kuwisdelu
Apr 12, 05:43 PM
Neither iLife nor Office are part of the OS, so why are we comparing them anyway?
JKK photography
Apr 8, 05:09 PM
You can say that about any consumer product.
Speaking in general terms, MS has added more to windows, improved performance and reduced the bloat with win7.
Apple has gone the opposite direction, adding bloat and no major feature since 10.5
So 10.6 is bloated?
I would say that Windows 7 has very few new features, compared to Windows Vista. It was a performance/stability upgrade.
I would say that Snow Leopard has very few new features, compared to Leopard. It was a performance/stability upgrade.
Now, one of last-gen OS' actually needed a big boost in the performance/stability department. One didn't.
I simply don't agree with you. Snow Leopard was a few GBs smaller than Leopard, and was faster... and yet you say it is bloated?
Speaking in general terms, MS has added more to windows, improved performance and reduced the bloat with win7.
Apple has gone the opposite direction, adding bloat and no major feature since 10.5
So 10.6 is bloated?
I would say that Windows 7 has very few new features, compared to Windows Vista. It was a performance/stability upgrade.
I would say that Snow Leopard has very few new features, compared to Leopard. It was a performance/stability upgrade.
Now, one of last-gen OS' actually needed a big boost in the performance/stability department. One didn't.
I simply don't agree with you. Snow Leopard was a few GBs smaller than Leopard, and was faster... and yet you say it is bloated?
ericmacuser
Apr 25, 01:08 PM
Looks a lot like this knock-off just posted to DX
http://www.dealextreme.com/p/3-5-touch-screen-dual-sim-dual-network-standby-quadband-gsm-cell-phone-w-wi-fi-white-70906
http://www.dealextreme.com/p/3-5-touch-screen-dual-sim-dual-network-standby-quadband-gsm-cell-phone-w-wi-fi-white-70906
Apple Shmapple
Oct 11, 04:09 PM
It's obvious that Steve Jobs was going to release the True Video iPod soon. I think they intended to release the true video iPod in October when they announced Movie downloads. Something must have happened that the iPod was just not ready, so they scrambled and made some minor upgrades that they intended to do anyways.
Apple knows it has to get it right or it could be a big disaster. Their goal is to release it before the holidays, but if for some reason they can't, it will be released at Mac World. I think their main issues that have caused it to be delayed is the battery life and the screen cover. The battery life has to be from 4 to 6 hours and the screen has to have some kind of protection that won't be damaged if it is touched constantly.
If it is going to be released it will happen anytime from now until the second week of November or during the first week of December. If it does not happen during these two time frames it won't happen until Mac World.
Great post. I've been saying this all along. The widescreen iPod is a severly delayed product. And don't give me semantics about how an unannounced product can be delayed. That's just Apple's way to shirk around the responsibility that comes along with a deadline.
This product will not drop during the holiday season. Who knows if it will even be ready by January.
Apple knows it has to get it right or it could be a big disaster. Their goal is to release it before the holidays, but if for some reason they can't, it will be released at Mac World. I think their main issues that have caused it to be delayed is the battery life and the screen cover. The battery life has to be from 4 to 6 hours and the screen has to have some kind of protection that won't be damaged if it is touched constantly.
If it is going to be released it will happen anytime from now until the second week of November or during the first week of December. If it does not happen during these two time frames it won't happen until Mac World.
Great post. I've been saying this all along. The widescreen iPod is a severly delayed product. And don't give me semantics about how an unannounced product can be delayed. That's just Apple's way to shirk around the responsibility that comes along with a deadline.
This product will not drop during the holiday season. Who knows if it will even be ready by January.
Dagless
Mar 23, 05:55 PM
This is fascinating!
Out of curiosity how built up is your area? Is this a neighbour you've spoke too before? I think I'd feel worse if one of my neighbours stole something rather than some thief I never met before. That said they're mostly old folk, Paul Scholes and a pub so I don't expect any of them to steal from me!
Anyway. I can't wait to hear how this ends. It sounds like it's all going to work out if you can just get the police into that house. Surely you'll be able to prove it's yours there and then by some serial number, hard drive key or something?
Out of curiosity how built up is your area? Is this a neighbour you've spoke too before? I think I'd feel worse if one of my neighbours stole something rather than some thief I never met before. That said they're mostly old folk, Paul Scholes and a pub so I don't expect any of them to steal from me!
Anyway. I can't wait to hear how this ends. It sounds like it's all going to work out if you can just get the police into that house. Surely you'll be able to prove it's yours there and then by some serial number, hard drive key or something?
Th0ughtcrime
Apr 4, 08:31 AM
Ugh, good luck man...
buckers
Apr 29, 02:18 PM
Steve really likes magic. Is he a magician?
Define magician ;)
Define magician ;)
Bubba Satori
Mar 28, 03:50 PM
What exactly is a 'hater'? Someone that disagrees with the company line? Someone with a dissenting opinion?
Yes, it's the new iToy double think paradigm.
Think Different has been replaced by Don't Think At All, Hater. :rolleyes:
Sad, what long term koolaid abuse does to the gray cells.
What's hilarious is the preemptive timing of the hating predictions.
Poor, feeble minded bois must be constantly trembling in fear.
Not even Pavlov's dog drooled before the bell rung.
Scary iZombies are scary.
"Don't think haters. Agree with glorious leader."
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4132/4991954896_4b42731d2d.jpg
Yes, it's the new iToy double think paradigm.
Think Different has been replaced by Don't Think At All, Hater. :rolleyes:
Sad, what long term koolaid abuse does to the gray cells.
What's hilarious is the preemptive timing of the hating predictions.
Poor, feeble minded bois must be constantly trembling in fear.
Not even Pavlov's dog drooled before the bell rung.
Scary iZombies are scary.
"Don't think haters. Agree with glorious leader."
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4132/4991954896_4b42731d2d.jpg
tylerhbrown
Oct 6, 12:05 PM
Except Verizon does that too!!!!
Ahh, no, not really. Or at least not in my experience or that of anyone I know. I have had all three iphones and I love them, but ATT and their admitted 30% call drop rate is truly sad. I never lost calls with Verizon (T-mobile and Sprint we're not great for me, but neither we in the same badness-ballpark as ATT). We need to let Apple know how disappointed we are with ATT. I would gladly pay to get out of my ATT contract and go back to Verizon, if they offered an iphone. Lucky for me, I really like texting (although even those have been failing a lot too lately)
THB
http://thingsithinkithinkithink.blogspot.com/
Ahh, no, not really. Or at least not in my experience or that of anyone I know. I have had all three iphones and I love them, but ATT and their admitted 30% call drop rate is truly sad. I never lost calls with Verizon (T-mobile and Sprint we're not great for me, but neither we in the same badness-ballpark as ATT). We need to let Apple know how disappointed we are with ATT. I would gladly pay to get out of my ATT contract and go back to Verizon, if they offered an iphone. Lucky for me, I really like texting (although even those have been failing a lot too lately)
THB
http://thingsithinkithinkithink.blogspot.com/
snberk103
Apr 13, 12:03 PM
I would prefer the cheaper and more effective way; profiling.
Also, you can't say security has been working well-- look at the number of incidences of things going through security accidentally via negligence (knives, guns, etc)-- while there's no official numbers, the anecdotal evidence is quite moving.
Actually, there is documented evidence (which I'm not going to look up, because it supports your contention). The TSA does publish numbers (though buried deep in their reports) on the number of times undercover agents are able to slip weapons through security on training/testing runs. The number is quite high, if you look at it in a "Sky is falling way". But that is the incomplete picture.
Suppose, just for argument's sake, you actually have a 50/50 chance of slipping something through security. Is that "good enough" to mount an operation? Consider that there are at least a dozen people involved, to support just one operative. You can try to separate them into cells - but that doesn't mean that they are entirely hidden... it just gives them time to try to escape while their links are followed. Plus, there is a lot of money involved.
Do you risk those 12 people, plus a large chunk of scarce resources, on a venture that only has a 50/50 chance of getting something onto the plane. (we haven't even considered that most bombs on planes lately have not gone off properly, eg. shoe bomber and underwear bomber)... or that if the intent is to forcibly take over the plane there might be sky marshall - or just a plane load of passengers who are not going to sit idly by.
So you try and reduce that risk by making the plan more "fool proof" and sophisticated - but this adds complexity ...and complex things/plans breakdown and require more resources and more people. More people means adding people with doubts, and the chances of leaking. Plus more resources, which brings attention to the operation. And as you add more people and resources, the "downside" to being caught gets bigger, so you try to reduce that risk by making it even more "foolproof".
If you are one of the 12+ people supporting the operative, and you have a 50/50 chance of being caught and spending a very long and nasty session in jail - even before you get your day in court - and you have no chance of the "ultimate reward" .... don't you think you might start having doubts, and talking to people? Sometimes the wrong people?
I don't buy for a minute all of the stories of traffic cops stopping a car for a routine check and finding "bad things" that were going to be used. The intelligence services have, imho, a pretty good idea of what is happening in these groups, and use these innocent looking traffic stops (and other coincidental discoveries) so that their undercover agents aren't suspected.
That is the value, imo, of the security checks. The barriers are are high enough to get the "bad" operations big and cumbersome, and to make the plans too complex to escape notice by the authorities. It's the planning and organization of getting past the security checks that the authorities are looking for. Once that "bad thing" is in the airport, the authorities have already lost most of the game. Then the security screening is just a last ditch attempt to catch something.
The real danger is the single lone-wolf person with a grudge, who hasn't planned in advance, and doesn't really care if they get caught. They have a 50/50 chance of getting through because the only security layer at that point is the security checkpoint. The intelligence services will not have picked them up, nor will the no-fly list incidentally.
.... all of this is just mho, of course..... read the later john lecarre though, for more chilling details....
Also, you can't say security has been working well-- look at the number of incidences of things going through security accidentally via negligence (knives, guns, etc)-- while there's no official numbers, the anecdotal evidence is quite moving.
Actually, there is documented evidence (which I'm not going to look up, because it supports your contention). The TSA does publish numbers (though buried deep in their reports) on the number of times undercover agents are able to slip weapons through security on training/testing runs. The number is quite high, if you look at it in a "Sky is falling way". But that is the incomplete picture.
Suppose, just for argument's sake, you actually have a 50/50 chance of slipping something through security. Is that "good enough" to mount an operation? Consider that there are at least a dozen people involved, to support just one operative. You can try to separate them into cells - but that doesn't mean that they are entirely hidden... it just gives them time to try to escape while their links are followed. Plus, there is a lot of money involved.
Do you risk those 12 people, plus a large chunk of scarce resources, on a venture that only has a 50/50 chance of getting something onto the plane. (we haven't even considered that most bombs on planes lately have not gone off properly, eg. shoe bomber and underwear bomber)... or that if the intent is to forcibly take over the plane there might be sky marshall - or just a plane load of passengers who are not going to sit idly by.
So you try and reduce that risk by making the plan more "fool proof" and sophisticated - but this adds complexity ...and complex things/plans breakdown and require more resources and more people. More people means adding people with doubts, and the chances of leaking. Plus more resources, which brings attention to the operation. And as you add more people and resources, the "downside" to being caught gets bigger, so you try to reduce that risk by making it even more "foolproof".
If you are one of the 12+ people supporting the operative, and you have a 50/50 chance of being caught and spending a very long and nasty session in jail - even before you get your day in court - and you have no chance of the "ultimate reward" .... don't you think you might start having doubts, and talking to people? Sometimes the wrong people?
I don't buy for a minute all of the stories of traffic cops stopping a car for a routine check and finding "bad things" that were going to be used. The intelligence services have, imho, a pretty good idea of what is happening in these groups, and use these innocent looking traffic stops (and other coincidental discoveries) so that their undercover agents aren't suspected.
That is the value, imo, of the security checks. The barriers are are high enough to get the "bad" operations big and cumbersome, and to make the plans too complex to escape notice by the authorities. It's the planning and organization of getting past the security checks that the authorities are looking for. Once that "bad thing" is in the airport, the authorities have already lost most of the game. Then the security screening is just a last ditch attempt to catch something.
The real danger is the single lone-wolf person with a grudge, who hasn't planned in advance, and doesn't really care if they get caught. They have a 50/50 chance of getting through because the only security layer at that point is the security checkpoint. The intelligence services will not have picked them up, nor will the no-fly list incidentally.
.... all of this is just mho, of course..... read the later john lecarre though, for more chilling details....
NAG
Jan 11, 10:42 PM
Before they posted the video they basically had a big post explaining why CES sucks and should go away. So I can believe it completely.
Applejuiced
Apr 29, 10:59 PM
Update. it started working again for me on IE9 and I didnt do anything.
Maybe something the Admin updated on their end.
Edit.
Ok 15 minutes after this post it started kicking me back to the main forum section again:D
I give up:D
Maybe something the Admin updated on their end.
Edit.
Ok 15 minutes after this post it started kicking me back to the main forum section again:D
I give up:D
thesheep
Aug 23, 08:26 AM
I bought a new 23" display last week, from the UK Apple Store website. I rang them before I ordered to check that it would be one with the new specs. They confirmed that it would be.
Now the monitor has arrived and it has serial number 2A6171XXXXX. Apparently manufactured in April 2006. I just rang technical support and they said it isn't one with the new specs. They didn't know if there was a new model number, or when they're getting the new specs in, or anything at all really.
If anyone is very keen to get the new version in the UK, I suggest you wait a while and try to be extremely specific when you do order.
Other than that it seems to be a really great display and I'm probably not going to bother sending it back.
However, I do have one issue with it. It seems that certain shades of bright green are much more saturated and more 'garish' on the display than they are on my Powerbook display. If I look at the same image on both, the difference is really noticeable. Not really sure what to do about it. I imagine it is probably the display that's inaccurate, rather than the powerbook, but I can't be sure. Anyone had any experiences like this? It is particularly noticeable on 'yellowy-green' colours, which look much more garish on the cinema display.
Now the monitor has arrived and it has serial number 2A6171XXXXX. Apparently manufactured in April 2006. I just rang technical support and they said it isn't one with the new specs. They didn't know if there was a new model number, or when they're getting the new specs in, or anything at all really.
If anyone is very keen to get the new version in the UK, I suggest you wait a while and try to be extremely specific when you do order.
Other than that it seems to be a really great display and I'm probably not going to bother sending it back.
However, I do have one issue with it. It seems that certain shades of bright green are much more saturated and more 'garish' on the display than they are on my Powerbook display. If I look at the same image on both, the difference is really noticeable. Not really sure what to do about it. I imagine it is probably the display that's inaccurate, rather than the powerbook, but I can't be sure. Anyone had any experiences like this? It is particularly noticeable on 'yellowy-green' colours, which look much more garish on the cinema display.
rtdgoldfish
Apr 2, 08:57 PM
Nothing new going on for the past few days. Someone is connecting to XBox Live with my account but it is no longer on my wireless network. I'm getting the feeling that my 360 is no longer in my neighborhood. :(
They still haven't actually played a game on the system though... :confused:
On a side note, EBGames called and said they are doing a midnight release for Guitar Hero 2 on the 360. I'm very upset that I won't be able to play it for a while except for at a friend's house.
They still haven't actually played a game on the system though... :confused:
On a side note, EBGames called and said they are doing a midnight release for Guitar Hero 2 on the 360. I'm very upset that I won't be able to play it for a while except for at a friend's house.
scu
Oct 11, 05:40 PM
I think it will come out only if the video iPod that is out now is starting to slow down in sales. The product cycle determines how quickly the next upgrade comes out. On the Apple Store the iPod is in 2nd place. When it drops down to 4th we might see the new video ipod. Although Apple might not wait that long and introduce it sooner to keep demand strong.
If the rumors are true about using it with iTV then this item will become a hot gadget quickly and iTV will sale even better when it does come out.
I have not bought an iPod in 3 years and own 3. For the first time I might buy a new one if this video iPod comes out with these specs.:)
If the rumors are true about using it with iTV then this item will become a hot gadget quickly and iTV will sale even better when it does come out.
I have not bought an iPod in 3 years and own 3. For the first time I might buy a new one if this video iPod comes out with these specs.:)
Multimedia
Oct 3, 01:44 PM
Just 97 days to go. :)No surprise to me. 8-Core Dual Clovertown Mac Pro will be announced in this presentation too. ;)
schwell
Oct 22, 07:29 PM
Thanks. However, that site doesn't seem to update its information. Some of it dates back at least five years.
For example, I looked around my area, and most of the well known dead zones marked on the map were resolved a few years ago with new towers.
The site does update the information. Zoom in and click on the "deadspots" The date reported is shown. I clicked on 25 for Verizon and 25 for AT&T they were all reported in 2008 or 2009.
For example, I looked around my area, and most of the well known dead zones marked on the map were resolved a few years ago with new towers.
The site does update the information. Zoom in and click on the "deadspots" The date reported is shown. I clicked on 25 for Verizon and 25 for AT&T they were all reported in 2008 or 2009.
Dunepilot
Nov 22, 03:46 AM
the current 17" C2D iMac is 6.8 inches thick
The Apple site quotes that as the 'depth' of the iMac (presumably the space needed to situate it on a desk, including the depth of the stand. I seem to remember the actual iMac 'screen' itself being around 2 inches thick when they introduced the G5 version. Have a look at the C2D iMac in a shop - it's certainly not 6.8" thick.
Back OT - there's really no reason why Apple would look at AMD now. They have a good relationship with Intel, are getting the supply of chips that they need, and they've very much fallen into bed with the company for the lower-end machines (integrated graphics etc). At present they're doing well with one supplier where they had mixed success with dealing with two in the past (IBM and Freescale).
The Apple site quotes that as the 'depth' of the iMac (presumably the space needed to situate it on a desk, including the depth of the stand. I seem to remember the actual iMac 'screen' itself being around 2 inches thick when they introduced the G5 version. Have a look at the C2D iMac in a shop - it's certainly not 6.8" thick.
Back OT - there's really no reason why Apple would look at AMD now. They have a good relationship with Intel, are getting the supply of chips that they need, and they've very much fallen into bed with the company for the lower-end machines (integrated graphics etc). At present they're doing well with one supplier where they had mixed success with dealing with two in the past (IBM and Freescale).
JohnnyQuest
Mar 17, 01:09 AM
As for the Karma, I found a iPhone 4 at Macy's 2-days before shopping with my girlfriend, and I didn't think twice about not turning it in. I made this woman's day when she got it back. So I figured hey, maybe that was a little something I got for doing something honest a few days before
Wow. You deserve a gold star.
Wow. You deserve a gold star.
balamw
Oct 3, 02:41 PM
I guess it depends how much of FairPlay they end up replicating. If they replicate the server too, then it'll probably be simple to tell iTunes to look at the third-party server (just capture the data going to Apple's IP address and send it off to DoubleTwist).
If they do that it probably wouldn't work with iTMS purchased tracks. This leads to the same kind of issue as Real faed, sure you can use the Real Store, but not at the same time as ITMS. ick.
(FWIW. They could probable accomplish a simple redirection just by adding an entry to the local hosts table, since Apple most likely addresses their servers by name not IP.)
We'll see if anything comes out of this, good or bad.
B
If they do that it probably wouldn't work with iTMS purchased tracks. This leads to the same kind of issue as Real faed, sure you can use the Real Store, but not at the same time as ITMS. ick.
(FWIW. They could probable accomplish a simple redirection just by adding an entry to the local hosts table, since Apple most likely addresses their servers by name not IP.)
We'll see if anything comes out of this, good or bad.
B
SimonMW
Jan 15, 05:50 PM
still 700:1 contrast ratio
In the context that manufacturers state such figures, this is meaningless. All it really boils down to is how white their whites are so they can claim a high contrast ratio, even though in the real world it means sod all.
Now what would really get me interested is a flat screen that displays truly black blacks.
In the context that manufacturers state such figures, this is meaningless. All it really boils down to is how white their whites are so they can claim a high contrast ratio, even though in the real world it means sod all.
Now what would really get me interested is a flat screen that displays truly black blacks.
shartypants
Mar 28, 05:39 PM
Its Apple's award, I think they have the freedom to set the rules as they wish. They are simply trying to encourage developers to go to the Mac App Store, don't they have that right with their award?
vincenz
Mar 17, 05:55 PM
That happened to me just last week..
I was answering a call beside a guy at a bus stop who had an evo.. Out of no where he was like "Hey, you better hurry up before that call drops.."
So I just stared at him for a few seconds and said "Well atleast it wont be because my batteries dead"
I knew I got him, because he couldnt come up with anything better and just stared at me with depression as if to say "awwww hes right -_-".. :apple:
Hah awesome! :D
I was answering a call beside a guy at a bus stop who had an evo.. Out of no where he was like "Hey, you better hurry up before that call drops.."
So I just stared at him for a few seconds and said "Well atleast it wont be because my batteries dead"
I knew I got him, because he couldnt come up with anything better and just stared at me with depression as if to say "awwww hes right -_-".. :apple:
Hah awesome! :D
Music-Man
Jan 9, 03:22 PM
Come on.
I dont think I can hold out much longer.
I'll give Apple til 8.30 Aussie time. ie another 10 mins.
I dont think I can hold out much longer.
I'll give Apple til 8.30 Aussie time. ie another 10 mins.