skunk
Sep 1, 08:01 AM
I;;,m drunkn as a skunk. Oi! :mad:
;)
;)
rtdunham
Sep 16, 11:53 AM
I would love to see an Apple Phone with these features:
- less than 100g
you're setting a high bar. my samsung a900, considered a very small RAZR-like phone, weighs 100g and lacks most all of the other feaures you want. (ex: the extended life battery adds 30g and even with it, the samsung's criticized for poor battery life)
- less than 100g
you're setting a high bar. my samsung a900, considered a very small RAZR-like phone, weighs 100g and lacks most all of the other feaures you want. (ex: the extended life battery adds 30g and even with it, the samsung's criticized for poor battery life)
FFTT
Sep 10, 05:56 AM
I get goosebumps thinking about the capabilties of Logic 8 Pro working seamlessly
with 8 processors!
If you can get enough raw processing power to avoid the use of Digi HD Accel cards
that's going to be some set-up.
with 8 processors!
If you can get enough raw processing power to avoid the use of Digi HD Accel cards
that's going to be some set-up.
Eidorian
Jul 14, 09:36 AM
Awesome!
Why 2 negatives over 1 positive? Wow.
Is there a way you can upgrade this new chip on previous intel mac? Just wondering. This is new to me.
iMac = Socket 479 (Yonah)
Conroe = Socket 775
So, no.
Why 2 negatives over 1 positive? Wow.
Is there a way you can upgrade this new chip on previous intel mac? Just wondering. This is new to me.
iMac = Socket 479 (Yonah)
Conroe = Socket 775
So, no.
LightSpeed1
Mar 29, 02:21 PM
As far as windows phone market share passing iPhone ever - I'll believe that $#*% when I see it.
peharri
Sep 18, 07:33 AM
OK. hang on. back the f&6king truck up.
maybe we're backwards here. but i have NEVER, EVER heard of ANY kind of phone service where INCOMING calls are anything BUT free (excluding reverse-charge, obviously).
No, that's not true, though the way it's presented often makes you think it is.
Sprint and a company called MetroPCS are one of the few companies in the entire world where incoming calls are in practice are "at no extra charge" (unless those calls are long distance.)
That is, someone can call someone with a Sprint phone on a "free unlimited incoming" plan, and NEITHER PARTY will be charged (subject to restrictions, namely that mobile party isn't roaming, and the caller has unlimited outgoing calls to at the very least the mobile party's area/exchange code. This is the default with US landlines.)
(I'm being picky with words here, because it's even worse than how I'm describing. I'm not aware of a single phone company in the entire world that offers free calls of any description save for 911/112/999 type calls. Every phone company in the world at the very least requires you pay a subscription fee before receiving any kind of unmetered service. Ok, I note the complaints I'm being picky and everyone "knows" what "free" means, but I think the word "free" is overused.)
Most other operators in the US offer unlimited airtime at nights, weekends, and often when calls are placed between mobiles on the same network, so the other networks also provide incoming calls "at no extra charge" for a specific subset of incoming calls.
Now, you're probably not in the US, which explains your confusion as to why someone would be wording this as it was, but don't think that because where you are the callee doesn't pay for incoming calls, that this means the calls are free. They're not. They're paid for by the caller, often at absurdly high rates. Do you never make calls to mobiles?
You are just as likely to be receiving a call as making one to a mobile phone (ie regardless of who pays, YOU are likely to pay it. You receive calls on your cellphone, and you call people who have cellphones), so when considering the total cost of ownership, the price of incoming calls, whether paid for by the caller or callee, makes a difference in terms of the use of mobile phones.
Because this is likely to descend to a debate on the subject of "Caller pays" or "Mobile user pays", the US system makes it harder to have a workable low-budget pay-as-you-go system, but once service-spends exceed around $40 a month, the provided tariffs are generally much, much, better value than that provided outside of the US. So there's a higher barrier to entry, but once you can afford it, even the most avid talkers can use it as their default phone. A typical tariff in the US is $50 a month for unlimited nights, weekends, and calls between same-network mobiles, plus 500 minutes for other call types. A typical tariff in the UK appears to be something approximating to 20-70c a minute for outgoing calls (the lower end for same network or landline calls, higher for calls to mobiles), with calls charged by the second and no, practical, monthly minimum call spends and everyone paying just for the calls they make. Someone who doesn't use a mobile phone very often would appreciate the latter, someone who wants to use it instead of a landline would appreciate the former.
maybe we're backwards here. but i have NEVER, EVER heard of ANY kind of phone service where INCOMING calls are anything BUT free (excluding reverse-charge, obviously).
No, that's not true, though the way it's presented often makes you think it is.
Sprint and a company called MetroPCS are one of the few companies in the entire world where incoming calls are in practice are "at no extra charge" (unless those calls are long distance.)
That is, someone can call someone with a Sprint phone on a "free unlimited incoming" plan, and NEITHER PARTY will be charged (subject to restrictions, namely that mobile party isn't roaming, and the caller has unlimited outgoing calls to at the very least the mobile party's area/exchange code. This is the default with US landlines.)
(I'm being picky with words here, because it's even worse than how I'm describing. I'm not aware of a single phone company in the entire world that offers free calls of any description save for 911/112/999 type calls. Every phone company in the world at the very least requires you pay a subscription fee before receiving any kind of unmetered service. Ok, I note the complaints I'm being picky and everyone "knows" what "free" means, but I think the word "free" is overused.)
Most other operators in the US offer unlimited airtime at nights, weekends, and often when calls are placed between mobiles on the same network, so the other networks also provide incoming calls "at no extra charge" for a specific subset of incoming calls.
Now, you're probably not in the US, which explains your confusion as to why someone would be wording this as it was, but don't think that because where you are the callee doesn't pay for incoming calls, that this means the calls are free. They're not. They're paid for by the caller, often at absurdly high rates. Do you never make calls to mobiles?
You are just as likely to be receiving a call as making one to a mobile phone (ie regardless of who pays, YOU are likely to pay it. You receive calls on your cellphone, and you call people who have cellphones), so when considering the total cost of ownership, the price of incoming calls, whether paid for by the caller or callee, makes a difference in terms of the use of mobile phones.
Because this is likely to descend to a debate on the subject of "Caller pays" or "Mobile user pays", the US system makes it harder to have a workable low-budget pay-as-you-go system, but once service-spends exceed around $40 a month, the provided tariffs are generally much, much, better value than that provided outside of the US. So there's a higher barrier to entry, but once you can afford it, even the most avid talkers can use it as their default phone. A typical tariff in the US is $50 a month for unlimited nights, weekends, and calls between same-network mobiles, plus 500 minutes for other call types. A typical tariff in the UK appears to be something approximating to 20-70c a minute for outgoing calls (the lower end for same network or landline calls, higher for calls to mobiles), with calls charged by the second and no, practical, monthly minimum call spends and everyone paying just for the calls they make. Someone who doesn't use a mobile phone very often would appreciate the latter, someone who wants to use it instead of a landline would appreciate the former.
CylonGlitch
Nov 13, 03:58 PM
In a sense, yes. The rules for iPhone development are different than for Mac OS X. I may not always agree with it but there you have it. :)
Exactly, they are technically different operating systems. But even so, just because an OS gives you access to specific images, doesn't give you the rights to take them and use them for something else. Obviously RA had to pull the image from the API and then save it to another file and use it in their iPhone application. Just because it is accessible via API doesn't mean it is free to use. The API is free to use, the data is not.
Example. You buy a CD of a song, you can play it on your CD player. You can use it all you want in your CD player, but try ripping that song off (ie copying the image from the API) and using it in a movie you're making.. Guess what, you can't.
Exactly, they are technically different operating systems. But even so, just because an OS gives you access to specific images, doesn't give you the rights to take them and use them for something else. Obviously RA had to pull the image from the API and then save it to another file and use it in their iPhone application. Just because it is accessible via API doesn't mean it is free to use. The API is free to use, the data is not.
Example. You buy a CD of a song, you can play it on your CD player. You can use it all you want in your CD player, but try ripping that song off (ie copying the image from the API) and using it in a movie you're making.. Guess what, you can't.
EricNau
Apr 25, 01:16 AM
It amazes me how such little things tick people off.
Indeed. ...Like someone driving the speed limit in the fast lane?
Indeed. ...Like someone driving the speed limit in the fast lane?
aohus
Apr 20, 12:23 PM
android enthusiast here.
i don't see what the big deal is. so what if Apple is storing your location data.
everyone here is on facebook, exposing their real names, friends, user uploaded photos that are under the control of facebook under the new TOS agreement, where they live, phone numbers, what they like, what they dislike, their status updates, etc.
so please, everyone be quiet about this 'omg my civil liberties are being trampled on!'
the moment you go on the internet, privacy goes right out the window.
and btw, google stores location data allll the time.
facebook.com? lol, more like facebook.gov
i don't see what the big deal is. so what if Apple is storing your location data.
everyone here is on facebook, exposing their real names, friends, user uploaded photos that are under the control of facebook under the new TOS agreement, where they live, phone numbers, what they like, what they dislike, their status updates, etc.
so please, everyone be quiet about this 'omg my civil liberties are being trampled on!'
the moment you go on the internet, privacy goes right out the window.
and btw, google stores location data allll the time.
facebook.com? lol, more like facebook.gov
tfskora
Apr 20, 11:31 AM
Sweet! Now I can stop checking in with yelp, facebook, and 4square.
I'm in the who cares crowd. Many have posted that everything you do on a computer is being tracked.
Just go hide in a cave with no technology, no one will find you. Look at Bin Laden.
I'm in the who cares crowd. Many have posted that everything you do on a computer is being tracked.
Just go hide in a cave with no technology, no one will find you. Look at Bin Laden.
steve_hill4
Aug 23, 05:36 PM
A little-known company, and that was to create it's product. If apple buys one of their largest competitors, that will raise a few eyebrows.
Think Microsoft strategy here. They settle with Creative for $100 million and Creative join the Made for iPod scheme. If they suceed and get back on their feet, it helps Apple argue they aren't anti-competition, if they fail, Creative fall by the wayside and Apple could perhpas snap them up for a bargain.
Buy Creative now and thy will not only be accused of anti-competitive behaviour, but probably lose any cases over Fairplay.
Think Microsoft strategy here. They settle with Creative for $100 million and Creative join the Made for iPod scheme. If they suceed and get back on their feet, it helps Apple argue they aren't anti-competition, if they fail, Creative fall by the wayside and Apple could perhpas snap them up for a bargain.
Buy Creative now and thy will not only be accused of anti-competitive behaviour, but probably lose any cases over Fairplay.
prady16
Sep 14, 09:06 AM
Have a look at the front page.
It doesn't mention anything about a keynote!
It doesn't mention anything about a keynote!
aristotle
Apr 20, 01:44 PM
Watch the video. It was happening on the guys phones who discovered it in the UK. Unless AT&T's signal is better than people let on, I doubt they have signal in the UK. ;)
Edit: From tatonka's link below, this is Southern England.
may 2011 calendar uk. may 2011
2011 calendar uk.
2011 calendar uk printable
january 2011 calendar uk.
A4 Double sided 2011 Calendar.
2011 calendar uk printable.
Edit: From tatonka's link below, this is Southern England.
gloss
Sep 26, 06:58 AM
Oh man. Verizon early termination fee, here I come.
LarryC
Apr 30, 11:04 PM
Two words: Future-proofing.
Macs are expensive, and many Mac users cannot afford or do not want to buy new Macs frequently. Such Mac users want to buy a Mac and have it work with the latest software and peripherals for as many years as possible. For such users, it makes total sense to want a Mac with Thunderbolt, even though there are isn't a single Thunderbolt peripheral on the market.
I absolutely agree. This is the same reason why I was hoping the USB 3.0 would be on this version. I realize now that is almost certainly not going to happen. I just thought that with so many PC's (including some PC laptops) already offering USB 3.0 that maybe the brand spankin' new iMac might be so equipped.
I was wondering why so many people are so opposed to Apple offering Blu-Ray as a BTO option. I have read where Steve Jobs spoke negatively about Blu-Ray, I wonder if these same people would be all gung-ho for BR if Jobs had spoken positively about it? I realize that he is a very smart man, but he isn't God! I always thought that BR would have been a great thing to have on a Mac for things like backing up your iTunes library. Imagine that, being able to back up your entire iTunes library on two or three BR discs. That would have been really nice. I read somewhere the other day that they either have or are getting ready to have BR discs that have a 100GB capacity. What in the world would have been wrong with that?
Macs are expensive, and many Mac users cannot afford or do not want to buy new Macs frequently. Such Mac users want to buy a Mac and have it work with the latest software and peripherals for as many years as possible. For such users, it makes total sense to want a Mac with Thunderbolt, even though there are isn't a single Thunderbolt peripheral on the market.
I absolutely agree. This is the same reason why I was hoping the USB 3.0 would be on this version. I realize now that is almost certainly not going to happen. I just thought that with so many PC's (including some PC laptops) already offering USB 3.0 that maybe the brand spankin' new iMac might be so equipped.
I was wondering why so many people are so opposed to Apple offering Blu-Ray as a BTO option. I have read where Steve Jobs spoke negatively about Blu-Ray, I wonder if these same people would be all gung-ho for BR if Jobs had spoken positively about it? I realize that he is a very smart man, but he isn't God! I always thought that BR would have been a great thing to have on a Mac for things like backing up your iTunes library. Imagine that, being able to back up your entire iTunes library on two or three BR discs. That would have been really nice. I read somewhere the other day that they either have or are getting ready to have BR discs that have a 100GB capacity. What in the world would have been wrong with that?
milo
Mar 30, 12:15 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?
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?
kurtsayin
Oct 12, 11:08 PM
Education to teach how to prevent the spread of AIDS costs money too.
Agreed
Agreed
hulugu
Apr 20, 04:54 PM
Sure is. A hypothetical I like to propose:
Considering that the discrepancies between "rich" and "poor" as far as voting goes are far over blown (http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/10/24/even-more-on-income-and-voting/) (Rich DO vote liberal and poor DO vote conservative) with the top third of white income earners STILL voting liberal, despite their high incomes and the ever-pervasive myth that rich people vote republican.
If this top third of income earners, instead of trying to legislate their charities through democratic votes and the force of law, simply put 50%, 60%, 70%, hell, 90% of their incomes towards charity rather than owning a home, owning multiple vehicles, owning boats, "traveling", shopping at Lunds or Kowalskis, etc, the poverty problem would be fixed, or at the very least, helped significantly without forcing ANYBODY to do ANYTHING.
But then again, these people would rather force everyone to pony up the dough rather than take a hit to their lifestyles.
Charity is a beautiful thing, but forced charity?
What programs do you consider to be 'forced charity?'
Considering that the discrepancies between "rich" and "poor" as far as voting goes are far over blown (http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/10/24/even-more-on-income-and-voting/) (Rich DO vote liberal and poor DO vote conservative) with the top third of white income earners STILL voting liberal, despite their high incomes and the ever-pervasive myth that rich people vote republican.
If this top third of income earners, instead of trying to legislate their charities through democratic votes and the force of law, simply put 50%, 60%, 70%, hell, 90% of their incomes towards charity rather than owning a home, owning multiple vehicles, owning boats, "traveling", shopping at Lunds or Kowalskis, etc, the poverty problem would be fixed, or at the very least, helped significantly without forcing ANYBODY to do ANYTHING.
But then again, these people would rather force everyone to pony up the dough rather than take a hit to their lifestyles.
Charity is a beautiful thing, but forced charity?
What programs do you consider to be 'forced charity?'
JAT
Apr 30, 02:42 PM
May 2010 join date complaining about bandwagon jumping. Go figure.
I say the same to just about everybody.
I say the same to just about everybody.
toddybody
Mar 22, 03:12 PM
Now I can rid myself of my 27" i7 2009 iMac.
Things that I would see/would like to see on the new iMacs:
- Thunderbolt (2 ports would be nice)
- Target DisplayPort Mode with HDMI + HDMI audio in, without needing to fully power up the entire computer (and a toggle that doesn't require an Apple keyboard)
- USB3 (I know Intel isn't natively putting USB3 on their chipsets until Ivy Bridge, but Apple could do the right thing and add this)
- get rid of the internal speakers as an option for more cooling
- at least a Radeon 6850 or GeForce GTX 560 Ti (preferably the nVidia card for CUDA/HW accelerated stuff) with at least 1 (2 please) GB of GDDR5 (I'm still boggled why they even offered a 256MB 6490 on the MacBook Pro)
- easily accessible 2.5" port for an SSD (doubt it)
- i7-2600 at the high end (Apple won't sell the K version, unless they go nuts and allow overclocking)
- a side mounted USB port or 2 would be nice, hell, more USB ports period (6-8) would be nice
- a second Firewire 800 (or 1600 if Apple is feeling frisky) port
- matte screen option (this, like the 2.5" bay, has a snowballs' chance in hell)
- Blu-Ray (see my note on the matte screen)
Wonder if Apple will allow for the full 32GB support that the Sandy Bridge processors can fully take, and the DDR3-1600 speeds, since they are limiting both on the MacBook Pros at the moment.
Ha ha ha ha! GTX 560 ti! Youre a funny guy! Apple always fails on it's GPU choices. :(
Things that I would see/would like to see on the new iMacs:
- Thunderbolt (2 ports would be nice)
- Target DisplayPort Mode with HDMI + HDMI audio in, without needing to fully power up the entire computer (and a toggle that doesn't require an Apple keyboard)
- USB3 (I know Intel isn't natively putting USB3 on their chipsets until Ivy Bridge, but Apple could do the right thing and add this)
- get rid of the internal speakers as an option for more cooling
- at least a Radeon 6850 or GeForce GTX 560 Ti (preferably the nVidia card for CUDA/HW accelerated stuff) with at least 1 (2 please) GB of GDDR5 (I'm still boggled why they even offered a 256MB 6490 on the MacBook Pro)
- easily accessible 2.5" port for an SSD (doubt it)
- i7-2600 at the high end (Apple won't sell the K version, unless they go nuts and allow overclocking)
- a side mounted USB port or 2 would be nice, hell, more USB ports period (6-8) would be nice
- a second Firewire 800 (or 1600 if Apple is feeling frisky) port
- matte screen option (this, like the 2.5" bay, has a snowballs' chance in hell)
- Blu-Ray (see my note on the matte screen)
Wonder if Apple will allow for the full 32GB support that the Sandy Bridge processors can fully take, and the DDR3-1600 speeds, since they are limiting both on the MacBook Pros at the moment.
Ha ha ha ha! GTX 560 ti! Youre a funny guy! Apple always fails on it's GPU choices. :(
AidenShaw
Mar 29, 02:42 PM
I think he is. Too bad IDC isn't one of them.
Why, because IDC isn't like David Pogue and Walter Mossberg - simply republishing Apple's latest PR dementia?
Why, because IDC isn't like David Pogue and Walter Mossberg - simply republishing Apple's latest PR dementia?
MagnusVonMagnum
Apr 14, 07:00 PM
Well, it would surprise me. USB3.0 and Thunderbolt will come included in Intel''s Ivy Bridge. Apple would have to add more hardware and disable USB 3.0 to make it 2.0 only. Makes zero cents.
They wouldn't have to add more hardware. USB3.0 is backwards compatible with 2.0. They would only have to disable 3.0 protocols somehow. Given they need a driver to make the hardware work this wouldn't be at all difficult, IMO; they have shipped iPhones with 802.11N hardware and limited it to G protocol/speeds so they already have a history of doing such things so I wouldn't put it past them. I KNOW if they got Blu-Ray drives somehow included with their hardware (i.e. only thing available), they would STILL not support it except in DVD/CD mode. Apple will do what they think is best for them NO MATTER WHAT. They don't give a flying rat's hind end about what the consumer wants. Steve thinks he knows better than anyone and he has a whole army of groupies telling him he's right so how on earth could he ever imagine otherwise?
They wouldn't have to add more hardware. USB3.0 is backwards compatible with 2.0. They would only have to disable 3.0 protocols somehow. Given they need a driver to make the hardware work this wouldn't be at all difficult, IMO; they have shipped iPhones with 802.11N hardware and limited it to G protocol/speeds so they already have a history of doing such things so I wouldn't put it past them. I KNOW if they got Blu-Ray drives somehow included with their hardware (i.e. only thing available), they would STILL not support it except in DVD/CD mode. Apple will do what they think is best for them NO MATTER WHAT. They don't give a flying rat's hind end about what the consumer wants. Steve thinks he knows better than anyone and he has a whole army of groupies telling him he's right so how on earth could he ever imagine otherwise?
eye
Mar 23, 06:25 PM
Pull them... As trauma surgeon I see the tragedies caused by drunk drivers EVERY Day. Whoever is on agreement to provide means to avoid check points is invited to my local trauma center to see the victims and their families. If we can save one life, one innocent student or parent, even someone who made the mistake of drinking and driving... I would consider this worth.
Besides, the cost of taking care of those who do not die, but spend weeks months or years in the hospital due to a drinking related accident is enormous.
Speed radars are another big issue. In my state, its ok to refuse a helmet while driving a donor-cycle, as we call them, yesterday alone, we lost one kid who is waiting for transplant procurement and half a dozen were admitted with severe injuries most of them traumatic brain injuries while driving motorcycles.
And what if the apps encourage people to not drink and and drive? You're basing this on nothing. No facts whatsoever on whether or not this will promote or make drunk driving easier. Please don't be my surgeon if you're not into facts.
Besides, the cost of taking care of those who do not die, but spend weeks months or years in the hospital due to a drinking related accident is enormous.
Speed radars are another big issue. In my state, its ok to refuse a helmet while driving a donor-cycle, as we call them, yesterday alone, we lost one kid who is waiting for transplant procurement and half a dozen were admitted with severe injuries most of them traumatic brain injuries while driving motorcycles.
And what if the apps encourage people to not drink and and drive? You're basing this on nothing. No facts whatsoever on whether or not this will promote or make drunk driving easier. Please don't be my surgeon if you're not into facts.
tsugaru
Mar 22, 03:15 PM
Ha ha ha ha! GTX 560 ti! Youre a funny guy! Apple always fails on it's GPU choices. :(
Hey. A boy can dream, right?
Remember when Apple put the latest and greatest GPUs in their computers? /looks back to the blue and white G3 keynote
Hey. A boy can dream, right?
Remember when Apple put the latest and greatest GPUs in their computers? /looks back to the blue and white G3 keynote
No comments:
Post a Comment