Vista also required the latest beefed up hardware. Leopard ran fine on old Macs though, it will run on a PowerPC G4. While Snow Leopard will not run on PowerPC hardware it will run on 3 year old Intel Macs.

      Too many of my friends were turned off by the unnecessary Windows-bashing; I guess if Apple was trying to win over the enterprise crowd, they did a good job of alienating them right from the start.

      While Apple pours the Microsoft bashing, anyone who let's marketing and not capability influence them then I don't think their opinion matters much.

      Falcon

    27. Re:The whole event was crap. by MBCook · · Score: 1

      That I'll agree with. The biggest wow for me is the $100 iPhone, but that was predicted.

      It's a bunch of neat stuff, and I'm happily awaiting OS 3 for my iPhone, but nothing amazing.

      I'd really like a iPhone 3GS. I'd love the camera. I bet there are some really neat games for the compass. But I'm under contract and there is no upgrade plan. I'd have to pay $600 just to get the same storage as my current phone.

      I'll just have to wait for next year's model.

      --
      Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
    28. Re:The whole event was crap. by recoiledsnake · · Score: 1

      It's $30. You're not forced to upgrade. You're not being asked for $400 for Business Ultimate Platinum edition.

      It's more comparable to XP SP2 than Vista Ultimate. And SP2 was free and probably had more new features than Snow Leopard.

      Just because Apple isn't competing in the $200 netbook category doesn't mean they are screwing up. It means they care about the customer experience.

      You mean a company that gives a good customer experience on a 3" inch can't on a 8" or 10" inch screen? You know that the real reason is margins and bottomline. Not to mention cannibalizing the sales of higher margin Macbooks by people who want the Mac experience.

      --
      This space for rent.
    29. Re:The whole event was crap. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What was with the Windows-bashing? They didn't even give a reason.

      Because bashing Windows has earned them 3-fold growth over the last two years alone.

      http://cultofmac.com/wwdc-mac-users-triple-in-last-2-years-to-75-mill/11492

      At that rate of growth they could become the second biggest retailer of PCs after HP in a couple of more years. Take that Michael Dell.

    30. Re:The whole event was crap. by chaim79 · · Score: 1

      While it is kinda hard to find a 'wow' in what they were talking about from most perspectives, looking at it from a developer perspective (not a Mac dev) it's very cool news.

      • 6gb reduction in space VS 10.5
      • 1.8x to 2.3x faster application launching
      • Full 64bit (was mix of 64bit/32bit)
      • OpenCL support
      • Grand Central support

      If I was doing Mac dev I'd definitely be jumping for joy, but even as a non-Mac dev I'm looking at these things with excitement.

      I'm also very jealous that they had the opportunity to do such work (going back and cleaning things up). I've wanted to do that every time I send code out the door on a deadline but have never really had the opportunity... there's always another deadline...

      --
      DEMETRIUS: Villain, what hast thou done?
      AARON: Villain, I have done thy mother.
      Shakespeare invents 'your mom'
    31. Re:The whole event was crap. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also, Apple made several netbooks back in the '90s, such as the PowerBook Duo and the eMate, and nobody bought them. In the Mac hardware and software market, stripped-down versions of existing products typically don't sell. It's a totally different environment than the Windows market in that way.

    32. Re:The whole event was crap. by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      Xubuntu, Done.

    33. Re:The whole event was crap. by drsmithy · · Score: 1

      While the ExpressCard was dropped from the 15" and there's not one in the new 13" MacBook Pro, the 17" model still has the slot. That new 13 MBP only costs $1200 too.

      That's because they just took a MacBook and slapped a "Pro" sticker on it. It "only" costs $1200 because that's about how much it cost previously.

      When it came out Vista also required the latest beefed up hardware.

      And by "latest beefed up hardware", you mean a somewhat above-average PC that cost less than Apple's cheapest iMac (and would have run Vista better than the iMac could have run OS X), right ?

      Leopard ran fine on old Macs though, it will run on a PowerPC G4.

      With a definition of "run" like that, you have no authority whatsoever to be crticising Vista's performance.

    34. Re:The whole event was crap. by jeff4747 · · Score: 1

      The place I think Apple is still blowing it is in the "netbook" space.

      I don't see how.

      First of all, what's the point of a netbook besides "I have a cool device"?

      Quick email check? Use your phone.

      Surf the web? I bet you can manage to buy a double mocha frappachino without seeing who else is buying one at that moment on twitter.

      Really, what's the space they're supposed to serve when there's devices that are smaller for the 'easy portability', and devices that have a lot more capability for not that much more size and weight.

      Secondly, netbooks are currently very low margin. Why spend the R&D bucks for something that appears to just be a fad when there's no margin in it? Instead, they'll do what Apple always does: be 3rd to market. Let Dell, et al work out if netbooks make sense, and what the specs and price points are. Once they've sunk a lot of cash into it, Apple shows up with a better one. Just like they did with mp3 players.

    35. Re:The whole event was crap. by harlows_monkeys · · Score: 1

      I see you posted the identical troll on Digg. Gonna hit Reddit, too?

    36. Re:The whole event was crap. by catchblue22 · · Score: 1

      ...but must agree that the new OS X update really does not have any new incredible features I am dying for.

      Actually, I'm glad that Apple has followed through on its promise to include architectural improvements instead of outwards facing bloat features. One of the main problems that software writers face is the pressure to include new features without concentrating on invisible but important architectural structures. This is obviously caused by the pressure to sell software at all costs by adding bells and whistles. The end result will be ugly architecture and bloat.

      [wishful thinking] I hope that their improvements add to the stability of the system, and that we won't go through the standard cycle of critical bugs and updates...we'll see[/wishful thinking]

      .

      --
      This and no other is the root from which a tyrant springs; when first he appears as a protector - Plato (423 to 327 BC)
    37. Re:The whole event was crap. by moosesocks · · Score: 1

      When did Apple ever release "me too!" products to jump into temporarily hot markets?

      Many people viewed the iPod as one such device upon its release (perhaps most famously, Slashdot)

      The AppleTV also seems like a somewhat half-assed product, while I honestly can't find a niche in which the MacBook Air would be an appealing purchase. Although I don't own one, I can definitely see the appeal of netbooks.

      The next time I upgrade my system, I'll purchase a nice desktop, and a half-decent netbook to carry around if I absolutely need to. It'll cost the same as a 'normal' laptop, although I'll have a workhorse desktop with a giant screen, and an extremely portable laptop with great battery life. (Actually, I'm quite interested to know how Apple managed to pull off their claimed battery innovations in the new Macbook, and whether or not that technology will make its way into low-end netbooks)

      --
      -- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
    38. Re:The whole event was crap. by DJRumpy · · Score: 1

      There were 4 items that really caught my eye:

      Full 64 bit support (I didn't realize there was any 32 bit thunking going on). At least that's history
      I heard a rumor that BootCamp will now come with native HPFS read/write support? (can someone confirm?)
      OpenCL
      Multi-Core optimization
      The updated finder code sounds interesting, but I don't know if it gets me excited in my pants. Still worth $49 bucks for 5 licenses in my book.

    39. Re:The whole event was crap. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple's already working on a Mac "net tablet", they're not interested in the netbook thing.
      I think they're on to a winner.

    40. Re:The whole event was crap. by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 1

      The battery situation (to the extent that you meant battery life, the only metric that matters for batteries) *improved* across the board.

      Really? My unibody Mac BookPro has 2x50 WHr batteries that let me go for a whole 8 hours = one full day of meetings. The new ones have 73WHr fixed batteries which are claimed to last 7 hours (so probably ~6 hours). True I have to switch them by hand but at least I can run for 8 hours. So could you explain how this is an improvement?

    41. Re:The whole event was crap. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can use the new snow leopard 64-bit dictionary and see if the definition of "sycophant" still fits as well. I'll bet it does.

    42. Re:The whole event was crap. by martyros · · Score: 1

      When did Apple ever release "me too!" products to jump into temporarily hot markets?

      In fact, Apple has done an amazing job revolutionizing markets that had been hot with promise, then just fizzled; or at least stagnated. See "iPod", "iPhone". If Apple enters the netbook market, it will be after very careful consideration, and probably after people have decided netbooks aren't really all they're cracked up to be.

      --

      TCP: Why the Internet is full of SYN.

    43. Re:The whole event was crap. by TheoMurpse · · Score: 1

      It's $30. You're not forced to upgrade.

      You'll effectively be forced. Small-shop Apple devs (who make very interesting products) have this terrible problem of writing a new piece of software that only runs on the very latest OS X version. I've had Tiger since I bought my MBP over two years ago. In that time, I've had to do without a few programs I really wanted because they only run in Leopard. If I could have afforded it, I would have made the switch. But until a couple weeks ago, I was a poor grad student. Now I'm a poor unemployed until August. In September, I'll finally have a paycheck, and I'm buying Snow Leopard ASAP so I can finally use some of the software I've had to put up with not having.

      Granted, this isn't directly Apple's fault. But I can't help wondering what created this microcosm in which devs write software for only the newest version of the OS when there's no real technical reason. Maybe it's Apple-provided libs and dev tools that only create software that runs on the latest version of the OS? In this case, Apple does strongly encourage an upgrade by making your previous-version OS obsolete.

    44. Re:The whole event was crap. by TheoMurpse · · Score: 1

      Not to mention Leopard was/is only $129. This means that even if you're not willing to concede that Snow Leopard is more than a service pack that ought to be free, Leopard+Snow Leopard (which only a blind Apple hater would argue is merely a service pack) is still less than the cost of Windows. Oh, and it comes with iLife, some of which I find to be well worth the cost of the OS.

    45. Re:The whole event was crap. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      pippin?

    46. Re:The whole event was crap. by windwalkr · · Score: 1

      Maybe it's Apple-provided libs and dev tools that only create software that runs on the latest version of the OS? In this case, Apple does strongly encourage an upgrade by making your previous-version OS obsolete.

      Nope. The tools allow you to select which set of headers and libraries you'd like to link against. The only technical reason for requiring a newer OS is to access new/fixed features.

    47. Re:The whole event was crap. by RazorSharp · · Score: 0

      "When did Apple ever release "me too!" products to jump into temporarily hot markets?"

      The Pippin. Okay, it was the nineties, didn't count.

      --
      "From the depths of my skeptical and rationalist soul, I ask the Lord to protect me from California touchie-feeliedom."
    48. Re:The whole event was crap. by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      First of all, what's the point of a netbook besides "I have a cool device"?

      Um, the ability to do real work on an ultra portable laptop? I got my wife an HP Mini for her birthday, it runs all the apps she needs and fits in her purse. Good luck doing that with a smartphone or a 13" laptop.

  18. Shake it by jargoone · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Am I the only one who hates the shake interface for any action at all? Half the time I don't shake it hard enough, so I have to do it again. And for something like undo, it takes your eyes off what you're trying to do... or undo. I realize there are limited inputs on a device with few hard buttons, but hope there's an alternate way.

    1. Re:Shake it by bwalling · · Score: 5, Funny

      I guess the Etch a Sketch patent expired, so the shake to undo method is now free to use.

    2. Re:Shake it by linhares · · Score: 1

      its comments like these that keep me coming to slashdot. where are my mod points now?

    3. Re:Shake it by MMC+Monster · · Score: 1

      Well, they did say that you could remotely brick the device, but many consider that a bit of an extreme way to undo an operation...

      --
      Help! I'm a slashdot refugee.
    4. Re:Shake it by quacking+duck · · Score: 1

      This classic Dilbert strip was fall-down funny when it came out in 1995, yet 14 years later you literally do shake a handheld computer to reset (undo) something.

    5. Re:Shake it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I abhor the shake interface (use) ... is that strong enough? I refuse to code it into any of my apps. It's second only to the f'n auto-rotate in apps that don't allow me to LOCK the orientation! Argh. So much for lying down, relaxing and using the iphone... now I have to be a contortionist just to keep the damn thing from flippin' rotating. Oh, AT&T svcks too.

    6. Re:Shake it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Am I the only one who hates the shake interface for any action at all?

      Yes.

  19. And of course, no non-glossy displays by mousse-man · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Can't Apple produce 15" or 13" laptops without that damn glossy display? These mirrors mounted on laptops get really annoying, and I'm not the only one who thinks that non-glossy displays are superior to their allegedly cheaper glossy displays.

    One more guy who's looking for a used MBP on ebay.

    1. Re:And of course, no non-glossy displays by Moridineas · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I'm getting disheartened...I switched to an apple laptop as my primary in 2004 and am on a macbook pro now. I absolutely can't stand the glossy, and would have to think long and hard about a future computer that didn't have the matte option.

    2. Re:And of course, no non-glossy displays by MBCook · · Score: 1

      It's nice they have a much greater color gamut.

      But that makes me wonder if these are just real 32-bit panels instead of the 24-bit panels they've been using (which is REALLY CHEAP of them).

      Glossy though? I agree. I don't intend to upgrade my MBP as long as I can hold out, because I don't want that glare.

      --
      Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
    3. Re:And of course, no non-glossy displays by Eil · · Score: 2, Interesting

      These mirrors mounted on laptops get really annoying, and I'm not the only one who thinks that non-glossy displays are superior to their allegedly cheaper glossy displays.

      What bugged me the most about these when they came out was that all the laptop makers (especially Apple) hyped it as a cool hip new feature when all they did was remove the anti-glare coating from the manufacturing process.

    4. Re:And of course, no non-glossy displays by TJamieson · · Score: 1

      I thought they were 18-bit panels (6-bit each for RGB). 24-bit is what they should be.

      --
      For the last time, PIN Number and ATM Machine are redundancies!
    5. Re:And of course, no non-glossy displays by MBCook · · Score: 2, Informative

      32-bit is with alpha.

      You're right. 24 is good, 18 is what they are.

      --
      Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
    6. Re:And of course, no non-glossy displays by aberkvam · · Score: 2, Informative

      Can't Apple produce 15" or 13" laptops without that damn glossy display? These mirrors mounted on laptops get really annoying, and I'm not the only one who thinks that non-glossy displays are superior to their allegedly cheaper glossy displays.

      One more guy who's looking for a used MBP on ebay.

      Why buy used? There are other options for anti-glare screens.

    7. Re:And of course, no non-glossy displays by TheNetAvenger · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The point isn't the glossy display, it is the 'cheap' glossy displays that reflect like mirrors.

      There are lots of LCDs on various other brands of laptops with 'glossy' displays that actually filter the light so they don't blind you or act like a mirror.

      The filtered glossy displays cost a few bucks more, but this is Apple, and apparently they don't care about the 'best' hardware anymore.

      This is something we became aware of when our techs bought several glossy laptops back in 2005. The higher end displays, like the 1920x1200 units didn't reflect like the cheaper displays, and the difference of using them in bright light is a massive difference.

      I feel sorry when sitting next to a Mac user at an airport, even when I'm using a Netbook with a filtered glossy screen with no problems and they are having trouble even seeing their screen.

      Sometimes they ask what the trick is, and I have to explain the LCD Gloss finish/cover and Apple uses the cheap crap.

    8. Re:And of course, no non-glossy displays by falconwolf · · Score: 1

      Can't Apple produce 15" or 13" laptops without that damn glossy display? These mirrors mounted on laptops get really annoying, and I'm not the only one who thinks that non-glossy displays are superior to their allegedly cheaper glossy displays.

      While it would be better if Apple offered glossy as well as anti-glare displays some prefer the glossy displays. When I ordered mine I wanted the glossy display, and I had to specifically check it off, the anti-glare was the default when I ordered my MacBook Pro. I heard many say they'd prefer it be anti-glare but I haven't have a problem with the glossy screen. On the other hand if and when I get a larger external LCD monitor I'll probably get a hood for it as well.

      Falcon

    9. Re:And of course, no non-glossy displays by falconwolf · · Score: 1

      I absolutely can't stand the glossy, and would have to think long and hard about a future computer that didn't have the matte option.

      If you think about it and don't want a glossy screen you can get a film for the display to make it matte, however for those who want a glossy screen there's no way to make a matte screen glossy. Apple should offer a both though.

      Falcon

    10. Re:And of course, no non-glossy displays by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They are superior, yes. The main problem is that you can barely see the screen if there is too much ambient light, like when you are outside.

    11. Re:And of course, no non-glossy displays by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No anti-gloss is exactly the reason why I did not break the bank just now. I still have a MBP 4,1, unlike the parent above, and by noting the nice Anti-Glare display that most PC competitors did not offer is how I got some PC users to convert to Macs.

      Well at least my other request have been answered, they are finally offering a 13 inch Macbook Pro, although does anybody beside myself feel like we are being cheated by Apple? Isn't the 13 inch Macbook Pro right now the 13 inch Macbook from yesterday? I guess more RAM + SD Card slot = Pro.

      Also, does anyone feel that the Macbook section is kind of empty now? Does anyone smell Netbooks coming along?

      And one last thing, why is the iPhone 3GS still not an iPhone 3G? I mean, I thought the whole argument behind 3G was because we can make video calls, so where is the front camera that all other 3G phones seemingly have?

      Well, to sum it up, this is still one hell of a WWDC keynote, one of the most satisfying in recent memory, just because there are so much updates being offered.

    12. Re:And of course, no non-glossy displays by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      this display style has gained popularity recently as they show richer more vibrant colors and depth, and IIRC also aver a wider view angle. Apple has always had a great reputation in the quality of its displays and the color accuracy they provide. many professionals (graphics design, advertisers, marketers, even film producers) turn to apple for this very reason. in light of that it is only natural for apple to use this display type. to my knowledge the tech required to retain that level of quality is too bulky to fit in a laptop. of course this may cause problems for some, but this is why competition is good- there is no one single best and one manufacturer can only offer so much variety in a sustainable business model (General Motors comes to mind...) it sure would be nice if apple would license their OS to other manufacturers.

      of course, i could be talking completely out of my ass....

    13. Re:And of course, no non-glossy displays by Falconhell · · Score: 1

      I have had a glossy screen in my laptop for the last year, used every day for work.

      It has never been a problem, in fact I find it much better than a matte screen.

    14. Re:And of course, no non-glossy displays by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or, barring that, you could get a matte screen filter...

    15. Re:And of course, no non-glossy displays by drew · · Score: 1

      The glossy screen hasn't bothered me too much on the MacBook that I've been using for work recently, but the big thing keeping me from buying my own (aside from the current state of my bank account) is the lack of a decent resolution on anything smaller than the 17" model.

      Well, that and the mouse, but Mighty Mouse aside, I can't imagine Apple ever sucking up their pride enough to actually change that.

      --
      If I don't put anything here, will anyone recognize me anymore?
    16. Re:And of course, no non-glossy displays by SimonTheSoundMan · · Score: 1

      Previous models had 6bit dithered displays.

    17. Re:And of course, no non-glossy displays by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dammit. Not even as an extra-pay OPTION?? Again??

      Has anyone come up with an after-market solution that doesn't suck? Is eBay for older models my only option?

    18. Re:And of course, no non-glossy displays by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Historically Apple has cared a lot more about looks than functionality. The glossy stuff makes the colors come out a bit better - it looks better. It's just harder to use with the wrong lighting. If you care about functionality over looks, Apple may not be the best place to look. Although I'm not sure any windows-based solution would be all that much better.

    19. Re:And of course, no non-glossy displays by intheshelter · · Score: 1

      While I understand (and agree with) users wanting a matte option for their screen, I disagree that the glossy Macs are some horrid experience they are being made out to be. I've used a glossy Macbook extensively for work and never had a problem at all. The only reason I'd absolutely want a matte screen is because I have a video/photography business (hence my matte MBP). While personal preference on this issue is understandable, they horror stories about the Mac's glossy screen seems completely false from my experience with them.

    20. Re:And of course, no non-glossy displays by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      Historically Apple has cared a lot more about looks than functionality.

      Historically that's been heavy concern trolling.

  20. How does the GS look to game devs? by nobodyman · · Score: 1

    Any iphone devs have any idea how the new graphics chipset might affect things? Are there going to be GS-specific graphics API calls?

    Also I wonder if we'll see 3gs-only games? Obviously it would unwise to do so from a sales perspective, but I wonder if apple will even allow such a thing.

    1. Re:How does the GS look to game devs? by Darkness404 · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't think so because the point of the iPhone OS is to provide the same platform across all generations of iPhones/iPod Touch. I think there would be some inputs that would make it be impossible to do such as using the camera, etc. But other than that I don't think it makes since to have GS only calls.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    2. Re:How does the GS look to game devs? by tepples · · Score: 1

      Also I wonder if we'll see 3gs-only games?

      Do you mean games that have a substandard frame rate on pre-3GS iPhone and iPod Touch models? Probably.

    3. Re:How does the GS look to game devs? by d235j · · Score: 3, Informative

      Any iphone devs have any idea how the new graphics chipset might affect things? Are there going to be GS-specific graphics API calls?

      Also I wonder if we'll see 3gs-only games? Obviously it would unwise to do so from a sales perspective, but I wonder if apple will even allow such a thing.

      Yes, the GS has OpenGL ES 2.0, which is not backwards compatible with OpenGL ES 1.1. So we'll probably see some GS-only games.

    4. Re:How does the GS look to game devs? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      This is something that worried me before the keynote.

      The change from Open GL ES 1.1 (original Iphone & 3G) to ES 2.0 (3GS) is significant. The key thing to note is that 2.0 (shader-based) is NOT 100% backward-compatible with 1.1, meaning a code update will be forced. I expect the majority of 3d engines to remain in the ES1.1 API for a long time (6 months+) or as long as the majority of devices in consumers hands only support it. ...then again I only do freelance work - I'm sure the larger dev studios can throw a person or two at the problem and have it worked out in a week.

      sigh.

  21. Hardware Encryption by SpottedKuh · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Umm, encryption of...what, exactly?

    Are we talking about the flash drive being encrypted? Are we talking about the iPhone finally supporting PGP?

    1. Re:Hardware Encryption by GraZZ · · Score: 1

      I was wondering about this. I wonder if it's going to be more of that trusted platform end-to-end encryption junk. Jailbreaking's last stand?

      I felt they really glossed over this new feature.

    2. Re:Hardware Encryption by caladine · · Score: 1

      They glossed over quite a bit. I was hoping to hear more in depth hardware specs than hardware features.

      Guess I'll have to wait for the tear-down reports in two weeks...

    3. Re:Hardware Encryption by iluvcapra · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I thought they meant the content of the phone. The address book, calendars, media, user data... since they mentioned it in the same breath as the remote wipe, I assume that both features address the same domains.

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
    4. Re:Hardware Encryption by sxeraverx · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure they just meant that the encryption would be offloaded from the main microcontroller (having a separate chip encrypt a stream, instead of the main one, would save a large amount of power, and would leave more computing power for everything else). And that's encryption, as in what you use to connect over HTTPS (good) not encryption as in DRM (bad), although it would probably save power on that, too. It's the same type of encryption either way, it just doesn't drain your batter as fast the new way.

    5. Re:Hardware Encryption by 2starr · · Score: 1

      The flash drive. The intention is to avoid someone cracking open your phone and reading the data without having to know your passcode.

      --

      "Let your heart soar as high as it will. Refuse to be average." - A. W. Tozer

    6. Re:Hardware Encryption by rekoil · · Score: 1

      Ten bucks says they also use the encryption chip to lock down the OS itself to thwart the jailbreakers...

    7. Re:Hardware Encryption by sxeraverx · · Score: 1

      Don't they already do this? Not to mention, machine code is already a form of encryption.

    8. Re:Hardware Encryption by rm999 · · Score: 1

      My guess is they are targeting business users, because 99% of normal users don't understand why this is good.

  22. Lots of brain candy for the geeks, but... by religious+freak · · Score: 1

    Yeah, we love developer APIs, and I'm sure there's a geek who's mouth is watering for cut and paste, but this announcement just isn't as shiny as past Apple announcements. I'm guessing many will disagree, but personally, I think Apple's innovation has been on a decline, and these smaller innovations (while still involving significant technical effort) will not resonate as well as the video ipod or iphone did, for example.

    --
    If you can read this... 01110101 01110010 00100000 01100001 00100000 01100111 01100101 01100101 01101011
    1. Re:Lots of brain candy for the geeks, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Well, it IS a developer's conference.

      Just sayin'.

    2. Re:Lots of brain candy for the geeks, but... by cowscows · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If your biggest problem is that your latest product upgrade isn't as exciting as the initial launch of said product, well that's not such a bad place to be.

      Apple has consistently released new iPods for years, but not every one was a giant step over the last. And people complained that the change wasn't that exciting. But they kept selling truckloads of the little things, and they'll probably keep selling iPhones as well.

      I don't know what sort of huge innovations you were expecting. Apple has spent a lot of effort in creating the iPhone as a platform, served by the app store. They're not going to release something so incredibly different that it fractures that platform "eco-system". They're going to be very careful about releasing hardware that will result in apps that aren't backwards compatible with the phones already out there.

      --

      One time I threw a brick at a duck.

    3. Re:Lots of brain candy for the geeks, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Jobs will be back at the end of this month. I'm sure they're leaving some of the interesting stuff for him to announce.

    4. Re:Lots of brain candy for the geeks, but... by WiiVault · · Score: 1

      To add to that Apple understands how extremely unwise it would be to stop supporting a phone before its 2 year contract is up. An example- 12 months ago people were still able to buy 1st gen iPhones, so I expect them to stay supported until at least the next rev., though the similarity to the 3G might extend that.

  23. iPhone fine print by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Requires new two-year AT&T wireless service contract, sold separately to qualified customers; credit check required; must be 18 or older. For non-qualified customers, including existing AT&T customers who want to upgrade from another phone or replace an iPhone 3G, the price with a new two-year agreement is $499 (8GB), $599 (16GB), or $699 (32GB). (from http://www.apple.com/iphone/buy/) Kudos for the new corporate aftertaste and giant spanking to current customers!

    1. Re:iPhone fine print by Fahrvergnuugen · · Score: 1

      Word to the wise, don't break your 32GB iPhone in the first 2 years.

      --
      Kiteboarding Gear Mention slashdot and get 10% off!
    2. Re:iPhone fine print by _Hiro_ · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Doesn't AT&T let you sign a new contract for a discount on a phone after your 2-year is up?

      I know Alltel, Verizon, AND T-Mobile all do.

      Maybe Apple's website just isn't setup to do renewals, and you have to go to an AT&T store?

      --
      -Pope Peter Porker, S.O.W., K.M.K.R., U.G.O.A., F.S.G.S.D.
    3. Re:iPhone fine print by Mabonus · · Score: 1

      I found it odd that the fine print just says iPhone 3G upgrades are spendy and I took a look at ATT's upgrade page for my account. Right now I'm being offered an upgrade to the existing 16G 3G iphone for $299. It's not cheap, but it's not as expensive as the fine print reads either. FWIW I've got one of the first gen Edge iphones, so perhaps that clause doesn't apply to me!

    4. Re:iPhone fine print by EastCoastSurfer · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'm with ATT and my 2 years is far from being up. The website told me I would get the upgrade pricing. If you're willing to sign another 2 year contract I bet one of their sales people will work with you. Everything is always negotiable.

    5. Re:iPhone fine print by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm hoping my local ATT shop will allow me to *extend* my contract 2 more years too get the $299 price on the 32GB.. otherwise, I'm not sure who they think they'll be selling these to... anyone that wanted one that could justify the $299 price w/ contract already has one.. who's going to buy one for $699???

      Someone needs to be fired..from a canon!

    6. Re:iPhone fine print by pknoll · · Score: 1

      If you're currently eligible to upgrade your hardware with AT&T, you get the $99/$199/$299 prices. All new hardware requires a new contract with AT&T, and if you're not currently eligible, you pay full price. This isn't unique to the iPhone.

    7. Re:iPhone fine print by swb · · Score: 1

      I'm wondering how my situation will work.

      I switched from Verizon to AT&T 3 weeks ago (my Motorola Q was dying, Verizon's phones suck) and got a 16GB iPhone.

      My wife wanted a non-work-tied phone to develop some freelance business, and I also got her a cell number but no contract for her (sim card stuck in some used RAZR for the time being), with the idea that since "her" line had no contract associated with it, I could get a new 3GS iPhone and tie the contract to her number, and she could take my 16GB iPhone and I could take the 3GS iPhone.

      Since she has no contract associated with her number and could easily port it over to another carrier, I suspect we will be able to get the pricing, as well as perhaps my relatively new AT&T status and that I want to add an additional iPhone to the account.

    8. Re:iPhone fine print by rho · · Score: 1

      T-Mobile doesn't give you the "new customer" rate, though. Just a discount. It used to be that you could yell at the store managers and they would swing a deal, but now all the brick & mortar stores are solely staffed by powerless plebes. They have to call a 1-800 number (just like you!) to talk to somebody who can actually make a decision more important than sweeping up. I'd have thought that number mobility would mean that carriers would work harder to keep their customers, but instead they just focused on poaching newbies from the other companies.

      I'm convinced that cell phone carriers in the US have a union contract with Satan himself to keep them in power. That's the only explanation I've got for why such completely retarded business practices have not been stamped out by market forces.

      --
      Potato chips are a by-yourself food.
    9. Re:iPhone fine print by frusengladje · · Score: 1

      I have an original iPhone, and went through their "check for eligibility" wizard, and it was $199/$299 for the 16/32GB models. Your "subsidized" 3g buyers still have the better part of 1-2 years on their contracts before they are eligible for a "discount". That's how the subsidized phones work on ALL carriers.

    10. Re:iPhone fine print by Elwood+P+Dowd · · Score: 1

      Yes! For example, my contract is over in December 2009. If I would like to renew now for 2 years, I only have to pay $499 for the 32GB phone.

      Lucky me!

      Of course, the real $$ in all of these smartphones is the monthly service. So the primary reason I am not dying to pay $500 is that I am not dying to sign up for $2400 over the next two years.

      Eventually, Google Voice will port in #s. That'll be an interesting day. Then maybe they'll offer iPhone plans at mifi prices.

      --

      There are no trails. There are no trees out here.
    11. Re:iPhone fine print by Ma8thew · · Score: 1

      AT&T subsidised the phone you 'bought' a year ago. It's not unreasonable that they won't subsidise a new phone for you now.

    12. Re:iPhone fine print by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Last time my family went to sign up for a new two-year contract with AT&T (and to add a new line to our plan, and get new phones at the same time), they forced us to change our cell phone numbers or we would not get any of those sweet "with two-year contract" deals. I hate that damn company.

      We are planning to go in again pretty soon (that was three years ago) for phone upgrades, new contract, etc. This time, if they try to make me change my phone number, I'm going to tell them, "Sorry, I'll just go across the street to Verizon instead" (Verizon wasn't there three years ago...)

    13. Re:iPhone fine print by harlows_monkeys · · Score: 1

      For non-qualified customers, including existing AT&T customers who want to upgrade from another phone or replace an iPhone 3G

      That is poorly worded. It makes it sound like existing customers who want to upgrade from another phone are automatically non-qualified, which is not true. I have an iPhone that is in month 18 of its contract. I qualify for the $99/$199/$299 price.

    14. Re:iPhone fine print by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dumbass that is how the whole cell industry works. It's a 2 year subsidized contract, same as everybody.

      If you have had an iPhone for 2 years (like me) then you have completed your 2 year contract and can sign another contract from-scratch for another 2 years of iPhone and get the phone subsidy. If you have an iPhone 3G you are only 1 year through your contract and can't get another subsidy right now. You have to wait a year. DUH.

      However, if you buy an iPhone 3GS for full price and sell your unlocked 3G it is basically a wash because there is a high demand for unlocked phones, even used, because iTunes will install iPhone OS 3.0 on there and you get an up-to-date phone. I guess you could call that a spanking from Apple but you'd be fucking retarded you jackass.

    15. Re:iPhone fine print by escay · · Score: 2, Informative
      eh? please don't misinform people about rates. The upgrade rates for existing AT&T customers (incl those who own an iPhone) are, with 2-year contract,
      • $99.00 : 8GB iPhone 3G (black)
      • $199.00 : 16GB iPhone 3G S (black or white)
      • $299.00 : 32GB iPhone 3G S (black or white)

      These are numbers i got from apple.com as I went through the upgrade process - I am an existing AT&T customer with an old (first gen) iPhone.

    16. Re:iPhone fine print by nine-times · · Score: 1

      I never really understood how they withhold these deals from existing customers, even when their contracts are up. I remember back when they were Cingular, they were offering a fancy high-end phone for free when you sign up, but even though I hadn't been under contract for over a year, they wouldn't offer me the same deal. Instead, I had to switch to T-Mobile, because they were offering a different high-end phone for free for new customers, and then a year later I switched back to AT&T to get a different high-end free phone.

      Doesn't customer loyalty get you anything? Don't they want to keep my business?

    17. Re:iPhone fine print by Ziwcam · · Score: 1
      I'm gonna say this once. THIS IS HOW IT'S ALWAYS BEEN IN THE CELLPHONE INDUSTRY! IF YOU WANTED A NEW PHONE BEFORE YOUR CONTRACT WAS UP, YOU PAID FULL PRICE

      Also, stupid slashdot, I was using so many caps because I am yelling. Yeesh.

      The quick brown fox jumped over the lazy dog. The rain in spain falls mainly on the plains. Now is the time for all good men to come to the aid of their country.

    18. Re:iPhone fine print by DJRumpy · · Score: 1

      Actually this is a little new. All previous generation iPhones allowed existing iPhone users to upgrade at any time. This is new where they are trying to at least stick to the 2 year upgrade cycle in print anyway.

    19. Re:iPhone fine print by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There was no misinformation, as you can check for yourself it was a direct copy/paste of the fine print on Apple's site! It's simple as that, current 3G customers would have to fork over $700 for a 32GB 3GS.

    20. Re:iPhone fine print by Wovel · · Score: 1

      No they didn't you just lied. No way you could ever prove it, what you said just did not happen.

    21. Re:iPhone fine print by Wovel · · Score: 1

      1st generation iphones were more expensive with a lower (maybe no) subsidy. iPhone 3Gs were all subsidized the $200 a phone AT&T uses on everything. That is the difference.

    22. Re:iPhone fine print by Wovel · · Score: 1

      They don't. If your contract is up, you get the price. AT&T has always been pretty good about that and continues to be now.

    23. Re:iPhone fine print by DJRumpy · · Score: 1

      Yes, but there were no contract requirements for 2G or 3G to upgrade your phone. You were eligible to upgrade at any time. That is no longer the case with 3GS. I'm curious to see if it will stick or not by the release date.

    24. Re:iPhone fine print by MojoStan · · Score: 1

      eh? please don't misinform people about rates. The upgrade rates for existing AT&T customers (incl those who own an iPhone) are, with 2-year contract,

      These are numbers i got from apple.com as I went through the upgrade process - I am an existing AT&T customer with an old (first gen) iPhone.

      Don't misinform people by implying that your rates will apply to other existing AT&T customers. According to an Ars Technica article, AT&T will typically allow full subsidized pricing after about 18 months after buying their previously subsidized phone. Also, your first-gen iPhone was not subsidized.

      --
      TO START
      PRESS ANY KEY

      Where's the 'ANY' key? I see Esk, Kitarl, and Pig-Up...

    25. Re:iPhone fine print by drew · · Score: 1

      I don't know about the iPhone specifically, but if you are far enough into your current contract (typically at least a year) AT&T will always let you sign a "new two-year AT&T wireless service contract". You don't have to be a new customer to sign a new contract.

      --
      If I don't put anything here, will anyone recognize me anymore?
    26. Re:iPhone fine print by drew · · Score: 1

      Your two years doesn't even have to be all the way up to sign up for a new one. I don't know exactly what their cut off is, though. I've known people who got new phones and contracts with six months remaining on their previous contract. I've heard of people who have done it with a year still remaining on the previous contract with a little bit of negotiation.

      --
      If I don't put anything here, will anyone recognize me anymore?
  24. Re:First post by jgtg32a · · Score: 1, Funny

    Um am I missing something? I'm not seeing any posts above mine and as I said I have Karma to burn. Go to Digg ouch, I wonder if you'll be modded funny

  25. Seems cheap but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Check out the fine print from the Apple Store:

    "For non-qualified customers, including existing AT&T customers who want to upgrade from another phone or replace an iPhone 3G, the price with a new two-year agreement is $499 (8GB), $599 (16GB), or $699 (32GB)."

    Ouch for upgraders.

  26. No iPod touch update? by bbasgen · · Score: 1

    I found it a bit surprising that the Touch was not updated. Technically I would think it is a non-issue, but I suppose they want to give the more lucrative iPhone the bump before the Touch gets the same thing. Its a shame -- I had been waiting a month to buy the Touch hoping it would get the same bump. Oh well.

    1. Re:No iPod touch update? by porcupine8 · · Score: 1

      Same here - but my birthday's not for a few more months, so I'm still waiting... Maybe they'll give it the boost when they do their iPod-centric show (with new & improved Jobs?) in September.

      --
      Warning: Apple/Nintendo fangirl. Likes her electronics cute & cuddly. May be rabid.
    2. Re:No iPod touch update? by teg · · Score: 1

      I found it a bit surprising that the Touch was not updated. Technically I would think it is a non-issue, but I suppose they want to give the more lucrative iPhone the bump before the Touch gets the same thing. Its a shame -- I had been waiting a month to buy the Touch hoping it would get the same bump. Oh well.

      Apple typically updates their ipods in the early autumn - Touch and the rest at the same time.

    3. Re:No iPod touch update? by XxtraLarGe · · Score: 1

      Apple typically updates their ipods in the early autumn - Touch and the rest at the same time.

      Hence the free iPod Touch giveaway

      . I got a free one last year, then a couple of months after that, they upgraded to the faster processor & built in speaker & side volume buttons. I'm sure the same thing will happen after this promotion ends. They're trying to clear out stock.

      --
      Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
    4. Re:No iPod touch update? by ubernostrum · · Score: 1

      Apple usually updates the iPod line in the fall, just in time to gear up for the holiday shopping season where iPod sales go through the roof.

  27. The Fraud of Tethering by Nom+du+Keyboard · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Other new features in 3.0 include the much debated tethering ability, allowing you to use your iPhone as a cellular modem (unfortunately there was no mention of AT&T actually supporting this feature, a wonder there wasn't a riot)

    Considering that the iPhone itself is really a small form-factor computer with communication abilities built in, the line has already been so blurred between phone and computer that I can't see how that fact that another computer can also access the Internet through the connection is all that different. Especially since you, the customer are paying to have the ability to transfer a given number of bits per month. Why should it even matter -- except to anal companies like AT&T who what to sell you capacity and then prevent you from actually using it -- the eventual destination of those bits? How it tethering even different from storing the downloaded data in an iPhone and transferring it later to another device?

    Answer: It isn't!

    The same for VoIP. It's all just bits being sent and received. Now create a business model that acknowledges this axiom.

    --
    "It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
    1. Re:The Fraud of Tethering by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Some people are trying, like Zer01 which was announced at CTIA. Supposedly unlimited data at a flat rate, and they explicitly said they don't care how you use it or if you tether a PC.

    2. Re:The Fraud of Tethering by horatio · · Score: 1

      I can't see how that fact that another computer can also access the Internet through the connection is all that different...

      It is different in AT&T's world because they do place restrictions (artificial to be sure) on what the iPhone can do on the 3G network. I've run into limitations on the 3G network where where I get a warning that I can't download something (file, song, app) because it is > 10MB, and no streaming (so the $30 slingplayer app requires WiFi...Fsck! If I had wifi I would run the app on my macbook)

      --
      There is very little future in being right when your boss is wrong.
    3. Re:The Fraud of Tethering by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is probably so you end up with 5GB as part of your monthly data when tethered with a higher rate when you exceed that instead of "unlimited" that all the non-tethered plans claim.

      Even with the non-tethered plans with AT&T that list as unlimited for data transfer (instead of 5GB included then about $0.49/MB after if you have a tethered plan) in the fine print they say that they can charge you if you exceed 5GB in a month.

      (Don't believe that? Go here and search for "if you use more than 5 GB in a month" It exists for Dataconnect, and PDA/Blackberry plans with tethering. No mention of iPhone right now, but give it time)

      A comment I wrote a few days back here goes a tad more into numbers about those data rates and what it would take to hit them as well as costs.

    4. Re:The Fraud of Tethering by AdmiralXyz · · Score: 5, Insightful

      How it tethering even different from storing the downloaded data in an iPhone and transferring it later to another device?

      Right or wrong, the answer that AT&T would give is that you're not going to use nearly as much data on an iPhone as you would on a laptop. Yes, they're converging, but we're still quite a ways from the point where people are going to be downloading torrents to watch on their phones, or even using a great deal of bandwidth on everyday internet applications, because phones are short-use devices. I'm not saying I agree with it, but the decision to disallow tethering is a pragmatic one based on the fact that it would almost certainly increase AT&T's network load by a huge margin, considering the number of people who already own iPhones, and people are already complaining about the crappy speeds of their network as it is. You can't have it both ways.

      --
      Dislike the Electoral College? Lobby your state to join the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact.
    5. Re:The Fraud of Tethering by WiiVault · · Score: 1

      While I agree that you can't have it both ways I think you are misunderstanding the average iPhone consumer. They use a ton of data, I would venture in the range of many netbook owners that sport 3G. While teathering would certainly kill AT&T the jump in usage would be far less than you assume. Just wanted to point out that I download torrents on my phone. But yeah thats still rare.

    6. Re:The Fraud of Tethering by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > How it tethering even different from storing the downloaded data in an iPhone and transferring
      > it later to another device?

      I don't want to defend AT&T or their pricing, but there's no conceivable way that a user who has tethering activated on their iPhone is going to use the same amount of data per month as before they got tethering. They are going to use more, and probably vastly more.

      Not only is the PC faster (you can render more Web pages per hour) but it can download any kind of file. With the iPhone, the kinds of files you can download are limited, and files over 10MB don't download over the cell network. You are definitely not downloading any torrents to your iPhone, for example.

      Also, most PC apps that use the Internet assume you have an unmetered connection. You can boot up your MacBook and Software Update may start downloading a gigabyte of Mac OS updates which it will ask you to approve before installing. Ten minutes in iTunes on a PC and you can setup more gigabytes of downloads than a typical iPhone does all month.

    7. Re:The Fraud of Tethering by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps some civil unrest would help to talk to AT&T, since all our iphone plans are "unlimited" data plans we all could start to downstream large files and see how well all customers of AT&T like it, I believe that tethering will add a spike because it will be a novelty with the iPhone but will increase network not in huge proportions in the long run.

    8. Re:The Fraud of Tethering by schnablebg · · Score: 1

      This business model is called "dumb pipe" and the cell phone carriers are trying desperately to avoid it.

    9. Re:The Fraud of Tethering by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think your claim breaks down when the "given number of bits" you get per month is actually... not a number of bits.

      You see, "infinite" isn't a number. This is probably why they don't want you connecting multiple devices over a single, unlimited connection.

  28. Re:First post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Yeah, I think you are missing the first post - the one before your post.

  29. No video conferencing then? by Colin+Smith · · Score: 1

    Only a 3 megapixel camera? Decent lens? Light source for indoor? 480/320 screen?

     

    --
    Deleted
    1. Re:No video conferencing then? by sadler121 · · Score: 3, Funny

      Only a 3 megapixel camera? Decent lens? Light source for indoor? 480/320 screen? lame

      Fixed that for you

    2. Re:No video conferencing then? by camperslo · · Score: 1

      Only a 3 megapixel camera?

      I wonder how many realize that 1080i or 1080p HDTV is only TWO megapixel? (1920*1080)

  30. At $99 the 3G is now relatively mainstream by toppavak · · Score: 4, Interesting

    There's always been a bit of a gap between the $100 (low cost) and the $200 (high cost) smartphones, the Pearl vs the 8820 in blackberry land, for example. With a $99 pricetag the 3G (hardware, at least, the data contract is still damned expensive)is now in line with all of the low-end smartphones currently on the market. With Apple taking a 30% cut on app sales plus a share of the AT&T contract price, it makes sense to push the cost of last generation's hardware down. As much as I and probably a lot of others would love to see a more open platform (Android or Linux, for example) gain ground in the mobile space, this will make it a lot harder to establish a sizable marketshare for the platforms that are more recently emerging into the market.

    Still, Android has a shot to build (and surpass) the app library of the iPhone by moving bottom up in terms of price-point. A large number of low to midrange phones running Android could give the platform the customer base it needs to support a large development community which would in turn help build the platform's maturity eventually leading to advanced smartphones with a large and diverse assortment of apps available. This would be almost the reverse of how the iPhone platform grew: starting out as a premium hardware and service, now working down to cheaper hardware to leverage growing revenue streams from a large app library and contracts from the installed (and growing) base. Philosophically and practically (monoculture is typically a bad thing) I would love to see Android succeed on a large scale in the marketplace but as much as I often disagree with Apple's stylistic choices and UI design I have to give kudos for how well they've executed the iPhone and app store as a business.

    1. Re:At $99 the 3G is now relatively mainstream by Lord+Ender · · Score: 1

      These phones don't cost $99. The $99 is a down-payment on a two-year payment plan.

      --
      A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
    2. Re:At $99 the 3G is now relatively mainstream by steeef · · Score: 1

      Most smartphones at this price are only offered with this kind of agreement, but yes, you're correct. The drop in price is nice, but not nice enough for me to consider upgrading until they lower monthly cost as well.

    3. Re:At $99 the 3G is now relatively mainstream by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't see how Google can do the opposite of Apple and yet arrive at the same place. Google is just doing what Microsoft did, even down to buying a 3rd party company and rebranding everything. They're shipping one software stack that is going to be shoehorned into dozens of phones (someday, they've been promising this for years so we know they really mean it) and it's going to ... suck? I think so.

      The key thing that Apple did was create a platform that was so good that even without 3rd party apps, they were able to sell 20 million in the first year (half iPhone, half iPod touch.) So instead of wooing developers with promises and nerdy hardware, they wooed them with an electronic storefront with 20 million 1-click users and a mature platform and sophisticated developers tools. They treated developers like adults instead of children and they treated their users like users instead of developers, and everybody was happy.

  31. $79 Touch by Nom+du+Keyboard · · Score: 0

    If there's a $99 iPhone, can a $79 iPod Touch be far behind? All Apple is doing for sure is ensuring that a Touch of similar capacity cannot exceed $99 any longer since an iPhone w/o a contract will otherwise be a better deal.

    --
    "It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
    1. Re:$79 Touch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      That $99 price is WITH a contract.

      Also, the 8GB iPhone 3G was $199 while the 8GB iPod touch 2G was $229.

    2. Re:$79 Touch by maxume · · Score: 1

      It costs a fair bit more than $99 if you don't have a contract.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    3. Re:$79 Touch by 0racle · · Score: 2, Informative

      It's $99 after the subsidies from the 2 year AT&T plan. You have to buy an iPod touch outright.

      --
      "I use a Mac because I'm just better than you are."
    4. Re:$79 Touch by mattack2 · · Score: 1

      But can you legally buy an iPhone w/o contract (in the US)? I honestly don't know. Even in other countries, I believe the iPhones without a contract cost more.

    5. Re:$79 Touch by byjove · · Score: 1

      ...an iPhone w/o a contract will otherwise be a better deal.

      A $99 iPhone without a contract is $499 according to the Apple shop. Not really competitive with the Touch, is it?

    6. Re:$79 Touch by tgibbs · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If there's a $99 iPhone, can a $79 iPod Touch be far behind?

      Very, very far behind. It's not really $99--that's probably no more than a third the total price. You pay the rest off on time as part of your AT&T subscription.

    7. Re:$79 Touch by dotgain · · Score: 1
      Unbelievable. My first cellphone in 1995 was subsidised, yet still to this day people are still baffled at:
      • How cheap subsidised cellphones seem to be, and:
      • How expensive non-subsidised ones are (usually when they've drowned their old phone and need to replace it, yet want to keep the same phone number)

      I wonder if every future /. story mentioning cellphones should have some kind of primer reminding people that companies sometimes use deception to make things look like they cost less than they do. And they work. Case in point, it's more profitable to market something for $99 than $100. It's not a hundred bucks, it's under a hundred.

  32. Let Those Mod Points Fly Apple Crazies! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Mod the unbeliever straight down to hell!

  33. FTFF by je+ne+sais+quoi · · Score: 1
    From here:

    10:21 am Rewrote Finder in Cocoa, which results in lots of extra features.

    Whoa. Did they finally FTFF? Wow, cool, I hope Apple posts a video of the keynote or the changes in the finder on their site. For those who don't use OS X, having the Finder rewritten in Cocoa is potentially huge because it gives them a chance to address a number of long-standing issues as well take advantage of a lot of cocoa built-in stuff, but it also may also give the user a lot of customizability because the interface becomes customizable. E.g., I've edited safari to remove the brushed metal look, I've added shortcuts to some menu options, and removed others all together, etc.

    --
    Gentlemen! You can't fight in here, this is the war room!
    1. Re:FTFF by mzs · · Score: 1

      Most likely not, since they said they liked the way that the current Finder worked. This was a code clean-up sort of thing since Carbon is not 64-bit native.

    2. Re:FTFF by mattack2 · · Score: 1

      You realize any user can add shortcuts to any menu option with the Keyboard & Mouse pref pane, right?

    3. Re:FTFF by larry+bagina · · Score: 1

      They also added new features (or added back features that were previously removed) and threw in some bug fixes.

      --
      Do you even lift?

      These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

    4. Re:FTFF by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whoa. Did they finally FTFF?

      They have likely not fixed all the functionality that was lost from the Finder when 10.0 was released. But there is hope that some things have been fixed:

      • "Restore deleted items to original folders."
      • "More reliable disk eject."
      • "Sortable search results."

      All things that were there in System 7.0, that have been missing since 10.0. To have come such a long way to get back to where we were.

    5. Re:FTFF by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

      You realize any user can add shortcuts to any menu option with the Keyboard & Mouse pref pane, right?

      Not anymore. With Snow Leopard they can add shortcuts with the Keyboard and Mouse preference panes. (They split them up in the new version). :)

    6. Re:FTFF by Achromatic1978 · · Score: 1

      "More reliable disk eject."

      Can you imagine the "I'm a Mac" ads that would have come out if this had been a problem in Windows since 98 and was only now being fixed with Windows 7?

      Sortable search results

      Wow. Novel. "Think different" indeed: "You want to search for something, so you obviously don't want to sort the results, right, you'll just keep refining ad infinitum til you get there".

    7. Re:FTFF by 644bd346996 · · Score: 1

      Does windows tell you which process is holding open a file on your USB drive and preventing you from "safely removing" it? That always seems to be something I have to fix with third-party software. (erm, well, it appears that Microsoft bought the company that created Process Explorer, so I guess it isn't technically third-party software anymore. Still, it isn't part of the OS yet.)

    8. Re:FTFF by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      The sad thing is, OS X already ships with lsof. If you do 'lsof | grep /Volumes/{disk name}' it tells you exactly which process is accessing the disk. Wrapping this up in an NSTask and displaying the results in a dialog from the GUI is about four lines of code. The fact that this has been true for several years shows just how far gone the Apple that was defined by attention to detail on the UI really is.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  34. suckers buying iPhones by speedtux · · Score: 1

    AT&T runs a standard GSM/3G network and allows unlocked phones. There are plenty of phones that support tethering, including all Symbian phones. If you buy an iPhone with restrictions, that's really your problem.

    1. Re:suckers buying iPhones by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      AT&T charges for tethering, and doing it without paying for it (an extra $30/mo for only 5GB of tethered data) is probably a violation of the ToS.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:suckers buying iPhones by _Hiro_ · · Score: 1

      So AT&T has removed the requirement to register your IMEI when you change phones? That was one of the reasons I left.

      --
      -Pope Peter Porker, S.O.W., K.M.K.R., U.G.O.A., F.S.G.S.D.
    3. Re:suckers buying iPhones by Ares · · Score: 1

      i've moved sim cards between phones on at&t as long as i've been on the gsm network.

      including when i've purchased phones from ebay.

      back in the tdms day, you had to register your imei with the new phone, but with the gsm switch those days are gone.

    4. Re:suckers buying iPhones by donny77 · · Score: 1

      Not sure if they "removed" the requirement or not. 4 years ago I bought Motorola Razors off e-bay. Came with European plugs and an adapter. I plugged my SIM in and it worked great. AT&T's site listed my old phone and not my Razor as my device, but I didn't care.

    5. Re:suckers buying iPhones by Achromatic1978 · · Score: 1

      I brought a N95 to AT&T and didn't need to do any IMEI registration - though perhaps as a new customer they picked it up on first registration with the network. IMEI is broadcast regularly with most GSM-level network activity.

    6. Re:suckers buying iPhones by _Hiro_ · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I left before they turned of the TDMA towers.

      --
      -Pope Peter Porker, S.O.W., K.M.K.R., U.G.O.A., F.S.G.S.D.
  35. Control by hax0r_this · · Score: 1

    Because they can't control how you use a tethered computer. Try torrenting something on an un-jailbroken iPhone, then tell me how much it is like "another computer".

    1. Re:Control by The+End+Of+Days · · Score: 1

      Here's a shocker for you - not everyone is interested in performing copyright infringement. Shocking, I know.

      Do you wanna go breaking out an argument about downloading Linux distros to your phone now?

    2. Re:Control by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      Sphincter says what? Where was he talking about infringing copyrights, jackass?

  36. Where's my quad-core MBP? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    Everyone thought it would happen last year. Is it going to happen this year? I will seriously buy a Quad-Core, FW800-equipped MBP, especially if I can get it in a 15". (The 17" form factor has turned out to be slightly cumbersome to transport... not that I have a MBP. My laptop is not TOO much bigger though.) Q9000 dissipates only like 27W TDP, it should be at least doable.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  37. Why an SD slot, I wonder? by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Since most higher-level dSLRs use Compact Flash, I'm a bit surprised they didn't include a CF slot on their "pro" line of laptops instead of an SD slot - especially since a CF slot could've served both CF and SD card users.

    --
    #DeleteChrome
    1. Re:Why an SD slot, I wonder? by WiiVault · · Score: 3, Informative

      CF slots are too bulky for Apple's design. Atleast thats my guess.

    2. Re:Why an SD slot, I wonder? by MaXintosh · · Score: 1

      I was wondering the same thing too. Apple prides itself on having gee-wiz hardware to go with. If I was reading the tea leaves, I would guess they couldn't get a reasonably priced parts contract with a co. that supplies Compact Flash, so they went with SD. Then again, it's apple. They're about as inscrutable as they get.

    3. Re:Why an SD slot, I wonder? by Itninja · · Score: 1

      Why does Apple do anything? Style over substance. It all starts off good, then someone if the design team says 'hey how about we make it meaninglessly small?'.

      It's all just Malibu Stacy's New Hat.

      --
      I judt got a nre Kinesis keybiartf so please excusr ant egregiou typos.
    4. Re:Why an SD slot, I wonder? by AtomicDog · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I, too, don't understand why Apple decided to replace the ExpressCard slot with an SD slot on a supposedly pro-level notebook.

      The ExpressCard slot provided the only high-speed expansion option on Apple's notebooks. Maybe I'd understand this move if there was a docking station available that added other expansion options, but there isn't.

      I do a lot of photography and often shoot gigabytes of raw photos in a single shoot with my dSLR (which uses CF, not SD). Yeah, the sort of work the MacBook Pro is supposed to be aimed at. Besides that, I also do a lot of work with large disk images for the IT work I do.

      Doing such work on my aging MBP is a joy because I have an ExpressCard Serial ATA adapter that lets me use external hard drives without the limitations and overhead of USB, FireWire or ethernet. If I wanted, I could also use the card to connect to an external RAID enclosure at SATA II speeds.

      What good are the performance increases with the CPU, memory, graphics, etc if the only expansion option that provided the quickest data transfer speeds is now gone? Disk i/o will be an even worse bottleneck for me on a new MBP than my old one. No thanks.

      I was looking to upgrade my 2.5 year old MBP with a newer model, but I refuse to do so until Apple brings back an ExpressCard slot or something better.

    5. Re:Why an SD slot, I wonder? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because they don't anymore. Low-end dSLRs like the Rebels are going to SDHC and the mid to high range ones are going to a mixed environment with (I'm guessing) the goal of switching all the way over to SDHC. Plus, if you're really using your dSLR with your computer, you're either uploading the pics later via a USB cable or you're tethered to start with.

    6. Re:Why an SD slot, I wonder? by secretcurse · · Score: 2, Informative

      HCSD is quickly replacing MiniDV tape in "prosumer" video cameras.

      --
      I'm using all of my mod points to mod ancient memes down. Please join me.
    7. Re:Why an SD slot, I wonder? by jimicus · · Score: 1

      A lot of higher level DSLRs are moving towards SD and Apple have always been the kind of company that would support the upcoming standard at the expense of totally ignoring the "legacy" (even if it's a good few years from being truly legacy).

    8. Re:Why an SD slot, I wonder? by WiiVault · · Score: 1

      Spoken like a true Slashdotter. Meanwhile 90% of the world continues to use their cheap point and shoots and doesn't want to bother with a CF --> SD converter or bulkier HW.

    9. Re:Why an SD slot, I wonder? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because the people who pay for the shiny apple and starbucks coffee pay for the fancy Nikons and Canon SLRs that use SD cards instead of CD. I'm also pretty sure that more point and shoot cameras use SD cards instead of CFs. Apple is just continuing to take the pro out of professional and marketing it more towards everyone.

    10. Re:Why an SD slot, I wonder? by Achromatic1978 · · Score: 1

      Sigh. They're not moving to SD to replace CF - they're moving so you can write a JPG to an SD, pull it while you continue to shoot in CF, and have someone else review it while the CF is recording RAWs.

    11. Re:Why an SD slot, I wonder? by Itninja · · Score: 1

      Meanwhile, 90% of of professional photographers are left saying 'great...now what?'. And next year all those point-and-shooters will also be left aside when they go microSD only because it was 'cooler'.

      --
      I judt got a nre Kinesis keybiartf so please excusr ant egregiou typos.
    12. Re:Why an SD slot, I wonder? by WiiVault · · Score: 1

      The "now what" I would assume would be a dongle. I mean its not like photographers don't already carry lots of crap already. Normal SD has been the defacto point and shoot memory for quite a while if it does as some point need an adapter chances are the laptop will be quite old.

    13. Re:Why an SD slot, I wonder? by c_forq · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I, too, don't understand why Apple decided to replace the ExpressCard slot with an SD slot on a supposedly pro-level notebook.

      They explained it clearly in the keynote. Less then 1% of users used ExpressCard. Over 90% of users owned cameras that use SD cards. Most users don't like using USB to hook up their cameras. ExpressCard is still available on the 17" MacBook Pro, because they acknowledge there are professional uses for it.

      --
      Computers allow humans to make mistakes at the fastest speeds known, with the possible exception of tequila and handguns
    14. Re:Why an SD slot, I wonder? by indiechild · · Score: 2, Informative

      CF is being phased out. Most of the new DSLRs coming out are using SDHC. As usual, Apple is dropping support for old formats, which inevitably ticks some people off.

    15. Re:Why an SD slot, I wonder? by Ma8thew · · Score: 1

      Also factor in that 100% of users will use the increased battery life gained by expanding the battery area.

    16. Re:Why an SD slot, I wonder? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You could pick up a refurbished older model from the apple store. Comes with a 1 year warranty.

  38. $100 for 16GB?! by Lord+Byron+II · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Ouch, that's a costly upgrade, when the same thing in an SD card is roughly $20.

    1. Re:$100 for 16GB?! by Lord+Byron+II · · Score: 1

      I should clarify - I'm referring to the additional $100 you pay for the additional 16GB to bring the iPhone to a total of 32GB.

    2. Re:$100 for 16GB?! by RudeIota · · Score: 2, Interesting

      same thing in an SD card is roughly $20.

      I share your view in a sense, but that's an unfair comparison.

      While I'm sure there's a substantial markup, don't forget they have to integrate this memory on the board which takes up valuable PCB real estate. The memory may also even be of better quality (Think solid state hard drives, where faster, more expensive SLC flash might be used). ... Okay, probably not, but just playing devil's advocate for a bit. :-)

      Regardless, I'm sure it doesn't *really* cost anywhere near $100... but sdcard comparisons are a little unfair.

      --
      Fact: Everything I say is fiction.
    3. Re:$100 for 16GB?! by MBCook · · Score: 3, Informative

      Nope. The 8GB version is only a 3G, not a GS. That means it has the old camera, no compass, etc.

      Pretty good deal actually.

      I wonder if they'll kill the $100 version when they run out of stock, or keep it for the market share.

      --
      Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
    4. Re:$100 for 16GB?! by jonbryce · · Score: 1

      What's the difference in size between a 16GB chip from whenever the last generation was launched, and a 32GB chip now?

    5. Re:$100 for 16GB?! by snuf23 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I don't think SD card comparisons are unfair when you consider just about every phone on the planet besides the iPhone offers SD card expansion.

      --
      Sometimes my arms bend back.
    6. Re:$100 for 16GB?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's the difference in size between a 16GB chip from whenever the last generation was launched, and a 32GB chip now?M

      Not a physical size difference, but the addition of another chip. You'll see there that Apple made a massive order for 8GB chips. I don't know what size they'll be using in the new iPhone, but perhaps they opted for 2 x 8GB (16GB model) for material price reasons and designed their PCB with the space in mind to hold these chips. That means the 32GB iPhone may actually be 4 x 8GB chips. Of course, it may even use 16GB x 2 or even a single 32GB NAND chip... That still doesn't change the non-linear increase in price for fitting more memory in a smaller space... Whether it be the board or the chips themselves.

      It's all speculation though, but let's assume they use a higher capacity chip. As it happens, chips near the end of the capacity bell curve tend to be priced almost exponentially higher... It's never a linear increase from start to end. For example, 16GB might be twice as much as 8GB, but 32GB might be nearly three times as much as a 16GB chip. A 64GB might be 6 times the price of a 32GB chip and so on... Whatever the price, 64GB will not be 8 times the price of an 8GB chip. You pay more to have more memory in a smaller space. This is why it may not be the equivalent to just adding the price of *another* $20 16GB sdcard.

      I also doubt it is the same memory - it's probably physically smaller and more expensive because of that. Again, you pay a premium for higher memory density.

      And of course, I'm not saying any of this is the case -- just trying to offer a different perspective.

    7. Re:$100 for 16GB?! by RudeIota · · Score: 1

      SD card? Not on *most* phones, but a Micro SD... sure.

      I think it is important to note these are all a hell of a lot more expensive (and slower) than an equivalent SD card for 16GB+ memory capacities. It *would* be nice if any of the iPhone came with an expansion slot, but it comes with more memory than any other phone -- standard.

      I'm sure Apple weighed the pros and cons of this. They always seem to put a substantial emphasis on physical design and probably decided adding to the size of the phone or working the electronics within the the reduced available space wasn't a fair trade off in terms of style or cost.

      --
      Fact: Everything I say is fiction.
    8. Re:$100 for 16GB?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's the difference in size between a 16GB chip from whenever the last generation was launched, and a 32GB chip now?

      32GB-16GB=16GB. Any other questions?

    9. Re:$100 for 16GB?! by zmollusc · · Score: 1

      So.. function follows form?

      --
      They whose government reduces their essential liberties for temporary security, receive neither liberty nor security.
    10. Re:$100 for 16GB?! by MCSEBear · · Score: 1

      I bought (OK, my parents bought) my first Mac back in 1985 when I entered college. In the late 90's I sold Macs and handled training at the local Apple dealer. I'm no Apple hater, but forcing users to buy a more expensive device to get something that should be a user upgradable in the first place is definitely an Apple strategy.

      With iPods and iPhones, there is no good reason not to include a microSD slot to allow for user upgradable memory except that it would cut into Apple's profit margins. Apple's ability to charge $100 for an upgrade whose cost is minimal and will become even smaller over time is not something that is occurring by accident.

      In the recent past, remember that Apple only put a DVD burner (Superdrive) in the most expensive version (good, better best) of their various computers. At any PC vendor, you could configure a cheaper computer to include a DVD burner, but Apple likes to milk it's customers.

      Also there is Apple's refusal to release something that Apple fans have been requesting for well over a decade. Why is there no mini tower Mac with easily user replaceable parts?

      I'm afraid the answer is that with an iMac, if the graphics chip gets too slow for what you are doing you have to purchase another whole iMac instead of being able to swap out just the graphics card.

      After decades of being nickel and dimed to death by Apple, I'm now the proud owner of my very own Hackintosh where I am free to configure my machine any way I see fit. Since Apple doesn't see it's way clear to provide normal expansion options to it's users, I don't feel the least bit guilty about it.

    11. Re:$100 for 16GB?! by XDirtypunkX · · Score: 1

      Interestingly enough, a lot of phones with "built in" flash don't have it on the PCB. They have a very minimal micro-SD card reader inside and a micro-SD pre-inserted. I'm not saying the iPhone does it this way, but it really might not be as unfair comparison as you might think.

  39. Re:Today's news = sad days for new iphone3g owners by drinkypoo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There is always something better just over the horizon. If you are a big Jobs devotee then you should have known better than to buy something just before WWDC. That is a MASSIVE NERD FAIL.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  40. AND NO ZFS in Leopard server by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://www.apple.com/server/macosx/technology/file-system.html :(

  41. No OpenGL ES 2.0 by Suiggy · · Score: 1

    There's no OpenGL ES 2.0 support in the iPhone 3GS, which makes me rather disseminated. I had been hoping for an upgrade, but it looks like it won't happen. The Palm Pre, on the other hand, has a GPU capable of OpenGL ES 2.0 and shaders.

    1. Re:No OpenGL ES 2.0 by d235j · · Score: 1

      apparently you weren't paying attention to the keynote, because there IS OpenGL ES 2.0 support in the iPhone 3GS.

    2. Re:No OpenGL ES 2.0 by bomanbot · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Are you sure? I was reading some of the live coverage of the the keynote and found in the live coverage from gdgt the following passage:

      11:48AM - Averages 2x speed increase -- some things are even faster. OpenGL ES 2.0 support. 7.2Mbps HSDPA. Big applause. "The new iPhone 3G S is a REALLY fast phone."

      I have also read the official press release from Apple (not sure if it is already released yet, but it should be soon) and it also mentions OpenGL ES 2.0, so I think you got your upgrade after all :)

    3. Re:No OpenGL ES 2.0 by hattig · · Score: 1

      Well, OpenGL ES 2.0 was explicitly mentioned as a feature of the 3GS in the keynote. I.e., it has PowerVR SGX graphics instead of MBX.

    4. Re:No OpenGL ES 2.0 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where did you get that from.

      http://developer.apple.com/iphone/program/sdk/

      Look at the panel on the right. It's the first thing listed.

    5. Re:No OpenGL ES 2.0 by pwfffff · · Score: 1

      "There's no OpenGL ES 2.0 support in the iPhone 3GS, which makes me rather disseminated."

      HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    6. Re:No OpenGL ES 2.0 by Achromatic1978 · · Score: 1

      I love how Apple gets applause for an AT&T network feature ... one that some of us are already enjoying with phones that support 7.2mbps+ HSDPA...

  42. Re:Today's news = sad days for new iphone3g owners by fx1718 · · Score: 1

    I'm easily willing to pay $199 for the new one (i got my 3g 3 months ago) because I'm sure I'll be able to sell my 3g. The real question is will AT&T sell you one for $199 if you are only a few months into your contract or will you have to pay like $400.

  43. Apple pushes the boundaries again by Matt+Perry · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Wow! MMS! Cut and Paste! Apple is really pushing the boundaries of computing these days.

    Everyone that bought an iPhone got sold down the river if the best Apple can do is release 5+ year old cell phone features as something new.

    --
    Slashdot: Failed Car Analogies. Amateur Lawyering. Anecdote Battles.
    1. Re:Apple pushes the boundaries again by javacowboy · · Score: 1

      Right. Because all phones that support MMS and copy and paste also have:

      1) Excellent mobile browsing.
      2) App stores with thousands of apps.
      3) Multi-touch
      4) Excellent music players.
      5) Syncing/backing up of data to PCs and Macs
      6) etc...

      But, sure, let's focus on the negatives, since that's easy to do.

      --
      This space left intentionally blank.
    2. Re:Apple pushes the boundaries again by hattig · · Score: 1

      Lol, it's like a broken record. Not only do those still within contract now get these features (one day you might write software and understand that creating a whole new platform takes time), but now that it is done, the past doesn't matter.

    3. Re:Apple pushes the boundaries again by The+End+Of+Days · · Score: 1

      Yeah, except the copy-and-paste is coming in a firmware upgrade available to all iPhone users. There are lots of reasons to bash the iPhone, go pick one that doesn't only live in your head next time.

    4. Re:Apple pushes the boundaries again by dunkelfalke · · Score: 1

      remove multitouch - which can be a huge disadvantage - and then you've got a clear yes.

      --
      "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
    5. Re:Apple pushes the boundaries again by Matt+Perry · · Score: 1

      the past doesn't matter.

      I disagree. The past can say a lot about how a company treats its customers.

      iPhone users have been clamoring for cut and paste since the phone was first released two years ago. Apple dismissed it as unnecessary and then finally, two years later, adds the feature. I would have expected Apple to listen to their customer base and implemented this feature earlier. Meanwhile, iPhone users either had to go without or jailbreak their phones and void their warranty. Apple's response to this says a lot about how they listen to their customers and what you can expect if you purchase an Apple product.

      Regarding MMS, many millions of phones supported MMS before the iPhone was released. Having MMS support is an interoperability issue. Until now the iPhone couldn't send or receive pictures to/from another phone.

      What this tells me is that Apple likes to work on the fun, sexy stuff like accelerometers and multi-touch interfaces, but skips over the mundane but still very useful features.

      --
      Slashdot: Failed Car Analogies. Amateur Lawyering. Anecdote Battles.
    6. Re:Apple pushes the boundaries again by hattig · · Score: 1

      I'm seeing a company that is providing a free new OS to people who bought iPhones two years ago, an OS with masses of new features and enhancements. I don't see many other phone companies that do that, although Android and webOS look like they will do it - they came after the iPhone however.

      Apple never said it was unnecessary. They said it was on the list of things to do, they wanted to get it right (in the context of the multitouch interface you deride), and that they couldn't do everything at once. You could have had a half-arsed C+P implementation that could have held the platform back. It was annoying if you needed it. Sales figures suggest that most people didn't care.

    7. Re:Apple pushes the boundaries again by Matt+Perry · · Score: 1

      multitouch interface you deride

      Please cite where I have derided the multitouch interface. Given that I have never done so, I think you will find citing that instance to be quite a challenge.

      You could have had a half-arsed C+P implementation that could have held the platform back.

      Now I'm curious. Why do you think a half-assed C+P implementation would have held the platform back? I would think that something, even if less than optimal, would have been better than nothing. I'm interested in hearing you elaborate on your comment.

      Sales figures suggest that most people didn't care.

      Sales figures are important if you are a stockholder. I'm not so I care from the perspective of "should I purchase this." As I said in my previous message, and as you pointed out, Apple had different priorities. I'd rather purchase a product that I feel the company is going to implement correctly and give the useful, but less exciting to code for, features as much priority as the flashy, shiny stuff. Apple's track record with the iPhone demonstrates that they value "shiny" over "not-exciting but necessary." Couple that with not being able to install whatever software I want on a device I own means that I don't find the iPhone to be a good value.

      --
      Slashdot: Failed Car Analogies. Amateur Lawyering. Anecdote Battles.
    8. Re:Apple pushes the boundaries again by hattig · · Score: 1

      Well, consider Windows Mobile - tap with stylus, select, untap. tap, hold ... ah, Cut. tap. tap, hold, wait, ah, Paste. Unless you weren't on a smart enough phone - then the function wasn't available.

      It's very easy to get it wrong, and then introduce a mechanism that can't be easily changed as other applications use it. Then it takes up valuable UI actions.

      However, I do actually agree that Apple took their sweet time over introducing the feature (I was a bit grumpy yesterday I think!) and it really should have been in version 2.

      Any idea how the new iPhone can be "oil resistant"?

    9. Re:Apple pushes the boundaries again by intheshelter · · Score: 1

      Remove multitouch and people wouldn't be buying the iPhone in the first place. Crappy smartphones with crappy input methods and UIs have been around, you're right, but a great multitouch implementation is the glue that made it consumer friendly.

  44. Finally I understood by anonymousNR · · Score: 1

    The reason behind having a smudgy touch keyboard, to support different language keyboards of course, that's a good move.

    --
    -- It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. -- Aristotle
  45. Re:First post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Two fails in one thread. That should count for something.

  46. HTML 5 is the big deal by WiiVault · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Seeing Apple jump on board with HTML 5 and especially the video/audio tags is huge. If Apple is right that they own 65% of mobile browsing; having them stay up to date with standards is huge and ought to set the tone for others.

    1. Re:HTML 5 is the big deal by hattig · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Kills off flash videos on sites that want to cater to mobile users - and once they've done that, they might as well provide the html5 video capability to other users. In the long term, Adobe should worry for the viability of Flash for video delivery.

    2. Re:HTML 5 is the big deal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I thought it was interesting that Apple didn't specify WHICH codecs would be used for the HTML5 and tags. Somehow I doubt it's the Xiph codecs.

    3. Re:HTML 5 is the big deal by Fahrvergnuugen · · Score: 1

      Considering there is a hardware decoder in the iPhone for H.264, I wouldn't be surprised if that's what they will use... I'm not certain how thats any better than just using an embed tag though, since H.264 is not license / royalty free.

      --
      Kiteboarding Gear Mention slashdot and get 10% off!
    4. Re:HTML 5 is the big deal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple was always on board with HTML 5. The damned Canvas element originated at Apple (their dashboard widgets use it).

  47. Re:First post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    two fails do not make a win

  48. Re:Today's news = sad days for new iphone3g owners by whisper_jeff · · Score: 5, Informative

    You're seriously complaining that the tech toy you bought went down in price and was replaced by a newer, better model? Have you never bought a computer before? Some might think I'm being a troll, but seriously, this is nothing new to tech products across the board - tech toy is released, sells, goes down in price and is replaced by better model, rinse and repeat until the model is phased out. Nothing new.

  49. Iphone 3GS : Yes and No ! by testman123 · · Score: 0, Troll

    OS 3.0 features : no surprise as per the beta, ie = where are the Java support ? the Flash support ? Tethering is fine but is not allowed yet on major operator :(

    3GS features : where are the SD port ? the front camera for 3G visual call ? the standard plug port like miniUSB or microUSB ?

    This is still a brillant product, but with new Android phones coming soon (next week ?), I am not sure it will keep contenders far away from the apple's tree.

    The brilliant idea of the keynote : zipcar, just a cool way to rent a car, like the one we have in europe to borrow a public bike (velib, velov http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Velib ). But we don't have remote horn on our iphone app :)

    Let's wait for iPhone 4.

    1. Re:Iphone 3GS : Yes and No ! by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      The brilliant idea of the keynote : zipcar

      Zipcar is great, and being able to open it with your phone is pretty cool. Right now you have to use your zip card and tap it against the windshield... not exactly hard, but I do find myself constantly digging for the zip card.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
  50. Re:Today's news = sad days for new iphone3g owners by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dude, Does the phone you bought at whatever contract you signed still meet your needs?
    If not go get anew phone, Doesn't matter when you buy something there will
    allways be something shiny and new around the corner.

    Upgrade itus is so f'n stupid

  51. Re:Today's news = sad days for new iphone3g owners by sideshow · · Score: 2, Insightful

    it would be different if they said, "in 1 year, there will be this blah blah blah phone for $199" because that would have given the consumers a chance to decide if they want to go ahead with the massive $199 purchase or wait to get something that is better for the same price.

    Yeah, so people like you would hold off on buying a phone for 5 months? Why would Apple do that to themselves? They much rather have you buy a phone in Feb and then the newer one a year later.

    --

    Hollow words will burn and hollow men will burn.

  52. Re:Today's news = sad days for new iphone3g owners by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

    New to buying Apple products? Consult: http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/

    Old Apple consumer getting ready to buy a new Apple product? Consult: http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/

    Analyst/Gypsy Fortune Teller (their almost the same thing) guessing what products Apple is likely to release soon? Consult: http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/

  53. -1 Troll by javacowboy · · Score: 5, Informative

    Excuse me?

    1) Apple spent maybe a minute bashing Windows. Since OS X is a competitor to Windows, this makes sense.
    2) Snow Leopard is not a service pack. It has new features, some of which are revolutionary such as a 64-bit kernel, exchange support, OpenCL, Grand Central and dramatic performance improvements. http://www.apple.com/macosx/
    3) Perhaps they took out the express slot because not enough of their customers wanted it. I have a MacBook Pro and never saw the use for it.
    4) The batteries now have way more battery life, which isn't "worsening" the battery situation in my book. Perhaps you're referring to the fact that the battery is not removable? I don't see that as a major issue. How often does a MacBook Pro user replace their battery?
    5) How did Apple "rip everyone off"? Apple is pricing their notebooks more aggressive *and* improving the hardware.
    6) Vista was badly received and Microsoft built Windows 7 on top of it. That was their point. I can't say whether or not Vista sucks, since I haven't used it that much.
    7) How is Apple "the biggest troll on the planet" for making fun of Microsoft for less than a minute? Other companies do the same things to their competitors.
    8) How does less than a minute of making fun of one of their competitors "turn off the enterprise crowd"? Oh, I forgot. All of your friends must comprise 100% of the "enterprise crowd". Maybe features like Grand Central Station, OpenCL, 64-bitness and Exchange Support, not to mention remote wipe and encryption will win the enterprise crowd. After all, you don't get enterprise accounts by selling vapourware. Apple knows this.

    --
    This space left intentionally blank.
    1. Re:-1 Troll by NervousNerd · · Score: 0

      1) Apple spent maybe a minute bashing Windows. Since OS X is a competitor to Windows, this makes sense.

      Can I buy OSX and install it on a PC legally and with ease? Sorry, no I can't. Thus, OS X is not a true "competitor" to Windows.

    2. Re:-1 Troll by Estanislao+Mart�nez · · Score: 1

      4) The batteries now have way more battery life, which isn't "worsening" the battery situation in my book. Perhaps you're referring to the fact that the battery is not removable? I don't see that as a major issue. How often does a MacBook Pro user replace their battery?

      I'll have to take issue with that one. I had a Powerbook from 2004 to about 2006, and a Macbook Pro from 2006 and ongoing, and in both cases the battery went to hell in less than two years. Maybe the new battery technology they're using improves this, I don't know, but I really am not inclined to trust them on this.

    3. Re:-1 Troll by Stevecrox · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think you minunderstand what "revolutionary" means. A 64bit kernel isn't revolutionary, nor is adding exchange support. These are evolutionary changes. Your buying into Apple hype.

      AMD's hypertransport was revolutionary, microwave ovens were revolutionary and not all revolutionary ideas have to be popular (see Office 2007's menu system). Taking a 32bit/64bit hybrid OS and making it purely 64bit is evolutionary.

    4. Re:-1 Troll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But I can install Windows on a Mac.

      And who are you kidding regarding no competition between Mac and Windows.

    5. Re:-1 Troll by gmccloskey · · Score: 2, Informative

      2) Snow Leopard is not a service pack.

      Even their own marketing calls it "fine tuning". Apple senior execs called it a refinement of Leopard, or words to that effect. It's a service pack.

      ... took out the express slot because not enough of their customers wanted it. I...never saw the use for it

      It's a pro slot, used by pros, to connect pro kit - usually high end audio, video and storage. Remind me of the branding of this product again... oh yeah, pro!

      How often does a MacBook Pro user replace their battery?

      In my case, after just over a year - and that following recommended charge/discharge practices. Apple kindly sent me a replacement, as the first was an explosion risk. It died a little over a year later. My experience is not unusual for a Powerbook battery. The lack of easy access to replace the cell cheaply with a non-oem part is a strong disincentive.

      Apple is pricing their notebooks more aggressive *and* improving the hardware

      Apple is reducing the price of entry. It's arguable they are NOT improving the hardware (beyond normal Moore's Law) for the same price at the mid and high end prices. Cf express card loss, FW400 loss, discrete gfx loss. And even in their Pro line, they charging $30 for a lead to let you connect to any external display - not even a free HDMI slot. Last but not least, still offering only 2 USB slots, on the 15" models is a joke - especially as there's no express slot now. Use an external mouse, and now you can't plug in your external drive, as there's no spare slot for power. Use a mouse and a external card reader, and you're SOL to do anything else. I wanted to buy a MBP from this upgrade cycle. I won't - instead staying with a Powerbook G4 that's alot slower, but offers so much more in terms of usability. My hope is that APPL will correct some of these decisions in the next cycle. It's unlikely we'll go back to discrete batteries any time soon, but hopefully get what many users want - connectivity options.

    6. Re:-1 Troll by smallfries · · Score: 1

      4) The batteries now have way more battery life, which isn't "worsening" the battery situation in my book. Perhaps you're referring to the fact that the battery is not removable? I don't see that as a major issue. How often does a MacBook Pro user replace their battery?

      Well, my first one died after 13 months. I'm hoping the second lasts a bit longer. My experience would put me off upgrading to a system where I can't take the battery out.

      Shame really, as the 7 or 8hrs on the new systems looks awesome. Especially as they've changed their measurement technique so that is 7 or 8 hours with wifi and realistic usage. I can squeeze 5hrs out of my Santa Rosa Macbook pro with the wifi off working in a shell with vim...

      --
      Slashdot: where don knuth is an idiot because he cant grasp the awesome power of php
    7. Re:-1 Troll by moosesocks · · Score: 1

      6) Vista was badly received and Microsoft built Windows 7 on top of it. That was their point. I can't say whether or not Vista sucks, since I haven't used it that much.

      Although I suppose that's true, the Win7 beta has been uniformly excellent in my experience. I think that the world will eventually forgive Microsoft for Vista, just like they did for Windows ME!

      --
      -- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
    8. Re:-1 Troll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Answers to your line comments:

      3) most (as in 20) of my MacBook Pro users have Expresscard Wireless devices from Verizon. They now much buy USB ones. This costs us money; some of these devices are less than 2 years old and cost around $80 each. Did I mention we're federal, so it's your tax dollars being spent to replace these cards because of Apple's arbitrary decision.

      4) I have a 2nd Gen intel MacBook Pro on it's 3rd battery. It is less than 5 years old. I do not have any ouch of faith that the internal ones will do any better. I have folks, again who spend your tax dollars, who cycle thru one a year because of use.

      8) Because the enterprise crowd won't buy hardware that does not have redundant power supplies. Apple sells toys as servers.

      1, 7, 8) Other than Michael Dell or Steve Ballmer, please name me one CEO or representative from a major company (Fortune 500/100) that has bashed their competition? I don't see anything when i google Ubuntu, Suse, Red hat bashes WIndows... can't seem to find it. Please give a reference, professionals do not stop to kindergarten tactics to make business.

    9. Re:-1 Troll by seanalltogether · · Score: 1

      I agree, myself and all of my coworkers work on macbook pros right now, almost all of us have had to change the battery out once (i was getting 30 mins off the plug) and we can do this on our own, with only a moments downtime to get it taken care of. There's no way in hell our IT guy is going to want to take all of our laptops to the genius bar everytime someone needs a new battery.

    10. Re:-1 Troll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      8) Because the enterprise crowd won't buy hardware that does not have redundant power supplies. Apple sells toys as servers.

      Maybe the should read the specs, because redundant power supplies are available on all intel xserves and some G5s

    11. Re:-1 Troll by Wovel · · Score: 1

      Battery went bad in my Macbook Pro, apple replaced it for free, I am sure they would do the same thing here..

    12. Re:-1 Troll by Wovel · · Score: 1

      Your It guy should become authorized to service apples then.. It is not difficult or expensive and makes perfect sense for someone supporting enough users where going to the genius bar every time a battery failed would be difficult.

    13. Re:-1 Troll by Wovel · · Score: 1

      3) You are discussing replacing an $80 device when upgrading a $1500(+++) device, maybe you can find a deal.

      4) Whole new battery system, hard to say one way or the other.

      8) Apple servers have redundant power supplies. You clearly do not know what you are talking about:

      # Output power: 750W
      # Optional second load-sharing 750W power supply for redundancy

      http://www.apple.com/xserve/specs.html

      1,7,8) Who cares....I am sure if they had a valid comparison to make they would...Perhaps all of those companies would do better if they would take the time to contrast themselves with the competition....

      http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/business/soa/Red-Hat-CEO-Tired-of-Microsoft-s-Linux-whining/0,139023166,120205505,00.htm ....."'blue screen of death' does not refer to Linux systems, but rather to the immature Windows products." ...Sounds like a bash...Your google skills suck.

    14. Re:-1 Troll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Point 4 misses a little, I think, because a removable battery isn't just useful in the event your battery dies. I carry 2 batteries for my iBook G4 so that I can get twice as much battery time if I don't have access to a plug. You're right about replacing the battery, that doesn't happen real often, but it would be nice to be able to carry more than one battery with you.

    15. Re:-1 Troll by SoupIsGoodFood_42 · · Score: 1

      You could replace the battery yourself. It's not hot-glued into a hard to get at place or anything hard. You just undo a few screws, peel off a piece of warning tape and pull the connector.

      Now, whether Apple are going to tolerate you replacing the battery yourself and still cover most of your warranty is a more pressing issue, IMHO.

    16. Re:-1 Troll by MojoStan · · Score: 1

      I'll have to take issue with that one. I had a Powerbook from 2004 to about 2006, and a Macbook Pro from 2006 and ongoing, and in both cases the battery went to hell in less than two years. Maybe the new battery technology they're using improves this, I don't know, but I really am not inclined to trust them on this.

      Apple's "new battery" page claims that "advanced chemistry and an innovative new charging method" will alllow "up to 1000 recharges before it reaches 80 percent of its original capacity -- nearly three times the lifespan of typical notebook batteries."

      Having seen outlandish Apple claims in the past, I'm not incilned to trust them until someone actually recharges their MacBook Pro 1000 times and gets close to 80 percent of original capacity (and gets close to Apple's claimed 8-hour battery life in typical use).

      --
      TO START
      PRESS ANY KEY

      Where's the 'ANY' key? I see Esk, Kitarl, and Pig-Up...

    17. Re:-1 Troll by TheRaven64 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The batteries now have way more battery life, which isn't "worsening" the battery situation in my book. Perhaps you're referring to the fact that the battery is not removable? I don't see that as a major issue. How often does a MacBook Pro user replace their battery?

      Well, my MBP just had its battery replaced; after around 100 charge cycles it was down to 50% of the maximum charge. Apple sent out a new one in a box, I put the old one in the same box and a UPS man came and took it away, all under warranty. If the battery was not removable, I'd have had to post the machine to them. I've done that a few times before. The best time, it was returned three days later, the worst they lost it and finally replaced it two months later. The more bits can be replaced easily by the user, the less chance I have of that happening again.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    18. Re:-1 Troll by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      AMD's hypertransport was revolutionary

      It was, back when it was the interconnect on the Alpha. When AMD bought it, it was decidedly less so.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    19. Re:-1 Troll by TheoMurpse · · Score: 2

      3) Perhaps they took out the express slot because not enough of their customers wanted it. I have a MacBook Pro and never saw the use for it.

      I'm going to have to agree with you here. I have a MBP. One day, in a fit of "I want to spend geek moneys," I searched for things I could buy that belong in the express slot. I couldn't find a single thing that belongs there that I'd like. TV Capture Cards (recording and encoding TV as a self-made PVR is more of a hassle than just getting it elsewhere (plus why would I try to do this on a laptop?)) and wifi (built in on the MBP as on most laptops currently). Neither is really a good use.

    20. Re:-1 Troll by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      Even their own marketing calls it "fine tuning".

      And your point is...? They call it a lot of other things as well.

      It's a service pack.

      It's a collection of new features and large improvements, as opposed to a bunch of bug fixes and features that should have been there in the first place (like XP SP2's firewall). Not a service pack.

      It's a pro slot, used by pros, to connect pro kit - usually high end audio, video and storage. Remind me of the branding of this product again... oh yeah, pro!

      But not by very many pros according to Apple. Seems sort of like how Apple chopped the number of expansion slots in half back in the day - a small number of users were pissed, but life went on. You do have a good point on the number of USB slots though.

  54. £900 for a 13 inch laptop by thetoadwarrior · · Score: 1

    There is no way I'm paying £900 for a 13 inch laptop. I'll likely get a Mac Book Pro in the near future and I'm ok with the larger ones being priced high but the 13 inch ones just don't feel priced right for what you're getting.

    1. Re:£900 for a 13 inch laptop by Mr.+DOS · · Score: 1

      ...the 13 inch ones just don't feel priced right for what you're getting.

      I'd say they do - I'm not a fan of Apple, but you try finding another 13.3" notebook with a graphics chip any better than an Intel GMA and with that high an advertised battery life (they say "7 hours"; I'm guessing that means it'll get at least 4-5 hours). It's not really possible to find that level of component power in a size that small. The major downside I can see to it is cooling (or lack thereof); Apple better have figured this out properly or that machine will literally be smokin' (or at least, anything you leave on it will be).

            --- Mr. DOS

    2. Re:£900 for a 13 inch laptop by falconwolf · · Score: 1

      There is no way I'm paying £900 for a 13 inch laptop. I'll likely get a Mac Book Pro in the near future and I'm ok with the larger ones being priced high but the 13 inch ones just don't feel priced right for what you're getting.

      Did you look at the 13" MacBook Pro?

      Falcon

  55. Re:Today's news = sad days for new iphone3g owners by kannibal_klown · · Score: 1

    it really peeves me that apple dropped the price to $99 AND introduced a new phone that has twice the capacity for the same price as the phone that I bought. it would be different if they said, "in 1 year, there will be this blah blah blah phone for $199" because that would have given the consumers a chance to decide if they want to go ahead with the massive $199 purchase or wait to get something that is better for the same price.
     

    On one hand, it makes sense for them from 2 standpoints. If in February they announced "Umm guys, FYI we're probably releasing a new iPhone on June 19th" they run into 2 main problems.

    1 - Only 1 model means massive sales dip
    Potential customers would wait until June, unless they NEEDED a replacement due to a broken Sony/Nokia/etc. Sales would drop, they couldn't get rid of their old models, etc.
    It's not like they're Nokia and have several models with different feature sets, where users would still focus on those instead of the new iPhone. They just have the 1 unit. At least Nokia's flip phones will be selling like hot-cakes while the rest the SmartPhone users await the new shiney.

    2 - No public deadline means no public failure.
    Face it, if they announce it back in February and then run into a major issue like fabrication, bug, etc then they get egg on their face and their stock price goes down. Keep it secret, and maybe that June announcement can pushed back to their next big show in the Fall/Winter/etc.

  56. Re:Today's news = sad days for new iphone3g owners by Powerbear · · Score: 1

    you didn't pay $199 for the iphone... you paid $199 + 24*$69 = $1855 ( you now, the monthly fees )

    The new price is $99 + 24*$69 = $1755 or a 6.5% price drop. ( Assuming AT&T's pricing doesn't change )

  57. Snow Leopard URLs now 404 or redirect by mzs · · Score: 3, Informative

    For a little bit there was a new page:

    http://www.apple.com/macosx/snowleopard/

    It was pretty light on details and basically had all the same info that was on this PR page that now 404s:

    http://www.apple.com/ca/press/2008_06/snow_leopard.html

    Here is the original that I gleaned from ars:

    http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/8300945231/m/102001262931/p/9

    "SAN FRANCISCO--June 9, 2008--Apple® today previewed Mac OS® X Snow Leopard, which builds on the incredible success of OS X Leopard and is the next major version of the world's most advanced operating system. Rather than focusing primarily on new features, Snow Leopard will enhance the performance of OS X, set a new standard for quality and lay the foundation for future OS X innovation. Snow Leopard is optimized for multi-core processors, taps into the vast computing power of graphic processing units (GPUs), enables breakthrough amounts of RAM and features a new, modern media platform with QuickTime® X. Snow Leopard includes out-of-the-box support for Microsoft Exchange 2007 and is scheduled to ship in about a year.

    "We have delivered more than a thousand new features to OS X in just seven years and Snow Leopard lays the foundation for thousands more," said Bertrand Serlet, Apple's senior vice president of Software Engineering. "In our continued effort to deliver the best user experience, we hit the pause button on new features to focus on perfecting the world's most advanced operating system."

    Snow Leopard delivers unrivaled support for multi-core processors with a new technology code-named "Grand Central," making it easy for developers to create programs that take full advantage of the power of multi-core Macs. Snow Leopard further extends support for modern hardware with Open Computing Language (OpenCL), which lets any application tap into the vast gigaflops of GPU computing power previously available only to graphics applications. OpenCL is based on the C programming language and has been proposed as an open standard. Furthering OS X's lead in 64-bit technology, Snow Leopard raises the software limit on system memory up to a theoretical 16TB of RAM.

    Using media technology pioneered in OS X iPhone(TM), Snow Leopard introduces QuickTime X, which optimizes support for modern audio and video formats resulting in extremely efficient media playback. Snow Leopard also includes Safari® with the fastest implementation of JavaScript ever, increasing performance by 53 percent, making Web 2.0 applications feel more responsive.*

    For the first time, OS X includes native support for Microsoft Exchange 2007 in OS X applications Mail, iCal® and Address Book, making it even easier to integrate Macs into organizations of any size."

    1. Re:Snow Leopard URLs now 404 or redirect by mzs · · Score: 1

      Hmm... in the time that I composed and submitted that comment the PR release came back, and it appears unchanged.

      Also I'm wondering what the final word will be on PPC with 10.6.

    2. Re:Snow Leopard URLs now 404 or redirect by mzs · · Score: 1

      I guessed this URL and decided to post what is there before it gets changed, 404s, or redirects as well. Of note are that OpenCL seems to have no software backend and requires capable GPUs, Grand Central requires at least two cores (no fall-back so devs can use the same API?), and PPC is gone (even G5):

      http://www.apple.com/macosx/specs.html

      General requirements
      Intel Core 2 Duo (pictured, but only intel required it seems, see the next line)

              * Mac computer with an Intel processor
              * 1GB of memory
              * 5GB of free disk space
              * DVD drive for installation
              * Some features require a compatible Internet service provider; fees may apply.
              * Some features require Apple's MobileMe service; fees and terms apply.

      Feature-specific requirements

      Time Machine

      Time Machine requires an additional hard drive or Time Capsule (sold separately).

      Photo Booth

      requires an iSight camera (built in or external), USB video class (UVC) camera, or FireWire DV camcorder. Backdrop effects when using a DV camcorder require fixed focus, exposure, and white balance.

      Boot Camp

      requires Windows XP with Service Pack 2 or Windows Vista (sold separately).

      Screen sharing

      in iChat and the Finder requires a 128-Kbps Internet connection (300 Kbps recommended).

      DVD Player

      requires a 1.6GHz processor or faster for improved deinterlacing.

      iChat

              * Audio chats require a microphone and a 56-Kbps Internet connection.
              * Video chats require an iSight camera (built in or external), USB video class (UVC) camera, or FireWire DV camcorder; and a 128-Kbps upstream and downstream Internet connection.
              * Backdrop effects when using a DV camcorder require fixed focus, exposure, and white balance.
              * Some iChat features offer better performance and quality with higher system capabilities. More details

      Exchange Support

      requires Microsoft Exchange Server 2007 Service Pack 1 Update Rollup 4. Auto-setup requires enabling the Autodiscovery feature of Microsoft Exchange Server.

      QuickTime X movie capture

      requires iSight camera (built-in or external), USB video class (UVC) camera, or FireWire DV camcorder.
      QuickTime H.264 hardware acceleration

      requires a Mac with a NVIDIA 9400M graphics processor.

      Developer tools

      require 1GB of memory and an additional 3GB of available disk space.

      OpenCL

              * NVIDIA Geforce 8600M GT, GeForce 8800 GT, GeForce 8800 GTS, Geforce 9400M, GeForce 9600M GT, GeForce GT 120, GeForce GT 130.
              * ATI Radeon 4850, Radeon 4870

      64-bit support

      requires a Mac with a 64-bit processor.

      Grand Central Dispatch

      requires a Mac with a multicore processor.

      How to get Mac OS X
      Snow Leopard.

      Mac OS X v10.6 Snow Leopard will be available in September 2009. Here's how to get it.

      With every new Mac.

      When it's released, every new Mac computer will come with Mac OS X Snow Leopard already installed. You won't need to do anything.

      Snow Leopard Up-to-Date Program.

      If you purchased a qualifying Mac on or after June 8, 2009, that does not include Mac OS X Snow Leopard, you can upgrade for $9.95.

      Upgrading from Mac OS X v10.5 Leopard.

      If your Intel-based Mac is running Mac OS X v10.5 Leopard, just purchase Mac OS X v10.6 Snow Leopard when it's available and follow the simple installation instructions.

      Upgrading from Mac OS X v10.4 Tiger.

      If your Intel-based Mac is running Mac OS X v10.4 Tiger, purchase the Mac Box Set (when available), which is a single, affordable package that includes Mac OS X v10.6 Snow Leopard; iLife '09, with the latest versions of iPhoto, iMovie, GarageBand, iWeb, and iDVD; and iWork '09, Apple's productivity suite for home and office including Pages, Numbers, and Keynote.

  58. No Macbook aluminium in apple store! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Looks like they silently removed the low end aluminium macbook!
    If you want aluminium now you will need a pro!

    1. Re:No Macbook aluminium in apple store! by hattig · · Score: 5, Informative

      Yeah, you can buy the 13.3" MacBook Pro they announced, which adds Firewire 800 and an SD card slot to the MacBook configuration they've dropped. Sadly you will have to pay an extra -$100 for this configuration.

    2. Re:No Macbook aluminium in apple store! by Huge_UID · · Score: 1

      You also get the backlit keyboard. To me, that's the big deal.

    3. Re:No Macbook aluminium in apple store! by hattig · · Score: 1

      Yeah. The 13" MacBook (Pro) certainly looks a lot better deal today than it did yesterday. £899 as well, that's only a £50 premium over the US price when VAT is included, it's almost not insulting! Also the screen is meant to be higher quality with 60% more colour gamut.

      $999 Macbook White ...
      +$200 => Better case, better screen, Firewire 800, SD Slot, Backlit keyboard, and probably more

  59. Don't Cry Assclown by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't cry assclown, no one is going to take your precious Apple products away from you.

    1. Re:Don't Cry Assclown by Macka · · Score: 1

      Dear anonymous crap-hard. He's not crying, he's laughing at you: we all are.

  60. Itouch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does any of the iPhone features transfer over to the iTouch? I'm getting closer to replacing my first generation shuffle and want to get the newest generation iTouch possible.

  61. Re:Today's news = sad days for new iphone3g owners by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Here's a hint, don't buy a 3GS this coming February. Super-secret, inside sources tell me that there will be an update to the iPhone in June of 2010 sometime near or in conjunction with WWDC. The 3GS will also drop in price at the same time.

  62. iPhone 3.0 software release date by pathological+liar · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The iPhone 3.0 software release date has been given as June 17th although apparently paid developers can get the GM copy now.

    You'd think a detail like that could have found its way into the summary somewhere...

    1. Re:iPhone 3.0 software release date by mapinguari · · Score: 1

      That's GM seed. It doesn't ship until it ships.

  63. 99 bucks? by nurb432 · · Score: 1

    Is that unlocked 99 or are you still 'tethered' to the service provider for a few years?

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    1. Re:99 bucks? by WiiVault · · Score: 1

      I'll give you one guess. Hint: Apple doesn't like to break even/lose money on hardware.

    2. Re:99 bucks? by dotgain · · Score: 1

      Also, that's not what 'tethering' is. Tethering is something people actually want.

    3. Re:99 bucks? by nurb432 · · Score: 1

      Yes i know its not the same. That is why i put it in quotes.

      --
      ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    4. Re:99 bucks? by nurb432 · · Score: 1

      Guess ill stick with a HiPhone instead, may not be as good but its mine out of box.

      --
      ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    5. Re:99 bucks? by WiiVault · · Score: 1

      $99 a side I would be willing to pay a bit more than subscribers for an iPhone but if the European unlock prices are any indication Apple doesn't want to let many of those escape.

  64. now with karma-shield by fulldecent · · Score: 0, Troll

    Go ahead and mod me troll, but... oh wow a Slashdot news story on the same day as the news?!

    --

    -- I was raised on the command line, bitch

  65. Re:Today's news = sad days for new iphone3g owners by je+ne+sais+quoi · · Score: 5, Insightful

    you should have known better than to buy something just before WWDC

    He purchased the phone in February! That's 4-5 months ago. He didn't get "screwed" out of a better phone, he's just bitching that his phone is now last years model. But hey, unreasonable bitching never stopped slashdotters, so while we're wishing for an upgrade discount, why stop at 4-5 months, why not more? Shit, I bought my mac desktop 5 years ago and they've upgraded it since then 3-4 times including changing processors AND operating systems on me, why shouldn't I get an upgrade discount on that? By the GP's logic, Apple should never update their products because people keep buying their existing products. Sorry dude, welcome to the world of electronics, they get upgraded on a yearly or bi-yearly basis and the very minute you buy your product, there is a finite probability you will wake up tomorrow and it will be out of date.

    --
    Gentlemen! You can't fight in here, this is the war room!
  66. Snow Leopard pricing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A nicel news item was that Snow Leopard will cost only $29 as upgrade. A non-typical low price for Apple.

  67. Or you don't care about tethering by weston · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Not everybody does.

    It's one of the things that has kept me from buying an iPhone so far, but really, it's a nicety. It was *particularly* nice to be able to tether through an old Nokia 6820 while I was on a four month road trip across the US a few years ago, and under those particular circumstance, convenient tethering might remain enough of a compelling feature by itself to outweigh anything else.

    But the funny thing is... for most of what I use tethering for *now* (quick email checks, occasional directions, priceline purchases on short trips, spur-of-the-moment amazon purchases)... I can and would pretty much use a well-designed smart phone for anyway. In other words, the phones themselves (not the least of which is the iPhone) are getting good enough that they do what most people would likely use a tethered computer for most of the time.

    This isn't to say another device might not be a better fit for you... personally, I'm still weighing the merits of an iPhone vs a Pre vs an E70 for my next phone. Tethering's a factor, but not a dealbreaker, at least unless I start living a completely mobile life again.

    1. Re:Or you don't care about tethering by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      I'd say WiFi has done a lot to reduce the need for tethering. I used to use tethering a lot, but now all of the places where I regularly used it have WiFi coverage and so I can get a faster connection without. It's still useful on the train, where it's cheaper to pay for a day of data access from my mobile provider than it is to pay for WiFi, but most of the places I go that don't have WiFi now are places where I don't take any computers or my mobile anyway.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  68. Re:Today's news = sad days for new iphone3g owners by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'd be pissed off to man. I started looking for my first computer when Intel released the 486/DX33. I'm STILL looking and waiting. Then came the DX/2 models, then PCI, then x4, then the Pentium. I came really close around the time of the FDIV bug. Things were looking good, the P75 and 90 were pigs, MMX did not have application support and it was going to be a while for the P2 and Cyrix had gone under. AMD screwed it up with the 686 and my wait started all over again. As soon as they stop getting faster and the price stops going down, I will eventually get a computer.

  69. Java on Macs by falconwolf · · Score: 1

    Though your dig against Apple for their slow to come Java updates is not unfounded

    It took way too long for Java 6 to be available for Macs, and it requires Leopard. Apple also made it hard to find the download.

    Falcon

    1. Re:Java on Macs by ischorr · · Score: 2, Informative

      Not just requires Leopard - it runs only on Macs with Core 2 (or some Xeon) processors. That means not only no PPC love, but even the first several Intel Macs are out of luck. Like my wife's 2-year old laptop (only 1 year old or so when they finally released Java 6).

    2. Re:Java on Macs by falconwolf · · Score: 1

      Not just requires Leopard - it runs only on Macs with Core 2 (or some Xeon) processors.

      Ump, I didn't know that.

      That means not only no PPC love, but even the first several Intel Macs are out of luck. Like my wife's 2-year old laptop (only 1 year old or so when they finally released Java 6).

      She must of gotten just before Apple released the Core 2 MBP. Perhaps version 2,x. I got mine about 22 months ago, it's a MacBook Pro 3,1.

      Perhaps from that link you can tell I have or want to install Ubuntu 9.04 on my MBP. Because it does not include in the install or repositories CinePaint I'm thinking about installing Ubuntu Studio 9.04 which does have CinePaint.

      Falcon

  70. See yourself in Apple logo - take picture by _Shorty-dammit · · Score: 5, Informative

    Taking a picture of yourself with the iPhone is easy. When you can see yourself in the reflection of the Apple logo, take your picture. Works just fine and dandy.

    1. Re:See yourself in Apple logo - take picture by WilyCoder · · Score: 1

      You mean the shiny logo has a use beyond signaling to females how rich I am? Cool!

  71. the usual BS about 64-bit by stevenj · · Score: 5, Informative
    I was dismayed to see this old canard in Apple's MacOS Snow Leopard technology summary

    64-bit computing [...] enables computers to process twice the number of instructions per clock cycle, which can dramatically speed up numeric calculations and other tasks.

    Haven't people learned by now that this is total BS? 64-bit addressing is independent of instructions per cycle, bus width, or anything like that. (Of course, newer 64-bit systems may be happen to be faster for other, unrelated reasons.) The old "64-bit is twice as fast as 32-bit" is a line of hooey that has been sold to the public for years now (I recall it gaining prominence when Intel started promoting its Itanium plans), but I thought it was finally dying out.

    --
    If a thing is not diminished by being shared, it is not rightly owned if it is only owned & not shared. S. Augustine
    1. Re:the usual BS about 64-bit by recoiledsnake · · Score: 3, Informative

      You're absolutely right. In fact, 64-bit code can slow down the application because memory pointers are now 64bit and accessing and moving them will take twice as much bandwidth as earlier. The real speed up comes from the extra registers that AMD introduced in AMD64 and the ability for huge apps to address more than 2GB at a time.

      --
      This space for rent.
    2. Re:the usual BS about 64-bit by Sonic+McTails · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Actually, i386->amd64 is an improvement. While you do loose performance going from 32->64 memory addresses (and thus using more cache), you gain more general use registers, which i386 is *greatly* starved (you basically have four that you know are always available, and the a bunch more that may or may not be available for general usage if you know what features the processor supports, and you hand-write ASM, or tune your compiler). Hence the performance increases going from i386->amd64, but no on other 32 to 64 migrations involving the same architecture base set (i.e., sparc32->sparc64 or powerpc32->powerpc64).

      --
      This signature was left intentionally blank.
    3. Re:the usual BS about 64-bit by tyrione · · Score: 1

      Part of this BS was due to the fact that filesystems were being run as 64 bit with 32 bit kernels typically on a single CPU/core of a Multi-core CPU.

    4. Re:the usual BS about 64-bit by TheNetAvenger · · Score: 3, Informative

      Yes and no...

      If you are in reference to traditional Apple's idea of 64bit, it is all about address space.

      However in outside of Apple world, 64bit means several things beyond just address space.

      1) 64bit chunks of computations instead of 32bit chunks. So the data being 'computed' is in native 64bit chunks - and in theory could be twice as fast in an optimal pass.

      2) 64bit CPU features - more registers, other AMD64/EMT64 features

      3) Combined memory read writes, for example in Vista x64 when a 32bit application is reading or writing to RAM the OS can often combine two 32bit read/writes into ONE 64bit read/write, thus speeding up RAM access.

      The problem with OS X and 64bit is that it hasn't been a 64bit OS, and the only 64bit features OS X has offered was the 64bit address space instead of all the 64bit features of the CPU.

      If the kernel is 'fully' 64bit in Snow Leopard (which it looks NOT to be) it would be faster for OS level operations and application handling. Vista x64 often is much faster than Vista x32 even when running 32bit applications because the OS does take advantage of the 64bit CPUs natively.

      So from OS X point of view, 64bit computing has only been about more address space. But in the non-OS X world, from Linux 64bit to Vista 64bit, the OS actually uses other features of the CPU and calculates in full 64bit chunks thus computing more data faster.

      You are right that 64bit is not going to be twice as fast as 32bit, just like 32bit wasn't twice as fast as 16bit computing. In fact, most 16bit applications took a slight hit when moving to 32bit processors. It was the 'other' features of the 32bit processors that made them a huge jump, like the pre-emptive scheduler. This is also true of the 32bit to 64bit move.

      There are a few 'features' in the 64bit processors, but nothing like the jump from 16bit to 32bit in the x86 timeframe. One feature is the memory access mode (beyond address spacing), but in terms of performance, it is not a big leap.

      The best 64bit performance bang is in how 64bit OSes are using the extra 'space' and 'modes' to get things done, like the Vista example of shoving two memory read/writes into one operation and removal of table linking for dealing with File Systems and even kernel level mapping tables that no longer have to link into 32bit spaces and can just natively use a singe 64bit addressing table. These are modest gains, though.

      True 64bit optimized applications can jump 50% over the same 32bit application, if they are big data crunching applications, like 3D modeling, photo editors, encoders, etc. Having twice the bits to shove data through the CPU does make a difference, and by a lot depending on the application.

      OS X doesn't offer this to its 64bit applications because it thunks the processing and is only giving the application a 64bit address space, so on OS X, a 64bit application will ONLY speed up if it is using more than 4GB of RAM (approx).

    5. Re:the usual BS about 64-bit by TheNetAvenger · · Score: 1

      Um, no...

      You are confusing a lot different things. (File Systems have nothing to do with this.)

    6. Re:the usual BS about 64-bit by smallfries · · Score: 1

      No, you're not quite right.

      A 64-bit machine implies a 64-bit data-path through the processor as well as the 64-bit address space. The numeric calculations that they are referring to are single-precision floating point values accessed through the SIMD extensions. You get twice the throughput on these in 64-bit mode on both AMD and Intel's processors.

      In general you're right, but there is actually something real behind that particular claim.

      --
      Slashdot: where don knuth is an idiot because he cant grasp the awesome power of php
    7. Re:the usual BS about 64-bit by nine-times · · Score: 1

      On the other hand, try to explain to my grandmother why 64-bit computing is a good thing at all. Eventually you'll come down to some kind of statement as inaccurate as "it's faster" or "it lets you deal with more stuff at the same time."

    8. Re:the usual BS about 64-bit by stevenj · · Score: 1

      Bullshit.

      You have a 64-bit data path even on old 32-bit processors: it's called double precision. And there are 128-bit data paths, too, on any 32- bit Intel x86 CPU for the past 10 years: MMX and SSE*. The width of the SSE registers (the single-precision SIMD extensions you are referring to) did not increase with x86_64/amd64/em64t.

      The width of the widest data register has absolutely nothing to do with the size of the address space.

      --
      If a thing is not diminished by being shared, it is not rightly owned if it is only owned & not shared. S. Augustine
    9. Re:the usual BS about 64-bit by stevenj · · Score: 1

      64bit chunks of computations instead of 32bit chunks. So the data being 'computed' is in native 64bit chunks - and in theory could be twice as fast in an optimal pass.

      Yes, you've managed to paraphrase the usual bullshit that you've been brainwashed with quite well. Here's a hint: the 32-bit x86 processors had 64-bit (and 128-bit) registers already.

      2) 64bit CPU features - more registers, other AMD64/EMT64 features

      Nothing to do with 64 bits, and certainly not a simple "factor of 2" in "data processing rates" or "instructions per clock cycle". As I said, newer architectures can certainly be faster for reasons that have nothing to do with 64 bit addressing, and which have nothing to do with hype about "factors of 2" gained by "going from 32 bits to 64 bits" (which is obviously twice as good, right?)

      3) Combined memory read writes, for example in Vista x64 when a 32bit application is reading or writing to RAM the OS can often combine two 32bit read/writes into ONE 64bit read/write, thus speeding up RAM access.

      See point (1): the 32-bit processors could do this already.

      --
      If a thing is not diminished by being shared, it is not rightly owned if it is only owned & not shared. S. Augustine
    10. Re:the usual BS about 64-bit by TheNetAvenger · · Score: 1

      Here's a hint: the 32-bit x86 processors had 64-bit (and 128-bit) registers already.

      You don't get this do you...

      You are going off of architecture and the hardware layer. Heck the 68000 was a 32/16bit processor, but do you think Apple System 2.x was a 32bit OS? No...

      Letâ(TM)s start with something very basic.

      The compiler for the OS and the application compilers can only utilize what architecture scope they are designed. So with a 32bit OS, the compiler is going to optimize and build to the native 32bit x86 mode of the CPU. PERIOD.

      This has nothing to do with brand prediction or RISC pipelines or any other 128bit or 64bit internals of the CPU architecture, because the compiler in native x86 32bit mode has NO ACCESS beyond the 32bit mode of the CPU, as it is the software layer NOT THE HARDWARE LAYER, and the internal CPU architecture specific abilities are NOT something the compiler/software deals with.

      So when you compile an OS as 32bit x86, it only gets access to the 32bit portions of the CPU mode, and it donâ(TM)t matter what the CPU is doing internally.

      And this is where the performance gains come from for 64bit SOFTWARE. So when the OS or applications are compiled for the 64bit mode of the CPU, they GET ACCESS TO THE ADDITIONAL 64bit registers and 64bit features of the CPU. (This also has to do with how the AMD64/EMT64 CPUs work and flip between 32bit and 64bit modes.)

      So if were to take a number crunching application and optimize it for 32bit FPU in my C compiler; and then rewrite it and optimize it for the 64bit FPU in my C compiler, I could in theory get TWICE the performance out of the Application. (See we live, breath, and work at the application level, not the hardware level.)

      Here think of it like this, you have a GPU in your computer, and it could be a 128bit GPU. Now get out your 32bit C compiler and throw a 128bit integer at the GPU? What you say you canâ(TM)t because the SOFTWARE doesnâ(TM)t have a freaking clue what a 128bit integer is natively? Of course it doesnâ(TM)t. So, instead, at the software level you have to use tricks to break up your 128bit integer into 32bit chunks when you are processing it and then shove it to the GPU in 32bit chunks at a timeâ¦

      Do you see where software and hardware layers are different?

      So if you take something like an OS that is breaking crap up into 32bits, as this is all it knows, and shoving it to the CPU compared to an OS that can use 64bit chunks to shove at the CPU, there is a performance difference.

      Now take this to not only the OS dealing with the CPU, but to devices and having native 64bit drivers. Shoving data between an application the CPU and GPU in 64bit chunks instead of 32bit chunks is a big difference, especially when the GPU and CPU understand 64bit and can do 64bit processing.

      And I will end here, as this is not even taking into the additional features that the 64bit compilers open up to OSes and Applications beyond 64bit access and number crunching.

    11. Re:the usual BS about 64-bit by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      Code that is heavy on 64-bit numerical operations also benefits on other platforms, for the same reason. In 32-bit mode, PowerPC and SPARC registers are 32-bit (on 64-bit systems they're just sign-extended when running 32-bit code). If you want to store a 64-bit value, you use two adjacent registers. This effectively halves the number of registers you have available. On x86 this is even worse; you only have eight GPRs anyway, and doing 64-bit operations limits this to four. This means you have a massive amount of register churn, as your compiler will be inserting loads and stores after almost every operation. You can eliminate this to a degree by using memory-register operations and the top few stack slots, and hope the CPU is clever enough to alias these with some hidden registers, but it doesn't always work.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    12. Re:the usual BS about 64-bit by smallfries · · Score: 1

      Oh dear. You need to think a bit harder before accusing someone else of spouting bullshit.

      Read the final paragraph in this. I trust it is a reliable enough source for you?

      I know the width of the widest data register is not related to the size of the address space. But unlike you, I also know that I didn't claim it was - reread what I wrote more carefully. Get an adult to explain the difference between implication and a biconditional, and how informal english differs from logic.

      I'm going to restate what I said originally so that it is simple enough for you to understand:
      1. The SIMD extensions on the 32-bit x86 instruction set were executed by AMD and Intel's ISAs over multiple cycles.
      2. When they transitions to the 64-bit ISA they used to the wider data-path to do more work per cycle.
      3. Specifically, they use it in the ALU to handle both single-precision floating-point operations at once.
      4. As a result dense numeric code (running over single-precision floats) runs at twice the speed.

      Think before you reply.

      --
      Slashdot: where don knuth is an idiot because he cant grasp the awesome power of php
    13. Re:the usual BS about 64-bit by stevenj · · Score: 1

      You really don't get it, do you. Even on a 32-bit processor like x86, there are programmer-visible (IN THE INSTRUCTION SET) 64-bit and 128-bit registers. The 64-bit registers are the double-precision floating-point registers (and in fact these are 80-bit extended-precision registers on x86), and the 128-bit registers are from SSE and the other Intel SIMD extensions. The terms 32-bit and 64-bit refer only to the size of addresses , not to all registers or anything else.

      The rest of your post follows from your total ignorance, and I will ignore it.

      --
      If a thing is not diminished by being shared, it is not rightly owned if it is only owned & not shared. S. Augustine
    14. Re:the usual BS about 64-bit by stevenj · · Score: 1

      Sorry, you're still wrong.

      What the document you are referring to is about is the support for Intel SIMD extensions on AMD. Originally, AMD supported their own 64-bit SIMD operations called 3DNow! which could do two single-precision fp operations at once. Intel, on the other hand, had 128-bit SIMD instructions called SSE which could do four single-precision fp operations at once. Then AMD added support for SSE to their processors, but essentially emulated it with 3DNow! so that one SSE instruction would really use two 3DNow! instructions and take two cycles. Intel also had SSE2 instructions that could do 2 double-precision fp instructions in a cycle, which AMD emulated by doing it in 2 cycles with their ordinary fp unit. The document you are linking describes the fact that AMD eventually dropped 3DNow! and added true hardware support for SSE/SSE2 so that they could do all four/two fp operations in a cycle.

      This happened to coincide with their switch to amd64, since they took advantage of the change in instruction set to drop their old 3DNow! instructions. But it has nothing to do with "64-bit" per se. Moreover, on Intel 32-bit CPUs, the 128-bit SSE instructions did execute in a cycle because they were supported in hardware. And even the old 32-bit AMD cpus did 64-bit floating-point and 3DNow! operations in a cycle.

      --
      If a thing is not diminished by being shared, it is not rightly owned if it is only owned & not shared. S. Augustine
    15. Re:the usual BS about 64-bit by stevenj · · Score: 1

      In 32-bit mode, PowerPC and SPARC registers are 32-bit (on 64-bit systems they're just sign-extended when running 32-bit code).

      I can't believe how much total nonsense is being propagated on this thread. To quote the IBM PowerPC Instruction Set Architecture manual:

      Implementations of this architecture provide 32 floating-point registers (FPRs). [...] Each FPR contains 64 bits that support the floating-point double format.

      So, you have it completely backwards: there are no 32-bit single-precision registers on PowerPC, whether in 32-bit or 64-bit mode. It only has 64-bit double-precision registers. Single-precision floating-point operations (not including AltiVec) are done with the double-precision hardware, and are rounded to single-precision when they are spilled. So, storing a 64-bit floating-point value does not "halve" the number of available registers: it uses exactly the same (double precision) registers as for single-precision math.

      The situation is very similar on x86: single and double precision use exactly the same hardware registers (which are actually 80-bit extended-precision registers on 32-bit x86 machines); going from 32-bit to 64-bit fp types does not halve the number of physical registers available. (And thanks to hardware register renaming, the instruction set's nominal limitation on the number of registers is not really a practical limitation; the hardware lets you exploit the much larger set of real physical registers.)

      Judging by this thread, the "64-bit CPUs can process data twice as quickly as 32-bit CPUs" hooey has been circulating for so long that people have begun to invent works of fiction to justifiy it in their minds.

      --
      If a thing is not diminished by being shared, it is not rightly owned if it is only owned & not shared. S. Augustine
    16. Re:the usual BS about 64-bit by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      I was talking about integer arithmetic, not floating point, as should have been obvious from the context. No one cares about the difference between 32-bit and 64-bit for floating point operations because all modern architectures use the same FPU in both modes. It's moderately important on x86 because in 64-bit mode you can assume SSE is present and not ever use the x87 instructions, but that isn't relevant for Apple who only support computers with SSE anyway.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    17. Re:the usual BS about 64-bit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're right, but on a x86 32 bit CPU the GPRs are 32 Bit, so if you want to do a 64 bit integer operation you have to break it up into at least two operations.

    18. Re:the usual BS about 64-bit by stevenj · · Score: 1

      Name one real-world application in which 64-bit integer calculations (not including address calculations) are a significant performance bottleneck, and 32-bit integers are too narrow.

      --
      If a thing is not diminished by being shared, it is not rightly owned if it is only owned & not shared. S. Augustine
    19. Re:the usual BS about 64-bit by stevenj · · Score: 1

      64-bit integer calculations are rarely if ever a performance bottleneck (not including address calculations). And in applications where 32-bit integers were already wide enough for you, there is no benefit to going 64-bit integers (and it is actually slower because of increased cache pressure).

      --
      If a thing is not diminished by being shared, it is not rightly owned if it is only owned & not shared. S. Augustine
    20. Re:the usual BS about 64-bit by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      ZFS.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    21. Re:the usual BS about 64-bit by stevenj · · Score: 1

      You've got to be joking. Filesystem operations use 64-bit integer calculations, sure, but that is not even close to their being performance limiting. Do you realize how many orders of magnitude slower the disk is than the CPU?

      --
      If a thing is not diminished by being shared, it is not rightly owned if it is only owned & not shared. S. Augustine
    22. Re:the usual BS about 64-bit by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      Clearly you've not seen benchmark differences between ZFS on x86 and x86-64. There is a significant difference - although the extra kernel address space for the ARC doesn't hurt - due entirely to the register churn on 64-bit calculations. A lot of simulation applications also make heavy use of 64-bit arithmetic. Some of the code I was working on for my PhD fell into this category, and was a lot faster if you turned on MMX for integer ops (8 extra 64-bit integer registers).

      A lot of code uses 64-bit integers these days, and the extra register churn from halving your number of GPRs on x86 is noticeable.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    23. Re:the usual BS about 64-bit by stevenj · · Score: 1

      I haven't seen those benchmarks, and I'm quite skeptical of your claim that ZFS is CPU-bound by 64-bit integer operations. The only times I've heard of where filesystems are CPU-bound are when they are using compression and/or encryption, and both of those problems can operate on narrower integers (possibly in 128-bit vectors ala SSE).

      As for simulations, the overwhelming majority of scientific simulations rely on floating-point arithmetic.

      --
      If a thing is not diminished by being shared, it is not rightly owned if it is only owned & not shared. S. Augustine
    24. Re:the usual BS about 64-bit by velen · · Score: 1

      "32-bit compatible.
      To ensure simplicity and flexibility, Mac OS X still comes in one version that runs both 64-bit and 32-bit applications. So you donâ(TM)t need to update everything on your system just to run a single 64-bit program. And new 64-bit applications work just fine with your existing printers, storage devices, and PCI cards."

      Vista x64 is better than XP x64 because of driver support. But breaking compatibility with a full transition to 64bit computing is bad. I personally prefer the OS X route. The migration path has been much simpler. Besides, with the new LLVM compilers, you get performance improvements all over the place.

    25. Re:the usual BS about 64-bit by chthonicdaemon · · Score: 1

      I can vouch for the fact that begin able to do 64 bit IEEE double precision math natively (instead of having to restate all your double precision work as single precision) translates to roughly 2x speedup* on my programs (which are CPU limited). It depends what you are doing, but for my work 64 bit is definitely twice as fast as 32 bit. If your work is memory or disk limited, going to 64 bit won't do much at all.

      * On a 32 bit system, changing all your doubles to singles and doing the same calcs with less precision is about twice as fast. On a 64 bit system, it makes no difference, as the FPU is using 64 bits anyway.

      --
      Languages aren't inherently fast -- implementations are efficient
    26. Re:the usual BS about 64-bit by TheNetAvenger · · Score: 1

      OMG, how f**king stupid are you?

      The whole campaign against AMD64 was from Intel, and they tried to sell people that the only advantage was memory address space.

      After they were laughed out of the tech world, they implemented EMT64.

      Yet here we are again, and you are reciting Intel talking points (not even sure you know you are) that Intel themselves has since refuted.

      So should everyone here just take your word that AMD and Intel are stupid and you are right?

      Should I ignore the benchmarks our techs use that show a 15-20% boost even in 32bit applications when running on a native 64bit OS?

      Really?

      You don't get this, and you are dismissed...

      Buh-Bye...

    27. Re:the usual BS about 64-bit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I read a study that said that performance actually could go down, since 64-bit pointers means more overhead in fetching pointer addresses from memory.

  72. What to do with a broken 16GB iPhone 3G? by ACAx1985 · · Score: 1

    So now that there is a $200 16GB 3GS, what do with a recently cracked (but completely functional) 16GB 3G? Repairs are $200+ .. throw it out a window?

    1. Re:What to do with a broken 16GB iPhone 3G? by scorp1us · · Score: 1

      See if the repairs come down in response... Otherwise, dispose of it properly at an ATT store. (Electronics recycling program)
       

      --
      Slashdot's rate-of-post filter: Preventing you from posting too many great ideas at once.
    2. Re:What to do with a broken 16GB iPhone 3G? by ACAx1985 · · Score: 1

      Hopefully they come down. It looks like its $500 for one of the new models if I'm already on a contract.

  73. PowerPC End of Line killing my PowerBook. by geogaia · · Score: 5, Informative

    Another Apple tradition gone by the wayside: Apple has long supported their older hardware better than most PC makers. (I still visit classrooms quite happily running Mac OS 8 on old PowerPC hardware, for example.) But the new Mac OS X 10.6 (Snow Leopard) will be the first that will not run on PowerPC Macs. That makes my barely-out-of warranty PowerBook G4 end of line as far as Apple is concerned. I'm not alone in this--I don't know how many million PPC Macs are still running, but Apple was selling them new three years ago. I'm more than a little annoyed. No doubt soon I won't be able to get Apple OS security patches, updates to iLife and iTunes, etc. It's almost like running Windows XP. Fortunately, it's still Mach *nix based, and as long as FOSS developers check their code against the PPC compilers, I can still get current versions of Firefox, Thunderbird, etc.

    1. Re:PowerPC End of Line killing my PowerBook. by ender- · · Score: 1
      I'm not sure where you think the problem lies. You say old PowerPC hardware is still running OS 8. That's great. But it's not like that old HW is supported on OS 9. Or OSX. It's been several years since Apple has started selling Intel hardware. You can't realistically expect them to continue supporting ever-aging hardware with new releases.

      In 10 years, I'm sure you'll see places happily running OS X Leopard on G4/G5 Macs. There's no difference with what you're seeing now. Frankly I think it's pretty impressive that Apple has continued to support your hardware for 3 years after switching to a completely different HW platform.

      If you want to run the same HW for a decade and expect new OS compatibility, you're never going to find it from a commercial desktop OS vendor.

    2. Re:PowerPC End of Line killing my PowerBook. by lakeland · · Score: 1

      I think ditching PPC for 10.6 was a good call by Apple.

      10.6 does not add many new features that are valuable to you as a PPC user. 10.6 is about consolodating their code-base, getting rid of 32 bit, getting rid of PPC, etc.

      We still get 10.4 updates now and I believe security still happens on 10.3 though I don't follow that. So no, you won't lose our security patches, upgrades to iLife for quite some time. I'd guess at least 2 years.

      At the end of the day, there are not that many people who want to run older hardware with the latest software and it's too expensive to base your business around them. As you've noted, you can continue running on Mac OS 8 (why not 9?), and I expect you can continue to run on 10.5 for a long time to come. But just as those people running on classic miss out on loads of features, you'll miss out on iLife 10 or 11 and other new software.

    3. Re:PowerPC End of Line killing my PowerBook. by squallbsr · · Score: 1

      Hmm, I bought my Core 2 Duo MacBook like 2.5 years ago, that was a second generation MacBook. The PowerPC models are just a tad bit older than that. Its not Apple's fault that you bought a bargain-basement-closeout-special Powerbook when they were selling Intel MacBooks new...

      --
      Sleep: A completely inadequate substitution for Caffeine.
    4. Re:PowerPC End of Line killing my PowerBook. by drsmithy · · Score: 1

      Another Apple tradition gone by the wayside: Apple has long supported their older hardware better than most PC makers.

      No, they don't. Even the "Pro" machines only come with a 12 month warranty, and they are notorious for suffen hardware changes without transition periods (eg: ADB to USB, no writable media on the first iMac). To say nothing of the piddling few years worth of patches and updates you get for an OS X release.

      Better than PC makers ? No chance. They're not even in the same ballpark.

    5. Re:PowerPC End of Line killing my PowerBook. by singularity · · Score: 1

      The very last PowerBooks were sold October 2005 - January 2006. Not only that, but Apple announced the transition on 6 June 2005, or almost exactly four years ago.

      If your PowerBook just expired its three year AppleCare, you must have bought your PowerBook *just* before the release of the MacBook Pros, and most certainly after Apple announced the transition.

      Four years is a very long time for notebook computers. Apple gave you four years of full support after announcing they were planning on EOL PowerPC machines.

      As far as security patches go, Apple continues to release updates and security patches for the previous generation OS. For example, with the release of Snow Leopard, support will cease for Tiger (OS X 10.4). Apple just last month released a security patch for Tiger (PPC). In addition, I believe all of the updates released recently for the various iLife products run on Tiger/PPC.

      This means you should expect continued patches for your Leopard/PPC machine for at least the lifespan of Snow Leopard.

      What confuses me most about your comment is your mention of a classroom of machines running MacOS 8. This proves that Apple software (and hardware) continues to be useful long after it has been EOL'd, but somehow your PowerBook will cease to be useful the minute Snow Leopard is released and is unavailable on your PowerBook?

      --
      - (c) 2018 Hank Zimmerman
    6. Re:PowerPC End of Line killing my PowerBook. by geogaia · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I understand WHY they're doing it--regression testing of however many million bugs they have against a whole second platform was no doubt getting expensive, especially when they want to focus on performance on the Intel platform. But if they could compile and test on PPC for Tiger and Leopard, why not Snow Leopard? Up until now, OS and compiler support for my PPC has been great. Apple leaving the platform doesn't hurt yet, but it will when the freeware and shareware developers stop compiling for PPC (as many already have for 10.4). I know I could just use Linux full time, but then I wouldn't be using a Mac, would I?

    7. Re:PowerPC End of Line killing my PowerBook. by geogaia · · Score: 1

      I just checked and I guess my PowerBook G4 is four years old. When I bought it, it was full price (not a closeout, sadly), and there was no Intel PowerBook option, though one was promised someday. My previous notebook was broken and I had work to do, so I wasn't going to wait for a vaporware computer. Don't get me wrong, it was worth it, I just want to get another couple of years of good use out of it.

    8. Re:PowerPC End of Line killing my PowerBook. by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 1

      But the new Mac OS X 10.6 (Snow Leopard) will be the first that will not run on PowerPC Macs.

      I'm in the same boat, although my Mac was nearly a gift so I don't have the same sunk investment as you. Having said that, the biggest feature of Snow Leopard is that it's optimized for 64-bit, and your Mac and mine are both 32-bit. I doubt that a 32-bit build (even if it were logistically feasible) would run well on our machines. While I wish I could play with Snow Leopard, 10.5 isn't going to stop running on release day. You've already gotten more than 3 years of use from your laptop with no signs of stopping. That's nothing to sneeze at!

      BTW, iLife '06 is the last version to fully support our Macs. iLife '08 requires a G5 or newer for iMovie. Also, OpenOffice.org 3.1 is only available for Intel. It's not just Apple that's deprecating PowerPC builds.

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
    9. Re:PowerPC End of Line killing my PowerBook. by illumin8 · · Score: 3, Informative

      That makes my barely-out-of warranty PowerBook G4 end of line as far as Apple is concerned. I'm not alone in this--I don't know how many million PPC Macs are still running, but Apple was selling them new three years ago.

      Actually, that's not correct. Apple stopped selling all G4 Macs in January 2006, when the transition to Intel was complete across all product lines. They have done everything they promised they would do, including provide compatibility with all new OS releases for 3 years. By the time Snow Leopard is released next January, you will have had 4 years of compatibility with all new OS releases, which is even more than they promised.

      What's more, you can continue to run Leopard on your Mac for years to come, and will still receive all security and compatibility updates. Apple is not making your old machine obsolete, even though the processor speed and performance of your old machine quite assuredly is (I had a PowerBook G4 from 2003 and it was getting quite long in the tooth).

      In short, you'll get 3-4 years of solid use out of your portable computer anyway. 5-6 years if Leopard works fine for you. Why are you complaining? How many PC laptops from 2006 are still usable and are even capable of running Vista or Windows 7?

      --
      "When the president does it, that means it's not illegal." - Richard M. Nixon
  74. Re:Today's news = sad days for new iphone3g owners by rjstanford · · Score: 1

    What? This is a technology item. Every year, there'll be an upgrade. Its going to be a cool upgrade. It'll cost you money. You may or may not do it.

    Sorry if any of that came as a surprise...

    Besides, if the iPhone was worth $199 to you, it was worth $199 to you. Enjoy it. Nothing that they do now (or even 6 months from now) should change that...

    --
    You're special forces then? That's great! I just love your olympics!
  75. Re:Today's news = sad days for new iphone3g owners by EastCoastSurfer · · Score: 1

    5 minutes on the internet in February would have shown you that Apple usually updates the iPhones around this time every year.

    Also, technology in general drops in price over time. I have some news for you. That computer you bought today is going to be cheaper 1 month from now. It might not even be for sale 9-12 months from now.

  76. Depends on how you define "success" by Alzheimers · · Score: 2, Insightful

    looks like another successful WWDC.

    Well, that really depends on how you define success. If you think that they succeeded because they made it through mostly unscathed and that it ended and everyone went home, then you're probably right. Their share price even managed to recover to nearly the same value by closing.

    However, most people expect more from Apple than a few minor tweaks and "refreshes", especially regarding the iPhone. Their presentation basically restated, bullet by bullet, everything that had been leaked to date. Nothing new or inspiring, and some things that weren't so inspiring (thanks, AT&T, for nothing). There wasn't even a "One More Thing".

    No visions for the future. Nothing innovative, inspiring, or even interesting. In all, it was an ordinary, if not downright boring, conference that promised nothing but More of the Same.

    1. Re:Depends on how you define "success" by jinushaun · · Score: 1

      I think sites like Engadget and Gizmodo are killing Apple presentations. Not only are things leaked weeks leading up to the presentation, but they build up such high expectations that would be IMPOSSIBLE for any company to meet. The past few Apple presentations have been boring. The speakers looked like they were just going through the motions, because everything they were presenting had already been leaked! Whatever happened to being surprised? Maybe we don't deserve a "one more thing".

      Also, from a business, marketing and technological standpoint, not every presentation can be revolutionary. That would require Apple engineers to make breakthroughs at an exponential rate! Good luck with that.

    2. Re:Depends on how you define "success" by Totenglocke · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'll undo my mods for this. The fact that they DOUBLED the processing power (and in turn actually using the phone is nicer because apps load faster, respond faster, etc) is not a "minor tweak". That's a pretty damn big improvement.

      --
      "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." ~Thomas Jefferson
    3. Re:Depends on how you define "success" by noob749 · · Score: 1

      I don't know why you sound so unimpressed. A lot of people would consider "more of the same" a good thing coming from Apple. Sure they have their flaws, but by and large they are very good at providing stuff their target market want. You shouldn't expect a world-changing announcement every year - that would detract from their announcements that actually DO change the world.

    4. Re:Depends on how you define "success" by mgblst · · Score: 1

      Not every conference can be an iPhone conference. If you follow all the new stories before the conference, you are definitely going to be disappointed, since the rumours promise so much, but reality doesn't deliver.

    5. Re:Depends on how you define "success" by garote · · Score: 1

      "Their presentation basically restated, bullet by bullet, everything that had been leaked to date. Nothing new or inspiring..."

      I've got an idea for you.
      Stop poring over the rumor sites and spoiling the surprise for yourself.

  77. Re:Today's news = sad days for new iphone3g owners by hattig · · Score: 1

    Good enough at the time for you to buy.

    You get the new software with new features for free.

    You signed up for a 2 year contract.

    You were happy at the time. This new product doesn't diminish what you were prevously happy with, indeed it actually enhances it with new features, for free.

    Quit yer bitchin'

  78. Re:Today's news = sad days for new iphone3g owners by hattig · · Score: 1

    He is seriously bitching that his $2000+ investment (including contract) has gone down by $100 (5%) since February.

  79. To bulky, also old school by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    Newer DLSR's are pretty much moving in bulk to SD cards already. CF is already on the way out for pro gear.

    A CF card adaptor on the laptop would be far larger as well...

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:To bulky, also old school by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 3, Informative

      Newer DLSR's are pretty much moving in bulk to SD cards already. CF is already on the way out for pro gear.

      No, this is incorrect. Low-end consumer dSLRs are certainly using SD; but those aren't pro gear. Pretty much all the new higher-end cameras from Nikon (D700, D3, D3x), Canon (EOS 5D mark II), Sony (Alpha A900), even Hasselblad (H3DII) are using CF.

      The only higher-end cameras I can find that use SD are the Leica Rangefinders - and people might debate whether or not those are "pro" in the usual sense of the word (they are certainly pricey!).

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    2. Re:To bulky, also old school by Achromatic1978 · · Score: 1
      What are you on about? Digital backs don't use SD cards. Canon's 1 and 5 series offer SD cards concurrently with CF, primarily for the ability to write a RAW to the CF, and JPG to the SD for quick preview by an assistant, etc.

      CF is not on the way out for any pro gear that I've read about in the last year, unless you're reading something that the rest of us aren't.

    3. Re:To bulky, also old school by Christian+Henry · · Score: 1

      Newer DLSR's are pretty much moving in bulk to SD cards already. CF is already on the way out for pro gear.

      Could you please name one pro-level DSLR that has moved to only SD. Or are you referring to dual-slot (SD + CF) camera bodies?

      A CF card adaptor on the laptop would be far larger as well...

      With simpler (and, I'm guessing, less expensive) less expensive electronics. Most CF-to-SATA adapters I've run across tend to be less expensive (and more robust) than the equivalent SD-to-SATA adapters. I'd have to guess that this is due to the simpler electronics on-board the CF-to-SATA adapters.

      Oh, and really, a CF card isn't really that much wider than an SD card (Apple certainly could have compromised with a CF-SD-combo slot; narrower than an ExpressCard slot, but better suited for the professional digital photographer market).

  80. Actually Yes, there is OpenGL ES 2.0 support by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    One of the slides in the keynote mentioned Open GL ES 2.0 specifically.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  81. Shouldn't that then be Gay Sex...? by denzacar · · Score: 1

    I mean... "Apple execs"... "squeezing their [Palm execs] junk"?

    Unless the squeezers and junk holders are of different sex. Doesn't sound like they are to me, though...

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
  82. Not great but good. by falconwolf · · Score: 1

    The $99 phone is the big news the rest of it is just nice. I like the voice controls, compass, and video but nothing is earth shattering.

    I thought that upgrading the 13" MacBook to a MacBook Pro, and dropping the price, was great news. MacBook Pros are now as low as $1200. One article also said the price for the 17" MacBook Pro was dropped from $2800 to $2500 as well as being upgraded also. However I looked in the Apple store and the 17" isn't even there, just the 13" and 15" are listed. I even searched the store and didn't find it.

    Falcon

    1. Re:Not great but good. by gEvil+(beta) · · Score: 1

      However I looked in the Apple store and the 17" isn't even there, just the 13" and 15" are listed. I even searched the store and didn't find it.

      Shows up fine for me. It's to the right of the 15"s when you click on MacBook Pro.

      --
      This guy's the limit!
    2. Re:Not great but good. by falconwolf · · Score: 1

      However I looked in the Apple store and the 17" isn't even there, just the 13" and 15" are listed. I even searched the store and didn't find it.

      Shows up fine for me. It's to the right of the 15"s when you click on MacBook Pro.

      Oh, I see it now. Some menu is overlain in front of it. All that's shown is a "select" button, but when I clicked on it nothing happened. Maybe it's a problem with Firefox... Ah, it is. I just tried in Safari and it renders fine.

      Falcon

  83. Progress by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    MMS, Copy&Paste, Video, Tomtom YEAh!
    Next year it will get a front facing camera!
    The year after that it will get a VGA screen.
    Then it will have the same specs as my phone from last year.

  84. Yup +5 funny by jgtg32a · · Score: 1

    Yup +5 funny

  85. I for one... by denzacar · · Score: 0

    Welcome AT&T and iPhone to the year 2002.

    OK, OK... not fair...
    I didn't get MMS until 2005 on my K700i. See... it's got an "i" in it, just like the iPhone.

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
  86. Re:Shouldn't that then be Gay Sex...? by craenor · · Score: 2, Funny

    WWRXSD?

    (What Would Rufus Xavier Sarsparilla Do?)

  87. The rumors that didn't come true by scorp1us · · Score: 1

    No rubbery backing? (Would have helped with dropping and sliding)
    No illuminated apple logo? (Would have helped with night pictures, dark bars(pubs), etc.)
    802.11n - Is this there, just not mentioned
    Enhanced graphics processor - again, there, but not mentioned?
    FM Transmitter - or was this the Nike+ thing? So no tuning to your iPhone? Bummer.

    --
    Slashdot's rate-of-post filter: Preventing you from posting too many great ideas at once.
    1. Re:The rumors that didn't come true by tyrione · · Score: 1

      Think iPod Touch for the gaming environment to get a boost and the FM Transmitter. The OLED and Radio in the iPod Touch makes the most sense and a product differentiator.

  88. Re:Today's news = sad days for new iphone3g owners by Palshife · · Score: 3, Insightful

    An iPhone is a poor investment. Here's a tip; they'll release a better phone next year, and the 3GS will be worth less.

    --
    Attention deficit disorder is a complicated issue, spanning several major... HEY LET'S GO RIDE BIKES!
  89. Think "development and setup costs" by Fished · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'm sure it cost apple a considerable amount to develop and have a manufacturing line for the second version of the iPhone, and I'm willing to bet that the vast bulk of iPhones sold will be the 16gb model. Therefore, they have to amortize the development costs over a smaller market for the larger memory size. It's not really about the cost of the memory, it's about the additional R&D and the cost of having a second assembly line.

    --
    "He who would learn astronomy, and other recondite arts, let him go elsewhere. " -- John Calvin, commenting on Genesis 1
    1. Re:Think "development and setup costs" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      The 16gb and 32 gb most likely use the same pcb, the only difference being the actual memory chips. Either the 16gb model has some empty spaces on the board or it has the same number of chips as the 32gb model, but each half the size.

      The latter could be an explanation for the steep price increase from 16gb to 32gb. You pay a hefty premium for the latest and greatest.

      otoh. it is also possible that Apple just likes the extra profit on the 32gb model.

    2. Re:Think "development and setup costs" by StikyPad · · Score: 1

      And I'm betting that the 16GB model is just the 32GB model with an empty spot where the additional flash RAM would be. It doesn't really cost much to *not* install a chip, so the majority of the savings would be on the chips themselves which, as the GP said, is a marginal cost. I'm guessing that either the 16GB models are loss leaders, or else damn close to being sold at cost. It would be interesting to see sales figures for the two models, though we probably never will.

      Regardless, charging 50% more for 16GB of flash is just insulting.

    3. Re:Think "development and setup costs" by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Either the 16gb model has some empty spaces on the board or it has the same number of chips as the 32gb model, but each half the size.

      Awesome. Send me a postcard frm Stockholm.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    4. Re:Think "development and setup costs" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd assume it works the same way as my digital scope... everything goes out with the same hardware, and the 32 GB models get a software key that enables the extra 16 GB. Kind of a ripoff but everybody does it.

    5. Re:Think "development and setup costs" by SwabTheDeck · · Score: 1

      I'm sure it cost apple a considerable amount to develop and have a manufacturing line for the second version of the iPhone, and I'm willing to bet that the vast bulk of iPhones sold will be the 16gb model. Therefore, they have to amortize the development costs over a smaller market for the larger memory size. It's not really about the cost of the memory, it's about the additional R&D and the cost of having a second assembly line.

      I suppose that's one way to look at it. The other way to look at it is that there's only one assembly line, and some PCBs come off it with a second flash chip soldered on, while others come off with bare contacts and it costs next to nothing to do one over the other beyond the cost of the chip.

    6. Re:Think "development and setup costs" by MojoStan · · Score: 1
      No, that can't be it. Your simpler, more plausible explanation doesn't justify Apple charging $100 for 16GB of storage. It's gotta be "additional R&D" and a "second assembly line" to add another flash chip.

      I'm hoping the moderators thought the GP was being "Funny," but modded the comment "Insightful" to help the GP's karma.

      --
      TO START
      PRESS ANY KEY

      Where's the 'ANY' key? I see Esk, Kitarl, and Pig-Up...

    7. Re:Think "development and setup costs" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WRONG!

      You are incredibly unfamiliar with Apple's R&D processes (or R&D processes in general), or their supply chain methodology. The cost of R&D or manufacturing the additional capacity iPhone is negligible -- ditto for the white or black backing models.

    8. Re:Think "development and setup costs" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      that sounded almost plausible except that flash chips are interchangable, for precisely that reason

      it is exactly this difficult to change their assembly line from 32GB to 16GB:

      (1) toss a bag of 16GB chips in the hopper

    9. Re:Think "development and setup costs" by mdwh2 · · Score: 1

      But surely, all I do is upgrade my 16GB model by plugging in a bigger memory card, right? No need to rely on buying the latest top model which would be expensive for the reasons you give, I just need to buy a new card for my old phone. The Iphone is the best phone ever, so surely it does this like every other phone on the planet, right?

  90. Re:Today's news = sad days for new iphone3g owners by whisper_jeff · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Property is an investment. Commodities are investments. Stocks and bonds are investments. iPhones are tech toys.

  91. OLED Screen by scorp1us · · Score: 1

    Screen shots don't look OLED to me.

    --
    Slashdot's rate-of-post filter: Preventing you from posting too many great ideas at once.
  92. 3G cheap as chips! by YourExperiment · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Wow, I can get a 3G for $99? I'll take one! Oh wait, I have to pay how much on the contract?

    I do wish the media would stop parroting these utterly irrelevant "costs" for mobile devices straight from the press release, as if it was true or something.

    1. Re:3G cheap as chips! by TheNetAvenger · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You can get 3G netbooks for $49 bucks, and full 3G laptops for $99 as well...

      The contract con is sad, as people think the Apple iPhone 'phone contract' is the normal for the industry, and it isn't.

      It isn't a full computer but get charged like one, and there are 'phones' out there with just as many features that don't get you locked into the 'data' plan rates, like many Windows Mobile phones.

      I recently needed a new 3G plan for an area that only had ATT service. I picked up a $49 buck netbook with the contract, threw Win7 on it, and have a full computer for what iPhone users are paying for a smaller screen and less computing features.

      If this was just a 'phone' contest it would lose, and if this was a computer/data contest, the iPhone also loses.

    2. Re:3G cheap as chips! by end3rtm · · Score: 2, Insightful

      But iPhone 3G being $99 is what it is. If you have any other 3G smartphone on AT&T, you'll pay the same amount. I'm not sure why people keep on bringing this up. Do other 3G smartphones on AT&T have unlimited data plan that's cheaper than $30 (that can do non proxied connection so you can access ports other than 80?) When people sell cars, they say what the retail price is...they don't add the gas price + insurance price + whatever other cost to keep the car running. As an informed consumer, you are suppose to calculate the total cost of ownership using your typical usage as a guide.

    3. Re:3G cheap as chips! by YourExperiment · · Score: 1

      When was the last time you bought a car where you had to pay $x for gas every month, regardless of how far you were driving, otherwise ownership of the car would automatically revert to the company from which you bought it?

    4. Re:3G cheap as chips! by changedx · · Score: 1

      Most things in life have a Total Cost of Ownership that greatly exceed the initial price:

      Printers - Ink
      TV - Cable
      Car - Gas / Repairs / Insurance
      Babies - Food / Diapers / College Fund

      I debated for a long time whether it was worth it -- to me -- to upgrade my 5-year-old PalmOS phone to an iPhone and pay for a data plan. I finally decided that it was worth the $1/day more than my old cell phone plan.

    5. Re:3G cheap as chips! by end3rtm · · Score: 1

      If you buy the iPhone 3G for $99 (subsidized) or $400 (unsubsidized), you are still going to pay for the same monthly rate. Is the 3G data rate cheaper for some other phone? It's not. Is the situation different with any other subsidized phone that requires data service? It's not. Is this situation different with any other carrier? It's not. Rules are clear. If you buy a subsidized phone, you give up that freedom to switch carrier freely without incurring penalty. I don't see how iPhone 3G is unique in this regard?

    6. Re:3G cheap as chips! by donny77 · · Score: 1

      Yes but in the one device for everything category, the iPhone wins. I don't work 24/7. I don't take my laptop to family functions. I don't take my laptop to dinner with my wife. So when we are out, and need to look something up on the internet, there is my iPhone. The perfect size, I carry my phone anyways. This is the market the iPhone wants, and it's a large market as Apple has shown us. Windows Mobile phones have the same data plan restrictions on AT&T for subsidized phones. Not sure what the big deal is.

    7. Re:3G cheap as chips! by YourExperiment · · Score: 1

      You seem to have got it into your head that I'm some kind of rabid anti-iPhone fanboi. I don't care how much other phones or data plans cost. I'm stating that I can't get an iPhone for $99, so the summary is blatantly untrue. Plain and simple.

      I bought my smartphone outright, I pay 5 pounds a month for data, and everything else is paid for as I use it. I'd love to own an iPhone, I think they're a wonderful little piece of kit, but the total price is far more expensive than I can justify paying.

    8. Re:3G cheap as chips! by YourExperiment · · Score: 1

      TV

      No-one advertises a TV for $20, then mentions that the $80 a month cable plan isn't optional.

      Car

      No-one sells a car for $100, then mentions that you have to spend at least $500 on gas from a particular station every month for the next two years otherwise they'll repossess it.

      Printer

      No-one sells you a printer for $10, but doesn't give you any ink cartridges with it. Oh wait, that's Lexmark.

  93. Apple by falconwolf · · Score: 1

    I love Apple, but must agree that the new OS X update really does not have any new incredible features I am dying for.

    Though I had the Leopard disk I waited almost a year and a half before upgrading to it from Tiger. And the only reason I did was because I wanted to install Java 6, whereas Leopard supports it Tiger doesn't.

    The place I think Apple is still blowing it is in the "netbook" space. I will not spend over $1,000 for an Air to just do email and surf the net.

    I agree but Apple dropped the price of the 13" MacBook to $1000. They also upgraded one 13" model to MacBook Pro status and are selling it for $1200. It surprised me when Apple dropped $300 from the 17" MacBook Pro price.

    Falcon

  94. Re:Today's news = sad days for new iphone3g owners by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't imagine Apple's in a hurry to relive WWDC 2003 again:

    "â¦So that was the the G5, it's 2 GHz now and will be over 3GHz this time next year."

    Macs finally hit 3GHz 6 years later on chips used in their competitors computers.

  95. Fuck the jewphone! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's evil, don't buy it!

  96. Remote Wiping by prestomation · · Score: 1

    IIRC, you have always been able to wipe the iphone remotely using the enterprise iphone configuration tool. Basically group policy for iphones.
    Although I haven't used it.

  97. ummm.... by buddyglass · · Score: 1

    Next up, Safari 4. It is the fastest browser on any platform. And that extends to JavaScript.

    How about "no"? That'd be Chrome.

    1. Re:ummm.... by Ksevio · · Score: 1

      [citation needed]

    2. Re:ummm.... by buddyglass · · Score: 1

      Futuremark's "Peacekeeper" benchmark does indeed show Safari 4.0 out front, narrowly edging Chrome. My own tests from January, i.e. prior to the most recent Chrome release, showed Chrome and Webkit in a dead heat on SunSpider and Chrome way out in front on Mozilla's "Dromaeo" suite.

      If I get time I'll run the tests again on the same machine, using the "official" Safari 4.0 build (i.e. not a Webkit nightly) vs. the currently released version of Chrome.

    3. Re:ummm.... by j!mmy+v. · · Score: 1

      Yes, citation needed.

      Here's one to start you off:

      http://www.apple.com/safari/whats-new.html#performance

      --
      -- often wrong; never in doubt
    4. Re:ummm.... by buddyglass · · Score: 1

      I reran the various benchmarks (Sunspider, Dromaeo, V8, Peacekeeper) using the currently available "stable" releases of Chrome and Safari. Results here.

  98. Not quite. by Estanislao+Mart�nez · · Score: 1

    They didn't really remove it. They just rebranded it as the Macbook Pro 13".

    1. Re:Not quite. by SocietyoftheFist · · Score: 1

      Not quite the same, added firewire back and it has more memory and the new battery design that was introduced on the 17". The white polycarbonate is the only MacBook left in the lineup.

  99. Thank YOU MICROSOFT! by linhares · · Score: 1

    For all those laptop hunter commercials. They may actually be working.

  100. Tethering - Countries? by nighty5 · · Score: 1

    Did Apple mention which respective countries and carriers will support tethering?

  101. Re:Today's news = sad days for new iphone3g owners by esme · · Score: 1

    Let me share with you a special URL:

    http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/

    Before you buy anything from Apple, check this URL. It will save you much heartache.

  102. NO FLASH by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    And I'm not talking about a camera flash either! Its been two years and there still is no flash support? I know it must be ATT holding things back, but come on, at least let us have flash enabled over Wi-Fi.

  103. hot markets by falconwolf · · Score: 1

    When did Apple ever release "me too!" products to jump into temporarily hot markets?

    iPods and iPhones. However Apple does things differently than others, it takes a basic idea others came out with then adds enough extras to it for people to pay a higher price for it.

    Falcon

    1. Re:hot markets by MBCook · · Score: 1

      Apple didn't jump into the MP3 player market, it had existed for few years first. They though about it.

      They didn't jump into the cell phone market either. How many years did Blackberries and Windown Mobile devices exist before the iPhone came out? Smart phones were not new by any stretch.

      Apple waits and thinks things out so that it's a good product (iPod) instead of just jumping in with a bullet list of features (Zune).

      --
      Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
    2. Re:hot markets by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

      When did Apple ever release "me too!" products to jump into temporarily hot markets?

      iPods and iPhones.

      The portable music player and smartphone markets weren't hot markets when Apple jumped into them. They were tiny niche markets and the average person found such devices way, way too hard to use. They were reserved mostly for nerds. The markets did exist, but what Apple did was went in and refined the overall usability of the devices to provide a solid base level of functionality that was easy enough for average people... drastically expanding the market. That's when they really heated up and everyone else tried to copy them and compete for share of the newly expanded market. Apple's not the only company that does this, but they are one of the most successful.

      ...it takes a basic idea others came out with then adds enough extras to it for people to pay a higher price for it.

      Usually Apple's initial offerings have fewer features than competitors, not more. They are good at making those features usable to normal people and ditching the features they can't make usable by the ship date. The iPod had less space than a Nomad and no wi-fi. It didn't have an FM tuner and was missing several other features competitors had on their bullet list. The difference was the average person could actually rip CDs with iTunes, transfer them to the iPod, and play them all without calling the neighbor's kid over to help. That's where Apple innovates and that's what many people are willing to pay more for.

    3. Re:hot markets by falconwolf · · Score: 1

      Apple waits and thinks things out so that it's a good product (iPod) instead of just jumping in with a bullet list of features (Zune).

      Perhaps I worded it badly. What I meant was that Apple takes an idea and refines it before releasing a product. Those products then become hot.

      Falcon

    4. Re:hot markets by falconwolf · · Score: 1

      The portable music player and smartphone markets weren't hot markets when Apple jumped into them.

      As I just said in the post above yours, I worded my reply wrong. Apple looks at a market for something then refines the idea before releasing a hot item.

      Usually Apple's initial offerings have fewer features than competitors, not more. They are good at making those features usable to normal people

      I call taking a feature and making it more user friendly as adding a feature, user friendliness. And being able to rip a cd and transferring the music to an iPod a feature as well.

      Falcon

  104. Discounted iPhone upgrade at a higher price (AT&am by tniermann · · Score: 1

    This is a quote from the AT&T site when upgrading from the original IPhone non3G
    "As a valued AT&T customer, we can offer you a discounted iPhone upgrade at a higher price, along with a 2-year commitment and an $18 upgrade fee. Please proceed with the online upgrade process for pricing details. You may qualify for a full discount on a standard iPhone upgrade on 07/23/2009
    I then try to select the single line to upgrade and the site tells me only select a single line. They seem to not want to sell to existing customers till 7/23.

  105. Once Again we have a company caving... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Tethering is the big thing with the new iPhone software was going to be tethering. As expected, AT&T won't likely be supporting it, and they should. I'm appalled at what the cell phone industry is getting away with in our country in limitations and charges. It'd be nice if for once a company got behind the fact that another corporation is abusing their customers and that is the reason why our products are crippled by the time they get to the consumers' hands.

  106. Apple cannibolizing MacBooks by falconwolf · · Score: 1

    You mean a company that gives a good customer experience on a 3" inch can't on a 8" or 10" inch screen? You know that the real reason is margins and bottomline. Not to mention cannibalizing the sales of higher margin Macbooks by people who want the Mac experience.

    ComputerWorld has an article that goes over this:
    "Apple can make money on $599 netbook, says analyst".

    Falcon

    1. Re:Apple cannibolizing MacBooks by Americano · · Score: 1

      Well, I suppose if some random analyst says they can do it, they better fire up the production line.

      If you read that article, the analyst basically says, "They could offer the same hardware as an HP Mini 1000 XP, which sells for about $399, for $599!"

      Apple has made it clear that they perceive the current round of netbooks as being sub-par. Why would they create a clone, slap an Apple label on it, and dilute their reputation?

    2. Re:Apple cannibolizing MacBooks by falconwolf · · Score: 1

      I guess you didn't notice I gave a link to an article saying they could offer netbooks but I didn't say they should.

      Falcon

  107. ExpressCard/34 by falconwolf · · Score: 1

    3) Perhaps they took out the express slot because not enough of their customers wanted it. I have a MacBook Pro and never saw the use for it.

    While I don't use the slot in my MBP if I find a card that will drive a high resolution, more than 1920 X 1200, monitor I'd think about getting it. I've been looking for one but the only ones I've found use USB.

    How often does a MacBook Pro user replace their battery?

    I switch mine every couple of weeks, but perhaps that's because I got two.

    Falcon

  108. no video card updates at all? a $1700 latop with o by Joe+The+Dragon · · Score: 1

    no video card updates at all? a $1700 latop with on board video?? removeing the exprees card slot? no blue ray? nice job apple!

    I will just keep my $1600 laptop with 17" mate screen, ati 4850 512, blue ray, 320gb 7200 hd, 3 usb , 1 usb / e-sata , firewire , sd slot , 4gb of ram, HDMI. It also has mini pci-e slots on the in side as well.

  109. Re:Today's news = sad days for new iphone3g owners by TrekkieTechie · · Score: 1

    Really, welcome to the world of technology as governed by Moore's Law.

    On the other hand...

    However many years ago, I'd saved up for a new 10GB iPod. I ordered it, decided what I wanted to have engraved on the back, and settled in for a week or two of excited waiting. A few days later, Apple announced a refresh of the iPod product line -- which included a 15GB 3rd-gen iPod at the price-point I'd just bought a 10GB. I spent a few minutes kicking myself before realizing that I had no way of knowing, them's the breaks, etc., and resigned myself to enjoying my outdated-before-I-even-received-it iPod.

    The next day, I received an email from Apple letting me know that they were sending me the new 15GB model, not the 10GB I'd ordered.

    I don't know if this was a lucky one-off or if this was their policy at the time, or if it's their policy now, but it did earn Apple a lot of respect in my book.

  110. Re:Today's news = sad days for new iphone3g owners by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    0) Tech products get faster, better, cheaper over time. Where have you been the last few decades.
    1) Apple has released a new iPhone every summer for 3 years now.
    2) Apple has released new iPods every year since 2001.
    3) There is no way Apple will give a 6 month grace period to people who purchased iPhone 3G. The product has only been on the market for ~1 year.

  111. SD card slot by rreay · · Score: 1

    3) Perhaps they took out the express slot because not enough of their customers wanted it. I have a MacBook Pro and never saw the use for it.

    The only thing I've ever seen used in the MBP expresscard slot is an expresscard SD reader.

    1. Re:SD card slot by snuf23 · · Score: 1

      The only thing I've ever seen used are wireless 3g cards. Which are very useful for on the road corporate users and also for mobile journalists (both the applications I've seen).

      --
      Sometimes my arms bend back.
  112. From AT&T by palmerj3 · · Score: 0

    iPhone Users: "Sweet! Tethering & MMS!"
    AT&T: "No fun for you, US!" *pats Japan on the head*

  113. AT&T has confirmed tethering will be offered by Shivetya · · Score: 2, Informative

    They just didn't have an announcement ready.

    See the engadget article, while brief confirms its availability http://www.engadget.com/2009/06/08/atandt-well-offer-tethering-on-the-iphone/

    --
    * Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
  114. Re:Today's news = sad days for new iphone3g owners by Kryis · · Score: 1

    "We would like to announce that in 3 months time we will be charging half the price you are currently paying. We are telling you this now because we don't need any sales over the next 3 months while everyone holds off for a $100 saving."

    Why do you think they announce the product 10 days before it is going to be released? It doesn't give consumers the option of waiting 3 months to pay $100 less. (Assuming that most people don't have a clue about WWDC and wont put the purchase off just in case)

  115. Re:no video card updates at all? a $1700 latop wit by JimR · · Score: 1

    It also has mini pci-e slots on the in side as well.

    Excellent. Oh, hang on, I thought you said it had mince pie slots.

    --
    #exclude <ms/windows.h>
  116. Re:Shouldn't that then be Gay Sex...? by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

    I assumed the junk being squeezed belonged to the Apple execs. However I was puzzled as to whether each was squeezing his own on an individual basis, or they were all mutually squeezing each other's.

    Then it all became clear; I remembered it was Apple.

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  117. Re:Today's news = sad days for new iphone3g owners by WiiVault · · Score: 1

    Good lord this is a massive fail. Where do I start? First off Apple owes you nothing because they chose to upgrade their HW. On top of that you chose not to stay informed about the iPhone annual product cycle. This also applies to the "missing" features. Those were clearly documented when you bought your phone. Again not Apple's fault. Now you want Apple to give you a discount if you bought one within 6 months of a new model? Do you think LG, RIM, or Palm would do that, or anybody? Heck most companies would already have an update or two in that time. Listen I know the feeling of buying something just to have a better one come out a bit later. Thats life, you had a lot of ways you could have learned more and decided to delay your purchase but you didn't. Also have had your phone for quite a long time. I would have far more sympathy if you had bought it in the last month or 2. You've had yours for almost half the product cycle.

  118. Re:Today's news = sad days for new iphone3g owners by sucati · · Score: 1

    so you're part of the 3% that doesn't have an existing cell phone? assuming you didn't break your contract, you're price is 99 + 24x(difference between current and new plan), which could be $99

  119. Re:Today's news = sad days for new iphone3g owners by The+End+Of+Days · · Score: 1

    Seeing technology as an investment is the first problem with your attitude. I know that historical performance doesn't dictate the future, but technology has never increased in value over time so it would be foolish in the extreme to expect it.

  120. Re:Today's news = sad days for new iphone3g owners by WiiVault · · Score: 1

    While you are certainly energetic, I find it a sad day when a post like yours gets modded troll. We all feel this guy's pain, but his post is absurd.

  121. Neat summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I liked the summary of the article. You don't need to read the whole thing if you just wanted a brief idea of what happened.

  122. Re:Today's news = sad days for new iphone3g owners by commodoresloat · · Score: 1

    You're seriously complaining that the tech toy you bought went down in price and was replaced by a newer, better model?

    I know, right? Try getting married! At least if you trash your iphone for a newer better model you're only out a few hundred bucks.

  123. 13" MacBook Pro by falconwolf · · Score: 1

    That's because they just took a MacBook and slapped a "Pro" sticker on it. It "only" costs $1200 because that's about how much it cost previously.

    They did more than just that. There are now two 13" model lines. The regular one is the same as the old but it's price was dropped to $1000. The new 13" MacBook Pro line has a backlit keyboard and Firewire 800. And there are two different ones, one is 2.26GHz, 2GB RAM, 9400M graphics, 160GB hard drive, for $1,119; and the other is 2.53GHz, 4GB, 250GB hard drive model for $1,499.

    Both lines were upgraded but the Pro line had more added.

    And by "latest beefed up hardware", you mean a somewhat above-average PC

    Yea, just like all those PCs that were billed as "Vista Ready" when they weren't, unless you wanted no access to some features. A number of lawsuits were filed over that and at least one gained class action status.

    Leopard ran fine on old Macs though, it will run on a PowerPC G4.

    With a definition of "run" like that, you have no authority whatsoever to be crticising Vista's performance.

    Apple was not slapped with a class action lawsuit, so who has the authority to be criticizing, I certainly wouldn't say it's you.

    Falcon

    1. Re:13" MacBook Pro by drsmithy · · Score: 1

      A number of lawsuits were filed over that and at least one gained class action status [seattlepi.com].

      And was smacked down, as it should have been.

      Apple was not slapped with a class action lawsuit, so who has the authority to be criticizing, I certainly wouldn't say it's you.

      Straw man. If you think OS X runs fine on a G4 _anything_ you're in no position to be criticising Vista's performance.

    2. Re:13" MacBook Pro by falconwolf · · Score: 1

      If you think OS X runs fine on a G4 _anything_ you're in no position to be criticising Vista's performance.

      I offer evidence which you slam as a straw man but offer none yourself. The link you do provide only says the class action status was slapped down not the lawsuit itself. The "judge ruled that each PC buyer has to bring his or her own legal action in order to seek damages from Microsoft."

      I stand by what I said. Now if you can provide a link saying Apple was also slapped with a lawsuit, I'll evaluate it in which case I may change my mind, unlike some I do change when I am convinced I was wrong. Do you?

      Falcon

    3. Re:13" MacBook Pro by drsmithy · · Score: 1

      I offer evidence which you slam as a straw man but offer none yourself.

      OS X's performance on G4 systems is fairly well known.

      The link you do provide only says the class action status was slapped down not the lawsuit itself. The "judge ruled that each PC buyer has to bring his or her own legal action in order to seek damages from Microsoft."

      And have any of them been successful ?

      I stand by what I said. Now if you can provide a link saying Apple was also slapped with a lawsuit, I'll evaluate it in which case I may change my mind, unlike some I do change when I am convinced I was wrong. Do you?

      First I need to be convinced. Saying that OS X doesn't perform badly on slow machines because no-one has filed a lawsuit, is not a convincing argument.

    4. Re:13" MacBook Pro by falconwolf · · Score: 1

      I stand by what I said. Now if you can provide a link saying Apple was also slapped with a lawsuit, I'll evaluate it in which case I may change my mind, unlike some I do change when I am convinced I was wrong. Do you?

      First I need to be convinced. Saying that OS X doesn't perform badly on slow machines because no-one has filed a lawsuit, is not a convincing argument.

      Okay, I'm willing to say Leopard doesn't run so well on older Macs. Are you willing to say Vista was bad? An article dated 2 June 2009, so it's not dated, says " Windows 7 already biting into Vista but XP still king". Not even out of the gate but Windows 7 looks to do doing better than Vista, Windows 7 has slowed Vista sales. I still stand by what I said, that "Vista sucks".

      Falcon

  124. Madtv? by E+IS+mC(Square) · · Score: 1

    I am sure you have seen this - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xgZKjJt-TkU

    BTW, what is common between Starbucks, BMW and Apple?

  125. Re:First post by SocietyoftheFist · · Score: 1

    Maybe this should be submitted to failblog.org?

  126. Re:no video card updates at all? a $1700 latop wit by justcauseisjustthat · · Score: 1

    Is that you Giampaolo, from the MS ad?

  127. Finder Blues by Sideswiped · · Score: 1

    No major updates to Finder's functionality. Ugh!

    Compared to Vista/Win 7's explorer, Finder is one of the areas I really find lacking, that and horrid mouse acceleration. In Windows 7 the folder tree navigator with a detail view is exactly what I need. I don't want to have to toggle between tree and details view just to get a decent look at my documents. I have reservations about Windows address bar's IE styling, but its functionality is spot on. Navigating back out of directories is a breeze and I always know where my folders are located on my drives. In contrast, breadcrumbs in osX are buried in text menus and the "Path" drop down menu is hidden by default.

    Thankfully the $30 upgrade fee is very reasonable and I'm looking forward to having my bootcamp partition recognize my mac partition.

    1. Re:Finder Blues by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      Uh, Finder is completely rewritten in Snow Leopard. The existing, Carbon, Finder is being replaced by a new, Cocoa, one. This obviously needed to happen because they want to trumpet 64-bit everywhere and Carbon didn't make the 64-bit transition. It's not yet clear what improvements this will actually bring from an end-user perspective. If they could get folders to remember when I left them in spacial mode, I'd be happy...

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  128. Re:Today's news = sad days for new iphone3g owners by hattig · · Score: 1

    Oh, get over yourself, all three of you bitching about the word "investment" instead of the fact that we're talking about a 2-year cost reduction of 6.5% over what he paid 4 months ago, i.e., it's not half the price. That was the point, it was fucking clear, I forgot I was writing in a forum full of autistics.

    SOOOOO SORRRRRRRY (Father Jack Voice) that I used that word.

  129. Re:Today's news = sad days for new iphone3g owners by hattig · · Score: 1

    Please see my reply above.

  130. APPLE FRAUD! by Nom+du+Keyboard · · Score: 0, Troll

    If you can't buy it over the counter sans service contract for $99, then it's NOT a $99 iPhone. It's a lie!

    --
    "It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
    1. Re:APPLE FRAUD! by dotgain · · Score: 1

      No, it's an iLie.

      Seriously, while I kind of agree with you in principle, this kind of bullshit has gone on for years, to the point "ninerninedollars" rolls off most people's tongues easier than "one hundred" these days. At this stage, they can hardly be blamed, it's what seems to be working for them. People either whinge about contract terms when they get them, or 'unlocked purchase prices' if they pay those, but they only whinge - people seem to keep lapping it up, and it's not illegal

  131. The pokes at AT&T in the WWDC 2009 keynote by Gary+W.+Longsine · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Apple was clearly not pleased with AT&T regarding MMS and tethering. If AT&T had a good reason, Apple would have held these features back until AT&T could be ready. In fact, it might well be the case that Apple already *did* hold these features back, as much as a year, and AT&T still isn't ready. Apple is inviting their audience to complain to AT&T. I recommend that AT&T receive a call from all of you iPhone customers who are annoyed by this.

    --
    If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine.
  132. Infrastructure by Gary+W.+Longsine · · Score: 1

    Every other phone on the AT&T network does *not* support 30 fps + audio vga resolution video messages. It's very likely that AT&T believes that their infrastructure would collapse under the load. They are probably right in that assessment. You, however, are correct that AT&T still doesn't "get it" on the whole. They have a lot of ground to cover before they can be a phone company that I don't want to flee, first chance I get to take iPhone elsewhere.

    --
    If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine.
  133. i am there as soon as tethering and calling circle by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i am there as soon as tethering and calling circle happen on at&t

    in lieu of the "circle", there used to be a gadget or service that would "live" on a cellular network (had a dial-in number on that network) and could forward calls out thru another line, resulting in unlimited calling thru this "in-network" relay but these devices seem to have disappeared - they were available for the various networks but i fear they have been squashed.. ... does anyone know if they still exist?

  134. It was five minutes of a multi hour keynote by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    Has Apple been this abrasive to their competitors during the keynotes before?

    Have they taken digs before? Yes, but just like this year it was a very small part of the presentation... mostly they were talking about new things with little mention of other companies.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  135. hardware upgrades by falconwolf · · Score: 1

    I bought my mac desktop 5 years ago and they've upgraded it since then 3-4 times including changing processors AND operating systems on me, why shouldn't I get an upgrade discount on that?

    I've had my MacBook Pro almost 2 years and when I can I'll order a new one. Then after I migrate my data I'll go ahead and list the old MBP on eBay. Right now there's one listed with a 2.33GHz CPU with the last bid at $1400, mine is 2.4GHz.

    Falcon

  136. Leopard was $129. Snow Leopard priced at $29. by dsinc · · Score: 1

    This is a rather unexpected, albeit very interesting marketing move. It will be interesting to see how well it plays out. I don't think Windows 7, in any incarnation, will be even remotely as affordable as the next version of OS X, due out in September.

  137. Holes by zogger · · Score: 1

    If what you say about MS and holes is true, why don't they just eliminate software sales to the general public and just limit it to a few official blessed vendors, so they can maintain strict integrated quality control? Say they picked six different computer makers, and only did the OEM installs with them, and it was only intended for what they sold and their official peripherals. They could do this, so why aren't they if they are concerned about their OS and apps being used on cheaper stuff?

    I guess my point is, I don't agree with your assessment that they would want to dig themselves out of this theoretical hole. Because they aren't doing that. Even if they see it as a marginal problem (if at all), they must have figured they could deal with it OK, else *they wouldn't be* selling to all comers. I think they like having their software on every possible machine they can, even if it only kinda sorta works with Cheapbox brand.

    1. Re:Holes by Tom · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If what you say about MS and holes is true, why don't they just eliminate software sales to the general public and just limit it to a few official blessed vendors, so they can maintain strict integrated quality control?

      Because they are just as locked-in to their own trap as everyone else. The moment they do something big and obvious like that, millions of consumers will start looking for alternatives.

      Yes, you're right that they are very obviously not stopping to sell to everyone. That is exactly the trap I mean. MS survives because it is everywhere. Monopoly, lock-in, whatever you call it. They can't stop doing that or the whole house of cards comes crashing down.

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
  138. Re:Today's news = sad days for new iphone3g owners by falconwolf · · Score: 1

    The next day, I received an email from Apple letting me know that they were sending me the new 15GB model, not the 10GB I'd ordered.

    Something like this happened to a friend a long, long tyme ago. Back then someone I knew bought a new PC from Zenith, yes they used to make PCs but then sold the devision to Group Bull in France. After he bought the PC Zenith dropped their prices and a couple of weeks later Zenith sent him a refund for the difference between what he paid and the new price.

    Falcon

  139. laptop sizes by falconwolf · · Score: 1

    The 17" form factor has turned out to be slightly cumbersome to transport... not that I have a MBP. My laptop is not TOO much bigger though.

    I have a 17" MBP yet I want a bigger one. Before I got it I saw a laptop in a Best Buy with a 21" LCD and almost started drooling. If Apple released a 21" MBP I'd be in line waiting to get one. And yes I take the one I have with me. I like hiking and if I can't carry the weight of my MBP then I'm in bad shape. The one thing that concerns me is the possibility of damaging it while carrying it. With padding though the possibility is reduced. Now I want to get a new backpack that's big enough to carry my laptop and my camera equipment, instead of carrying two bags.

    Falcon

  140. Re:Today's news = sad days for new iphone3g owners by nine-times · · Score: 1

    Most people are going to respond to you saying "an iPhone isn't an investment." However, even if you consider it an investment, dropping 5% in 4 months isn't so bad when you think about it. If you put the same $2k in the stock market back in September, and after 4 months your investment had only dropped 5%, you'd be considered incredibly lucky.

  141. CF is already on the way out for pro gear. by falconwolf · · Score: 1

    Newer DLSR's are pretty much moving in bulk to SD cards already.

    Canon's EOS 5D Mark II, which most certainly is a pro model, uses CF but not SD cards. Now the EOS-1Ds Mark III uses both as does the EOS-1D Mark III.

    Falcon

  142. Anonymous? Eh? by RudeIota · · Score: 1

    I have no clue why that posted anonymously. I didn't check the box...

    --
    Fact: Everything I say is fiction.
  143. Re:Today's news = sad days for new iphone3g owners by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He is seriously bitching that his $2000+ investment (including contract) has gone down by $100 (5%) since February.

    your math is a little off there, bud. that $2000 number that everyone throws around is BS. for 1 phone, you are only paying $30 more per month to include a dataplan, which is what you would have to purchase for any smartphone... in fact, an att blackberry/pda data plan is $35 for personal and $65 for business. so take the iphone data plan of $30 per month * 24 months = $720 + $200 for the phone. the only difference between the iphone purchase price and any other phone with a data plan is the upfront cost involved.

  144. Some Nokia's have video phone feature by thule · · Score: 1

    Some Nokia's DO have video call support. They include two cameras, one on the front and one on the back. The video is based on the H.323M standard. If the carrier supports it, it will even connect the call over ISDN BRI or PRI lines to video conferencing equipment.

  145. WebOS will give Apple competition by thule · · Score: 1

    Palm will also release a lower end, lower cost WebOS phone soon that should compete with the $99 price point of the low end iPhone.

    So far, I'm really liking WebOS. Especially the "card" multitasking interface and the cloud sync. I just wish that Palm would get the SDK out to everyone! Programming WebOS appears to be really, really easy. It is the most powerful feature of the phone, but only programmers get to see it.

    1. Re:WebOS will give Apple competition by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      "I just wish that Palm would get the SDK out to everyone!"
      Yea I signed up and have not heard a word.
      I want it now.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
  146. 6GB Reduction in OS X Space...hmmm Netbook? by mcwop · · Score: 1

    Maybe they knocked 6GB of space off, because here come the netbooks with small SSD drives...or tablet thingy.

    --

    "I don't think it's selfish, to eat defenseless shellfish." -NOFX

  147. Re:Today's news = sad days for new iphone3g owners by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Even tech toys are investments* if you get more out of having one than doing without+money saved.

    *Obviously, you can also make "investments" which are just pissing money down a hole.

  148. Re:Today's news = sad days for new iphone3g owners by complete+loony · · Score: 1

    And you'll damage it after the warranty expires, and the 3GS with be worthless.

    --
    09F91102 no, 455FE104 nope, F190A1E8 uh-uh, 7A5F8A09 that's not it, C87294CE no. Ah! 452F6E403CDF10714E41DFAA257D313F.
  149. Re:Today's news = sad days for new iphone3g owners by je+ne+sais+quoi · · Score: 1

    Thank you, I really appreciate your comment. It's true that I wrote that comment a lot more aggressively that I should have, but when I wrote it I was a little annoyed that here Apple had what seemed like a nice hardware refresh, an update to their mobile OS, and some important updates to their computer OS to make sure it stays current and all the slashdot people can think of, or what gets modded up, is what they did wrong or what they didn't include. It's a little weird.

    --
    Gentlemen! You can't fight in here, this is the war room!
  150. A few questions for the it crowd by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I was looking forward to a bigger pricedrop on the SSDs in the MBP (the computer formerly known as the MacBook, reintroducing the old white is a bit weird to be honest. it went iBook / Powerbook > MacBook / MacBook Pro > iBookesque / MacBookesque 'Pro'. Just saying, bringing back the old case and relabeling it seems a bit unapple), is it worth adopting SSD now? Will the speed be noticeable? And what about the 187$ (Danish prices) MacBook 13" price difference for 0.27GHz, does that really matter if you're running on SSD, 4GB Ram and decent gfx cards?

  151. Simple economics by RMH101 · · Score: 1

    Perform a thought experiment: measure the quantity of data that a hundred iPhone users go through in a month at present. You'll find it's X, mainly composed of some light web browsing, a bit of email, some youtube, etc.
    Fast forward to a brave new world of tethering, just after Joe Sixpack has realised he doesn't need a USB 3G modem for his laptop, or even home broadband - he can just tether and use his iPhone. Measure the quantity of data a hundred users go through in a month. Be surprised that it's several multiples of X.

  152. I had no choice by geoffrobinson · · Score: 1

    I bought a new phone in April. I wanted to wait, but my old phone died and my wife was pregnant. Oh well. Such is life. I'll just get a super-duper iPhone 2 years+3 months from now.

    --
    Except for ending slavery, the Nazis, communism, & securing American independence, war has never solved anything.
  153. Bout frickin time by rsborg · · Score: 1

    Adobe should worry for the viability of Flash for video delivery.

    I absolutely hate flash. It crashes, causes pages to hang, and is a rampant memory hog. HTML5 killing flash video will make me very happy.

    --
    Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
  154. Re:Today's news = sad days for new iphone3g owners by carlmenezes · · Score: 1

    Wanna bet the next phone will do HD video and probably have an SD slot?

    --
    Find a job you like and you will never work a day in your life.
  155. Re:Today's news = sad days for new iphone3g owners by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Property is an investment. Commodities are investments. Stocks and bonds are investments. iPhones are tech toys.

    I bought my iPhone 3G for $299 with Rogers.
    I get my new 3GS for $299.
    I sell my old phone on Craigslist for $450 (one year old 3G white 16 gb)
    Profit on my iPhone investment = $151.

    Same contract terms, same contract, length extended 1 year but who cares. I have to have a phone or I am out of business.
    next year, same deal.