bdj21ya
Oct 12, 04:43 PM
Dude... That has to be the most racist thing I have ever read! :eek:
Evolved???? And comparing humans to natural selection of animals????
I don't see the point of your incredulity (come on man using 4 question marks twice in one post. That's totally flagrant).
We aren't any different. Social interaction is just another aspect of biological evolution. It all breaks down to reactions between atoms and there's nothing racist about it. Are you going to tell me that the evolution of animals doesn't depend on their social interactions?
Evolved???? And comparing humans to natural selection of animals????
I don't see the point of your incredulity (come on man using 4 question marks twice in one post. That's totally flagrant).
We aren't any different. Social interaction is just another aspect of biological evolution. It all breaks down to reactions between atoms and there's nothing racist about it. Are you going to tell me that the evolution of animals doesn't depend on their social interactions?
ThaDoggg
Apr 25, 02:08 PM
Ahhh just as I bought a new MBP!!!!! Hopefully resale value won't take too big of a hit :(
darthcarto
Mar 29, 12:34 PM
As someone who used a Samsung Focus for 5 long, painful months, only to switch back to my old 3GS this past weekend, I say: "Umm... NO!" I don't see that happening.
cube
Apr 22, 12:17 PM
Regardless of whether or not there are BDXL notebook drives, do you really think Apple's issue with Blu-Ray is the size the discs can hold? :rolleyes:
I'm not about to sit here and list off reasons why an internal optical drive is useless today. It's pretty clear that if Apple were to keep the optical drive in their machines they would've upgraded to Blu-Ray a long time ago but they haven't so it's quite clear that they have the intentions of removing it in all of their notebooks in the not so distant future.
If it were OK to remove the optical drives they would have already done so.
They are fighting against Blu-Ray. But that's where the notebook market has already moved into.
I'm not about to sit here and list off reasons why an internal optical drive is useless today. It's pretty clear that if Apple were to keep the optical drive in their machines they would've upgraded to Blu-Ray a long time ago but they haven't so it's quite clear that they have the intentions of removing it in all of their notebooks in the not so distant future.
If it were OK to remove the optical drives they would have already done so.
They are fighting against Blu-Ray. But that's where the notebook market has already moved into.
peharri
Sep 18, 09:00 AM
You are right. I make a call. i expect to pay for it. i dont expect the person im calling to get billed for the damn call.
The other way of looking at it is that the mobile user has made a technology choice. They shouldn't expect other people to pay for their technology choice. A system where each person pays to connect to the network and decides how they want to pay for that is inherently fairer, even if it makes it harder for people to choose to subsidize the systems of others.
(Remember too that in the majority of cases, most US users have a fixed bill because of the high number of bundled minutes coupled with the huge unmetered portions of their bills. It's not the case that we get billed for the incoming call in the majority of cases. If it's made at peak time, from a different network, then yeah, we'll use bundled minutes, but most of us end up with large amounts of bundled minutes free at the end of the month despite this. And you never have to accept an incoming call.)
and. as for pricing. yes, vodafone have a 1c/sec flat rate on calls. but. i pay $79/month and at the end of the my account has a automatic refund (of sorts) applied, so anything up to $500 in calls/txt/etc is included in the $79.
That doesn't sound like a bad plan, that's unusually good outside of the US from what I've researched, though most of my research has been limited to the UK.
i DO use my mobile for most calls. i use my landline maybe once a week, because it has a better speakerphone if im using it for a long time.
If I were back in Britain, I couldn't substitute a cellphone for a landline because of the incoming calls issue. It's simply not fair to my family or friends to make them pay through the nose to contact me. I might use one for the bulk of my outgoing calls, but for incoming calls, it wouldn't be right.
An ideal compromise, in my view, would be for the operators to provide two numbers on every phone, a caller pays and a mobile party pays (with the latter being treated as ordinary airtime, or unmetered according to a fixed monthly charge), but alas I don't think the operators would ever do something that could potentially undermine their interconnect revenues like that.
Neither solution is perfect. The US seems better at the moment because of the emphasis on unmetered usage. At least unmetered incoming calls are an option here. But the downside is the lack of a practical PAYG system.
The other way of looking at it is that the mobile user has made a technology choice. They shouldn't expect other people to pay for their technology choice. A system where each person pays to connect to the network and decides how they want to pay for that is inherently fairer, even if it makes it harder for people to choose to subsidize the systems of others.
(Remember too that in the majority of cases, most US users have a fixed bill because of the high number of bundled minutes coupled with the huge unmetered portions of their bills. It's not the case that we get billed for the incoming call in the majority of cases. If it's made at peak time, from a different network, then yeah, we'll use bundled minutes, but most of us end up with large amounts of bundled minutes free at the end of the month despite this. And you never have to accept an incoming call.)
and. as for pricing. yes, vodafone have a 1c/sec flat rate on calls. but. i pay $79/month and at the end of the my account has a automatic refund (of sorts) applied, so anything up to $500 in calls/txt/etc is included in the $79.
That doesn't sound like a bad plan, that's unusually good outside of the US from what I've researched, though most of my research has been limited to the UK.
i DO use my mobile for most calls. i use my landline maybe once a week, because it has a better speakerphone if im using it for a long time.
If I were back in Britain, I couldn't substitute a cellphone for a landline because of the incoming calls issue. It's simply not fair to my family or friends to make them pay through the nose to contact me. I might use one for the bulk of my outgoing calls, but for incoming calls, it wouldn't be right.
An ideal compromise, in my view, would be for the operators to provide two numbers on every phone, a caller pays and a mobile party pays (with the latter being treated as ordinary airtime, or unmetered according to a fixed monthly charge), but alas I don't think the operators would ever do something that could potentially undermine their interconnect revenues like that.
Neither solution is perfect. The US seems better at the moment because of the emphasis on unmetered usage. At least unmetered incoming calls are an option here. But the downside is the lack of a practical PAYG system.
MattG
Aug 28, 01:32 PM
Wow, that Dell 2010...it's just like an iMac, just 3x the price and 3x as ugly. Eww.
brewno
Apr 14, 12:10 PM
Nice. USB3 on a MBP, all I wanted. My '07 MBP C2D is still running perfectly. It can wait a year for it :) I already have a 2Tb USB3 external HD waiting for it.
jesteraver
Sep 10, 07:23 AM
It seems Apple could just wait for Clovertown...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/02/11/intel_clovertown/
which appears to be 2 Woodcrests on one processor. Could we see 8-Core Mac Pros' in 2007?
arn
More than likely. It will come with a price probably.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/02/11/intel_clovertown/
which appears to be 2 Woodcrests on one processor. Could we see 8-Core Mac Pros' in 2007?
arn
More than likely. It will come with a price probably.
Multimedia
Aug 23, 07:02 PM
Smooth Move � Willingness To Admit They Are Right When They Are Right Is Smart Biz. Long Term it's cheap insurance. :)
W. Ademczyk
Aug 28, 11:24 PM
Don't get me wrong, I would welcome a new enclosure but I think that allowing the prospect of one to be the determining factor in the purchase of a machine is ridiculous. As much as I would LOVE to have a gunmetal colored mbp, if it came out tomorrow I wouldn't be upset that I have a silver one because I truly do love my machine. Apple will always continue to innovate and release new products, and IMO now that they're using intel chips the rate of obsolescence will increase (in terms of harware and performance more than appearance).
More than likely a new case would mean a snazzy magnetic latch, a user replaceable HDD, and possibly an end to the MBP heat issue. When a 120 gb ipod comes out, is that the HDD you want in your computer? Besides, this is Apple we're talking about--do you really think any design change is going to be a demotion? Has any Apple redesign sucked? Ever?
More than likely a new case would mean a snazzy magnetic latch, a user replaceable HDD, and possibly an end to the MBP heat issue. When a 120 gb ipod comes out, is that the HDD you want in your computer? Besides, this is Apple we're talking about--do you really think any design change is going to be a demotion? Has any Apple redesign sucked? Ever?
impierced
Nov 13, 03:20 PM
So, did you even READ what Rogue Amoeba had to say?
I'm seriously amazed with you apologists. You guys are defending Apple in an instance where they are CLEARLY in the wrong.
w00master
Please be more specific when you say "wrong", in what way?
Apple owns the rights to their intellectual property, this includes images and icons of their products that they have created.
However, let me be clear here... I think Apple's "stance" regarding this is "wrong". Rogue Amoeba has enriched the user experience by providing an accurate representation of the source. This should have been resolved when Apple looked into it on more than the surface level.
I'm seriously amazed with you apologists. You guys are defending Apple in an instance where they are CLEARLY in the wrong.
w00master
Please be more specific when you say "wrong", in what way?
Apple owns the rights to their intellectual property, this includes images and icons of their products that they have created.
However, let me be clear here... I think Apple's "stance" regarding this is "wrong". Rogue Amoeba has enriched the user experience by providing an accurate representation of the source. This should have been resolved when Apple looked into it on more than the surface level.
ucfgrad93
Apr 25, 12:14 AM
Good luck with reporting my plates. I've done that to drunk drivers before, the 911 operator has told me "We're sorry sir, we cannot divert officers based on heresy." Also, see above: My uncle is the traffic court judge in the jurisdiction where I did this, good luck getting a ticket to stand.
EDIT: @mrsirs2009 - No I actually just felt like going fast.
-Don
And the sense of entitlement just keeps getting larger. Hope your uncle can protect you when you kill someone.
EDIT: @mrsirs2009 - No I actually just felt like going fast.
-Don
And the sense of entitlement just keeps getting larger. Hope your uncle can protect you when you kill someone.
vwcruisn
Mar 23, 05:58 PM
you don't think a web app will pop up for this the second these apps are removed from the store?
***I am 100% against drunk driving, if you drive drunk you are ignorant and should be put in jail. period.
what about other dangerous/distracted drivers? People who use a cell phone, speed, eat, text, don't wear corrective lenses when they are supposed to, etc. Aren't they just as big of a risk to everyone's safety? Do you think they should be thrown in jail? Why single out one type of "bad" driver?
***I am 100% against drunk driving, if you drive drunk you are ignorant and should be put in jail. period.
what about other dangerous/distracted drivers? People who use a cell phone, speed, eat, text, don't wear corrective lenses when they are supposed to, etc. Aren't they just as big of a risk to everyone's safety? Do you think they should be thrown in jail? Why single out one type of "bad" driver?
iApples
Apr 4, 12:28 PM
Anybody responsible for guarding should have a gun. If the person isn't qualified to carry a gun, they he/she isn't qualified to guard anything and shouldn't be a guard.
When you're exchanging gunfire with a criminal, the main goal is not to wound; it is to remove the threat to your life completely. Let's say the guard shoots the guy in the arm, the guy's going to be so pumped up on adrenaline that he's not going to even know he's shot, giving him plenty of opportunity to take another shot.
Ask yourself this: If it were your life he was guarding, what would you want the guard to do?
Well said.
I don't feel bad for criminals... I rather see him die than an innocent bystander that was just visiting the Apple store.
When you're exchanging gunfire with a criminal, the main goal is not to wound; it is to remove the threat to your life completely. Let's say the guard shoots the guy in the arm, the guy's going to be so pumped up on adrenaline that he's not going to even know he's shot, giving him plenty of opportunity to take another shot.
Ask yourself this: If it were your life he was guarding, what would you want the guard to do?
Well said.
I don't feel bad for criminals... I rather see him die than an innocent bystander that was just visiting the Apple store.
ickies
Sep 19, 03:15 PM
jeez, thats about 10x what i would have expected.
a lot of people I have talked to thought that it was "crazy" to expect people to wait 30+mins to download a movie.
couldn't apple develop something into itunes that lets you watch while it is downloading? is this possible?
I'm also really surprised by these numbers but that's a really good idea you mentioned!
If it takes a few minutes to buffer before the movie starts, why not have the option of watching lower-res movie trailers while you wait? If the studios are willing to pay for the advertising, it could even subsidize the purchase a little bit and maybe Apple could knock a buck off the price.
a lot of people I have talked to thought that it was "crazy" to expect people to wait 30+mins to download a movie.
couldn't apple develop something into itunes that lets you watch while it is downloading? is this possible?
I'm also really surprised by these numbers but that's a really good idea you mentioned!
If it takes a few minutes to buffer before the movie starts, why not have the option of watching lower-res movie trailers while you wait? If the studios are willing to pay for the advertising, it could even subsidize the purchase a little bit and maybe Apple could knock a buck off the price.
MattSepeta
Apr 18, 03:37 PM
The very fact that people think they "deserve" vacation days is mind-boggling. Why should you "Deserve" to get paid a single dime you did not earn?
I work about 60% self-employed free lance, and 40% at my old "day job". Guess what. Neither one offers me "vacation days". Am I miserable? Hardly!
If I want a vacation day, I simply do not work. That also means I do not get paid. It would seem mighty pretentious of me to be expect pay for work not done.
If you want a job with more vacation days, FIND ONE! no one owes you a darn thing, certainly not pay for days off.
I work about 60% self-employed free lance, and 40% at my old "day job". Guess what. Neither one offers me "vacation days". Am I miserable? Hardly!
If I want a vacation day, I simply do not work. That also means I do not get paid. It would seem mighty pretentious of me to be expect pay for work not done.
If you want a job with more vacation days, FIND ONE! no one owes you a darn thing, certainly not pay for days off.
wywern209
Apr 25, 06:44 PM
ehh, i don't think much will change from the unibody we have this yr. there might be some infusion of liquid metal for sturdiness but besides that, i don't think much will change. on the other hand, USB3 will be standard next yr and maybe some stuff will be out to take advantage of lightpeak. and i seriously doubt that we will have super highres stuff next year for the laptops. I anticipate higher res ACDs but nothing more.
Mattsasa
Apr 30, 06:47 PM
Glad, hoping for a redesign, but probably unlikely, also would be great to see the yellow tint issue resolved..
Yea I don't think I redesign is likely, Apple likes the current one still, and it is pretty nice IMO
Yea I don't think I redesign is likely, Apple likes the current one still, and it is pretty nice IMO
MattyMac
Oct 12, 05:07 PM
100% confirmed.
via Chicago Tribune:
http://img183.imageshack.us/img183/5016/25865863uz2.jpg
Nice!
via Chicago Tribune:
http://img183.imageshack.us/img183/5016/25865863uz2.jpg
Nice!
jimmyjoemccrow
Jan 12, 01:10 AM
And is the alleged attack proceeding through the Mac community? No.
Once again, targeting and successfully attacking are worlds apart.
Oh, and the "time" needed to identify that you're on an Apple (or other) operating system is essentially zero. All you have to do is look at the user agent (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_agent) header.
Thanks for reminding me to put you on ignore. I know how easy it is to identify an operating system, but if they bothered to make a message just for Mac users it stands to reason they made malware for Mac users too. Or would they just make the message for fun? We all know what funny guys malware writers are.
It doesn't matter if it hasn't propagated, it never even would have happened in the past. The more malware attacks there are on the Mac, the greater the chance of one of them actually becoming a widespread nuisance.
Once again, targeting and successfully attacking are worlds apart.
Oh, and the "time" needed to identify that you're on an Apple (or other) operating system is essentially zero. All you have to do is look at the user agent (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_agent) header.
Thanks for reminding me to put you on ignore. I know how easy it is to identify an operating system, but if they bothered to make a message just for Mac users it stands to reason they made malware for Mac users too. Or would they just make the message for fun? We all know what funny guys malware writers are.
It doesn't matter if it hasn't propagated, it never even would have happened in the past. The more malware attacks there are on the Mac, the greater the chance of one of them actually becoming a widespread nuisance.
oldwatery
Sep 26, 01:25 PM
Damn you guys bitch alot:rolleyes:
Seriously though...I think it is fair to say we all have good and bad stories about carriers. All carriers.
But read the release.
They are using Cingular for just 6 months then offering it to everyone (who wants to take it)
This is a wise decision on a brand new product for lots of obvious reasons.
I personally use Cingular but have my issues with them and all the rest for that matter. (don't waste your $$$ on their lame insurance plan for instance)
Also it would seem that this will not be a US only product.
I know it is hard to be patient with these things....damn it I am frustrated at having to wait 2 weeks for my wireless keyboard and 2 months for my Shuffle.
BUT as they say and the truth is.....ALL good things come to those who wait.
I think many of you have missed the simple significance of this news.
At last the phone is real...it is coming soon. No more rumors:D
Seriously though...I think it is fair to say we all have good and bad stories about carriers. All carriers.
But read the release.
They are using Cingular for just 6 months then offering it to everyone (who wants to take it)
This is a wise decision on a brand new product for lots of obvious reasons.
I personally use Cingular but have my issues with them and all the rest for that matter. (don't waste your $$$ on their lame insurance plan for instance)
Also it would seem that this will not be a US only product.
I know it is hard to be patient with these things....damn it I am frustrated at having to wait 2 weeks for my wireless keyboard and 2 months for my Shuffle.
BUT as they say and the truth is.....ALL good things come to those who wait.
I think many of you have missed the simple significance of this news.
At last the phone is real...it is coming soon. No more rumors:D
Cheerwino
Apr 28, 03:54 PM
Steve Ballmer about the iPhone...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eywi0h_Y5_U
"The problem with Microsoft is they just have no taste." - Steve Jobs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dR8SAFRBmcU&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eywi0h_Y5_U
"The problem with Microsoft is they just have no taste." - Steve Jobs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dR8SAFRBmcU&feature=related
vitaboy
Aug 24, 03:49 AM
There seems to be a lot of misunderstanding about just exactly what the settlement means. But I would like to remind people not to take things at face value - Apple is smarter than that.
I suspect that it was Apple who proposed the settlement to Creative. More than that, I suspect it was Apple who dictated the actual terms. Creative had no choice but to accept, which was just as well because at first appearance, they look like the winner.
However, I believe Apple is playing corporate jujitsu here. The settlement is a strategic move that greatly benefits Apple in the long term even as Apple is willing to suffer an apparent loss of face.
Why?
Because the settlement gives Creative much needed ammunition (in both cash and legal standing) to go after every one of the iPod's competitors. You can be sure Creative is getting ready to send out letters to Sandisk, which has raced past them in the music player space this year. You can be sure Creative will be sending letters to iRiver.
And most certainly, you can be certain that Creative will be sending letters to Microsoft with regards to Zune.
Really, Apple was not playing from a weak position. There's no other way to say it, but that's a simplistic and naive interpretation. Patent battles are very, very expensive, lasting years and thousands of man-months of time. Creative not only had to fight Apple over its original patents, but simultaneously defends itself against Apple's countersuit (which were filed in a different state, just to make life more difficult for Creative's legal team).
Without any effort at all, Apple could drag the case through the courts for 5+ years and force Creative to cough up tens of millions of dollars in legal expenses. Creative simply does not have that kind of money, after blowing through $100 million in cash to write of unsold inventory last year. The company's cash position is very weak and the company was undoubtedly sweating blood trying to determine if it would have enough cash to see things through the end - an end which was far from guaranteed. Even if Creative won its original patent suit, they would have lost the countersuit for the same reasons.
The prospect of blowing $50 million over 5 years to pay lawyers for a net gain of nothing was weighing heavily on their minds, I'm sure.
I think what really motivated the settlement is the sudden appearance of Zune. That basically gave Apple the ace it needed to give it a four-of-a-kind. Why? Because while Creative might have been able to tough it out before Zune, the existence of Zune would basically kill the company before the case could wind through the court system.
I mean, we saw Creative's share of the music player market dive from 8% to just 4% in about a year. Sandisk, which was a virtually unknown brand in the music player space, went from nothing to 8% in a short time.
Even if Zune is far from being an "iPod killer", with Microsoft's marketing machine backing it up, I think any reasonable person could see that it is quite likely that Creative's marketshare would be dropping to nothing a year from now.
So Apple basically gave Creative an offer it couldn't refuse.
Settle with us now and forget this silly patent threat of yours. We'll give you $100 million to license your patents, if only because you got them first. And now that we're all family, why don't you go after some of our competitors. You'll probably be able to get just as much, if not more, which is a lot better than what you were getting trying to fight us with that Zen thing.
And if you want to let your pride get in the way, I don't think we need to remind you that Zune is just a few months away from demolishing what little is left of your company. A year from now, it will be iPod, Sandisk, Zune....everyone will have forgotten about Creative because frankly, you don't have any loyal customers like we do.
In fact, we'll be nice and help you gain some loyal customers, too. By making great iPod accessories, you'll be truly a welcome part of the family and more importantly, you'll have products that people actually buy. How about that!
Just remember, the $100 million is a kind of loan, of sorts. When you talk to that Microsoft fella, remember to share some of the payments you extract with us. We're all family, right?
Given that the writing was on the wall, I figure Creative realized that if you can't beat 'em, it was far, far better to join Apple.
I suspect that it was Apple who proposed the settlement to Creative. More than that, I suspect it was Apple who dictated the actual terms. Creative had no choice but to accept, which was just as well because at first appearance, they look like the winner.
However, I believe Apple is playing corporate jujitsu here. The settlement is a strategic move that greatly benefits Apple in the long term even as Apple is willing to suffer an apparent loss of face.
Why?
Because the settlement gives Creative much needed ammunition (in both cash and legal standing) to go after every one of the iPod's competitors. You can be sure Creative is getting ready to send out letters to Sandisk, which has raced past them in the music player space this year. You can be sure Creative will be sending letters to iRiver.
And most certainly, you can be certain that Creative will be sending letters to Microsoft with regards to Zune.
Really, Apple was not playing from a weak position. There's no other way to say it, but that's a simplistic and naive interpretation. Patent battles are very, very expensive, lasting years and thousands of man-months of time. Creative not only had to fight Apple over its original patents, but simultaneously defends itself against Apple's countersuit (which were filed in a different state, just to make life more difficult for Creative's legal team).
Without any effort at all, Apple could drag the case through the courts for 5+ years and force Creative to cough up tens of millions of dollars in legal expenses. Creative simply does not have that kind of money, after blowing through $100 million in cash to write of unsold inventory last year. The company's cash position is very weak and the company was undoubtedly sweating blood trying to determine if it would have enough cash to see things through the end - an end which was far from guaranteed. Even if Creative won its original patent suit, they would have lost the countersuit for the same reasons.
The prospect of blowing $50 million over 5 years to pay lawyers for a net gain of nothing was weighing heavily on their minds, I'm sure.
I think what really motivated the settlement is the sudden appearance of Zune. That basically gave Apple the ace it needed to give it a four-of-a-kind. Why? Because while Creative might have been able to tough it out before Zune, the existence of Zune would basically kill the company before the case could wind through the court system.
I mean, we saw Creative's share of the music player market dive from 8% to just 4% in about a year. Sandisk, which was a virtually unknown brand in the music player space, went from nothing to 8% in a short time.
Even if Zune is far from being an "iPod killer", with Microsoft's marketing machine backing it up, I think any reasonable person could see that it is quite likely that Creative's marketshare would be dropping to nothing a year from now.
So Apple basically gave Creative an offer it couldn't refuse.
Settle with us now and forget this silly patent threat of yours. We'll give you $100 million to license your patents, if only because you got them first. And now that we're all family, why don't you go after some of our competitors. You'll probably be able to get just as much, if not more, which is a lot better than what you were getting trying to fight us with that Zen thing.
And if you want to let your pride get in the way, I don't think we need to remind you that Zune is just a few months away from demolishing what little is left of your company. A year from now, it will be iPod, Sandisk, Zune....everyone will have forgotten about Creative because frankly, you don't have any loyal customers like we do.
In fact, we'll be nice and help you gain some loyal customers, too. By making great iPod accessories, you'll be truly a welcome part of the family and more importantly, you'll have products that people actually buy. How about that!
Just remember, the $100 million is a kind of loan, of sorts. When you talk to that Microsoft fella, remember to share some of the payments you extract with us. We're all family, right?
Given that the writing was on the wall, I figure Creative realized that if you can't beat 'em, it was far, far better to join Apple.
jofarmer
Sep 12, 06:18 PM
picture attached
Edit: Tested on Three iPods now. One bought days after the first 5G was realsed right up to one bought in july... all work with itunes purchase and home encoded content.
I have never been more happy to be proven wrong. But now: Steve has been lying to us about the capabilities of this great iPod 5G for nearly a year now, just so we wouldn't anticipate the iTunes Movie Store.
What a dear.
Edit: Tested on Three iPods now. One bought days after the first 5G was realsed right up to one bought in july... all work with itunes purchase and home encoded content.
I have never been more happy to be proven wrong. But now: Steve has been lying to us about the capabilities of this great iPod 5G for nearly a year now, just so we wouldn't anticipate the iTunes Movie Store.
What a dear.
No comments:
Post a Comment