Nekbeth
Apr 26, 08:23 PM
Of course I like help Dejo and I know you have help a lot people, you have even helped me before this thread and I appreciate it a lot. I said that because so many seasoned developers just throw that bomb at newbies so often when they try to find answers in forums (not just this one), it happens not only in Programming but in many other professional environments, people just shoot to kill when some new guy makes a basic mistake, but luckily not all, some people do like to help (or enjoy) and have the patience to explain even the dumbest detail. But hey, it's cool.. We're all here to share and learn after all. I'll be glad to see you contribute to my threads, but you know.. that is up to you.
Popeye206
Apr 16, 05:59 PM
Apple has by far the most restrictive ecosystem. You can't even load applications that are not approved by Apple.
Ahhhh.... dude... the only Apps that don't really get approved are ones that do things that can cause security risks or just plain trying to steal your information.
Yeah, I know... there are also Apps that break the rules and get axed, but for the most part, my first point is true. Any legitimate application can get approved.
If you keep up with Android apps, security is one of the their problems. Open? Yes... risky? Yes.
Ahhhh.... dude... the only Apps that don't really get approved are ones that do things that can cause security risks or just plain trying to steal your information.
Yeah, I know... there are also Apps that break the rules and get axed, but for the most part, my first point is true. Any legitimate application can get approved.
If you keep up with Android apps, security is one of the their problems. Open? Yes... risky? Yes.
Jony Mac
Apr 13, 08:42 AM
What are you doing with a camera shot of my servant's quarters? :confused:
Ha ha. I've never stayed here, I'm thinking my wife will like to stay in a castle.
Ha ha. I've never stayed here, I'm thinking my wife will like to stay in a castle.
leekohler
Mar 4, 11:07 AM
Keep talking Veil, 2010 was just the 'coming attractions.'
No- you keep talking, please. Please, we beg you to keep trying crap like this. It'll all but guarantee the Republicans' demise. Really, you could not self destruct more beautifully. You're not for freedom at all, just freedom for government and corporations to walk all over their workers. And since you never mentioned the anti-gay addition to this bill, I assume you're OK with that too.
No- you keep talking, please. Please, we beg you to keep trying crap like this. It'll all but guarantee the Republicans' demise. Really, you could not self destruct more beautifully. You're not for freedom at all, just freedom for government and corporations to walk all over their workers. And since you never mentioned the anti-gay addition to this bill, I assume you're OK with that too.
JorgeG
Mar 17, 08:11 AM
Sure I feel bad for the kid. Most people sit here reading this and think gee, I wish I got my iPad for that much.. It's really the kids fault and if hes liable for his register and made this mistake than he shouldn't be working the register.
One of my good friends sold me mine from the Apple Store. No dumbfoundedness there. :rolleyes:
One of my good friends sold me mine from the Apple Store. No dumbfoundedness there. :rolleyes:
Mr. McMac
Jul 27, 03:54 PM
The Volt should sell for no more than $20,000. What a ripoff!!!!
zap2
Mar 7, 10:54 AM
Android OS has gone through many changes and many people are now starting to feel iOS is getting dated. Android was first with true multi-tasking (iOS still lacks it even though it doesn't kill batteries on Android phones), copy/paste, augmented reality apps and they've implemented a much better notification system than Apple's near useless "block everything you're doing to answer this question".
I suggest you check our Symbain if you think Android had it beat for multitasking. As far as "true multi-tasking", look if you're unhappy with iOS mutli-tasking solution, then it might be time to leave the OS, because it works just fine.
Look at the MacBook Air, Rev A. They launched it, then basically forgot about it until the Rev D model which is now one of their top sellers. Will they stagnate there too ? A lot of people thought that "the future of Macbooks!" would actually translate in a few changes to other Macbook lines. It didn't. Look at the Mac Mini.
Are sorry are you upset that Apple doesn't redo their laptop each time? Yes, sometimes all we are going to get spec updates, not the end of the world, it just makes sense from a business model. "Basically forgetting about it" is just code for only spec updates right?
I suggest you check our Symbain if you think Android had it beat for multitasking. As far as "true multi-tasking", look if you're unhappy with iOS mutli-tasking solution, then it might be time to leave the OS, because it works just fine.
Look at the MacBook Air, Rev A. They launched it, then basically forgot about it until the Rev D model which is now one of their top sellers. Will they stagnate there too ? A lot of people thought that "the future of Macbooks!" would actually translate in a few changes to other Macbook lines. It didn't. Look at the Mac Mini.
Are sorry are you upset that Apple doesn't redo their laptop each time? Yes, sometimes all we are going to get spec updates, not the end of the world, it just makes sense from a business model. "Basically forgetting about it" is just code for only spec updates right?
slffl
Jan 9, 01:57 PM
Wow, so much for the spoiler free link. I just checked the page and saw WHAT THEY ANNOUNCED in some kind of news ticker!!!!!!!
Maybe next year.
Maybe next year.
Europe calling
Jan 16, 01:40 AM
The Macbook Air will be like a one night stand with a hot looking chickie.
Once you get to know her better you'll dump her because of what's missing! :D
Once you get to know her better you'll dump her because of what's missing! :D
anotherarunan
Jan 15, 01:14 PM
Pretty much standard procedure from apple. Although i was dissapointed with one thing...NO "ONE MORE THING".....:eek:
apart from that, expect the usual complaints...and take a look at the price of a macbookair with a SSD! :eek:
im happy though, my SR macbook is still top of the range! and justifys me buying it in december :D
apart from that, expect the usual complaints...and take a look at the price of a macbookair with a SSD! :eek:
im happy though, my SR macbook is still top of the range! and justifys me buying it in december :D
quagmire
May 4, 06:19 PM
I don't see how people condone people asking intrusive questions.
Now provide information on gun safety as part of a package of being information that helps people become responsible parents, but to be perfectly honest, what I own or do not own (as long as it is legal) is no ones business but my own and my families.
I really don't think it is intrusive just as long as they keep it within reason of making sure it is locked up and away from kids. If the doctor goes beyond that, than yes it is intrusive.
Would you be offended if they asked you if you had a crib, playpen, etc for the kid?
Now provide information on gun safety as part of a package of being information that helps people become responsible parents, but to be perfectly honest, what I own or do not own (as long as it is legal) is no ones business but my own and my families.
I really don't think it is intrusive just as long as they keep it within reason of making sure it is locked up and away from kids. If the doctor goes beyond that, than yes it is intrusive.
Would you be offended if they asked you if you had a crib, playpen, etc for the kid?
PygmySurfer
Oct 29, 01:13 PM
There big time investors also won't take 'just because' as an answer to why Apple won't license there OS, if the growth stops than there is no alternative.
They will take "because it'll kill Apple's hardware business, which is where Apple makes most of their money" as an answer, however.
Apple's interests lie in selling high-margin solutions, not bottom-of-the-market extremely low margin PCs.
Think of Dell as Ford, and Apple as BMW.
They will take "because it'll kill Apple's hardware business, which is where Apple makes most of their money" as an answer, however.
Apple's interests lie in selling high-margin solutions, not bottom-of-the-market extremely low margin PCs.
Think of Dell as Ford, and Apple as BMW.
phytonix
Nov 23, 10:45 PM
I hope AppleCare will be on sale.
roadbloc
Apr 7, 10:19 AM
I've heard that disk images will be automatically mountable. Another OS X/Linux feature that should have been in the last two features in the very least.
Live integration is also what I'm hearing. It'll be interesting to see how that ones pans out because I hate Live Essentials, but I know some people who love it.
Live integration is also what I'm hearing. It'll be interesting to see how that ones pans out because I hate Live Essentials, but I know some people who love it.
Multimedia
Oct 4, 12:21 PM
I'm afraid the new Intel Apple is going to be the same as the old PPC Apple.
Apple, (in the past), always blamed slow implementation of new processors and long shipping wait times on low Motorola or IBM processor yields.
Now Apple doesn't have the same excuse with Intel but I bet we don't see a Merom MBP or an Octo-MacPro until MacWorld SF or later.
Anyone taking bets!I'm not betting. But I think the C2D MB & MBPs will come out before Thanksgiving November 23. I can see them holding out on the Dual Clovertown Mac Pro for dramatic purposes in the January 9 SteveNote. But they will be a full two months behind the shipping date if they do, which would confirm your fear which I can fully understand.
Seems like they have not figured out how to turn on a dime or have make a conscious decision to not try and keep up with the latest ASAP and just poke along to the beat of their own weird drum. I feel a little bit hostage to their slow release pace. But perhaps we can't really understand what goes on behind the curtain and should cut them more slack. :)
After all, they were spot on with the rapid release of the C2D iMacs a month ago. Maybe we're all being irrationally and prematurely impatient.
Apple, (in the past), always blamed slow implementation of new processors and long shipping wait times on low Motorola or IBM processor yields.
Now Apple doesn't have the same excuse with Intel but I bet we don't see a Merom MBP or an Octo-MacPro until MacWorld SF or later.
Anyone taking bets!I'm not betting. But I think the C2D MB & MBPs will come out before Thanksgiving November 23. I can see them holding out on the Dual Clovertown Mac Pro for dramatic purposes in the January 9 SteveNote. But they will be a full two months behind the shipping date if they do, which would confirm your fear which I can fully understand.
Seems like they have not figured out how to turn on a dime or have make a conscious decision to not try and keep up with the latest ASAP and just poke along to the beat of their own weird drum. I feel a little bit hostage to their slow release pace. But perhaps we can't really understand what goes on behind the curtain and should cut them more slack. :)
After all, they were spot on with the rapid release of the C2D iMacs a month ago. Maybe we're all being irrationally and prematurely impatient.
iGary
Sep 28, 10:49 AM
Well I got it back today (tried it out at the Genius Bar before I left the store) and it's working brilliantly.
Now I have to change my whole workflow again. :(
Now I have to change my whole workflow again. :(
Mac.World
Apr 17, 01:43 PM
Being gay for most of human history has been pretty difficult. To not touch on that is really stupid and shows a bias that when it comes to history, should not be shown.
You do realize that homosexuality is not new and in fact was prevalent throughout ancient Greece, Rome and Egypt. It wasn't until Christianity took root and became prevalent that homosexuality was looked down upon. You can thank religion for that (Leviticus 18:22). So in fact, for most of human history homosexuality was seen as no different from heterosexuality.
You do realize that homosexuality is not new and in fact was prevalent throughout ancient Greece, Rome and Egypt. It wasn't until Christianity took root and became prevalent that homosexuality was looked down upon. You can thank religion for that (Leviticus 18:22). So in fact, for most of human history homosexuality was seen as no different from heterosexuality.
gravytrain84
Mar 17, 11:48 AM
Way to rep LSU! TOPS money well spent.
http://i96.photobucket.com/albums/l178/akg0186/b98a24ee.png
http://i96.photobucket.com/albums/l178/akg0186/b98a24ee.png
rdowns
Dec 14, 02:23 PM
But the fact remains how are they going to exactly implement two separate phones for carriers that use different cell tech, and implement them properly
Exactly why you won't see a Verizon phone until Apple decides to adopt a chip that handles GSM and CDMA/LTE. One phone for both (all?) US carriers.
Exactly why you won't see a Verizon phone until Apple decides to adopt a chip that handles GSM and CDMA/LTE. One phone for both (all?) US carriers.
raleigh1208
Nov 24, 01:28 PM
As noted above, even with the Apple discount today on .mac, since you pay sales tax you'll be better off purchasing it on Amazon. I saw an even better deal on buy.com, where you can buy .mac for $62.77 if you use Google checkout ($20 off $50 deal). The current Google Checkout deal is a good deal if buy.com has your item in stock. The discount is $20 off $50 or $10 off $30 purchases, and you can use it multiple times, if you checkout your items separately.
DiamondMac
Mar 25, 11:33 AM
The ability to know that my computer will load, not break down, etc...has been price-less for me with Mac OS's
Love it and will continue using it
Love it and will continue using it
gwangung
Jan 13, 03:06 PM
You're issued press credentials to report on the news at a conference. You're not supposed to MAKE news at a conference.
Consultant
Apr 15, 04:34 PM
Let's see, Google's open wasteland is undesirable. What's news? ;)
Ho hum...
Competition for itunes would not be a bad thing but those record companies are just too greedy!
There are plenty of competition. Look back the history for the past 10 years. Almost all of them, including Microsoft's versions, failed against iTunes.
Ho hum...
Competition for itunes would not be a bad thing but those record companies are just too greedy!
There are plenty of competition. Look back the history for the past 10 years. Almost all of them, including Microsoft's versions, failed against iTunes.
CalBoy
Apr 15, 04:21 PM
As I said, I understood the point you were trying to make. But.... you can't take two non-TSA incidents and use those to make a case against the TSA specifically. All you can do is say that increased security, similar to what the TSA does, can be shown to not catch everything. I could just as easily argue that because the two incidents (shoe and underwear bombers) did not occur from TSA screenings then that is proof the TSA methods work. I could, but I won't because we don't really know that is true. Too small a sample to judge.
Well actually we know the TSA methods don't work because both of the incidents were from European airports that mirror what the TSA does. Added to the number of weapons that make it through TSA checkpoints, it's easy to see that the TSA does in fact not work to the extent that it is expected to.
Did you not read my post above? Or did you not understand it? Or did I not write clearly? I'll assume the 3rd. Past history is that bombs are not put on planes by lone wolf fanatics. They are placed there by a whole operation involving a number of people... perhaps a dozen, maybe? The person carrying the bomb may be a brainwashed fool (though, surprisingly - often educated) - but the support team likely aren't fools. The team includes dedicated individuals who have specialized training and experience that are needed to mount further operations. The bomb makers, the money people, the people who nurture the bomb carrier and ensure that they are fit (mentally) to go through with a suicide attack. These people, the support crew, are not going to like 50/50 odds.
I understood your rather simplistic attempt at game theory just fine. The problem remains that one side is not a rational actor. The command portion of terrorists have virtually nothing to lose with a botched attempt, and neither does the fanatic patsy. A 50/50 ratio isn't good enough for our security because the downside for both command and patsy are much smaller than the upside (from their perspective). The chances of failure need to be much higher in order to effectively deter terrorists.
You are right. There has been a cost to dignity, time and money. Most of life is. People are constantly balancing personal and societal security/safety against personal freedoms. In this case what you think is only part of the balance between society and security. You feel it's too far. I can't argue. I don't fly anymore unless I have to. But, I also think that what the TSA (and CATSA, & the European equivalents) are doing is working. I just don't have to like going through it.
Sacrificing these things is appropriate when there is a tangible gain. There hasn't been much of a tangible gain with TSA, and this is coming from the head of Israeli Security. We're paying a lot and getting almost nothing in return. Every year there's a new "standard" put out there to make it seem like TSA is doing something, but time and again security experts have lambasted TSA and its efforts as a dog and pony show.
Your own opinion of flying should be an example of how ridiculous things have gotten. If people now become disgruntled and irritated every time they fly, for perhaps marginal gains in security, then our methods have failed.
Give the man/woman/boy a cigar! There is no way to prove it, other than setting controlled experiments in which make some airports security free, and others with varying levels of security. And in some cases you don't tell the travelling public which airports have what level (if any) of security - but you do tell the bad guys/gals.
It is difficult to prove, but you can make an educated guess about what the cause is. Other than the correlational evidence, there is no other good data to suggest that TSA has actually been effective. In no field is correlation enough to establish anything but correlation.
I cited a sharp drop-off in hijackings at a particular moment in history. Within the limits of a Mac Rumours Forum, that is as far as I'm going to go. If you an alternative hypothesis, you have to at least back it up with something. My something trumps your alternative hypothesis - even if my something is merely a pair of deuces - until you provide something to back up your AH.
No, that's not how it works. If you want to assert your idea as correct, the burden is on you to show that it is correct. I am going to try to poke holes in your reasoning, and it's up to you to show that my criticisms are invalid on the bases of logic and evidence.
So far you've only cited correlation, which is not sufficient evidence for causation. You ignored my criticism based on military intervention, changing travel patterns, etc, and only want to trumpet your belief that correlation is enough. It's not. If you don't want to do more on Mac Rumors, then don't post anymore on this topic concerning this line of discussion.
Well actually we know the TSA methods don't work because both of the incidents were from European airports that mirror what the TSA does. Added to the number of weapons that make it through TSA checkpoints, it's easy to see that the TSA does in fact not work to the extent that it is expected to.
Did you not read my post above? Or did you not understand it? Or did I not write clearly? I'll assume the 3rd. Past history is that bombs are not put on planes by lone wolf fanatics. They are placed there by a whole operation involving a number of people... perhaps a dozen, maybe? The person carrying the bomb may be a brainwashed fool (though, surprisingly - often educated) - but the support team likely aren't fools. The team includes dedicated individuals who have specialized training and experience that are needed to mount further operations. The bomb makers, the money people, the people who nurture the bomb carrier and ensure that they are fit (mentally) to go through with a suicide attack. These people, the support crew, are not going to like 50/50 odds.
I understood your rather simplistic attempt at game theory just fine. The problem remains that one side is not a rational actor. The command portion of terrorists have virtually nothing to lose with a botched attempt, and neither does the fanatic patsy. A 50/50 ratio isn't good enough for our security because the downside for both command and patsy are much smaller than the upside (from their perspective). The chances of failure need to be much higher in order to effectively deter terrorists.
You are right. There has been a cost to dignity, time and money. Most of life is. People are constantly balancing personal and societal security/safety against personal freedoms. In this case what you think is only part of the balance between society and security. You feel it's too far. I can't argue. I don't fly anymore unless I have to. But, I also think that what the TSA (and CATSA, & the European equivalents) are doing is working. I just don't have to like going through it.
Sacrificing these things is appropriate when there is a tangible gain. There hasn't been much of a tangible gain with TSA, and this is coming from the head of Israeli Security. We're paying a lot and getting almost nothing in return. Every year there's a new "standard" put out there to make it seem like TSA is doing something, but time and again security experts have lambasted TSA and its efforts as a dog and pony show.
Your own opinion of flying should be an example of how ridiculous things have gotten. If people now become disgruntled and irritated every time they fly, for perhaps marginal gains in security, then our methods have failed.
Give the man/woman/boy a cigar! There is no way to prove it, other than setting controlled experiments in which make some airports security free, and others with varying levels of security. And in some cases you don't tell the travelling public which airports have what level (if any) of security - but you do tell the bad guys/gals.
It is difficult to prove, but you can make an educated guess about what the cause is. Other than the correlational evidence, there is no other good data to suggest that TSA has actually been effective. In no field is correlation enough to establish anything but correlation.
I cited a sharp drop-off in hijackings at a particular moment in history. Within the limits of a Mac Rumours Forum, that is as far as I'm going to go. If you an alternative hypothesis, you have to at least back it up with something. My something trumps your alternative hypothesis - even if my something is merely a pair of deuces - until you provide something to back up your AH.
No, that's not how it works. If you want to assert your idea as correct, the burden is on you to show that it is correct. I am going to try to poke holes in your reasoning, and it's up to you to show that my criticisms are invalid on the bases of logic and evidence.
So far you've only cited correlation, which is not sufficient evidence for causation. You ignored my criticism based on military intervention, changing travel patterns, etc, and only want to trumpet your belief that correlation is enough. It's not. If you don't want to do more on Mac Rumors, then don't post anymore on this topic concerning this line of discussion.