mrgreen4242
Jan 15, 02:56 PM
Absolute madness. No offence.
Well, we'll wait and see. Laptops already account for over half of all new computer sales, and the iMac uses MOSTLY laptop parts as it is. The big thing holding laptops back has been drive speed and capacity. Those are both being improved upon with traditional HDDs and SSDs. The Time Capsule will become the place where you store your "extra" files and big media, etc. There's even already a spec being developed for wireless HD video communication for TV to media player connection. People could have a MacBook with a 20"+ display, 1TB HDD, and fullsize keyb and mouse on their desk with no wires. Add in an induction charging pad and you've got a really, really cool workspace.
I think they'll bring back the $1500 PowerMac/Mac Pro and drop the iMac and mini lines in favor of expanded laptop lines, including a 20" "laptop" (wouldn't be the first one on the market).
Well, we'll wait and see. Laptops already account for over half of all new computer sales, and the iMac uses MOSTLY laptop parts as it is. The big thing holding laptops back has been drive speed and capacity. Those are both being improved upon with traditional HDDs and SSDs. The Time Capsule will become the place where you store your "extra" files and big media, etc. There's even already a spec being developed for wireless HD video communication for TV to media player connection. People could have a MacBook with a 20"+ display, 1TB HDD, and fullsize keyb and mouse on their desk with no wires. Add in an induction charging pad and you've got a really, really cool workspace.
I think they'll bring back the $1500 PowerMac/Mac Pro and drop the iMac and mini lines in favor of expanded laptop lines, including a 20" "laptop" (wouldn't be the first one on the market).
arn
Oct 2, 04:39 PM
The problem is that I don't see how it can be iTunes compatible without Apple's involvement. (See above post on Real Harmony). iTunes will only query ITMS for validating a DRMed file, not DoubleTwist or Amazon. Without iTunes things get a lot less compelling.
B
perhaps true... but depends on how it works. if it's just tied to an email address, if they can encode that same email address into the files, it would probably work. Alternatively, it could also mean that someone could come out with a non-iTunes media player that doesn't validate against a server.
arn
B
perhaps true... but depends on how it works. if it's just tied to an email address, if they can encode that same email address into the files, it would probably work. Alternatively, it could also mean that someone could come out with a non-iTunes media player that doesn't validate against a server.
arn
milo
Oct 3, 06:02 PM
Okay, you've got me. Pirating stuff is fun and nobody will ever get to you. And if they do it's still fun since you don't get a criminal record. And if you got one then it would be totally unfair. Man, I am a total idiot for even considering to buy stuff. You know, pay money for it.
Don't put words in our mouths. If you're going to make the moral argument against piracy, make it. I just don't agree with trying to fearmonger by saying that the feds are going to bust your door down and impound your hard drives.
Don't confuse condoning piracy with pointing out incorrect statements.
Don't put words in our mouths. If you're going to make the moral argument against piracy, make it. I just don't agree with trying to fearmonger by saying that the feds are going to bust your door down and impound your hard drives.
Don't confuse condoning piracy with pointing out incorrect statements.
NAG
Jan 13, 03:03 PM
Gizmodo is responsible for this because it vouched for the prankster and obtained a credential for him. Media organizations put their reputations at stake each time they obtain a credential for someone, whether it's to a high school basketball game, a trade show or a political event.
I can quote out of context too. But I won't, because I don't attack people who disagree with me.
Saying that Gizmodo's actions are going to hurt other online media is silly. It screams scapegoat. I know online media is trying to be taken seriously but viciously attacking each other instead of trying to come to a real solution doesn't help anyone.
I can quote out of context too. But I won't, because I don't attack people who disagree with me.
Saying that Gizmodo's actions are going to hurt other online media is silly. It screams scapegoat. I know online media is trying to be taken seriously but viciously attacking each other instead of trying to come to a real solution doesn't help anyone.
more...
Geckotek
Jan 1, 02:22 AM
My understanding is that AT&T is pretty far along in its upgrade from HPSA (3G) network to HPSA+ (faster 3G). They're doing this to maximize their existing investment in their infrastructure, and they should be able to employ LTE a little faster than Verizon has been, since LTE is a more streamlined upgrade from HPSA+. They claim that this is best for customers long-term, because when LTE (4G) coverage gives out, users can fall back on widespread HPSA+ coverage with similar performance. Whereas with Verizon, when you move out of an area with 4G coverage, you notice a HUGE drop in speed going to their ancient EV-DO technology.
Unless AT&T finally starts to upgrade their 2G network to HSPA or HSPA+, you're wrong. And Verizon's EV-DO network is still pretty speedy. It may be somewhat slower than AT&T's HSPA, but not as bad as people describe it in this forum.
Also, there is no difference what so ever in AT&T's deployment of LTE and Verizon's. LTE may have come from the same group that developed past GSM tech, but it is an entirely new tech and still requires new switches for both AT&T and Verizon. So no, AT&T will not be able to get LTE up faster than Verizon (except for the fact that AT&T will only cover part of their network if they continue their current pattern.)
Oh, and how is EV-DO ancient exactly? The current version is only about 2 years older than AT&T's WCDMA network.
FYI, I was getting about 500Kbps earlier today on my iPhone 4 here in Dallas. Not exactly lightning fast. Best I've ever seen is 3.12 Mbps and that was in a single test and wouldn't run that high consistently.
Unless AT&T finally starts to upgrade their 2G network to HSPA or HSPA+, you're wrong. And Verizon's EV-DO network is still pretty speedy. It may be somewhat slower than AT&T's HSPA, but not as bad as people describe it in this forum.
Also, there is no difference what so ever in AT&T's deployment of LTE and Verizon's. LTE may have come from the same group that developed past GSM tech, but it is an entirely new tech and still requires new switches for both AT&T and Verizon. So no, AT&T will not be able to get LTE up faster than Verizon (except for the fact that AT&T will only cover part of their network if they continue their current pattern.)
Oh, and how is EV-DO ancient exactly? The current version is only about 2 years older than AT&T's WCDMA network.
FYI, I was getting about 500Kbps earlier today on my iPhone 4 here in Dallas. Not exactly lightning fast. Best I've ever seen is 3.12 Mbps and that was in a single test and wouldn't run that high consistently.
bluewire
Mar 29, 10:16 AM
BUMP!!!
Can someone get David Caruso on this case?
::Cue music for CSI: Goldfish::
Good luck, hope we hear word TODAY! :cool:
Can someone get David Caruso on this case?
::Cue music for CSI: Goldfish::
Good luck, hope we hear word TODAY! :cool:
more...
door4
Sep 12, 07:56 AM
To be honest I don't care about the bitrate of audio tracks..
However if they brought American TV shows onto a global release date (ie we get them the same time as they do) - THEN i'd care about the update.
Anything else is just more clutter..
Don't be to hopeful... most of our (US) tv is crap. I'd rather watch BBC.
However if they brought American TV shows onto a global release date (ie we get them the same time as they do) - THEN i'd care about the update.
Anything else is just more clutter..
Don't be to hopeful... most of our (US) tv is crap. I'd rather watch BBC.
iBug2
Apr 30, 10:04 PM
Me and most everyone I know owns a truck..
Weird, I don't know anyone who owns a truck. But that's irrelevant anyway. You can't really think that there are as many trucks as there are automobiles around. :)
Weird, I don't know anyone who owns a truck. But that's irrelevant anyway. You can't really think that there are as many trucks as there are automobiles around. :)
more...
alent1234
Apr 8, 02:03 PM
Probably in the form of "bundles" where you're required to buy an iPad with their special accessory packs just so they can push overpriced accessories out of the door.
and don't forget the yearly cleaning that's a $199 value
and don't forget the yearly cleaning that's a $199 value
ilfn143
May 3, 02:23 PM
take out the sim, go to market on wifi. all carrier restrictions is gone. :p
more...
CaoCao
Apr 17, 03:05 PM
It's so refreshing to see that with their 1 in 4 illiteracy rate and 1 in 5 high school dropout rate, California really has their priorities in order when it comes to education. Well done I say.
There are tons of Hispanic immigrants in California, many are hard working, but that doesn't necessarily mean they are educated
I have no idea what experience you are speaking from, but it isn't universal. :confused:
I assure you that in the junior high, high school, and college classes I took, Hinckley was mentioned, JFK may or may not have been described as a Catholic, and Jodi Foster wasn't even popular yet.
I'm talking about my experiences on history class in California.
There are tons of Hispanic immigrants in California, many are hard working, but that doesn't necessarily mean they are educated
I have no idea what experience you are speaking from, but it isn't universal. :confused:
I assure you that in the junior high, high school, and college classes I took, Hinckley was mentioned, JFK may or may not have been described as a Catholic, and Jodi Foster wasn't even popular yet.
I'm talking about my experiences on history class in California.
brywalker
Apr 29, 05:07 PM
Don't you think they were really unintuitive? It works on a touch screen. Not on a OSX device.
Naah. You could click on them like normal and it would slide the button over to where you clicked - or you could slide it manually. It looked slick and operated either way.
Naah. You could click on them like normal and it would slide the button over to where you clicked - or you could slide it manually. It looked slick and operated either way.
more...
jbg232
Mar 17, 11:03 AM
Of course, but dishonesty is immoral. Dishonesty coupled with theft and injury is illegal.
dishonesty in the abstract sense is the main tenet of your profession counsel.
Obviously this is not the case, but it would not necessarily be immoral to lie to save someone's life. This is a complicated topic which I don't want to go in to...
dishonesty in the abstract sense is the main tenet of your profession counsel.
Obviously this is not the case, but it would not necessarily be immoral to lie to save someone's life. This is a complicated topic which I don't want to go in to...
OneMike
Apr 6, 10:45 AM
http://img709.imageshack.us/img709/3282/photoapr06114008am.jpg (http://img709.imageshack.us/i/photoapr06114008am.jpg/)
Re-upped on my sunburst mix
Re-upped on my sunburst mix
more...
AndroidfoLife
Apr 16, 07:49 PM
Ahhhh.... dude... the only Apps that don't really get approved are ones that do things that can cause security risks or just plain trying to steal your information.
Yeah, I know... there are also Apps that break the rules and get axed, but for the most part, my first point is true. Any legitimate application can get approved.
If you keep up with Android apps, security is one of the their problems. Open? Yes... risky? Yes.
Apple does censor things they do not want certain content on the appstore. Show a nip and you get axed I highly disagree with that enable a type of parental control don't chose for me
Yeah, I know... there are also Apps that break the rules and get axed, but for the most part, my first point is true. Any legitimate application can get approved.
If you keep up with Android apps, security is one of the their problems. Open? Yes... risky? Yes.
Apple does censor things they do not want certain content on the appstore. Show a nip and you get axed I highly disagree with that enable a type of parental control don't chose for me
Teddy's
Oct 2, 03:18 PM
Since when is Apple not a litigious company?
That's right!
When? Since they decided anybody can use the term POD to virtually anything!!!
Podcasts for all!!! horay!!! :rolleyes:
That's right!
When? Since they decided anybody can use the term POD to virtually anything!!!
Podcasts for all!!! horay!!! :rolleyes:
more...
Popeye206
May 3, 11:16 PM
When I hear �It�s just getting started,� that signals to me there is more to come. Which implies that patience will be rewarded. Which further implies to wait for future models. That's obviously not how Apple intended it, but that�s the way I interpret it as a viewer. Could just be me though. I am a very happy owner of many Apple products by the way�including an iPad 1st gen�so I�m not being biased against Apple by any means. JMO
I don't think they're trying to hint towards anything hardware... I think they're setting up for the changes coming with iOS 5, Lion and the new iCloud stuff.
Can't wait until June... I think we have some very nice surprises coming for all Apple devices.
I don't think they're trying to hint towards anything hardware... I think they're setting up for the changes coming with iOS 5, Lion and the new iCloud stuff.
Can't wait until June... I think we have some very nice surprises coming for all Apple devices.
Stevenup7002
Jan 14, 06:37 PM
If anyone sitting in the front row of macworld, or works backstage there, please, bring your apple remotes and reak havok during a demo presentation. But seriously, DONT
-Steve
-Steve
Thomas Veil
Mar 4, 05:13 PM
http://www.advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2011/03/04/Ohio_AntiLabor_Bill_Goes_Antigay/
This is the language tacked onto the anti-union bill.
Fivepoint- I assume you're OK with this since you got yours.Good one, lee. :D
...deep down everyone realizes that these protesters are protesting for petty reasons. They don't care about the kids, the schools, the state, the budget, the economy... they just don't want THEIRS to be taken away.Which is interesting, because isn't this exactly what we say about the corporations? That they don't care about their workers, the country, the economy; they're so short-sighted that all they care about is how much they can grab for themselves. Interesting because apparently that's okay for corporations, but not for people.
Not that I think the unions are that shallow. Just sayin' that it seems it's okay to be selfish as long as your name ends in INC or LLC.
And finally, from earlier in the thread:
That's true regarding federal employees. It's being labeled as draconian because that's how union thugs get their message across. They need to scare people in order to get their way. Scare or intimidate... and thankfully they aren't powerful enough to intimidate all of us at this point. Not that they aren't trying:
https://fbcdn-profile-a.akamaihd.net/hprofile-ak-snc4/188078_139173095668_4256766_n.jpgReally. That's meant to scare people?
Perhaps you'd prefer one of these:
http://forums.macrumors.com/picture.php?albumid=54&pictureid=585 http://forums.macrumors.com/picture.php?albumid=54&pictureid=584 http://forums.macrumors.com/picture.php?albumid=54&pictureid=586 http://forums.macrumors.com/picture.php?albumid=54&pictureid=587
"... Meticulous attention should be paid to the special relationships and obligations of public servants to the public itself and to the government. All Government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service. It has its distinct and insurmountable limitations ... The very nature and purposes of Government make it impossible for ... officials ... to bind the employer ... The employer is the whole people, who speak by means of laws enacted by their representatives ...
"Particularly, I want to emphasize my conviction that militant tactics have no place in the functions of any organization of government employees. Upon employees in the federal service rests the obligation to serve the whole people ... This obligation is paramount ... A strike of public employees manifests nothing less than an intent ... to prevent or obstruct ... Government ... Such action, looking toward the paralysis of Government ... is unthinkable and intolerable." -Franklin D. Roosevelt, President of the United States, and Progressive/Liberal HeroOur labor unions are not narrow, self-seeking groups. They have raised wages, shortened hours and provides supplemental benefits. Through collective bargaining and grievance procedures, they have brought justice and democracy to the shop floor. But their work goes beyond their own job, and even beyond our borders. For the labor movement is people. Our unions have brought millions of men and women together ... and given them common tools for common goals. -- John F. Kennedy
This is the language tacked onto the anti-union bill.
Fivepoint- I assume you're OK with this since you got yours.Good one, lee. :D
...deep down everyone realizes that these protesters are protesting for petty reasons. They don't care about the kids, the schools, the state, the budget, the economy... they just don't want THEIRS to be taken away.Which is interesting, because isn't this exactly what we say about the corporations? That they don't care about their workers, the country, the economy; they're so short-sighted that all they care about is how much they can grab for themselves. Interesting because apparently that's okay for corporations, but not for people.
Not that I think the unions are that shallow. Just sayin' that it seems it's okay to be selfish as long as your name ends in INC or LLC.
And finally, from earlier in the thread:
That's true regarding federal employees. It's being labeled as draconian because that's how union thugs get their message across. They need to scare people in order to get their way. Scare or intimidate... and thankfully they aren't powerful enough to intimidate all of us at this point. Not that they aren't trying:
https://fbcdn-profile-a.akamaihd.net/hprofile-ak-snc4/188078_139173095668_4256766_n.jpgReally. That's meant to scare people?
Perhaps you'd prefer one of these:
http://forums.macrumors.com/picture.php?albumid=54&pictureid=585 http://forums.macrumors.com/picture.php?albumid=54&pictureid=584 http://forums.macrumors.com/picture.php?albumid=54&pictureid=586 http://forums.macrumors.com/picture.php?albumid=54&pictureid=587
"... Meticulous attention should be paid to the special relationships and obligations of public servants to the public itself and to the government. All Government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service. It has its distinct and insurmountable limitations ... The very nature and purposes of Government make it impossible for ... officials ... to bind the employer ... The employer is the whole people, who speak by means of laws enacted by their representatives ...
"Particularly, I want to emphasize my conviction that militant tactics have no place in the functions of any organization of government employees. Upon employees in the federal service rests the obligation to serve the whole people ... This obligation is paramount ... A strike of public employees manifests nothing less than an intent ... to prevent or obstruct ... Government ... Such action, looking toward the paralysis of Government ... is unthinkable and intolerable." -Franklin D. Roosevelt, President of the United States, and Progressive/Liberal HeroOur labor unions are not narrow, self-seeking groups. They have raised wages, shortened hours and provides supplemental benefits. Through collective bargaining and grievance procedures, they have brought justice and democracy to the shop floor. But their work goes beyond their own job, and even beyond our borders. For the labor movement is people. Our unions have brought millions of men and women together ... and given them common tools for common goals. -- John F. Kennedy
chrismacguy
Apr 13, 12:57 PM
Put a big, thick, security door between the cockpit and the passengers that can take a stronger blast than the plane's hull.
Problem solved; the risk of a man with a knife on a plane is identical to that same man on a public train or bus.
No ridiculous pat-downs and feeling up of children needed. Allow profiling and leave the metal detectors in place (similar security to our local courthouse) to prevent casual idiots, and have the security door to minimize damage from an organized attempt (if they can't hijack the plane, and can only kill the people on board, it's not worth the trouble; they can just go blow up a bus), and you've got a pretty good balance of security.
Actually, that wont work, because someone somewhere on that plane outside of the cockpit will have to know the code, and the door will end up being opened mid-flight regardless - otherwise how are pilots supposed to eat/go to the loo on longer flights? Organised groups would take advantage of that in a second, making your idea null and void on any flight over approx 3 hours. The Shoot-up on a plane also wont cause that much damage. While a bullet may exit the aircraft and cause a decompression, in theory the most that should rip away of the aircrafts outer-skin is a 10-10 square. Not drastic, and definitely survivable. Even with multiple bullet holes, the plane would still in all likelihood get down to 10,000ft and then proceed to land with no loss of non-shot-at life, which is what the TSA actually cares about
Problem solved; the risk of a man with a knife on a plane is identical to that same man on a public train or bus.
No ridiculous pat-downs and feeling up of children needed. Allow profiling and leave the metal detectors in place (similar security to our local courthouse) to prevent casual idiots, and have the security door to minimize damage from an organized attempt (if they can't hijack the plane, and can only kill the people on board, it's not worth the trouble; they can just go blow up a bus), and you've got a pretty good balance of security.
Actually, that wont work, because someone somewhere on that plane outside of the cockpit will have to know the code, and the door will end up being opened mid-flight regardless - otherwise how are pilots supposed to eat/go to the loo on longer flights? Organised groups would take advantage of that in a second, making your idea null and void on any flight over approx 3 hours. The Shoot-up on a plane also wont cause that much damage. While a bullet may exit the aircraft and cause a decompression, in theory the most that should rip away of the aircrafts outer-skin is a 10-10 square. Not drastic, and definitely survivable. Even with multiple bullet holes, the plane would still in all likelihood get down to 10,000ft and then proceed to land with no loss of non-shot-at life, which is what the TSA actually cares about
Chundles
Sep 12, 08:34 AM
Ooh....nice find, the movies shown there are terrible though :-)
*SMACK!*
Those are Movie Trailers for the iPod.
*SMACK!*
Those are Movie Trailers for the iPod.
VenusianSky
Oct 6, 03:47 PM
Former Verizon, unhappy AT&T customers...
It is impossible to argue that Verizon would be better if it had the iPhone. We will never know the answer to such a question unless exclusivity goes over to Verizon. If Verizon would have got the iPhone deal instead of AT&T, thousands and thousands (whatever the number may be) of cusomters would have left AT&T, Sprint, etc. to join up with Vierzon just to get an iPhone. The networks may or may not have become over-saturated with the additional cusomters. We will never know. So if you are really that unhappy with AT&T's service, go back to Verizon. I'm sure they would welcome you back with open arms. I personally couldn't imagine paying for such terrible service if I were in that situation. AT&T's service just happens to be great in my area.
It is impossible to argue that Verizon would be better if it had the iPhone. We will never know the answer to such a question unless exclusivity goes over to Verizon. If Verizon would have got the iPhone deal instead of AT&T, thousands and thousands (whatever the number may be) of cusomters would have left AT&T, Sprint, etc. to join up with Vierzon just to get an iPhone. The networks may or may not have become over-saturated with the additional cusomters. We will never know. So if you are really that unhappy with AT&T's service, go back to Verizon. I'm sure they would welcome you back with open arms. I personally couldn't imagine paying for such terrible service if I were in that situation. AT&T's service just happens to be great in my area.
benzslrpee
Mar 13, 01:52 AM
easy answer to the original question. they have different product strategies. why does BMW crank out sexy M3s while Toyota and Honda try to make every sedan look as conservative as possible?
can BMW switch markets? sure. however, BMW will dilute their brand equity by playing in a lower market segment. so for better or worse, BMW always has to produce products that are in comparison more luxurious, innovative and unique compared with Detroit and Japan.
Apple faces a similar situation.
can BMW switch markets? sure. however, BMW will dilute their brand equity by playing in a lower market segment. so for better or worse, BMW always has to produce products that are in comparison more luxurious, innovative and unique compared with Detroit and Japan.
Apple faces a similar situation.
twoodcc
Apr 11, 03:23 PM
Mate if you think thats bad, I'n holding out for a Mac mini and there has been no rumors for it! Would love to see a intel i5 :D
yeah i hear ya. an i5 mac mini would be very nice. but again, i doubt it will happen this year, if ever
yeah i hear ya. an i5 mac mini would be very nice. but again, i doubt it will happen this year, if ever