vizkiz
Apr 16, 03:48 PM
thats a lot of ports. :eek:
Just one port, for the dock connector...
Just one port, for the dock connector...
MrNomNoms
May 3, 05:49 PM
I don't really get this... You already pay fees for the data - why do they care for how you use it?
It's funny because nowhere in europe (well, from first hand experience in UK/ Scandanavia), do the carriers prevent tethering, nor do they charge an extra fee for it.
They have data caps (100MB, 500MB, 1GB etc) but they don't care what you use it for. And this makes sense. Thus I can work from cafes through my HTC Desire, and as long as I'm not streaming video or downloading many podcasts then the 1GB/month is more than enough for my phone and occasional tethered usage.
For once Europe seems to be ahead of the curve to the advantage of the consumer when compared to the USA.
Because in the US they differentiate between data from a smart phone and data - it is based on the idea that a pure smart phone user is going to use a whole lot less data (due to the nature of the device itself) when compared to someone tethering it on a computer. In most other countries, such as where I live, there is no differentiation, there is one set of prices for data and whether you do it via smart phone, tethering, or 3G stick the telco doesn't matter because the data is all priced the same.
It's funny because nowhere in europe (well, from first hand experience in UK/ Scandanavia), do the carriers prevent tethering, nor do they charge an extra fee for it.
They have data caps (100MB, 500MB, 1GB etc) but they don't care what you use it for. And this makes sense. Thus I can work from cafes through my HTC Desire, and as long as I'm not streaming video or downloading many podcasts then the 1GB/month is more than enough for my phone and occasional tethered usage.
For once Europe seems to be ahead of the curve to the advantage of the consumer when compared to the USA.
Because in the US they differentiate between data from a smart phone and data - it is based on the idea that a pure smart phone user is going to use a whole lot less data (due to the nature of the device itself) when compared to someone tethering it on a computer. In most other countries, such as where I live, there is no differentiation, there is one set of prices for data and whether you do it via smart phone, tethering, or 3G stick the telco doesn't matter because the data is all priced the same.
asdf542
Apr 29, 02:35 PM
They won't make Lion "uninstallable" on it. But it might be "unbearable" for all but the most casual of users. ;)
On a side note, I've noticed there's now a "Show downloads" button to the left of the Search Field:
Image (http://forums.macrumors.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=283487&stc=1&d=1304105242)
Hmm, a lot of new white UI elements(this and Quick Look). I wouldn't be surprised if Apple started offering Macs with a white bezel option.
On a side note, I've noticed there's now a "Show downloads" button to the left of the Search Field:
Image (http://forums.macrumors.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=283487&stc=1&d=1304105242)
Hmm, a lot of new white UI elements(this and Quick Look). I wouldn't be surprised if Apple started offering Macs with a white bezel option.
arn
Jan 5, 11:19 AM
we can set this up...
stay tuned.
arn
stay tuned.
arn
more...
macenforcer
Nov 23, 05:56 PM
You would be better off getting an ipod from Target with the 10% off for getting a target credit card. Apple sales suck.
breadesign
Jan 15, 05:05 PM
Still. No. Flash. On. My. Iphone.
W. T. F??!
... oh yes forgot that... another strike!
W. T. F??!
... oh yes forgot that... another strike!
more...
Mikeadelic
Apr 6, 06:54 AM
There's another, much more messed up story (http://www.slashgear.com/apple-rejects-iphone-app-for-lack-of-functionality-later-releases-app-with-same-functionality-itself-06144635/) behind this app. For those too lazy to click on the link, basically Apple decided to reject a third-party app that has the same functionality as the iAd Gallery for -- get this -- "lack of functionality". Then it turns around and develops the exact same app.
If what Apple has done here doesn't demonstrate anti-competitiveness, then I don't know what does.
If what Apple has done here doesn't demonstrate anti-competitiveness, then I don't know what does.
JDOG_
Oct 19, 10:04 AM
This is great news, and that's a lot of macs! I can't help but think part of this is a big group of people waiting to buy a PC until it comes with Vista. Maybe I'm giving them too much credit, but if I could wait a couple months on the purchase to avoid an imminent ~$150+ O.S. upgrade I would. :cool:
more...
CAWjr
Mar 17, 09:20 AM
I wonder how you would have reacted it the "stoner" kid charge your card the entire puchase and pocketed the cash?
I bet if this was the case, the OP would be flipping out on the store manager & demanding some kind of compensation for the error.
It's cases like this that are the reason retailers put in insane return policies or restocking fees. Too many dishonest people out there trying to game the system & retailers finally decided to punish the masses for the dishonesty of the few.
So thanks to people like the OP, we can all be glad that a simple return requires an original receipt, picture ID, credit card, and a sworn affidavit that we purchased our products legally & honestly.
I bet if this was the case, the OP would be flipping out on the store manager & demanding some kind of compensation for the error.
It's cases like this that are the reason retailers put in insane return policies or restocking fees. Too many dishonest people out there trying to game the system & retailers finally decided to punish the masses for the dishonesty of the few.
So thanks to people like the OP, we can all be glad that a simple return requires an original receipt, picture ID, credit card, and a sworn affidavit that we purchased our products legally & honestly.
NewSc2
Oct 2, 06:01 PM
psh, you all are mistaken. this is the best evidence YET that Merom MBP's will be released at Photokina, with updated chassis and everything under the sun included.
*sigh*
on another note, my friends that have other-branded mp3 players and sometimes lament that they can't purchase off of iTunes. also they'd like to switch from their mp3 player to an iPod but they don't want to deal with re-encoding all their files from wma to mp3.
*sigh*
on another note, my friends that have other-branded mp3 players and sometimes lament that they can't purchase off of iTunes. also they'd like to switch from their mp3 player to an iPod but they don't want to deal with re-encoding all their files from wma to mp3.
more...
bbplayer5
Dec 13, 09:49 AM
Ill be handing out grains of salt.
macman2790
Oct 3, 01:37 PM
This is my prediction as well. We'll see!
i've been pessimistic about the mbp update for a while now considering how long it would take for santa rosa if they released a new one now.
i've been pessimistic about the mbp update for a while now considering how long it would take for santa rosa if they released a new one now.
more...
SevenInchScrew
Nov 14, 05:07 PM
About the footsteps issue, while you may not hear someone else, your own footsteps are almost deafening now. I take the Ninja perk just to NOT hear my own footsteps.
Right, and that was what made it so good in MW2. You were super quiet, and could hear everyone else much better because of that. Now in Black Ops, while your own movements are certainly much quieter with Ninja, everyone else running around makes basically no noise, regardless of their Green perk. Because of that, no one HAS to use Ninja, and can still run around all stealthy, stabbing or shooting you in the back.
In MW2, you could easily hear people coming if you were paying attention, and get a jump on them. In Black Ops, since you can't hear anyone, ever, the game is a constant battle of internet connection and reflexes. What happens now is, you and an enemy both, surprisingly, come around a corner to face each other. What ensues is each person wildly spraying bullets until one of you falls over dead. That isn't very fun.
A new update or patch will be welcome, and I look forward to playing the game despite it's problems. Good fun.
I agree. Even though there are a few issues I have with the game, and a couple are close to game-breaking, the game has a lot of fun in it. With a good update/patch, it could be great.
Right, and that was what made it so good in MW2. You were super quiet, and could hear everyone else much better because of that. Now in Black Ops, while your own movements are certainly much quieter with Ninja, everyone else running around makes basically no noise, regardless of their Green perk. Because of that, no one HAS to use Ninja, and can still run around all stealthy, stabbing or shooting you in the back.
In MW2, you could easily hear people coming if you were paying attention, and get a jump on them. In Black Ops, since you can't hear anyone, ever, the game is a constant battle of internet connection and reflexes. What happens now is, you and an enemy both, surprisingly, come around a corner to face each other. What ensues is each person wildly spraying bullets until one of you falls over dead. That isn't very fun.
A new update or patch will be welcome, and I look forward to playing the game despite it's problems. Good fun.
I agree. Even though there are a few issues I have with the game, and a couple are close to game-breaking, the game has a lot of fun in it. With a good update/patch, it could be great.
iScott428
Apr 8, 01:52 PM
I wonder what the special promotion is.
Hey Best Buy, not sure what you are waiting for but last time I checked the special iPad 2 promotion was the release on 3/11...Seriously a BS excuse and weak stuff if they are really holding back supplies.
Hey Best Buy, not sure what you are waiting for but last time I checked the special iPad 2 promotion was the release on 3/11...Seriously a BS excuse and weak stuff if they are really holding back supplies.
more...
gorgeousninja
Apr 16, 11:53 AM
No, when Apple revealed the iPhone most people were thinking something along the line of "Apple seriously need to reconsider leaving out 3G and the ability to install software if they want to make it in the smart phone business", a phone that doesn't let you install new software is by definiton not a smart phone. The iPhone 3G was the real deal, ofcourse the first gen was successful, simply because it was Apple, but the 3G was when it turned into a good product and soared in popularity.
And iPhone is far from the first icon based phone and I personally believe the Sony Ericsson P800 and P900 was a big inspiration for iPhone.
No, that is exactly my point, people were not thinking along those lines at all. You can name any phone from the last ten years if you want, and you might as well include Alexander Graham-Bell, and Star Trek. When the iPhone debuted everyone got interested, but just saying that it was 'only because it was Apple' is being extremely disingenuous.
There were also many 'experts' saying that Apple were going to fall flat on it's face trying to take on the 'big boys' of Nokia and Motorola et al.
This is the same roundabout argument that has gone on since Apple started, 'Oh, it wasn't them it was Xerox, Riva, Sony, MS etc etc. Why is it so hard for some to give credit where it is due, and instead try to rubbish everything. It just seems so petty.
And iPhone is far from the first icon based phone and I personally believe the Sony Ericsson P800 and P900 was a big inspiration for iPhone.
No, that is exactly my point, people were not thinking along those lines at all. You can name any phone from the last ten years if you want, and you might as well include Alexander Graham-Bell, and Star Trek. When the iPhone debuted everyone got interested, but just saying that it was 'only because it was Apple' is being extremely disingenuous.
There were also many 'experts' saying that Apple were going to fall flat on it's face trying to take on the 'big boys' of Nokia and Motorola et al.
This is the same roundabout argument that has gone on since Apple started, 'Oh, it wasn't them it was Xerox, Riva, Sony, MS etc etc. Why is it so hard for some to give credit where it is due, and instead try to rubbish everything. It just seems so petty.
mw360
Apr 6, 08:15 AM
That is the very first thing I thought of. I remember that rejection and how ridiculous it was for 2 reasons.
1: She was trying to promote Apple's iAds! How does it hurt Apple?
2: Has Apple seen all the apps that could easily be called "not required" or "redundant"?
She'd be taking money for worthless ad impressions.
1: She was trying to promote Apple's iAds! How does it hurt Apple?
2: Has Apple seen all the apps that could easily be called "not required" or "redundant"?
She'd be taking money for worthless ad impressions.
more...
Macnoviz
Oct 11, 10:50 AM
A bigger screen than the iPod's would be preferable, even without an increase in pixel count. A 320x240 video on my iMac display is far easier on the eyes than a 320x240 video on my iPod when both are set to the same brightness. Why? Because the iPod display is too damn small for long-term comfortable viewing.
Yep, I fear that the Zune may let the iPod screen look small. Now is Apple's turn to make people think the Zune has a small screen in comparison to the vPod
Yep, I fear that the Zune may let the iPod screen look small. Now is Apple's turn to make people think the Zune has a small screen in comparison to the vPod
toddybody
Apr 25, 12:13 PM
IMHO, it looks gorgeous. I'd love to have one...
MagicBoy
Mar 24, 08:18 PM
It's drifting off topic. I'm not going to turn a "Happy Birthday OS X" thread into a the time honoured "Windows sucks" debate. If anyone wants to discuss it then I suggest they create a new thread called "Windows vs Mac part 677249 (cont)"
MOFS
Mar 13, 12:18 PM
So you mean computing won't be "Input, Process, Output, Storage" but something else ?
You failed to see any of my points. Tablets are not some kind of "future change to computers!", tablets are very much computing devices utilizing the same concepts and ideas that have been the very core of the industry for the last 50 years.
Touch based computer ? It's still input and input is just that, input. It doesn't matter whether is touch, keyboards, mice, network, voice, biometrics. Input is input.
A lot of you people want to see a massive change where frankly there isn't any. A new type of device doesn't somehow make everything different. It can just be a "new type of device", something the computer industry of the last 50 years has seen plenty of.
Read my post again carefully, you'll see that I already addressed all your points. Don't just respond to me without even understanding what I'm talking about and at least trying to counteract my points if you're going to try to contradict me.
For me, I do see the iPad (and actually the App Store) as a change in computing. By removing the complex processes that we go through in a computer (eg instead of downloading an app, moving it into a folder, deleting the dmg its a simple case of downloading the app), the iPad is changing our computer experience by simplifying it to the extent that it's only the part we want to use rather than need to use. The iPad and the App Store process have the potential to kickstart and similarly drastic change in computing as moving from a line based OS to a GUI. In this case, "input is not input": a GUI opened up computers to more than just programmers, and the simplified OSs of the iPad (and, as we can see, creeping into Mac OS Lion) will only help people using these actually really quite complex devices. It will happen, as we can see it happening as Apple and Google look to move the "computer" into phones and televisions. Some people will want different devices (servers etc) but increasingly I think the computer is moving away from the idea of a desktop PC.
You failed to see any of my points. Tablets are not some kind of "future change to computers!", tablets are very much computing devices utilizing the same concepts and ideas that have been the very core of the industry for the last 50 years.
Touch based computer ? It's still input and input is just that, input. It doesn't matter whether is touch, keyboards, mice, network, voice, biometrics. Input is input.
A lot of you people want to see a massive change where frankly there isn't any. A new type of device doesn't somehow make everything different. It can just be a "new type of device", something the computer industry of the last 50 years has seen plenty of.
Read my post again carefully, you'll see that I already addressed all your points. Don't just respond to me without even understanding what I'm talking about and at least trying to counteract my points if you're going to try to contradict me.
For me, I do see the iPad (and actually the App Store) as a change in computing. By removing the complex processes that we go through in a computer (eg instead of downloading an app, moving it into a folder, deleting the dmg its a simple case of downloading the app), the iPad is changing our computer experience by simplifying it to the extent that it's only the part we want to use rather than need to use. The iPad and the App Store process have the potential to kickstart and similarly drastic change in computing as moving from a line based OS to a GUI. In this case, "input is not input": a GUI opened up computers to more than just programmers, and the simplified OSs of the iPad (and, as we can see, creeping into Mac OS Lion) will only help people using these actually really quite complex devices. It will happen, as we can see it happening as Apple and Google look to move the "computer" into phones and televisions. Some people will want different devices (servers etc) but increasingly I think the computer is moving away from the idea of a desktop PC.
Dont Hurt Me
Nov 16, 08:16 AM
And people thought Apple could never ever go Intel, so why not? Athlon 64 x2 cores have dropped in price,ati has a bunch of video chips it could mate and this machine would kill any integrated graphic solution if both Apple & Ati were wanting to do this. It would make sense. Rumors:)
Sedulous
May 3, 07:57 PM
Ok, here's the thing. The contract, presented to you when you signed up for the service *explicitly* disallows tethering unless you sign up for that extra service. You pay them money for the service you signed up for *as defined in the contract*. There's the consideration from both sides. If you want to *add* something to that, they're going to want *you* to provide more consideration in exchange for giving you more capabilities under the service agreement *contract*.
(Wow, there's a lot of arm-chair lawyers here who think the contract they signed doesn't apply to *them*.)
I don't give a damn. If I pay for a chunk of data, it isn't up to the provider to dictate how I use my data. If I want to syphon fuel out of my vehicle for use in another, that is my decision not Exxon's.
(Wow, there's a lot of arm-chair lawyers here who think the contract they signed doesn't apply to *them*.)
I don't give a damn. If I pay for a chunk of data, it isn't up to the provider to dictate how I use my data. If I want to syphon fuel out of my vehicle for use in another, that is my decision not Exxon's.
KnightWRX
Apr 26, 09:37 AM
Oh please don't be so smart. What you say means to lose the pixel density of Retina Display. Would you want that?
Considering the treshold is 300 PPI for "Retina" at 12 inches of distance and that the iPhone 4 has 326 PPI at 3.5", yes I say we can afford to lose a few PPI for a bigger screen. In the end, it will still be "Retina" (as in you can't distinguish individual pixels at a normal viewing distance).
Anyway, it's not like a screen being "Retina" or not has any effect on a developer. If both screens are 960x640, the developer has nothing to change with his code or art at all. It will all work, no matter the actual screen size. What does being a developer even have to do with losing some PPI ? Nothing. Nothing at all.
Considering the treshold is 300 PPI for "Retina" at 12 inches of distance and that the iPhone 4 has 326 PPI at 3.5", yes I say we can afford to lose a few PPI for a bigger screen. In the end, it will still be "Retina" (as in you can't distinguish individual pixels at a normal viewing distance).
Anyway, it's not like a screen being "Retina" or not has any effect on a developer. If both screens are 960x640, the developer has nothing to change with his code or art at all. It will all work, no matter the actual screen size. What does being a developer even have to do with losing some PPI ? Nothing. Nothing at all.
GFLPraxis
Apr 15, 02:02 PM
The OP was ambiguous ... I read it that the weapons used on 9/11 were still not banned. As opposed to not banned at the time.
Hasn't anyone noticed that not a single US plane has been hijacked in the past 10 years? A quick look at Wikipedia shows 7 US planes hijacked in the 1970s, several in the 80s and 90s. Four planes were hijacked in 2001 (all on the same day....) - and then not a single US, European, Japanese plane has been hijacked.
Something is working.....
1980s - Aer Ligus Dublin - London; Air France Frankfurt - Paris; Rio Airways Killen, Texas - Dallas, Texas; TWA Athens - Beirut; Egypt Air Athens - Cairo; Malev Hungarian Airlines Prague - ?? ;
1990s - Lufthansa Frankfort - Cairo; FedEx flight Memphis - ??; Air Malta Malta - Turkey; All Nippon (domestic flight);
I've only listed those flights that departed from a European (and one Japanese) airport.... not European airlines that departed from non-European airports. After 9/11 there were still a number of hijackings, but the closest they come to European departure points are Nicosia, and Tirana. Though there was one from a Mexican Airport and one from a Caribbean airport. The Mexican hijacking was by a man threatening a bomb, but I don't think they actually found one.
I'll grant you the eighties. Now we get in to the ninties and there's...one in the United States, and it's an employee hijacking a company plane (FedEx).
So what's the correlation you're going for here? I'm not seeing it.
I see a decline from the 70's to the 80's, but the 90's seems in line with 2K.
We go ten years without a single commercial U.S. flight getting hijacked. Then 9/11. Then ten more years without. I'm not seeing some amazing statistical shift as a result of TSA. Further, I'm not seeing anything that justifies the new full body scanners. These were added without any supporting reasons.
If your argument is that security changes post 9/11 have made things better than the previous decade, I think showing it via statistics will be shaky at best. Zero passenger-carrying hijacks in the U.S. in the decade before 9/11 followed by zero passenger-carrying hijacks in the U.S. in the decade after 9/11 is not a statistic you can make a very solid conclusion off of.
And if your argument is that last year's full body scanners are justified, I would request much more evidence.
And how may people have the TSA found?
You tell me.
And how many people have not even bothered to try, because they were afraid of getting caught?
Same number as in the 90's.
Hasn't anyone noticed that not a single US plane has been hijacked in the past 10 years? A quick look at Wikipedia shows 7 US planes hijacked in the 1970s, several in the 80s and 90s. Four planes were hijacked in 2001 (all on the same day....) - and then not a single US, European, Japanese plane has been hijacked.
Something is working.....
1980s - Aer Ligus Dublin - London; Air France Frankfurt - Paris; Rio Airways Killen, Texas - Dallas, Texas; TWA Athens - Beirut; Egypt Air Athens - Cairo; Malev Hungarian Airlines Prague - ?? ;
1990s - Lufthansa Frankfort - Cairo; FedEx flight Memphis - ??; Air Malta Malta - Turkey; All Nippon (domestic flight);
I've only listed those flights that departed from a European (and one Japanese) airport.... not European airlines that departed from non-European airports. After 9/11 there were still a number of hijackings, but the closest they come to European departure points are Nicosia, and Tirana. Though there was one from a Mexican Airport and one from a Caribbean airport. The Mexican hijacking was by a man threatening a bomb, but I don't think they actually found one.
I'll grant you the eighties. Now we get in to the ninties and there's...one in the United States, and it's an employee hijacking a company plane (FedEx).
So what's the correlation you're going for here? I'm not seeing it.
I see a decline from the 70's to the 80's, but the 90's seems in line with 2K.
We go ten years without a single commercial U.S. flight getting hijacked. Then 9/11. Then ten more years without. I'm not seeing some amazing statistical shift as a result of TSA. Further, I'm not seeing anything that justifies the new full body scanners. These were added without any supporting reasons.
If your argument is that security changes post 9/11 have made things better than the previous decade, I think showing it via statistics will be shaky at best. Zero passenger-carrying hijacks in the U.S. in the decade before 9/11 followed by zero passenger-carrying hijacks in the U.S. in the decade after 9/11 is not a statistic you can make a very solid conclusion off of.
And if your argument is that last year's full body scanners are justified, I would request much more evidence.
And how may people have the TSA found?
You tell me.
And how many people have not even bothered to try, because they were afraid of getting caught?
Same number as in the 90's.
No comments:
Post a Comment