what happend on 1st june 2004?

liketom

macrumors 601
Original poster
Apr 8, 2004
4,167
23
Lincoln,UK
so Macrumors stat's tell me :

Most users ever online was 2652, 01-06-2004 at 08:14 PM.

which i think was a thursday , what happend then ?
 

Doctor Q

Administrator
Staff member
Sep 19, 2002
36,134
3,351
Los Angeles
I believe the peak forum activity was during the buildup (of rumors, speculation, and opinions) in the weeks before the Worldwide Developers Conference in 2004, where Tiger was first presented publically. See news story after the event.
 

MacsRgr8

macrumors 604
Sep 8, 2002
7,832
1,126
The Netherlands
Sure?
Isn't the US Date & Time format: MM-DD-YY?

Could be me... over here we use DD-MM-YY, so maybe I'm confused....

The 2004 MacWorld San Francisco Keynote was on January 6th 2004. It was the demo of iLife '04 and iPod mini IIRC.
 

mkrishnan

Moderator emeritus
Jan 9, 2004
29,641
12
Grand Rapids, MI, USA
MacsRgr8 said:
Sure?
Isn't the US Date & Time format: MM-DD-YY?

Could be me... over here we use DD-MM-YY, so maybe I'm confused....

The 2004 MacWorld San Francisco Keynote was on January 6th 2004. It was the demo of iLife '04 and iPod mini IIRC.
Yes. We say:

01/02/2005 (for the second of January)

January 2, 2005.

It's mostly annoying because dates in that format don't automatically alphabetize. :D But people also frequently use the

2 January 2005

type of nomenclature.

And I checked my subscription list and at least in that view, I get dates in MM-DD-YYYY.

Semi-OT, when I name files and I want the date in the name (because I want to quickly see the original date, not the last modified date), I have gotten into the habit of calling them something like "20050405 - xxxx." :)
 

szark

macrumors 68030
May 14, 2002
2,889
0
Arid-Zone-A
Doctor Q said:
I believe the peak forum activity was during the buildup (of rumors, speculation, and opinions) in the weeks before the Worldwide Developers Conference in 2004, where Tiger was first presented publically. See news story after the event.
Nope. It was definitely after the January 2004 MacWorld keynote, at 12:14 pm EST.

I know because I made a post about it at the time.
 

Doctor Q

Administrator
Staff member
Sep 19, 2002
36,134
3,351
Los Angeles
You guys are right. I took liketom's word for it (and the title of the thread), but now that I look at the main forum page I see it was January, not June!
 

Mr. Anderson

Moderator emeritus
Nov 1, 2001
22,407
0
VA
I also think arn initiated a requirement to sign up in order to view and post - no guests. So we got a ton more members and a lot more viewing online as it happened.

But wasn't that also the debut of the LCD iMac? Which Time Canada let us all know about a day before? I'm not sure, its been a while....

D
 

Josh396

macrumors 65816
Oct 16, 2004
1,128
0
Peoria/Chicago, IL
Mr. Anderson said:
But wasn't that also the debut of the LCD iMac? Which Time Canada let us all know about a day before? I'm not sure, its been a while....
No the LCD iMac was introduced in 2001 I believe, 2002 at the latest. Speaking of which, does anyone either have a video file of when it was introduced or know where I could find it? I've always wanted to see what Steve had to say about it.
 

Freg3000

macrumors 68000
Sep 22, 2002
1,914
0
New York
Josh396 said:
No the LCD iMac was introduced in 2001 I believe, 2002 at the latest. Speaking of which, does anyone either have a video file of when it was introduced or know where I could find it? I've always wanted to see what Steve had to say about it.
It was MWSF 2002, and I would be very interested in seeing that Keynote too.
 

liketom

macrumors 601
Original poster
Apr 8, 2004
4,167
23
Lincoln,UK
Silly me i should of thought that the date format was different ,


i wonder what other date's in apple history has attracted the most online people to macrumors

:rolleyes:
 

MacNut

macrumors Core
Jan 4, 2002
21,628
7,865
CT
liketom said:
Silly me i should of thought that the date format was different ,


i wonder what other date's in apple history has attracted the most online people to macrumors

:rolleyes:
That sounds like something for DrQ to look up. :)
 

rt_brained

macrumors 6502a
Jan 13, 2002
554
0
Creativille
Josh396 said:
No the LCD iMac was introduced in 2001 I believe, 2002 at the latest. Speaking of which, does anyone either have a video file of when it was introduced or know where I could find it? I've always wanted to see what Steve had to say about it.
His comments were generally favorable.
 

noaccess

macrumors 6502
Jun 11, 2005
445
1
06-01-2004
[Offtopic]
My Nokia 7600 3G phone was stolen by a guy who threatened to stab me if I don't give it to him. It was new and I had waited for it to be released for 4 months, until I bought it. Some luck... :( (Sorry couldn't help it)
Ok, enough about the phone.

[pretty much on topic]
BTW... europeans usually use the DDMMYYYY format. The MMDDYYYY format can pretty confusing to people who aren't used to it.
 

stridey

macrumors 65816
Jan 21, 2005
1,136
0
Massachusetts, Connecticut
noaccess said:
06-01-2004

BTW... europeans usually use the DDMMYYYY format. The MMDDYYYY format can pretty confusing to people who aren't used to it.
Or conversly, americans usually use the MMDDYYYY format. The DDMMYYYY format can be pretty confusing to people who aren't used to it.

That road goes both ways. :D
 

MacRy

macrumors 601
Apr 2, 2004
4,248
4,971
England
stridey said:
Or conversly, americans usually use the MMDDYYYY format. The DDMMYYYY format can be pretty confusing to people who aren't used to it.

That road goes both ways. :D
Do you not agree that ddmmyyyy is more logical though? The date today is xx and that is of xx month in xxxx year. Seems so much more logical to me and flows a lot better.
 

ham_man

macrumors 68020
Jan 21, 2005
2,265
0
MacRy said:
Do you not agree that ddmmyyyy is more logical though? The date today is xx and that is of xx month in xxxx year. Seems so much more logical to me and flows a lot better.
Or in a MMDDYYYY it would be <Month> <Date>th, <Year>. Interesting that so many members were here for that keynote. Guess the iPod Mini was that big...
 

MacNut

macrumors Core
Jan 4, 2002
21,628
7,865
CT
Its fine the way it is, January 1st is just that not 1st January, that makes no sense at all. The first January would be like 2000 years ago. :rolleyes:
 

mkrishnan

Moderator emeritus
Jan 9, 2004
29,641
12
Grand Rapids, MI, USA
MacNut said:
Its fine the way it is, January 1st is just that not 1st January, that makes no sense at all. The first January would be like 2000 years ago. :rolleyes:
ROFL...just in case you're serious... I think it's confusing to Europeans because their system goes in order of increasing time interval (days < months < years), whereas ours has a mixed order -- the days, which are the shortest timeframe, are in the middle. ;)
 

MacRy

macrumors 601
Apr 2, 2004
4,248
4,971
England
mkrishnan said:
ROFL...just in case you're serious... I think it's confusing to Europeans because their system goes in order of increasing time interval (days < months < years), whereas ours has a mixed order -- the days, which are the shortest timeframe, are in the middle. ;)
It's not so much confusing just odd that's all. Like you say, we go in increasing time interval's rather than just being totally random ;)

By the way, we refer to it as the 1st of January and not just 1st January. That wouldn't make sense like you say.
 

stridey

macrumors 65816
Jan 21, 2005
1,136
0
Massachusetts, Connecticut
MacRy said:
Do you not agree that ddmmyyyy is more logical though? The date today is xx and that is of xx month in xxxx year. Seems so much more logical to me and flows a lot better.
That's true from a lesser-than greater-than standpoint, but from a pure time-telling standpoint, I think the MMDDYYYY makes a lot of sense. With MMDDYYYY what you're seeing is in order of importance. Knowing the day (the first piece of information you receive in the european way) is useless unless you know the month it's in, whereas knowing the month tells you quite a bit, then the following day adds detail.

Of course, it's all apples and oranges, and i'm sure whatever way you're brought up with makes the most sense. :D
 

Doctor Q

Administrator
Staff member
Sep 19, 2002
36,134
3,351
Los Angeles
stridey said:
That's true from a lesser-than greater-than standpoint, but from a pure time-telling standpoint, I think the MMDDYYYY makes a lot of sense. With MMDDYYYY what you're seeing is in order of importance. Knowing the day (the first piece of information you receive in the european way) is useless unless you know the month it's in, whereas knowing the month tells you quite a bit, then the following day adds detail.
Year-month-day makes the most sense to me (biggest unit first, sortable). Day-month-year is second, since it's like street addresses (most local/specific first). Month-day-year, the dumb American system, is certainly third. Maybe we Americans should write our times as minute-hour-second while we're on a roll!
 

ravenvii

macrumors 604
Mar 17, 2004
7,583
489
Melenkurion Skyweir
Doctor Q said:
Year-month-day makes the most sense to me (biggest unit first, sortable). Day-month-year is second, since it's like street addresses (most local/specific first). Month-day-year, the dumb American system, is certainly third. Maybe we Americans should write our times as minute-hour-second while we're on a roll!
Actually it should be minute:second:hour if we want to go according to the logic of mm/dd/yyyy! :D

This reminds me to thank the almighty for the new servers. Newbies pouring out of the woodwork to whine on macrumors and spamming legitimate users with a "server is busy" message, then disappearing back into the wood without a trace was really pissing me off. Wait, even without the busy messages, they still piss me off!