Huntn
Apr 20, 08:40 PM
We need unions to protect people from abusive BS like this (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/12/walmart-contracted-warehouse-workers_n_848262.html). Either that or we just need to have a limit on how big a company can get before it has to become the property of the employees.
The lower we sink, the more popular unions will become, that is if Republican's don't succeed in outlawing them.
The lower we sink, the more popular unions will become, that is if Republican's don't succeed in outlawing them.
LCC
Sep 21, 03:18 AM
Let's hope there is the ability to import large address books with multiple contact numbers. Most cell phones allow you up to 500 contacts; some up to 1,000 (with a maximum of three numbers per contact).
The memory is there for the music, allow Power Users the choice of dedicating it to contact numbers and other data. The only other option is to carry around a bulky PDA phone.
The memory is there for the music, allow Power Users the choice of dedicating it to contact numbers and other data. The only other option is to carry around a bulky PDA phone.
SmalTek
Nov 14, 12:21 PM
I think that Apple doesn't have resources for decent quality review process.
App store works in a such way, that all underdog app developers want to update their apps as often as possible. A new update brings an app to the first page in its category, sorted by date (for a day or 2)
Apple does not have guts or desire to charge for reviews, and all this mess goes on. They "review" apps very formally, and I suspect that this is outsourced to India.
If Apple wants to make this right, they should include 10 or 20 reviews into the annual $100 developer fee, and charge $20-$50 for each additional review. That would greatly reduce the number of updates, and increase the quality of reviews.
I myself have several apps in the appstore, and my apps and updates were also rejected many times for formal reasons, which were totally stupid in the context of my apps.
And what's also funny, Apple suddenly rejected my critical update with a bug fix because of a piece of graphic that already was in my app for 6 months :-)
App store works in a such way, that all underdog app developers want to update their apps as often as possible. A new update brings an app to the first page in its category, sorted by date (for a day or 2)
Apple does not have guts or desire to charge for reviews, and all this mess goes on. They "review" apps very formally, and I suspect that this is outsourced to India.
If Apple wants to make this right, they should include 10 or 20 reviews into the annual $100 developer fee, and charge $20-$50 for each additional review. That would greatly reduce the number of updates, and increase the quality of reviews.
I myself have several apps in the appstore, and my apps and updates were also rejected many times for formal reasons, which were totally stupid in the context of my apps.
And what's also funny, Apple suddenly rejected my critical update with a bug fix because of a piece of graphic that already was in my app for 6 months :-)
cuestakid
Sep 13, 09:18 PM
I think people need to remember that not every cell phone is avaliable on every carrier-meaning that if this phone is only on a couple of carriers, someone who's carrier isnt avaliable is gonna be whinning and complaining
rtheb
Apr 30, 01:28 PM
Kind of makes you feel really sad for Steve and Bill...
$5,000,000,000.00 :eek:
$5,000,000,000.00 :eek:
Stella
Mar 30, 12:25 PM
I thought the poster I was referencing referring to the word "App"... apparently he wasn't. Yes, I know Apple are trading marking "App store".
"App" is NOT BEING TRADEMARKED. "App Store" is. How do people not understand that changing/adding/subtracting letters actually changes words? Like the guy who repeatedly typed "using" instead of "suing" above?
Touche!
(why can't Windows give me easy access to an accent?)
"App" is NOT BEING TRADEMARKED. "App Store" is. How do people not understand that changing/adding/subtracting letters actually changes words? Like the guy who repeatedly typed "using" instead of "suing" above?
Touche!
(why can't Windows give me easy access to an accent?)
Eraserhead
Apr 18, 11:51 AM
So the US doesnt even have paid holiday from work?
cozmot
Mar 21, 02:16 PM
The point is that MisterMe said nothing that your response would have fit. You can infer all you want, but it's very clear that MisterMe was talking about the market share myth, and was not inferring that Macs are immune to malware.
No, I just took the first example you posted and saw that it didn't prove your point at all.
That's quite true.
Using your STD example, I have zero need for protection if my wife and I are exclusive with each other, as we are. Likewise, protection isn't currently necessary for a Mac if the user exercises reasonable care and caution. If you want to run AV on your Mac, it's perfectly within your right. It's just not needed for protection.
You alone have the power to stop reading or posting in this thread.
It's not turning a mountain into a mole hill to stand by accurate, factual statements when they're challenged. It's not a "status-quo"; it's the current reality in the Mac computing world. No one is saying that it couldn't change in the future. It just hasn't yet.
You have no idea what attitude "most Mac users" have, unless you've interviewed the many millions of them. If I exercise the reasonable care that I've already described, it can't happen to me, in the current computing environment. If that situation ever changes, such as the introduction of a true Mac virus into the wild, any antivirus app I may have installed today will provide no protection from that event.
It's called "profit motive", which any successful company has.
Again, a personal opinion. Like millions of others, I find their hardware options perfectly acceptable and I don't have a problem with their pricing. If that weren't true, I and millions of others simply wouldn't buy from them.
No one is suggesting that you shouldn't be careful. In fact, that's exactly what we've been saying: if you're careful, you don't need antivirus software to protect your Mac from malware.
I think GGJstudios answered MagnusVonMagnum's contentions, misrepresentations and straw-man arguments perfectly. And Magnus, I hope that you're truly sick of this thread, because I am too with your belaboring the same points, putting words in peoples' mouths and contributing nothing to this thread. Really, enough already! Quit reading and posting here, and get well soon.
No, I just took the first example you posted and saw that it didn't prove your point at all.
That's quite true.
Using your STD example, I have zero need for protection if my wife and I are exclusive with each other, as we are. Likewise, protection isn't currently necessary for a Mac if the user exercises reasonable care and caution. If you want to run AV on your Mac, it's perfectly within your right. It's just not needed for protection.
You alone have the power to stop reading or posting in this thread.
It's not turning a mountain into a mole hill to stand by accurate, factual statements when they're challenged. It's not a "status-quo"; it's the current reality in the Mac computing world. No one is saying that it couldn't change in the future. It just hasn't yet.
You have no idea what attitude "most Mac users" have, unless you've interviewed the many millions of them. If I exercise the reasonable care that I've already described, it can't happen to me, in the current computing environment. If that situation ever changes, such as the introduction of a true Mac virus into the wild, any antivirus app I may have installed today will provide no protection from that event.
It's called "profit motive", which any successful company has.
Again, a personal opinion. Like millions of others, I find their hardware options perfectly acceptable and I don't have a problem with their pricing. If that weren't true, I and millions of others simply wouldn't buy from them.
No one is suggesting that you shouldn't be careful. In fact, that's exactly what we've been saying: if you're careful, you don't need antivirus software to protect your Mac from malware.
I think GGJstudios answered MagnusVonMagnum's contentions, misrepresentations and straw-man arguments perfectly. And Magnus, I hope that you're truly sick of this thread, because I am too with your belaboring the same points, putting words in peoples' mouths and contributing nothing to this thread. Really, enough already! Quit reading and posting here, and get well soon.
gugy
Aug 31, 09:28 PM
The fact that it isn't a "format," for starters.
$10 ~ $15, if that is the price for anything below a 720p encoding of a movie, would be the stupidest thing that Apple has done. (Well, at least in the last 10 years or so.)
If they do 720p encodes - and that would have to be the minimum, as they really should be 1080p - then they might have something worthwhile. The problem is, this will totally clash with the move to Blu-Ray and HD-DVD, so being realistic, my guess would be 480p encodes. Which, of course, then makes purchasing movies this way versus DVD a really stupid decision (IMHO).
I'd love to see Apple get this right, but... I'm really not holding my breath.
Very true, I just can't see Apple doing this. That will kill the Movie store from the start.
IMHO they might do the rental of movies that was speculate before.
If they decide to sell it, it has to be cheaper than the current DVD offerings, unless the quality and resolution are higher. If not, I would not even waste my time going there to buy it.
$10 ~ $15, if that is the price for anything below a 720p encoding of a movie, would be the stupidest thing that Apple has done. (Well, at least in the last 10 years or so.)
If they do 720p encodes - and that would have to be the minimum, as they really should be 1080p - then they might have something worthwhile. The problem is, this will totally clash with the move to Blu-Ray and HD-DVD, so being realistic, my guess would be 480p encodes. Which, of course, then makes purchasing movies this way versus DVD a really stupid decision (IMHO).
I'd love to see Apple get this right, but... I'm really not holding my breath.
Very true, I just can't see Apple doing this. That will kill the Movie store from the start.
IMHO they might do the rental of movies that was speculate before.
If they decide to sell it, it has to be cheaper than the current DVD offerings, unless the quality and resolution are higher. If not, I would not even waste my time going there to buy it.
Josias
Aug 28, 02:45 PM
To the guy that on page 2 requested a 7600GT in the MBP's: Why? The X1800XT is gonna whoop it's butt, and ATI is way better at making mobile cards. Oh BTW, the X1600's were not underlocked. I saw a thread somewhere, that said they wouldn�t run at full speed when not needed.;)
DeathChill
Apr 30, 01:24 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
Neither will be redesigned next year. Look at the length of time Apple stuck with the previous design. There are still a few years left to this "look."
Except there are multiple sources saying that MacBook Pro's will indeed be redesigned next year.
Neither will be redesigned next year. Look at the length of time Apple stuck with the previous design. There are still a few years left to this "look."
Except there are multiple sources saying that MacBook Pro's will indeed be redesigned next year.
justflie
Sep 12, 03:22 PM
The real question is when will the true video ipod be released? Christmas?
auxplage
Sep 26, 07:20 AM
I may have to break down and buy my first cell phone. I feel so out of place being 18 and in college without a cell phone. Well, at least when I do get the "iPhone" I can be "cool" for three months? :o :rolleyes: :)
DavidLeblond
Aug 28, 01:14 PM
Apple would not leave "secret" massive shipments lying around unsold.
Yeah, Apple would NEVER do THAT. :rolleyes:
Yeah, Apple would NEVER do THAT. :rolleyes:
puma1552
Apr 22, 08:28 AM
Problems:
--Dependence on an internet connection. Deal breaker right there. Subways? Forget it.
--Buffer times
--Connection instability/loss
--Already way overstrained data networks contributing to the above
--Battery life will suffer if it's wifi
--And if it's 3G, well there's another bill in the mail every month. A recurring bill in the form of data charges to listen to my music I already paid for? No thank you. No, no, no thank you.
Since when did every device in the house need a monthly bill to go with it? AT&T provides a pretty crappy service as it is to begin with, why shuffle any more money right into their pockets?
Dependence on an internet connection and a bill in the mail are enormous deal breakers.
To the people saying "Oh, well Apple isn't taking your hard drive away", no, they aren't, but this is the first step. In 20 years hard drives will be obsolete, as everything will be cloud based, and you'll be forced into the cloud whether you want to be or not.
This service is a completely stupid idea for anyone who has an iPod with a big enough hard drive to store their stuff. I can see the appeal for those with more than 160 GB of music, but other than those people, I see literally zero benefits to be had by this, and a slew of problems/frustrations to be gained.
--Dependence on an internet connection. Deal breaker right there. Subways? Forget it.
--Buffer times
--Connection instability/loss
--Already way overstrained data networks contributing to the above
--Battery life will suffer if it's wifi
--And if it's 3G, well there's another bill in the mail every month. A recurring bill in the form of data charges to listen to my music I already paid for? No thank you. No, no, no thank you.
Since when did every device in the house need a monthly bill to go with it? AT&T provides a pretty crappy service as it is to begin with, why shuffle any more money right into their pockets?
Dependence on an internet connection and a bill in the mail are enormous deal breakers.
To the people saying "Oh, well Apple isn't taking your hard drive away", no, they aren't, but this is the first step. In 20 years hard drives will be obsolete, as everything will be cloud based, and you'll be forced into the cloud whether you want to be or not.
This service is a completely stupid idea for anyone who has an iPod with a big enough hard drive to store their stuff. I can see the appeal for those with more than 160 GB of music, but other than those people, I see literally zero benefits to be had by this, and a slew of problems/frustrations to be gained.
jz1492
Nov 13, 03:25 PM
So they "knew" they were Right after being told otherwise. :rolleyes:
If I remember correctly, apps that get rejected multiple times experiment unusual delays in the approval process.
Maybe they have never developed software for a client and so it is their way or else. Sad.
If you want to develop for the highly rewarding AppStore you have to come to grips with the fact that it is a combination of both models -there is a client, Apple, and there are customers. Fail to please any of them at your own risk.
On the other hand, new openings in a crowded marketplace are more of a good thing for everybody. Farewell, strong-headed developers! :D
If I remember correctly, apps that get rejected multiple times experiment unusual delays in the approval process.
Maybe they have never developed software for a client and so it is their way or else. Sad.
If you want to develop for the highly rewarding AppStore you have to come to grips with the fact that it is a combination of both models -there is a client, Apple, and there are customers. Fail to please any of them at your own risk.
On the other hand, new openings in a crowded marketplace are more of a good thing for everybody. Farewell, strong-headed developers! :D
w00master
Nov 17, 03:33 PM
Boom:
http://twitter.com/kickingbear/status/5803909520
To quote:
"Good question raised by Guy English: Why is it OK for the new Star Wars: Trench Run iPhone game to include this image of an iPhone, when many other apps, like for example Instapaper, have been rejected for including original icon artwork that merely resembles an iPhone?"
Boom. So what now apologists?
w00master
http://twitter.com/kickingbear/status/5803909520
To quote:
"Good question raised by Guy English: Why is it OK for the new Star Wars: Trench Run iPhone game to include this image of an iPhone, when many other apps, like for example Instapaper, have been rejected for including original icon artwork that merely resembles an iPhone?"
Boom. So what now apologists?
w00master
deputy_doofy
Aug 29, 08:18 AM
Apple is going to have a serious backlog of orders, I think. I know I'm buying the upcoming MBP. This waiting does suck, though.
However, I have seen Apple release products silently on Monday, Tuesday, AND Wednesday, so there's a possibility, albeit extremely slight, that we could see something tomorrow. Next week looks more likely. :|
However, I have seen Apple release products silently on Monday, Tuesday, AND Wednesday, so there's a possibility, albeit extremely slight, that we could see something tomorrow. Next week looks more likely. :|
jofarmer
Sep 12, 04:26 PM
I thought the 5G was already able to handle 640x480 movies, just couldn't display them at full resolution?
The way I understood, it was capable of playin that resolution in mp4, but not when using AVC/H.264...
The way I understood, it was capable of playin that resolution in mp4, but not when using AVC/H.264...
israelagm
Mar 30, 12:27 PM
Just for those that insist Microsoft only ever uses the term 'program' . XP dates back to 2001.
http://i.imgur.com/Wdw3y.jpg
Am I missing something from this? You're using a screenshot of Windows showing file types and the only thing showing the use of the term "Application" is on iTunes related files?
How does that prove your point? I really don't know if I missed what you were actually trying to convey? It's kinda like when someone is horribly wrong and because of that you start to question yourself if you were even right in the first place.
http://i.imgur.com/Wdw3y.jpg
Am I missing something from this? You're using a screenshot of Windows showing file types and the only thing showing the use of the term "Application" is on iTunes related files?
How does that prove your point? I really don't know if I missed what you were actually trying to convey? It's kinda like when someone is horribly wrong and because of that you start to question yourself if you were even right in the first place.
kashimo
Sep 26, 09:39 PM
Cingular gets the US contract. But we already know who will get the exclusive for Japan...Softbank. Their relationship is getting closer and closer.
DoCoMo already sells phones with download capibilities and has its own service.
AU/KDDI has a very very popular service for downloading music to their phnes.
Vodafone/Softbank has a service but doesn't hack it in comparison to the other two companies. Softbank is now promoting "buy a phone/service get an iPod Nano".
iTunes Japan has not been doing well as many Japanese do not want to use their Credit Cards online (security and massive scamming rings). They download to their cellphone and pay for it in cash with their bill.
DoCoMo already sells phones with download capibilities and has its own service.
AU/KDDI has a very very popular service for downloading music to their phnes.
Vodafone/Softbank has a service but doesn't hack it in comparison to the other two companies. Softbank is now promoting "buy a phone/service get an iPod Nano".
iTunes Japan has not been doing well as many Japanese do not want to use their Credit Cards online (security and massive scamming rings). They download to their cellphone and pay for it in cash with their bill.
kharvel
Apr 29, 12:58 PM
There is just so much wrong with 100% of your post. I can't even begin, nor will I spend time, contradicting every sentence.
There is so much wrong with 100% of your comment above. I can't even begin, nor will I spend time, trying to explain why you're 100% wrong about me being 100% wrong.
In short, there is no war between Apple and Microsoft...nor has been for decades.
You either jumped on the Apple bandwagon after Y2K or you're a MS fanboy. Which is it?
Also, you think Apple is not a monopoly? Apple makes the hardware, the OS, the apps, and Appstore, and APPROVES what apps consumers can purchase. No...that's not a monopoly. No, sir.
Sony makes Playstation 2, the Playstation 2 OS, the Playstation 2 network, and APPROVES what can or cannot be done on the Playstation 2 network and to some extent, APPROVES what games consumers can or cannot play on Playstation 2.
Therefore, based on your logic, Sony is a . . . MONOPOLY!
Let's do another one:
RIM makes the Playbook, the Playbook OS, the Playbook apps and Playbook app store, and APPROVES what apps consumer can purchase.
Therefore, based on your logic, RIM is a. . . .. MONOPOLY!
There is so much wrong with 100% of your comment above. I can't even begin, nor will I spend time, trying to explain why you're 100% wrong about me being 100% wrong.
In short, there is no war between Apple and Microsoft...nor has been for decades.
You either jumped on the Apple bandwagon after Y2K or you're a MS fanboy. Which is it?
Also, you think Apple is not a monopoly? Apple makes the hardware, the OS, the apps, and Appstore, and APPROVES what apps consumers can purchase. No...that's not a monopoly. No, sir.
Sony makes Playstation 2, the Playstation 2 OS, the Playstation 2 network, and APPROVES what can or cannot be done on the Playstation 2 network and to some extent, APPROVES what games consumers can or cannot play on Playstation 2.
Therefore, based on your logic, Sony is a . . . MONOPOLY!
Let's do another one:
RIM makes the Playbook, the Playbook OS, the Playbook apps and Playbook app store, and APPROVES what apps consumer can purchase.
Therefore, based on your logic, RIM is a. . . .. MONOPOLY!
Ommid
Apr 25, 01:07 PM
Wooo hooo i cant wait, allready have the money on the side.
I was planning on getting a new Macbook in oktober when i start my courses, buy decided to wait because of this.
Wow, you people...
I was planning on getting a new Macbook in oktober when i start my courses, buy decided to wait because of this.
Wow, you people...
BlizzardBomb
Jul 14, 01:58 PM
After looking at a chart of all the Core 2 Duo's, it seems like the most reasonable implementation would be to but the 2MB L2 cache Allendale cores into the iMacs (1.86ghz for the 17" and 2.16ghz for the 20") and the 4MB L2cache Conroe cores into the 3 Mac Pros (2.33ghz @ $1999, 2.66ghz @ $2499, and 2.93ghz @ $2999), with possibly and ultra-high end Dual 3.0ghz Woodcrest offering @ $3499 (I don't think economy of scale effects that likleyhood as Apple will already be purchasing them for their entire X-Serve line).
That's probably how I would roll it out if it were up to me.
If it were up to me, I would make the product line look like this before November (I doubt Apple would make a Mini-Tower, but think it would be great):
Mac Mini (Combo) - $549/£399
Core 2 Duo T5500 (Merom) -> 1.66GHz, 2MB, 667MHz FSB
GMA X3000
Mac Mini (SuperDrive) - $749/£499
Core 2 Duo T5600 (Merom) -> 1.83GHz, 2MB, 667MHz FSB
GMA X3000
Mac Plus (Mini-Tower) - $1,049/£699 + iMac 17" - $1,299/£849
Core 2 Duo E6400 (Conroe/Allendale) -> 2.13GHz, 2MB, 1066MHz FSB
Radeon X1600 Pro (128MB)
Mac Plus (Mini-Tower) - $1,299/£849 + iMac 20" - $1,699/£1,099
Core 2 Duo E6600 (Conroe) -> 2.4GHz, 4MB, 1066MHz FSB
Radeon X1600 XT (256MB)
Mac Pro - $2,699/£1,999
Dual Xeon 5150s (Woodcrest) -> 2.66GHz, 4MB, 1333MHz FSB
Radeon X1900 GT (256MB)
Mac Pro - $3,699/£2,699
Dual Xeon 5160s (Woodcrest) -> 3GHz, 4MB, 1333MHz FSB
Radeon X1900 XT (512MB)
That's probably how I would roll it out if it were up to me.
If it were up to me, I would make the product line look like this before November (I doubt Apple would make a Mini-Tower, but think it would be great):
Mac Mini (Combo) - $549/£399
Core 2 Duo T5500 (Merom) -> 1.66GHz, 2MB, 667MHz FSB
GMA X3000
Mac Mini (SuperDrive) - $749/£499
Core 2 Duo T5600 (Merom) -> 1.83GHz, 2MB, 667MHz FSB
GMA X3000
Mac Plus (Mini-Tower) - $1,049/£699 + iMac 17" - $1,299/£849
Core 2 Duo E6400 (Conroe/Allendale) -> 2.13GHz, 2MB, 1066MHz FSB
Radeon X1600 Pro (128MB)
Mac Plus (Mini-Tower) - $1,299/£849 + iMac 20" - $1,699/£1,099
Core 2 Duo E6600 (Conroe) -> 2.4GHz, 4MB, 1066MHz FSB
Radeon X1600 XT (256MB)
Mac Pro - $2,699/£1,999
Dual Xeon 5150s (Woodcrest) -> 2.66GHz, 4MB, 1333MHz FSB
Radeon X1900 GT (256MB)
Mac Pro - $3,699/£2,699
Dual Xeon 5160s (Woodcrest) -> 3GHz, 4MB, 1333MHz FSB
Radeon X1900 XT (512MB)