Creibold
Oct 12, 03:55 PM
Look at the Story on the front page of the chicago tribune, it's true. It says right there that apple is introducing a Red iPod Nano, it's not photoshoped you goofs.
DelisleBA.info
Apr 22, 12:02 PM
I hope they bring back the backlit keyboard.
Rodimus Prime
Apr 25, 01:23 AM
Well I'm sorry to hear that happened to your father. My mother was in a similar situation a few years back. She cut off an idiot doing 20 under the speed limit, slammed on the brakes, and there was a wreck. The guy she cut off was found to be at fault for not maintaining a proper distance, my mother was not found at fault. She openly told the cops that she had just passed the guy, and after she passed she thought she saw a squirrel enter the road, so she slammed on the breaks. On top of doing $15,000 grand worth of damage to the guys car (which he had to pay for due to not having broadform insurance) she then sued him for her $2,000 deductible, and won. Sucks to be him, maybe he does the speed limit now.
EDIT: @ EricNau - what do you guys not understand about "she was doing 65mph is a 70mph zone" which she then lowered to 55mph after brakechecking me????????
-Don
wow clearly no one in your family should not be hind the wheel of a car.
You all do road rage.
One day someone will pull a gun on you.
Sadly the cop was a crappy investigatory because your mom did an illegally lane changed. plus road rage and really there was a lot of room to prove it but you had a lazy cop and then a mother who lies and teachers her son to lie and pull the same crap.
EDIT: @ EricNau - what do you guys not understand about "she was doing 65mph is a 70mph zone" which she then lowered to 55mph after brakechecking me????????
-Don
wow clearly no one in your family should not be hind the wheel of a car.
You all do road rage.
One day someone will pull a gun on you.
Sadly the cop was a crappy investigatory because your mom did an illegally lane changed. plus road rage and really there was a lot of room to prove it but you had a lazy cop and then a mother who lies and teachers her son to lie and pull the same crap.
Hayzie
Apr 25, 01:43 PM
What if the new form took after the iphone4 and ipad2 with an aluminium body sandwiched between black/ white plastic/glass ala two 2 ipads on top of each other (touch screens together)
that sounded better in my head...
that sounded better in my head...
Spiritgreywolf
Apr 30, 04:38 PM
Okay, all the new processor stuff - awesome. Wonderful that it will have some super-fast ports.
When I got my 27" 2.7GHz Core i7 iMac, I tried boosting some throughput with iSCSI and fatter network packets between my older MBP and my Drobo-FS NAS.
Alas, that was not the case. I was restricted to the network framesize of 1500 because someone at Apple decided to cheap-out and go chintzy on the network chips.
Are they going to do the same thing on this round? Gee - one extra dollar might have made a big difference. As it stands, only my OLDER MBP and an ASUS P6T Mobo-based PC I built can handle bigger frames. :mad:
So tell me Steve - gonna do that again? Cheese-out on something you think *I* don't need? Personally I would e-Bay my 27" iMac and get a new one - but if the Broadcom chipset is chintzed again, a new iMac will never be in my future again...
When I got my 27" 2.7GHz Core i7 iMac, I tried boosting some throughput with iSCSI and fatter network packets between my older MBP and my Drobo-FS NAS.
Alas, that was not the case. I was restricted to the network framesize of 1500 because someone at Apple decided to cheap-out and go chintzy on the network chips.
Are they going to do the same thing on this round? Gee - one extra dollar might have made a big difference. As it stands, only my OLDER MBP and an ASUS P6T Mobo-based PC I built can handle bigger frames. :mad:
So tell me Steve - gonna do that again? Cheese-out on something you think *I* don't need? Personally I would e-Bay my 27" iMac and get a new one - but if the Broadcom chipset is chintzed again, a new iMac will never be in my future again...
zer0sum
Mar 18, 07:06 PM
It certainly has a huge amount to do with market share and therefore return on investment in creating malware.
It all used to be done for fun and a little destruction and now its about the $
Windows = ~87%
OS X = ~6%
IOS = ~2%
Linux = ~1%
Android = ~0.5%
So...the malware authors can either put all the time and effort into an amazing exploit and payload that successfully owns 100% of the OS X devices in the world or they can bash something together that only needs to work out on a very small percentage of windows machines.
Criminals are not generally the hardest working people in the world :)
Which option do you think they are most likely to take?
But there will come a time...simple as that!
For now OS X is a nice place to be and with knowledge as an end user it is extremely easy to avoid being exploited.
Certainly no need for AV unless you are situated in a company that mandates all end points must have AV regardless of OS and even then traditional AV is dead and should be combined with a complete endpoint security solution.
I highly recommend getting your firewall and little snitch running on your mac to get some security and visibility of exactly what is happening under the hood.
It all used to be done for fun and a little destruction and now its about the $
Windows = ~87%
OS X = ~6%
IOS = ~2%
Linux = ~1%
Android = ~0.5%
So...the malware authors can either put all the time and effort into an amazing exploit and payload that successfully owns 100% of the OS X devices in the world or they can bash something together that only needs to work out on a very small percentage of windows machines.
Criminals are not generally the hardest working people in the world :)
Which option do you think they are most likely to take?
But there will come a time...simple as that!
For now OS X is a nice place to be and with knowledge as an end user it is extremely easy to avoid being exploited.
Certainly no need for AV unless you are situated in a company that mandates all end points must have AV regardless of OS and even then traditional AV is dead and should be combined with a complete endpoint security solution.
I highly recommend getting your firewall and little snitch running on your mac to get some security and visibility of exactly what is happening under the hood.
QuarterSwede
Sep 10, 06:34 PM
My guess is that the Core 2 Duo MBs & MBPs will be a silent release who knows when.
The Showtime event will be for the iTunes Movie Store and an upgraded iPod with a slight design change (not the widescreen iPod). And possibly an Airport Express with video streaming, which would be sweet because I'd like to get another Airport Express anyway.
The Showtime event will be for the iTunes Movie Store and an upgraded iPod with a slight design change (not the widescreen iPod). And possibly an Airport Express with video streaming, which would be sweet because I'd like to get another Airport Express anyway.
whooleytoo
Oct 12, 03:58 PM
Maybe because all across the globe, women and children are hugely disadvantaged economically and socially in comparison to men? People who need more help should get more help.
Generally, that's a good point. But in this case I don't think it's significant: your average adult male in Africa is likely to be more affluent than the average adult female (or child), sure - but it's not as if he can afford quality healthcare either!
It's just people at two different levels of poverty, neither of whom can afford the healthcare they need.
Generally, that's a good point. But in this case I don't think it's significant: your average adult male in Africa is likely to be more affluent than the average adult female (or child), sure - but it's not as if he can afford quality healthcare either!
It's just people at two different levels of poverty, neither of whom can afford the healthcare they need.
chasemac
Aug 24, 12:02 AM
Seriously, all... this is much better than the alternative. I.e. Apple having to completely re-engineer or stop selling the iPod. $100 million is chump change. Stock market is highly reactionary and irrational. It should all smooth out in the next couple days.
Yes, the consumer could care less. Apple reached the top of this mountain first. They got the loot first right? Or not, it just reminds me of something.:)
Yes, the consumer could care less. Apple reached the top of this mountain first. They got the loot first right? Or not, it just reminds me of something.:)
miyamoto
Nov 9, 02:37 PM
Some time back there was a post of someone swapping out a cpu in an Imac. Does anyone know if someone has managed to swap out the core 2 duo cpu yet? I assume they still arent soldered?
Small White Car
Nov 13, 02:06 PM
CAREFULLY read APPLEs developers rules
You should try it!
They didn't break the rules.
You should try it!
They didn't break the rules.
iDisk
Mar 23, 04:20 PM
Personally I find it hard to believe that so drunk as to warrant avoiding a checkpoint will be collected enough to use the app effectively in the first place.
Miles you make a great point... You also confirm that Apple better pull them, its a pointless app because if your so drunk then you can't operate a phone let alone an app.
Miles you make a great point... You also confirm that Apple better pull them, its a pointless app because if your so drunk then you can't operate a phone let alone an app.
savar
Sep 12, 02:36 PM
Gapless playback? What does this mean?
How will the home sync work? I don't want to screw up my iPod, my home library on my MacBook Pro & my iTunes library on my office G5.
I've downloaded iTunes 7, bought a game (same trouble w/my 5G; still no iPod software update yet to make the game work) & clicked to "Get Album Artwork," which seems to be running in the background. So far so good.
If you have a CD which has long pieces of classical music on it, they break it up into separate tracks even though there technically aren't any pauses in the music. On any decent CD player these tracks play back seamlessly -- without any gaps. iPod would insert a pause in between playing these.
Edit: The REAL question is have they updated iTunes to be a better video player? I hate watching TV or movies in the current version.
How will the home sync work? I don't want to screw up my iPod, my home library on my MacBook Pro & my iTunes library on my office G5.
I've downloaded iTunes 7, bought a game (same trouble w/my 5G; still no iPod software update yet to make the game work) & clicked to "Get Album Artwork," which seems to be running in the background. So far so good.
If you have a CD which has long pieces of classical music on it, they break it up into separate tracks even though there technically aren't any pauses in the music. On any decent CD player these tracks play back seamlessly -- without any gaps. iPod would insert a pause in between playing these.
Edit: The REAL question is have they updated iTunes to be a better video player? I hate watching TV or movies in the current version.
Hodapp
Sep 27, 12:25 PM
Do the new Cingular phones with iTunes still have the 100 song limit? It is a ridiculously easy restriction to remove if you have the right software and access to a PC. I've got about 150 songs on my SLVR, which is all that will really fit on a 512MB card.
ImageWrangler
Apr 19, 01:32 PM
The phone's look is indeed very similar.
Of course, Samsung's Android phone has many additional items such as their pulldown notification shade with built-in radio and orientation lock controls... which many people would love for Apple to copy.
The tablet is a different matter, and doesn't have the same look.
Wait, people actually still listen to actual radios?
But seriously yeaaaahhhh not a huge wanted feature by the general populace.
Of course, Samsung's Android phone has many additional items such as their pulldown notification shade with built-in radio and orientation lock controls... which many people would love for Apple to copy.
The tablet is a different matter, and doesn't have the same look.
Wait, people actually still listen to actual radios?
But seriously yeaaaahhhh not a huge wanted feature by the general populace.
MacCheetah3
Apr 11, 05:10 PM
Hi
I didn't know it was possible to use Home Sharing to play music simultaneously between several Macs - care to tell how? (not being sarcastic, just curious)
Not simultaneous control like AirTunes. You can stream to multiple computers, but it will need to be controlled separately -- as far as I know.
I can't think of a good reason to stream strictly audio to multiple computers, even if each is connected to speakers. Seems very clumsy to me, and you'd be better off getting an Airport Express ($69 refurbished (http://store.apple.com/us/product/FB321LL/A?mco=MTY3ODQ5OTY)) for each speaker system or getting AirPlay-supported speakers.
WiFi2HiFi (http://www.wifi2hifi.com) takes the AirTunes idea beyond iTunes, however, it's only to an iDevice, not a computer.
I didn't know it was possible to use Home Sharing to play music simultaneously between several Macs - care to tell how? (not being sarcastic, just curious)
Not simultaneous control like AirTunes. You can stream to multiple computers, but it will need to be controlled separately -- as far as I know.
I can't think of a good reason to stream strictly audio to multiple computers, even if each is connected to speakers. Seems very clumsy to me, and you'd be better off getting an Airport Express ($69 refurbished (http://store.apple.com/us/product/FB321LL/A?mco=MTY3ODQ5OTY)) for each speaker system or getting AirPlay-supported speakers.
WiFi2HiFi (http://www.wifi2hifi.com) takes the AirTunes idea beyond iTunes, however, it's only to an iDevice, not a computer.
grum
Sep 12, 02:46 PM
As of now, If I rip my Pink Floyd Dark Side of the Moon Album onto iTunes and put it in my iPOD, there are little gaps in between songs. If you listen to the album on CD, the tracks change, but there are no gaps, one song goes into the next.
The same could be said for other music, classical music that is multiple movements, but THROUGH composed might have track changes, but lead from one section to the next.
Kind of a small thing, but a good thing none the less.
Hooray!!!
Pretty big thing if you are into dance music/dj mixes that are seperated into tracks. There are suprisingly few mp3 players that will play them gapless
The same could be said for other music, classical music that is multiple movements, but THROUGH composed might have track changes, but lead from one section to the next.
Kind of a small thing, but a good thing none the less.
Hooray!!!
Pretty big thing if you are into dance music/dj mixes that are seperated into tracks. There are suprisingly few mp3 players that will play them gapless
guet
Nov 13, 05:08 PM
Obviously the images are copyrighted by Apple, and those images they don't want people using. Ok, well, that is their rights, they designed them and copyrighted them.
For the benefit of others who don't bother to read the article, the images in question are provided by a system API on OS X. The API is *provided* to give developers images they can use to represent the current computer, and is supposed to be used that way. All RA have done is used those same images to transmit from the desktop to the iPhone, to show the user which computer they're connecting to.
Some idiot reviewer at Apple has seen the images and decided that since they're displayed on an iPhone they're infringing one of the many incredibly vague rules in the SDK. Given the completely borked review process, it's unlikely to be rectified, and has wasted a lot of everyone's time - there's no way to know in advance which rules the reviewer may decide to impose - almost every app could be seen to infringe one of them. Like the iPhone book app rejection and many others for different obscure reasons, this is a case of a sensible rule interpreted in an insane way.
Can't blame the developers at all for walking away from the frustrating, capricious waste of time which is iTunes store approvals, and good on them for publicising this; taking three months to even give a firm reason for rejection is a real failure on Apple's part, and the entire process is a train wreck.
If Apple doesn't defend their copyright, then they can lose it, so they HAVE to fight for it.
I think you're confusing copyright and Trademarks. This is not the case with copyright at all.
For the benefit of others who don't bother to read the article, the images in question are provided by a system API on OS X. The API is *provided* to give developers images they can use to represent the current computer, and is supposed to be used that way. All RA have done is used those same images to transmit from the desktop to the iPhone, to show the user which computer they're connecting to.
Some idiot reviewer at Apple has seen the images and decided that since they're displayed on an iPhone they're infringing one of the many incredibly vague rules in the SDK. Given the completely borked review process, it's unlikely to be rectified, and has wasted a lot of everyone's time - there's no way to know in advance which rules the reviewer may decide to impose - almost every app could be seen to infringe one of them. Like the iPhone book app rejection and many others for different obscure reasons, this is a case of a sensible rule interpreted in an insane way.
Can't blame the developers at all for walking away from the frustrating, capricious waste of time which is iTunes store approvals, and good on them for publicising this; taking three months to even give a firm reason for rejection is a real failure on Apple's part, and the entire process is a train wreck.
If Apple doesn't defend their copyright, then they can lose it, so they HAVE to fight for it.
I think you're confusing copyright and Trademarks. This is not the case with copyright at all.
iStudentUK
Mar 30, 12:33 PM
While my gut wants to side with MS on this one, there's a simple test of whether App Store is generic or not.
Before apple created the App Store within iTunes, was the term in use (and specifically "app store", not just "app")? Possibly more importantly, before they applied for the trademark was any company selling apps and calling it by that term?
It probably comes down to prior art - if it truly is a generic term, then someone should be able to provide the example of X used the term in 19XX, before the trademark was filed. Anyone here able to provide an example of the term being used before Apple filed for it?
Yay! Somebody who understands the question!
It's so funny watching people write "well windows/office/word is generic" (although nobody does that with Apple/pages/numbers/keynote). Clueless! :rolleyes:
Before apple created the App Store within iTunes, was the term in use (and specifically "app store", not just "app")? Possibly more importantly, before they applied for the trademark was any company selling apps and calling it by that term?
It probably comes down to prior art - if it truly is a generic term, then someone should be able to provide the example of X used the term in 19XX, before the trademark was filed. Anyone here able to provide an example of the term being used before Apple filed for it?
Yay! Somebody who understands the question!
It's so funny watching people write "well windows/office/word is generic" (although nobody does that with Apple/pages/numbers/keynote). Clueless! :rolleyes:
kavika411
Apr 20, 10:04 AM
I wonder, if in this day and age of "find my iPhone" and all the location-enabled apps on an iPhone, if it's not actually harder-to-the-point-of-impossible to ensure such information is immediately, constantly erased.
gnasher729
Apr 19, 07:49 AM
But that's the thing, this simply can't be about "look and feel" since the precedents on that are firmly established by Apple vs Microsoft where Apple lost the whole "look and feel" part of the suit.
You are quite badly informed. Just because a court case about "look and feel" was lost doesn't mean nobody else can win such a case. Apple lost that one because someone at Apple messed up some contracts between Apple and Microsoft. Unless the facts in two cases are identical you have no precedent.
(If I sued you for damaging my car with a hammer, and you proved in court that you were nowhere near my car when it was damaged, that wouldn't set a precedent that it is now allowed to damage someone else's car with a hammer).
Anyone who is stupid enough to confuse a Galaxy S with an iPhone shouldn't own a smartphone anyway. All they have to do is turn over the freaking phone and notice that big Samsung logo to know it's not an Apple product.
Many people want to buy a phone that looks like an iPhone, but are willing to buy a Samsung phone as long as it looks the same. Yes, that is a stupid reason to buy a phone, but some people are like that. Apple thinks that all those people should have to buy the real thing.
And some people base their decision on how nice a phone looks, and they think the iPhone looks nice, and since the Samsung phone looks the same, they think that one looks nice as well. These people might buy a Samsung phone because Apple put lots of effort into designing a nice looking phone, and Samsung just copied it. In Germany, that would fall straight under "unfair competition" and would be blocked for that reason; if one company spends lots of money developing a product and another company just copies it, that is "unfair competition".
You are quite badly informed. Just because a court case about "look and feel" was lost doesn't mean nobody else can win such a case. Apple lost that one because someone at Apple messed up some contracts between Apple and Microsoft. Unless the facts in two cases are identical you have no precedent.
(If I sued you for damaging my car with a hammer, and you proved in court that you were nowhere near my car when it was damaged, that wouldn't set a precedent that it is now allowed to damage someone else's car with a hammer).
Anyone who is stupid enough to confuse a Galaxy S with an iPhone shouldn't own a smartphone anyway. All they have to do is turn over the freaking phone and notice that big Samsung logo to know it's not an Apple product.
Many people want to buy a phone that looks like an iPhone, but are willing to buy a Samsung phone as long as it looks the same. Yes, that is a stupid reason to buy a phone, but some people are like that. Apple thinks that all those people should have to buy the real thing.
And some people base their decision on how nice a phone looks, and they think the iPhone looks nice, and since the Samsung phone looks the same, they think that one looks nice as well. These people might buy a Samsung phone because Apple put lots of effort into designing a nice looking phone, and Samsung just copied it. In Germany, that would fall straight under "unfair competition" and would be blocked for that reason; if one company spends lots of money developing a product and another company just copies it, that is "unfair competition".
lilo777
Apr 19, 04:08 PM
Yeah cause a contract breach takes just as long to prove a IP suite. They'd get slapped so fast they wont know what hit them, not to mention other companies would see it as samsung being cowboys for mixing their two business up.
I doubt those contracts last longer than one year and this is how long it will probably take for this lawsuit to get to court hearing. Samsung will be in a great bargaining position then.
I doubt those contracts last longer than one year and this is how long it will probably take for this lawsuit to get to court hearing. Samsung will be in a great bargaining position then.
poppe
Sep 5, 10:02 PM
My Guess:
Just think if that Data Center Apple bought was acctually a place to store alll the studios movies. Then you pay 9.99 for the rights to what ever movie and it is streamed Slingbox style to your Airport Extreme that has HDMI, Component, Composite etc outlets for your TV. Then you have your movie you bought anytime all the time but never have to take storage of your own, and never have to deal with downloading or anything.
You heard it hear first!
Just think if that Data Center Apple bought was acctually a place to store alll the studios movies. Then you pay 9.99 for the rights to what ever movie and it is streamed Slingbox style to your Airport Extreme that has HDMI, Component, Composite etc outlets for your TV. Then you have your movie you bought anytime all the time but never have to take storage of your own, and never have to deal with downloading or anything.
You heard it hear first!
MagnusVonMagnum
Nov 13, 11:41 PM
Apple is a terrible company when it comes to ETHICS and people need to just understand that basic fact of life when dealing with them. They are greedy greedy greedy and they don't CARE what you think about them, what you want in a product and whether you wasted months working on an application that they just reject for the most ridiculous illogical reasons ever. This goes to show why NO COMPANY should be allowed to DICTATE (as in a dictatorship) terms for software releases on ANY platform (No, I don't care that it's based on a "phone" platform; it's STILL a computer; the iPod Touch is STILL a computer). We need a freedom of information/software/market act for software releases on all platforms. Apple has a monopoly on software distribution for the iPhone/iPod Touch computer platform and that simply should not be allowed. If you create a new hardware platform that is open to software development, that market should be independent of the company pushing the platform since clearly that constitutes a monopoly of software for that platform and leads to BS nonsense like this example shows. Imagine if they wanted 30% of all profits for the Mac platform and insisted software for the Mac could only be sold through iTunes.... That would never stand the light of day. Yet apparently it's OK if OSX is put onto a hand-held mobile computer and then forced to interface through iTunes (shakes head). As usual, the real loser here is the consumer who does not get all the software for the platform that he/she should be able to get. Instead you get mountains of two-bit 99 cent throw-away applications because no company in their right mind would put a lot of money into developing a really good application only to have Apple reject it on a whim!
Yes I know that you brain-washed types that worship Steve Jobs will scream and moan about this sort of comment since you seem to think that Steve should be allowed to do ANYTHING he wants in this world and have some contorted view of Capitalism that seems to think competition doesn't include Apple since they are somehow special and magical and should be left alone to do things like extort 30% off the top of all 3rd party software (very Mafia-esque IMO), but I say I don't care what a bunch of brain-washed groupies think so do me a favor and spare me your opinions. I couldn't care less about any form of fan-boy or fanatical viewpoint on ANYTHING Apple related since it will clearly be completely 100% Apple biased and therefore 100% WORTHLESS. Yes I already know you think it's Apple's hardware and therefore they have no market responsibilities to ANYONE. I think that's a load of horse manure. They exist in a country based on competition and if they don't like it, they should move to Communist China where there is none. Oh wait a second, they already make their hardware there so they're halfway there already! :eek:
Yes I know that you brain-washed types that worship Steve Jobs will scream and moan about this sort of comment since you seem to think that Steve should be allowed to do ANYTHING he wants in this world and have some contorted view of Capitalism that seems to think competition doesn't include Apple since they are somehow special and magical and should be left alone to do things like extort 30% off the top of all 3rd party software (very Mafia-esque IMO), but I say I don't care what a bunch of brain-washed groupies think so do me a favor and spare me your opinions. I couldn't care less about any form of fan-boy or fanatical viewpoint on ANYTHING Apple related since it will clearly be completely 100% Apple biased and therefore 100% WORTHLESS. Yes I already know you think it's Apple's hardware and therefore they have no market responsibilities to ANYONE. I think that's a load of horse manure. They exist in a country based on competition and if they don't like it, they should move to Communist China where there is none. Oh wait a second, they already make their hardware there so they're halfway there already! :eek:
No comments:
Post a Comment