j-traxx
Apr 11, 11:27 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
The marantz one is, you have to pay $40 to uPgrade firmware to get AirPlay working at all. At least you did with early versions, not sure about current versions, AirPlay may work without upgrade with those.
if you have marantz speakers...... you have 40 dollars.
The marantz one is, you have to pay $40 to uPgrade firmware to get AirPlay working at all. At least you did with early versions, not sure about current versions, AirPlay may work without upgrade with those.
if you have marantz speakers...... you have 40 dollars.
kedar
Sep 14, 11:45 AM
Hmmm, an Aperture update would be cool. I wonder if they would make any financial "concessions" to people who have recently purchased Aperture... :o
I have just received two copies of Aperture - what is Apple's policy on this - do I just have to go and buy upgrade two weeks later. :(
I have just received two copies of Aperture - what is Apple's policy on this - do I just have to go and buy upgrade two weeks later. :(
whatever
Oct 12, 02:01 PM
Please CAN IT!
CAN IT!
My god we cant talk about anything on this board without the core 2 duo macbook/pro crew coming to mess up a thread THAT HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH LAPTOP UPDATES
CAN IT!
:mad:
And maybe they'll add the Mac Pro Mini Tower.....
Only joking.
CAN IT!
My god we cant talk about anything on this board without the core 2 duo macbook/pro crew coming to mess up a thread THAT HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH LAPTOP UPDATES
CAN IT!
:mad:
And maybe they'll add the Mac Pro Mini Tower.....
Only joking.
Kingsly
Sep 1, 02:08 AM
Well for the sake of pontificating.....
Taking pictures and movies wtih cell phones is very big right now.
But as Steve Jobs would say "it's not a great experience."
He'll show a really crappy movie made on a cell phone.
He'll talk about how the world is evolving, more bandwidth has led to sites like Youtube.
Consumers are getting way more intelligent with movies, and we pioneered desktop movies with iMovie and then added HD functionality with iMovie HD.
But we want to take this one step further.
We want to go from this (shows youtube home movie) to a really great cinematic experience.
Today Apple introduces the world's least expensive High Definition video camera. There are no tapes. It's as easy as iPod.
You just shoot in 1080p, hook it up to your supercharged Intel Mac, edit in iMovie HD, and BOOM.
Look at this. It's gorgeous. Isn't this amazing?
So we're going from this (youtube video) to this. BOOM. Wow.
ROARS OF APPLAUSE AND THUNDER.
And we're introducing the all new QuickTake (or iCam whatever) for just $599.
Do you take PayPal!?!?!?!?!?
Taking pictures and movies wtih cell phones is very big right now.
But as Steve Jobs would say "it's not a great experience."
He'll show a really crappy movie made on a cell phone.
He'll talk about how the world is evolving, more bandwidth has led to sites like Youtube.
Consumers are getting way more intelligent with movies, and we pioneered desktop movies with iMovie and then added HD functionality with iMovie HD.
But we want to take this one step further.
We want to go from this (shows youtube home movie) to a really great cinematic experience.
Today Apple introduces the world's least expensive High Definition video camera. There are no tapes. It's as easy as iPod.
You just shoot in 1080p, hook it up to your supercharged Intel Mac, edit in iMovie HD, and BOOM.
Look at this. It's gorgeous. Isn't this amazing?
So we're going from this (youtube video) to this. BOOM. Wow.
ROARS OF APPLAUSE AND THUNDER.
And we're introducing the all new QuickTake (or iCam whatever) for just $599.
Do you take PayPal!?!?!?!?!?
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.
miles01110
Apr 4, 01:03 PM
Perhaps you should read your own articles before vilifying me?
Thanks for coming out.
How does that not contradict your incorrect statement below:
Generally it is not legal to carry a firearm into an establishment that sells alcohol for immediate and on-premesis consumption.
It's even legal to carry a gun (assuming you have the proper licenses) into a bar in New York, which has some of the strictest state gun control laws in the country. So, while it's almost always illegal to consume alcohol while carrying a gun, it is hardly ever illegal to simply carry a gun into a bar.
You made a mistake and got called out on it. I made a mistake by not being specific about which part of your statement I was having an issue with. Life goes on.
Thanks for coming out.
How does that not contradict your incorrect statement below:
Generally it is not legal to carry a firearm into an establishment that sells alcohol for immediate and on-premesis consumption.
It's even legal to carry a gun (assuming you have the proper licenses) into a bar in New York, which has some of the strictest state gun control laws in the country. So, while it's almost always illegal to consume alcohol while carrying a gun, it is hardly ever illegal to simply carry a gun into a bar.
You made a mistake and got called out on it. I made a mistake by not being specific about which part of your statement I was having an issue with. Life goes on.
munkery
Mar 22, 08:35 PM
Kernel
A privilege checking issue existed in the i386_set_ldt system call's handling of call gates. A local user may be able to execute arbitrary code with system privileges. This issue is addressed by disallowing creation of call gate entries via i386_set_ldt().
Generating a successful malware from that list of vulnerabilities has two requirements:
1) A remote arbitrary code execution vulnerability has to be linked to a local privilege escalation vulnerability.
2) Those vulnerabilities that can be linked together must both be exploitable. Not all vulnerabilities are exploitable.
The only local privilege escalation vulnerability in that update is shown above. To be linked to a remote vulnerability to create a successful malware requires the following:
1) The call function must be used by a process that also has an remote vulnerability so that the vulns can be linked together to install a payload, such as rootkit. It is likely that not all processes will use that call function. Also, that call function is for 32-bit processes and most client side software in Mac OS X that may contain a remote exploit are 64-bit processes.
2) The two vulnerabilities have to be reliably exploitable once linked together as well as being reliably exploitable independently so that they can actually be linked together. Again, not all vulnerabilities are exploitable.
Linking together remote and local exploits is more difficult in Mac OS X than Windows. This is because Windows has far more local privilege escalation exploits than Mac OS X. Another factor is that the different levels of Windows are less insulated from each other than the different levels of Mac OS X. A common method to achieve privilege escalation in Windows is by manipulating registry values.
http://www.exploit-db.com/bypassing-uac-with-user-privilege-under-windows-vista7-mirror/ -> outlines how to exploit win32k.sys vulnerabilities by manipulating registry values.
http://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvekey.cgi?keyword=win32k -> list of win32k.sys vulnerabilities.
A privilege checking issue existed in the i386_set_ldt system call's handling of call gates. A local user may be able to execute arbitrary code with system privileges. This issue is addressed by disallowing creation of call gate entries via i386_set_ldt().
Generating a successful malware from that list of vulnerabilities has two requirements:
1) A remote arbitrary code execution vulnerability has to be linked to a local privilege escalation vulnerability.
2) Those vulnerabilities that can be linked together must both be exploitable. Not all vulnerabilities are exploitable.
The only local privilege escalation vulnerability in that update is shown above. To be linked to a remote vulnerability to create a successful malware requires the following:
1) The call function must be used by a process that also has an remote vulnerability so that the vulns can be linked together to install a payload, such as rootkit. It is likely that not all processes will use that call function. Also, that call function is for 32-bit processes and most client side software in Mac OS X that may contain a remote exploit are 64-bit processes.
2) The two vulnerabilities have to be reliably exploitable once linked together as well as being reliably exploitable independently so that they can actually be linked together. Again, not all vulnerabilities are exploitable.
Linking together remote and local exploits is more difficult in Mac OS X than Windows. This is because Windows has far more local privilege escalation exploits than Mac OS X. Another factor is that the different levels of Windows are less insulated from each other than the different levels of Mac OS X. A common method to achieve privilege escalation in Windows is by manipulating registry values.
http://www.exploit-db.com/bypassing-uac-with-user-privilege-under-windows-vista7-mirror/ -> outlines how to exploit win32k.sys vulnerabilities by manipulating registry values.
http://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvekey.cgi?keyword=win32k -> list of win32k.sys vulnerabilities.
macenforcer
Oct 12, 03:24 PM
Ah, classic manipulation of an idea. At no point in that post did I say "helping people" is a bad thing, or that it should never be done. Quite the contrary... I actually said:
So please, don't cherrypick. Education is the only answer to this problem, nobody disputes that. But to say there is absolutely no correlation between the death and suffering going on in Africa, and a large portion of that society which is beyond help and beyond the limitations of education would be naive.
There are times in human history when, despite all our better efforts, nature is going to run its course, and those groups who have not adapted their lifestlye and way of thinking are left behind. I'm certainly not saying don't try, nor am I saying that saving even a single life wouldn't be worth the effort. I'm merely saying that Africa's problems are deeper than education. There's a culture there that has been in place a lot longer than even our own system of education and medicine has existed. To think that we can change that by giving them some condoms, explaining how they work and why it's important, is foolish. I'm saying that Africa will sort out it's own problems in time, when those individuals who recognize the problem for themselves get a voice. We can help, and every little bit helps, but it's not ours to fix. This is FAR FAR more complex and rooted than a kid who hurts his knee on a skateboard.
AMEN brotha!
So please, don't cherrypick. Education is the only answer to this problem, nobody disputes that. But to say there is absolutely no correlation between the death and suffering going on in Africa, and a large portion of that society which is beyond help and beyond the limitations of education would be naive.
There are times in human history when, despite all our better efforts, nature is going to run its course, and those groups who have not adapted their lifestlye and way of thinking are left behind. I'm certainly not saying don't try, nor am I saying that saving even a single life wouldn't be worth the effort. I'm merely saying that Africa's problems are deeper than education. There's a culture there that has been in place a lot longer than even our own system of education and medicine has existed. To think that we can change that by giving them some condoms, explaining how they work and why it's important, is foolish. I'm saying that Africa will sort out it's own problems in time, when those individuals who recognize the problem for themselves get a voice. We can help, and every little bit helps, but it's not ours to fix. This is FAR FAR more complex and rooted than a kid who hurts his knee on a skateboard.
AMEN brotha!
FreeState
Oct 12, 03:30 PM
I'll probably come of sounding like a jerk and opening a HUGE can of worms with this, BUT...
...Why do we constantly have to place a line between men and women, black and white, American and everyone else.
You do realize HIV effects women differently than men? It also effects children differently than adults.
Do yourself a favor and do a quick google on how much money has been spent on HIV research and prevention for children and women, compare that to men with HIV. Then do a search on children/women with HIV and mortality rates compared to men w/HIV.
We live in a very sexist society. HIV research was never funded or taken seriously by society at large until heterosexual white men started to develop AIDS.
...Why do we constantly have to place a line between men and women, black and white, American and everyone else.
You do realize HIV effects women differently than men? It also effects children differently than adults.
Do yourself a favor and do a quick google on how much money has been spent on HIV research and prevention for children and women, compare that to men with HIV. Then do a search on children/women with HIV and mortality rates compared to men w/HIV.
We live in a very sexist society. HIV research was never funded or taken seriously by society at large until heterosexual white men started to develop AIDS.
aswitcher
Sep 15, 07:06 PM
Widgets would be a phone killer... Some of the widgets out there consume a lot of memory.
I figure they could sort that out. Widgets only activate when button pushed etc.
I figure they could sort that out. Widgets only activate when button pushed etc.
tatonka
Mar 24, 09:01 AM
I don't get peoples fascination with thunderbolt. Besides that it is new, it is pretty much useless right now. I agree that it is a cool port once they come out with the suitable accessories .. but til then, I couldn't care less.
The one thing I would like to see is the thunderbolt mag safe adapter as basically a one plug docking station .. not sure that is ever going to see the daylight though.
T.
The one thing I would like to see is the thunderbolt mag safe adapter as basically a one plug docking station .. not sure that is ever going to see the daylight though.
T.
logandzwon
Mar 30, 01:45 PM
That's like saying it's OK to name a restaurant "Burger Place" because it's technically a "Fast Food Place".
ya or "Burger King" because technically they were just the king of making burgers?
ya or "Burger King" because technically they were just the king of making burgers?
BRLawyer
Aug 31, 02:13 PM
I have just called SJ, and he told me the following:
- iTMS Movie Store;
- MBPs with Merom, and the new MBP 12";
- MacMini with Core Duo;
- iMacs with Conroe;
- Apple IIGS 2006 Edition.
- iTMS Movie Store;
- MBPs with Merom, and the new MBP 12";
- MacMini with Core Duo;
- iMacs with Conroe;
- Apple IIGS 2006 Edition.
jiggie2g
Jul 14, 11:27 AM
I don't see the connection between overclocking and childishness. Overclocking is done by enthusiasts and power users of all ages. There is nothing wrong with it, and the practice should not be stigmatized.
There is no connection , just ignorant people who can't handle the fact that someone just saved alot of money buying a lower end cpu and overclocking it to a point where it stomps their $999 cpu. I would never spend over $350 for a CPU or Video Card.
There is no connection , just ignorant people who can't handle the fact that someone just saved alot of money buying a lower end cpu and overclocking it to a point where it stomps their $999 cpu. I would never spend over $350 for a CPU or Video Card.
SPUY767
Aug 23, 09:44 PM
Apple could blow a hundred million in legal expenses. It's less of an instance of throwing in the towel, and more of an instance of, "You know, the way idiot judges/juries hand out settlements these days, let's just give them a paltry sum, let them think they've won, and still destroy them in the MP3 market."
MacRumors
Apr 25, 12:50 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/25/next-macbook-pro-to-get-new-case-design/)
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/25/013535-mbp.jpg
Boston Marathon Run, 2011
the 2011 Boston Marathon
oston marathon 2011 logo.
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/25/013535-mbp.jpg
ezekielrage_99
Sep 10, 08:38 PM
Face it the Conroe Mac is coming.
iMac 24" - $1999
Mac Pro (downgraded to 2.0 Ghz) + 23" - 3198
That is a $1k price gap.
A high quality midtower would fit perfectly. They have another chip to differentiate the product matrix. It is coming!
Mac Mini - Core Duo (yonah) - base entry machine. 2 RAM slots
iMac - Core 2 Duo (Merom) - All in one basic to prosumer models, quiet operation and powerful. 2 RAM Slots
"Mac" - Core 2 Duo (Conroe) - mini tower 1 optical, 2 drives, 2 PCIe, 4 RAM Slots - prosumer to low end workstation.
Mac Pro - Xeon (Woodcrest) - Full tower 2 processors, 8 RAM slots, 4 PCIe, 2 optical, 4 drive bays. - Mid to high end workstation.
Sounds kind of feasible for a single CPU "Mac" Conroe system and it would fit nicely into the Apple product line up. I think a Conroe system would appeal nicely to prosumers and gamers.
iMac 24" - $1999
Mac Pro (downgraded to 2.0 Ghz) + 23" - 3198
That is a $1k price gap.
A high quality midtower would fit perfectly. They have another chip to differentiate the product matrix. It is coming!
Mac Mini - Core Duo (yonah) - base entry machine. 2 RAM slots
iMac - Core 2 Duo (Merom) - All in one basic to prosumer models, quiet operation and powerful. 2 RAM Slots
"Mac" - Core 2 Duo (Conroe) - mini tower 1 optical, 2 drives, 2 PCIe, 4 RAM Slots - prosumer to low end workstation.
Mac Pro - Xeon (Woodcrest) - Full tower 2 processors, 8 RAM slots, 4 PCIe, 2 optical, 4 drive bays. - Mid to high end workstation.
Sounds kind of feasible for a single CPU "Mac" Conroe system and it would fit nicely into the Apple product line up. I think a Conroe system would appeal nicely to prosumers and gamers.
firsttube
Sep 13, 09:57 PM
My friend has that phone, it's amazing.
THESE SLIDER PHONES ARE A HUGE HIT RIGHT NOW!
Some of you may not like the slider style, but most consumers love it. And love the idea of a True music playing cell phone that can replace your iPod (nano at least)
I wouldn't say amazing, but I really like it. The interface is very inconsistent, however. I complain quite a bit about that - but then again, maybe I'm spoiled! :D
THESE SLIDER PHONES ARE A HUGE HIT RIGHT NOW!
Some of you may not like the slider style, but most consumers love it. And love the idea of a True music playing cell phone that can replace your iPod (nano at least)
I wouldn't say amazing, but I really like it. The interface is very inconsistent, however. I complain quite a bit about that - but then again, maybe I'm spoiled! :D
OllyW
Mar 29, 12:57 PM
by 2015, wp7 doesn't exist.
You're probably right, wp8 is scheduled for late 2012. :D
You're probably right, wp8 is scheduled for late 2012. :D
Cybix
Sep 13, 10:17 PM
thats not an artist rendition.. it's a very very poor photochop job. poorly aligned, among other things.... urgh..
bombrider
Mar 22, 11:26 PM
How are you MBP owners liking your Thunderbolt port? Do you feel like someone with a DVD disk in 1975?
I'm not sure if this is anti-Thunderbolt sarcasm or if you're just being playful, but in any event - it wasn't at all a selling feature of the MBP. It's still just my Mini Displayport, for now.
Like many, I would have happily bought the latest MBP as is, for the same price, even without the TB added in.
So.. It's really nice to know that in the coming months & years, brand new peripherals will come out that my MBP will already have support for. Plus, I would bet a hefty sum of money that Apple have new Cinema Displays in the pipeline that take advantage of the TB port in very interesting ways.
I'm not sure if this is anti-Thunderbolt sarcasm or if you're just being playful, but in any event - it wasn't at all a selling feature of the MBP. It's still just my Mini Displayport, for now.
Like many, I would have happily bought the latest MBP as is, for the same price, even without the TB added in.
So.. It's really nice to know that in the coming months & years, brand new peripherals will come out that my MBP will already have support for. Plus, I would bet a hefty sum of money that Apple have new Cinema Displays in the pipeline that take advantage of the TB port in very interesting ways.
IngerMan
Apr 30, 07:05 PM
It has been only 19 months since they changed the look of the iMac.
In 10/20/09 the released the 21.5" and 27" models with aluminum backing, wireless keyboard and Magic Mouse.
I beg to differ, My iMac 7,1 looks like the new ones. I have had it for over 3 years.
In 10/20/09 the released the 21.5" and 27" models with aluminum backing, wireless keyboard and Magic Mouse.
I beg to differ, My iMac 7,1 looks like the new ones. I have had it for over 3 years.
iGary
Sep 10, 04:27 PM
I hate to say it, but my guess is this is an iPod event, not a MB MBP event. ;)
kettle
Oct 28, 03:58 AM
What can be offensive about being "green"?
The idea... nothing.
The implementation of the idea...
It's just another big stick with a flag on the end.
The idea... nothing.
The implementation of the idea...
It's just another big stick with a flag on the end.