Chundles
Oct 12, 12:28 PM
Bono, whilst playing a gig in Glasgow, got the whole crowd to be silent and then began slowly clapping his hands. He got the crowd to clap along for a while, the stadium quiet except for the rhythmic clapping...
After a short period Bono spoke, saying that everytime he clapped his hands a child in Africa died...
Suddenly, from the front row of the venue a voice broke out in thick Scottish brogue, ending the silence as it echoed across the crowd, the voice cried out to Bono "Well stop ****ing doing it then!!"
True story.
Red glossy 1G nano - blergh, red anodised 2G nano - could be cool.
After a short period Bono spoke, saying that everytime he clapped his hands a child in Africa died...
Suddenly, from the front row of the venue a voice broke out in thick Scottish brogue, ending the silence as it echoed across the crowd, the voice cried out to Bono "Well stop ****ing doing it then!!"
True story.
Red glossy 1G nano - blergh, red anodised 2G nano - could be cool.
stracky
Sep 14, 07:09 AM
a ipod nano with phone function really isnt anythign amazing and would be well behind current technology, they should be fully going for that crazy multi device that was patented lately. at least that would be up with or infront of other technology.
2 iPhones,
- iphone (nano) base phone and cheaper, limited abilties
- iPhone (multifunction device) more expensive and more pda like.
2 iPhones,
- iphone (nano) base phone and cheaper, limited abilties
- iPhone (multifunction device) more expensive and more pda like.
gugy
Sep 26, 02:30 PM
Hey I'm satisfied with my carrier. I think the last time I had any problems with coverage was back in the 20th century. I've got coverage even in the freaking underground. I'd have coverage in the middle of wilderness if I chose to go there. It's cheap as well, I never pay incoming calls, my phone has never been locked and it works pretty much all over the world, my operator has had packet data connection most of this century as well and 3g for several years. What more could I wish?
I guess you are a lucky dude!
I guess you are a lucky dude!
ChrisTX
Apr 28, 09:05 PM
Wow, Apple is pretty much unstoppable now. And if anyone tries to get in their way, they've got a $60b war chest.
To be fair I read that it is now $65b but who's counting. :D
To be fair I read that it is now $65b but who's counting. :D
AaronEdwards
Apr 20, 11:27 AM
Of course that's the ideal answer but an impossible answer. So again, Google or your device/computer?
I'd rather have Google or Apple for that matter having that information in their servers, than it being in a unencrypted file on my phone or on my computer.
What Apple has done here is giving anyone with access to either your phone or your computer a way to track your movement. And that person would not need to either install something or deal with encrypted files. The person tracked would have no clue that it's happening.
Once again, it's shown that when it comes to security and encryption, Apple needs to improve their game.
But, it's great thing for jealous husbands who would want to monitor what their wives are doing.
I'd rather have Google or Apple for that matter having that information in their servers, than it being in a unencrypted file on my phone or on my computer.
What Apple has done here is giving anyone with access to either your phone or your computer a way to track your movement. And that person would not need to either install something or deal with encrypted files. The person tracked would have no clue that it's happening.
Once again, it's shown that when it comes to security and encryption, Apple needs to improve their game.
But, it's great thing for jealous husbands who would want to monitor what their wives are doing.
dukebound85
Apr 25, 02:04 AM
Uh no I didn't. I just interpreted the law. As someone implied earlier, this could all be a ruse. I might not have done anything I said in this thread. No one here can know 100% for sure, because you did not witness the event I claim occurred. That simple fact, in addition to any record searching anyone did without a warrant would be an invasion of privacy would get anything I say in this thread thrown out of court faster than you could blink.
-Don
OP, I do find it amusing you think you know the intricacies of the law just because your uncle is a judge
Until you have the education/training yourself, I would not be so confident in your opinions...especially as one who has not even finished hs
I also advise you to stop digging yourself in a hole. I feel you are rapidly losing any credibility/respect that many long time posters previously had of you due to this very, and I mean very childish and selfish mindset you are exhibiting in this thread
-Don
OP, I do find it amusing you think you know the intricacies of the law just because your uncle is a judge
Until you have the education/training yourself, I would not be so confident in your opinions...especially as one who has not even finished hs
I also advise you to stop digging yourself in a hole. I feel you are rapidly losing any credibility/respect that many long time posters previously had of you due to this very, and I mean very childish and selfish mindset you are exhibiting in this thread
cmaier
Nov 23, 01:09 PM
http://www.rogueamoeba.com/utm/2009/11/23/airfoil-speakers-touch-1-0-2-is-now-available/
Looks like Apple admitted it was in the wrong.
But the posters here who were defending apple won't admit they were wrong.
Looks like Apple admitted it was in the wrong.
But the posters here who were defending apple won't admit they were wrong.
AppliedVisual
Oct 27, 01:38 PM
Also, thanks for the Apple environment link. Didn't know about the 10% discount on iPods when turning in an old one. With no educational discounts on iPods anymore, that's a pretty decent deal.
Well, you can get a better deal by just selling an old one on ebay. But if you have an old one that doesn't work, there ya go.
Well, you can get a better deal by just selling an old one on ebay. But if you have an old one that doesn't work, there ya go.
ripfrankwhite
Sep 5, 01:00 PM
attempts to unify the TV and the computer have been done for the last 15 years or so without success. I give Apple a less then 10% success. Even if they succeed, the definition of success here is greatly compromise to a point of failure.
Cinch
But with every attempt, the chance of success increases significantly. Lets keep our fingers crossed. :)
Cinch
But with every attempt, the chance of success increases significantly. Lets keep our fingers crossed. :)
cere
Apr 14, 02:02 PM
Yeah, it is. USB 3.0 is not that big of a step up from USB 2.0 so those that really need the extra bandwidth will not bother with it and go straight to Thunderbolt. Simple as that. Leave your rinky dink Toys R Us low bandwidth peripherals to USB and leave the big boy peripherals to Thunderbolt.
Sure you have, you've completely ignored my other post then changed the subject to reading comprehension to smokescreen the topic at hand. Oh and give me a break with your non-insult ********. You have been making jabs about short buses and taking comprehension classes over a Thunderbolt and USB discussion. If anything you are the one that needs to take some classes, maybe not on comprehension but I'm sure you get the idea.
Actually let's do a real recap:
You agree with a claim that Thunderbolt will be Mac only
I respond with an article that simply states it won't be
You respond with the reason it won't take off as manufacturers will have to add it separately
Econgeek tells you it's a completely different scenario because they don't need a license through Apple
I tell you Intel will be supporting both
You then start with your strawman argument and ignore a portion of what I stated
You also follow that up with some insults
I respond with video proof of why Thunderbolt will be popular with many devices
You ignore then respond with more insults
Honestly, can you try to post without arguing against claims I never made? That is at least 3 times now and it shows a lack of honesty or reading ability. I am not sure which.
I never said it was going to Mac only (though you have accused me of that twice). I agreed with the insinuation that it could be. I never said manufacturers would have to add it separately. I did say that the article you posted said only that it would be available to all and that it didn't say all would add it. Mainly, I said that, because you know, the article doesn't actually say that.
I think we are done. No point in debating someone that doesn't understand what he is reading and also makes up things to reply to. Arguing against someone that uses strawman arguments or misses common subtleties in language is bad enough. Arguing against someone that is making up things to argue against is pointless.
Sure you have, you've completely ignored my other post then changed the subject to reading comprehension to smokescreen the topic at hand. Oh and give me a break with your non-insult ********. You have been making jabs about short buses and taking comprehension classes over a Thunderbolt and USB discussion. If anything you are the one that needs to take some classes, maybe not on comprehension but I'm sure you get the idea.
Actually let's do a real recap:
You agree with a claim that Thunderbolt will be Mac only
I respond with an article that simply states it won't be
You respond with the reason it won't take off as manufacturers will have to add it separately
Econgeek tells you it's a completely different scenario because they don't need a license through Apple
I tell you Intel will be supporting both
You then start with your strawman argument and ignore a portion of what I stated
You also follow that up with some insults
I respond with video proof of why Thunderbolt will be popular with many devices
You ignore then respond with more insults
Honestly, can you try to post without arguing against claims I never made? That is at least 3 times now and it shows a lack of honesty or reading ability. I am not sure which.
I never said it was going to Mac only (though you have accused me of that twice). I agreed with the insinuation that it could be. I never said manufacturers would have to add it separately. I did say that the article you posted said only that it would be available to all and that it didn't say all would add it. Mainly, I said that, because you know, the article doesn't actually say that.
I think we are done. No point in debating someone that doesn't understand what he is reading and also makes up things to reply to. Arguing against someone that uses strawman arguments or misses common subtleties in language is bad enough. Arguing against someone that is making up things to argue against is pointless.
Lynxpoint
Sep 13, 11:04 PM
I just do not think Apple is going to introduce a cellular phone. The ideas sound great around here, but I don't see any good busness model for such a device. What is Apple going to make money on selling such a product?
juicedropsdeuce
Mar 29, 11:16 AM
.
By that point Steve will be long gone so this is easily possible.
By that point Steve will be long gone so this is easily possible.
LarryC
Apr 30, 03:28 PM
delete. sorry.
Benjy91
Mar 29, 11:35 AM
When Windows starts to come close to SL in terms of ease of use and functionality let me know ;)
Sorry I'm late, Windows 7 launched October 22, 2009. And its been awesome since.
Sorry I'm late, Windows 7 launched October 22, 2009. And its been awesome since.
panzerchieftain
Apr 30, 06:12 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; nl-nl) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
Will there be new sizes ? A 24 inch would be perfect :)
Will there be new sizes ? A 24 inch would be perfect :)
xUKHCx
Sep 9, 05:17 AM
You're correct. As soon as the new iMacs were released, they were immediately excluded from the free iPod offer. If anyone is hoping that MBP's or MB's are updated to C2D before the 16th so they can get the free iPod from that promotion, it won't happen. If you want the free iPod, you'd better order a MB or MBP before/if they update those systems to C2D. It sucks because I was hoping to take advantage of that promotion when/if the updates happened before the 16th.
Not true at least in the Uk, taken from the t & c's
Mac Product � any one of the following:
(i) iMac 20-inch 2GHz Intel Core Duo, iMac 17-inch 2GHz Intel Core
2 Duo, iMac 20-inch 2.16GHz Intel Core 2 Duo, iMac 20-inch
2.33GHz Intel Core 2 Duo, iMac 24-inch 2.16GHz Intel Core 2 Duo,
iMac 24-inch 2.33GHz Intel Core 2 Duo;
Not true at least in the Uk, taken from the t & c's
Mac Product � any one of the following:
(i) iMac 20-inch 2GHz Intel Core Duo, iMac 17-inch 2GHz Intel Core
2 Duo, iMac 20-inch 2.16GHz Intel Core 2 Duo, iMac 20-inch
2.33GHz Intel Core 2 Duo, iMac 24-inch 2.16GHz Intel Core 2 Duo,
iMac 24-inch 2.33GHz Intel Core 2 Duo;
ct-scan
Oct 12, 12:51 PM
They might as well add a Core 2 Duo Mac Book Pro too.
Hehe...this topic goes everywhere! ;)
Hehe...this topic goes everywhere! ;)
gnasher729
Mar 30, 11:37 AM
I don't claim to know a thing about trademark law, but looking at this simply I find it difficult to understand how the term "Windows" can become a trademark but "App Store" cannot.
Windows is a trademark. Microsoft sued Lindows because of the similarity, then ended up paying them $20,000,000 to go away when it looked as if Microsoft could lose the trademark. And Apple owns "App Store". Microsoft just wants to use the name.
And a company named ContainerStore owns the trademark on the word "Container Store" !!!!
That linguist obviously says what Microsoft wants him to say. Which is the truth, but not the whole truth. The whole truth would mention that the term "App Store" was not used by anyone before Apple used it and wouldn't be used by anyone if Apple hadn't used it.
Windows is a trademark. Microsoft sued Lindows because of the similarity, then ended up paying them $20,000,000 to go away when it looked as if Microsoft could lose the trademark. And Apple owns "App Store". Microsoft just wants to use the name.
And a company named ContainerStore owns the trademark on the word "Container Store" !!!!
That linguist obviously says what Microsoft wants him to say. Which is the truth, but not the whole truth. The whole truth would mention that the term "App Store" was not used by anyone before Apple used it and wouldn't be used by anyone if Apple hadn't used it.
AidenShaw
Sep 9, 10:56 AM
I just assumed that being 64-bit or 32-bit was a system wide principle, either or.
A 64-bit operating system is one that provides 64-bit virtual addresses to its processes. It requires a CPU that supports 64-bit virtual addressing. The C2D is such a CPU, and runs 64-bit code and O/S.
These humongous 64-bit virtual addresses need to be translated to a physical address to reach the actual memory. The 64-bit CPU has a list of pages of physical memory, and tables to map a program's virtual address to a physical page. Once that mapping is done, the 64-bit virtual address can be used as a "synonym" for the actual physical address. The mapping is per process - two processes can use the same virtual address without interference - the same virtual address refers to different physical pages depending on the process which is using it.
In the case of the Napa(32) chipset, the chipset only has 32 address lines, and cannot physically handle more than 4 GiB of RAM. Some of those addresses are reserved for I/O purposes (such as the 256 MiB that is mapped to the VRAM of the video card).
If you plug 4 GiB of RAM into a Napa(32) system, you'll "lose" the memory that is over-mapped by I/O space. For example, right now I'm typing from a dual-Xeon (32-bit Netburst) with 4 GiB of RAM installed. Windows reports that I have 3520 MiB of memory. I've "lost" a half GiB due to these I/O space mappings. (My 4 GiB Yonah laptop reports 3.1 GiB available - PCIe systems seem to reserve a lot more memory for I/O than PCI-X systems.)
Apple is apparently saying that 3 GiB is the limit, so that they don't have to explain PCIe I/O bus mapping to people calling to complain that OSX isn't using all 4 GiB.
____________
This virtual-to-physical mapping has some other implications:
A 64-bit operating system is one that provides 64-bit virtual addresses to its processes. It requires a CPU that supports 64-bit virtual addressing. The C2D is such a CPU, and runs 64-bit code and O/S.
These humongous 64-bit virtual addresses need to be translated to a physical address to reach the actual memory. The 64-bit CPU has a list of pages of physical memory, and tables to map a program's virtual address to a physical page. Once that mapping is done, the 64-bit virtual address can be used as a "synonym" for the actual physical address. The mapping is per process - two processes can use the same virtual address without interference - the same virtual address refers to different physical pages depending on the process which is using it.
In the case of the Napa(32) chipset, the chipset only has 32 address lines, and cannot physically handle more than 4 GiB of RAM. Some of those addresses are reserved for I/O purposes (such as the 256 MiB that is mapped to the VRAM of the video card).
If you plug 4 GiB of RAM into a Napa(32) system, you'll "lose" the memory that is over-mapped by I/O space. For example, right now I'm typing from a dual-Xeon (32-bit Netburst) with 4 GiB of RAM installed. Windows reports that I have 3520 MiB of memory. I've "lost" a half GiB due to these I/O space mappings. (My 4 GiB Yonah laptop reports 3.1 GiB available - PCIe systems seem to reserve a lot more memory for I/O than PCI-X systems.)
Apple is apparently saying that 3 GiB is the limit, so that they don't have to explain PCIe I/O bus mapping to people calling to complain that OSX isn't using all 4 GiB.
____________
This virtual-to-physical mapping has some other implications:
Bickity
Mar 29, 11:34 AM
If they load it on every free, **** phone out there. Actually sounds very possible. Race to the bottom.
LagunaSol
Apr 19, 10:47 PM
The Beatles did this to Apple, oh wait, they had Apple Records and the Apple logo for over 5 years before Apple Computer existed. But I'm sure that is overlooked.
As I mentioned in the other thread, you might actually want to take a look at the Apple Records logo before you make silly arguments that the Apple Computer logo is a copy.
And as cmaier clearly explained to you, this is a different scenario entirely as they were in two completely different industries at that time.
Oh, and what do the Beatles have to do with partnering technology companies turning around and stabbing their partner in the back? Nothing.
As I mentioned in the other thread, you might actually want to take a look at the Apple Records logo before you make silly arguments that the Apple Computer logo is a copy.
And as cmaier clearly explained to you, this is a different scenario entirely as they were in two completely different industries at that time.
Oh, and what do the Beatles have to do with partnering technology companies turning around and stabbing their partner in the back? Nothing.
DeSnousa
Sep 19, 04:56 PM
My point is...
1) The Movies take up huge amounts of storage space.
2) I hate having to always plug external drives into my iBook.
3) We need redundancy for storing these movies we buy. An "external HD" just won't cut it.
4) If I want to take my iBook on the road with me, then how are the other people in my house going to access the Movies and other media via iTV if it's stored on my iBook or some "external HD" which requires a host computer to be of any use.
I think the major problem with external hardrives, is that iTunes will organises all your content into the Music folder. I just bought a 300GB drive and would love to place all my movies in their, but at the same time I want my music on my Mac (not the external). Apple really needs to address the storage features in iTunes, as movies are large files.
1) The Movies take up huge amounts of storage space.
2) I hate having to always plug external drives into my iBook.
3) We need redundancy for storing these movies we buy. An "external HD" just won't cut it.
4) If I want to take my iBook on the road with me, then how are the other people in my house going to access the Movies and other media via iTV if it's stored on my iBook or some "external HD" which requires a host computer to be of any use.
I think the major problem with external hardrives, is that iTunes will organises all your content into the Music folder. I just bought a 300GB drive and would love to place all my movies in their, but at the same time I want my music on my Mac (not the external). Apple really needs to address the storage features in iTunes, as movies are large files.
zap2
Apr 11, 03:22 AM
All those monthly bills add up. I'm glad I never bought an iPhone, for example, when they first came out. I've saved a ton of money not buying the required data plan that goes comes with it. I don't want to put words in your mouth but it sounds like our priorities are all wrong and I agree.
I don't see what your point is...how does that respond to the person you quoted? He was saying people made bad choice due to keep oil and you say "I'm glad I didn't get an iPhone right away"
The price of gas living in suburbia is much more of a drain on a household then an extra 20 dollars for iPhone data. 20 bucks is nothing in a month of gas. And for the amount of usage iPhones often get(like in my case) it is well worth the money for many people.
Don't criticize people for making different choices then yourself
I don't see what your point is...how does that respond to the person you quoted? He was saying people made bad choice due to keep oil and you say "I'm glad I didn't get an iPhone right away"
The price of gas living in suburbia is much more of a drain on a household then an extra 20 dollars for iPhone data. 20 bucks is nothing in a month of gas. And for the amount of usage iPhones often get(like in my case) it is well worth the money for many people.
Don't criticize people for making different choices then yourself
manu chao
Sep 10, 05:25 PM
I have to conclude that people who want to use their 10 year old CRT are just incredibly cheap and don't value their screens as much as being able to claim how fast their CPU is.
Maybe, with the current pace at which CPUs are improving, I would want to upgrade my CPU every 18 months but my screen only every 36 months?
Maybe, with the current pace at which CPUs are improving, I would want to upgrade my CPU every 18 months but my screen only every 36 months?
No comments:
Post a Comment