srxtr
Mar 23, 05:44 PM
You should tell that to my son. Oh wait, you can't, he was murdered someone like you.
Is that really true? A drunk driver killed your son?
Is that really true? A drunk driver killed your son?
CapturedDarknes
Nov 13, 10:35 PM
That's interesting, I didn't know they did that. That's nice that they let them use the icons. I guess it reminds people go out and buy photoshop. :)
Mhm :) That's why you can export Office and iWork files to .pdf from in the program, without having to buy Acrobat.
Mhm :) That's why you can export Office and iWork files to .pdf from in the program, without having to buy Acrobat.
sfh
Mar 23, 05:06 PM
There are plenty of websites that do the same thing so therefore they need to petition the websites to censor their sites if they are going to ask apple to censor their app store.
Ommid
Apr 25, 12:53 PM
The unibody was already a giant leap forward. How much better can Apple get?
I'm more interested in the specifications, and hardware (electronics) not so much the casing.
Well they arent going to get worse are they!!
I'm more interested in the specifications, and hardware (electronics) not so much the casing.
Well they arent going to get worse are they!!
ezekielrage_99
May 1, 05:49 AM
I think you're gonna get pretty disappointed. It wont't have blu-ray, likely no usb3, less likely that it'll have 2GBVram, the only way you're getting another hdd is to take out the optical drive, and it won't support 24GB of RAM.
I know I'll be disappointed if it doesn't come with that spec and I did add comments to the side reinforcing the fact I am realistic, but I would expect it to at least support 24GB considering there are Sandy Bridge mainboards that do support that while 1GB graphics is pretty standard now (well for PC).
2 internal HDDs and no i3 option is just wishful thinking though ;) While Bluray I can understand from an Apple stand point why it wont be an addition anytime soon.
However consider this, the last MBP release did surprise many with regards to the specs and performance. Many speculated it would be i3/5 and BTO would have i7 while the other main rumor speculated would not come with Thundercats or a 1GB Video card option.
Lately with regards to specs I think Apple are getting a little better with releasing competitive spec machines.
I know I'll be disappointed if it doesn't come with that spec and I did add comments to the side reinforcing the fact I am realistic, but I would expect it to at least support 24GB considering there are Sandy Bridge mainboards that do support that while 1GB graphics is pretty standard now (well for PC).
2 internal HDDs and no i3 option is just wishful thinking though ;) While Bluray I can understand from an Apple stand point why it wont be an addition anytime soon.
However consider this, the last MBP release did surprise many with regards to the specs and performance. Many speculated it would be i3/5 and BTO would have i7 while the other main rumor speculated would not come with Thundercats or a 1GB Video card option.
Lately with regards to specs I think Apple are getting a little better with releasing competitive spec machines.
LightSpeed1
Apr 25, 01:35 PM
Could just be me, but I think the design is perfect. Apple is still way ahead of the competition with the unibody design. How much better can it get?
4God
Sep 5, 08:23 AM
Well, the Apple Store Online U.S. is down. Could be something, could be nothing.
infidel69
Mar 29, 11:27 AM
Microsoft should work on perfecting windows before starting a mobile OS
Windows 7 kicks ass, it's every bit as good as Snow Leopard if not better.
Windows 7 kicks ass, it's every bit as good as Snow Leopard if not better.
twoodcc
Sep 5, 01:45 PM
wow. well this confirms it then. man this is gonna be a long week of waiting
Westside guy
Sep 14, 08:38 AM
:eek: I just literally finished ordering a new battery and 1gb memory upgrade so my ibook would last a little longer. If they release a tablet (which is what I'm holding on for) I'll cry!
Don't cry - a tablet would be the absolute worst interface for edit digital photos, so there's absolutely no chance that'll be happening at photokina.
Don't cry - a tablet would be the absolute worst interface for edit digital photos, so there's absolutely no chance that'll be happening at photokina.
darwen
Oct 13, 12:07 AM
I am sure this has been said but I wanted to get my post in...
Looks cool, just hope the $10 donation does not mean it will cost more. Red is not THAT great.
Looks cool, just hope the $10 donation does not mean it will cost more. Red is not THAT great.
8CoreWhore
Apr 30, 01:37 PM
THANK CHRIST....sorry :o
Steve has been called all kinds of names, but...
Steve has been called all kinds of names, but...
munkery
Mar 23, 04:20 PM
http://www.macforensicslab.com/ProductsAndServices/index.php?main_page=document_general_info&products_id=174
Much of the information in the PDF (http://www.macforensicslab.com/Malware_on_Mac_OS_X.pdf) associated with this article (http://www.macforensicslab.com/ProductsAndServices/index.php?main_page=document_general_info&products_id=174) is incorrect. For example:
Page 26
It refers to the bundle architecture as insecure. The argument presented would be true if security sensitive apps were not owned by system. Given that they are owned by system, malware cannot modify the bundle of an app owned by system without authentication when the app is run with user privileges in an admin or standard account.
For example, show package contents of iTunes, Safari, or Mail and try to create a folder in the bundle. In relation to the example in the article, try renaming iTunes. The argument in the article relies on actions that can not be completed in an OS X admin account; these type of changes are even more restricted in a standard account.
Apps not owned by system are vulnerable but without privilege escalation can not install rootkits or keyloggers. Even apps owned by system run with user privileges and require privilege escalation to install dangerous payloads.
Mac OS X does not prompt for authentication if you install apps in the proper location for that user account type. When installed in the proper location, apps are sandboxed from the system level of Mac OS X by the Unix DAC model used within Mac OS X.
Windows is less secure because most apps (Chrome only exception I can recall) install their associated files in levels of the system that require authentication regardless of user account type (unless Admin in Windows XP because running as superuser - no authentication required to install with elevated privileges - very dangerous). It is easier to trick Windows users to install a trojan with elevated privileges given that almost all apps ask for authentication to install and the user can not distinguish the intent of that authentication.
Page 30
The claim that the Application folder is unprotected is false. Security sensitive apps within the Application folder are owned by system.
Also, security sensitive system binaries are still stored in /bin and /sbin in Mac OS X.
Page 31
The ability to read the contacts stored in Address Book could be used by a worm to propagate. But, malware that uses this to spread is not likely to appear in the wild if the malware is not profitable. It is unlikely that malware will be profitable without being able to hook (this is a specific function) into apps owned by system.
Page 33
Starts off talking about trojans, trojans are easily avoided with user knowledge in Mac OS X because most apps do not require authentication to install if installed in the appropriate location where the Unix DAC model protects the system.
Viruses using the model shown in the article will not be successful without privilege escalation. This is the reason why Mac OS X malware is not successful in the wild.
By default, very few server side services are exposed in Mac OS X and those that are exposed are sandboxed. Vectors for worm propagation are limited to client side. Client side worms require authentication to install and spread if do not include privilege escalation via exploitation because of the Unix DAC model used in Mac OS X. Trojans used to trick users to authenticate are less likely to be successful in Mac OS X as stated above.
Much of the information in the PDF (http://www.macforensicslab.com/Malware_on_Mac_OS_X.pdf) associated with this article (http://www.macforensicslab.com/ProductsAndServices/index.php?main_page=document_general_info&products_id=174) is incorrect. For example:
Page 26
It refers to the bundle architecture as insecure. The argument presented would be true if security sensitive apps were not owned by system. Given that they are owned by system, malware cannot modify the bundle of an app owned by system without authentication when the app is run with user privileges in an admin or standard account.
For example, show package contents of iTunes, Safari, or Mail and try to create a folder in the bundle. In relation to the example in the article, try renaming iTunes. The argument in the article relies on actions that can not be completed in an OS X admin account; these type of changes are even more restricted in a standard account.
Apps not owned by system are vulnerable but without privilege escalation can not install rootkits or keyloggers. Even apps owned by system run with user privileges and require privilege escalation to install dangerous payloads.
Mac OS X does not prompt for authentication if you install apps in the proper location for that user account type. When installed in the proper location, apps are sandboxed from the system level of Mac OS X by the Unix DAC model used within Mac OS X.
Windows is less secure because most apps (Chrome only exception I can recall) install their associated files in levels of the system that require authentication regardless of user account type (unless Admin in Windows XP because running as superuser - no authentication required to install with elevated privileges - very dangerous). It is easier to trick Windows users to install a trojan with elevated privileges given that almost all apps ask for authentication to install and the user can not distinguish the intent of that authentication.
Page 30
The claim that the Application folder is unprotected is false. Security sensitive apps within the Application folder are owned by system.
Also, security sensitive system binaries are still stored in /bin and /sbin in Mac OS X.
Page 31
The ability to read the contacts stored in Address Book could be used by a worm to propagate. But, malware that uses this to spread is not likely to appear in the wild if the malware is not profitable. It is unlikely that malware will be profitable without being able to hook (this is a specific function) into apps owned by system.
Page 33
Starts off talking about trojans, trojans are easily avoided with user knowledge in Mac OS X because most apps do not require authentication to install if installed in the appropriate location where the Unix DAC model protects the system.
Viruses using the model shown in the article will not be successful without privilege escalation. This is the reason why Mac OS X malware is not successful in the wild.
By default, very few server side services are exposed in Mac OS X and those that are exposed are sandboxed. Vectors for worm propagation are limited to client side. Client side worms require authentication to install and spread if do not include privilege escalation via exploitation because of the Unix DAC model used in Mac OS X. Trojans used to trick users to authenticate are less likely to be successful in Mac OS X as stated above.
kettle
Oct 27, 01:47 PM
Yes, they should just just shut-up and vote for corporate-sponsored Republicrats or Converalabour every four or five years and take it.
It's a shame that there is no longer any meaningful democracy.
I think that's pretty accurate (well observed) whichever side of this particular fence people are sitting.
It's a shame that there is no longer any meaningful democracy.
I think that's pretty accurate (well observed) whichever side of this particular fence people are sitting.
applefanDrew
Apr 30, 03:48 PM
SB + Mediocre GPU = meh :(
A 2560x1440 screen deserves more than some lame mobile gpu.
That display isn't happening this time.
A 2560x1440 screen deserves more than some lame mobile gpu.
That display isn't happening this time.
bigwillis
Aug 28, 11:27 PM
Anyone else voting that they drop the price on the BlackBook to match the white MB? What are the chances, eh?
manu chao
Apr 11, 09:01 AM
How? Not unless I buy airfoil?
It is $25, not the end of the world. And it seems you also have to buy each iOS device you want to stream to, they do not come free with a new Mac.
It is $25, not the end of the world. And it seems you also have to buy each iOS device you want to stream to, they do not come free with a new Mac.
macidiot
Jul 14, 02:34 PM
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2648&p=1
Compare Core Duo vs. AMD. At least until someone does a Core Duo vs. Core 2 Duo benchmark.
hmm, so it looks like the core duo is roughly similar to the athlon 64 x2 2.0Ghz.
Soo... the 2.16 Yonah is around 1.86Ghz Core 2 Duo speed. Kind of figures, considering Merom is supposed to come in ~30% faster.
Not that great, but not that bad either.
Compare Core Duo vs. AMD. At least until someone does a Core Duo vs. Core 2 Duo benchmark.
hmm, so it looks like the core duo is roughly similar to the athlon 64 x2 2.0Ghz.
Soo... the 2.16 Yonah is around 1.86Ghz Core 2 Duo speed. Kind of figures, considering Merom is supposed to come in ~30% faster.
Not that great, but not that bad either.
poppe
Aug 29, 02:39 AM
I don't know. I think the latest MBP was rushed to market a bit. I think Apple just wanted to get to intel and really ddn't think about design.
The current PB look has been around since 2001. I think the alumin look is starting to look soooo 2000. Were heading toward time to move on with a new chip and a new look.
Personally I prefer plastic to metal. Metal shows way too many scratches, finger prints, smudges, etc. The smooth shiny plastic look is much better and it is more durable. The metal enclosures dent, bend and break. They also transmit the heat faster to your lap and interfere with BT and Airport. The plastic enclosures give and spring back like new.
Gun Metal ABS plastic with rounded smooth corners, new keyboard, quick access ram, HD, and battery, magnetic latch, sound like the future to me.:D
New keyboard? Like the MBs? Why would you want that (not trying to say thats dumb, i'm just curious to why you would want that over the current)
The current PB look has been around since 2001. I think the alumin look is starting to look soooo 2000. Were heading toward time to move on with a new chip and a new look.
Personally I prefer plastic to metal. Metal shows way too many scratches, finger prints, smudges, etc. The smooth shiny plastic look is much better and it is more durable. The metal enclosures dent, bend and break. They also transmit the heat faster to your lap and interfere with BT and Airport. The plastic enclosures give and spring back like new.
Gun Metal ABS plastic with rounded smooth corners, new keyboard, quick access ram, HD, and battery, magnetic latch, sound like the future to me.:D
New keyboard? Like the MBs? Why would you want that (not trying to say thats dumb, i'm just curious to why you would want that over the current)
AppleScruff1
Apr 28, 08:55 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8H7)
It's very, very telling. MS is riding the coattails of their universal licensing racket while Apple keeps changing the face of consumer tech. This day was bound to come.
This is the post-PC era and we'll see MS in decline.
Did you forget that Microsoft is what got the pc world to where it is today?
It's very, very telling. MS is riding the coattails of their universal licensing racket while Apple keeps changing the face of consumer tech. This day was bound to come.
This is the post-PC era and we'll see MS in decline.
Did you forget that Microsoft is what got the pc world to where it is today?
iGary
Sep 14, 10:11 AM
MBP C2D IS going to happen. sometime between now and (for example) a year from now. saying "there is no way they will get announced on the 24th becuase its a photo event" is quite simply ignorant. it most certainly MAY happn, and the other machines that were released at the last photo event as mentioned above proove there is even a precident for it happening. i personally think its seems reasonably likely it will happen on the 24th, tho i would not bet on it.
edit: removal of an uneccesary comment
Not happening on the 24th fo any reason - photo, computer, or other wise.
edit: removal of an uneccesary comment
Not happening on the 24th fo any reason - photo, computer, or other wise.
OddyOh
Mar 29, 01:34 PM
That tears it...I'm dropping out of school to become a full-time analyst...easiest job in the world. :D
EagerDragon
Aug 28, 05:01 PM
I bet they announce tomorrow and available on the 5th. That will match with the bulk shipment.
p0intblank
Jul 14, 12:08 PM
Wow, 2.93 GHz... I can't wait until what August brings us! :D
No comments:
Post a Comment