Rodimus Prime
Apr 23, 12:28 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) Mobile/8H7)
The issue is that there is no issue. Just an opportunity for headlines.
LTD answer the question that was ask multiple times of you. Your refusal to answer is tell me that you are nothing than someone who will defend apple at all cost and can not think for your self. So please provide reasoning.
We have provided multiple bad reasons and you have failed to deliver us some good reasonings. Come on we ask you last night and you still have not provided one good reason must less several.
The issue is that there is no issue. Just an opportunity for headlines.
LTD answer the question that was ask multiple times of you. Your refusal to answer is tell me that you are nothing than someone who will defend apple at all cost and can not think for your self. So please provide reasoning.
We have provided multiple bad reasons and you have failed to deliver us some good reasonings. Come on we ask you last night and you still have not provided one good reason must less several.
jowie
Apr 29, 03:53 PM
Great news. Glad to see Apple taking a leaf out of their own guidelines... A touch OS has a different interface for a reason.
The Mad Kiwi
Sep 25, 06:45 PM
The thing I truely love about Apple, is they look after their customers with regular updates to their software with useful features added. I can't think of another company that will add so many new features without charging users for it.
And with some luck it might be faster as well, something that Apple are great at delivering as well, better and faster.
And with some luck it might be faster as well, something that Apple are great at delivering as well, better and faster.
IJ Reilly
Oct 19, 12:39 PM
Yikes, you win. ;)
more...
dethmaShine
Apr 29, 04:12 PM
Hey wildcowboy, at least credit me for this article. :P
sarper
Apr 26, 12:37 AM
As a developer, this will be pain in the ass!
Retina Displays have exactly the double number of pixels with the same resolution, having a second resolution is a giant step to gain one of the crappiest features of Android. I really doubt Apple would do that.
What if this isn't a bigger screen but a smaller device with the same screen on it? Hmm..
Retina Displays have exactly the double number of pixels with the same resolution, having a second resolution is a giant step to gain one of the crappiest features of Android. I really doubt Apple would do that.
What if this isn't a bigger screen but a smaller device with the same screen on it? Hmm..
more...
schwell
Oct 11, 08:07 PM
I too came from Verizon where I hardly ever dropped a call. I can't remember it ever being a problem. Now I have my second iPhone (first was with tmobile) and I have to say that AT&T is the worst carrier I've ever used. I live in Chicago and not a day goes by where at least 1 call is dropped (usually more than 1).
I'd be right behind you in line at verizon to get one of their iPhones.
AT&T should be penalized for their garbage coverage by apple ripping the exclusivity deal away from them.
We in America would really benefit from legislation that bans anticompetitive exclusivity contracts. Similar laws to that which Europe enjoys would make everyone here a little happier.
Choice is never a bad thing.
You have hundreds of phone choices.
I doubt the legislation would make people happier. Most of you would find something else to complain about (e.g. price, features).
I'd be right behind you in line at verizon to get one of their iPhones.
AT&T should be penalized for their garbage coverage by apple ripping the exclusivity deal away from them.
We in America would really benefit from legislation that bans anticompetitive exclusivity contracts. Similar laws to that which Europe enjoys would make everyone here a little happier.
Choice is never a bad thing.
You have hundreds of phone choices.
I doubt the legislation would make people happier. Most of you would find something else to complain about (e.g. price, features).
starstreak
Apr 25, 10:06 PM
I hope it's bigger (the screen) than it looks. Almost doesn't look worth the upgrade. From a 3.5 to a 3.7? Sheesh
more...
wpotere
Apr 13, 12:21 PM
4. The most rational response would be to realize that a butter knife cannot harm anyone and allow you to carry it on the plane.
I'm going to duck out of this thread but I want to answer this one....
I could sharpen that butter knife to a lethal edge in less that 10 min. They did the right thing.
I'm going to duck out of this thread but I want to answer this one....
I could sharpen that butter knife to a lethal edge in less that 10 min. They did the right thing.
currentinterest
Apr 15, 04:58 PM
Yep, I remember all those fake, poorly photoshopped iPod Nanos and Mac Minis as well. These may very well be real, or could be an early version.
more...
John Purple
Jan 15, 03:13 PM
Genius move, that.
"Old old old?" Not compared to my early-2003 computer. It's dramatically faster, dramatically more efficient, and dramatically more capacious than the machine I've got. Based on the Penryn tests I've seen so far, an MBP update will result in only a marginal improvement. I don't NEED a few extra percent of battery life or performance here and there.
Yes, but for $ 2.500 to 3.000 I would prefer to buy the newest technology.
It is always wiser in the long run IMHO to be a late adopter and buy near the end of a product lifecycle than near the beginning. Early adopters are, and have always been, late beta testers.
Yes, but switching to Penryn and adding Blue-Ray should be no rocket science. I'm not waiting for a fully re-designed MBP.
They still make great products.
Yes, but movie and music markets are quite different to the computer market. And I would be perfectly happy if they would focus as much on their computer business as they do for the rest.
"Old old old?" Not compared to my early-2003 computer. It's dramatically faster, dramatically more efficient, and dramatically more capacious than the machine I've got. Based on the Penryn tests I've seen so far, an MBP update will result in only a marginal improvement. I don't NEED a few extra percent of battery life or performance here and there.
Yes, but for $ 2.500 to 3.000 I would prefer to buy the newest technology.
It is always wiser in the long run IMHO to be a late adopter and buy near the end of a product lifecycle than near the beginning. Early adopters are, and have always been, late beta testers.
Yes, but switching to Penryn and adding Blue-Ray should be no rocket science. I'm not waiting for a fully re-designed MBP.
They still make great products.
Yes, but movie and music markets are quite different to the computer market. And I would be perfectly happy if they would focus as much on their computer business as they do for the rest.
ChrisA
Oct 17, 10:55 AM
That comment about not including the burner is interesting, and I'm at least trying to give it some more thoughtful consideration. Who really needs to burn 30 - 50 GB of data? For backup solutions, wouldn't just getting a huge external hard drive be more practical?
Anyone who owns a video camera and uses it will have way more then 30 to 50 GB of data. Mini DV camera make 12Gb of data per hour. If you own a DSLR and shoot in RAW format the image files are on order of 10MB each. My music colection is 50GB.
I do use a hard drive to do backups but there is a basic rule in the computer industry that data is not safe unless it exists in three copies and at two physical locations. How many 500GB hard drives do you want to own? What about photos. Peope like to think they will keep these for 50 or 90 years. You need a very robust backup system if the data are to last that long. Some of the ways data has been lost historically is by theft, fire or flood.
Anyone who owns a video camera and uses it will have way more then 30 to 50 GB of data. Mini DV camera make 12Gb of data per hour. If you own a DSLR and shoot in RAW format the image files are on order of 10MB each. My music colection is 50GB.
I do use a hard drive to do backups but there is a basic rule in the computer industry that data is not safe unless it exists in three copies and at two physical locations. How many 500GB hard drives do you want to own? What about photos. Peope like to think they will keep these for 50 or 90 years. You need a very robust backup system if the data are to last that long. Some of the ways data has been lost historically is by theft, fire or flood.
more...
anotherarunan
Jan 16, 05:43 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
LOL :p
On a side note, was it me or did SJ seem different, almost duller yday? Something just didnt seem right, or are we all just feeling the effects of a MASSIVELY overhyped keynote.
Almost like when you hype up a big football (soccer for you yanks) game between two massive teams only to see a 1-0 scrappy win. You get a result, but its just not as exciting as you wished it to be, even though it was the most likely result.
Once you get to know her better you'll dump her because of what's missing! :D
LOL :p
On a side note, was it me or did SJ seem different, almost duller yday? Something just didnt seem right, or are we all just feeling the effects of a MASSIVELY overhyped keynote.
Almost like when you hype up a big football (soccer for you yanks) game between two massive teams only to see a 1-0 scrappy win. You get a result, but its just not as exciting as you wished it to be, even though it was the most likely result.
longofest
Nov 16, 01:05 PM
please no page 1 vs page 2 comments... :)
more...
Selena Gomez Pregnant By
is selena gomez pregnant from
more...
Is+selena+gomez+pregnant+
selena gomez pregnant by
selena gomez pregnant 2011. selena gomez and justin bieber; selena gomez and justin bieber. oracle_ab. Apr 27, 09:30 AM. Capitalization does not impact
more...
valdore
Jan 12, 03:50 PM
I guess I missed any smugness in the keynote thanks to not watching the entirety of the boring thing. :rolleyes:
CalBoy
Apr 14, 10:50 PM
I understand the point you are trying to make (re: enhanced security measures] but technically those two incidents had nothing to do with the TSA since they both flew from non-USA airports - that is, the TSA didn't screen them at all.
While this is true, we can't allow that technicality to wipe the slate clean. Our security as a whole is deficient, even if the TSA on its own might not be responsible for these two particular failures. Our tax dollars are still going to the our mutual safety so we should expect more.
I guess that depends on how you define "not much trouble". We can't know the actual number, since we will never know many actually get through. But they are catching over half the weapons that their own agents try to smuggle through on test/training runs. So that counts as being "some trouble". How much "trouble" is enough? Read my post above about how much risk a "bad person" organization is willing to take on 50/50 odds. My late father made his career "gaming" situations, so I have a bit of a passing knowledge of it. I am certain that the TSA has "gamed" the odds, and the TSA believe that they have reached a reasonable balance between costing the public time, money, and indignities - and - ensuring a reasonable level of safety for the flying public. They may be wrong.... but I would bet money that, to the best of their ability, they believe they have reached a balance.
Well when a fanatic is willing to commit suicide because he believes that he'll be rewarded in heaven, 50/50 odds don't seem to be all that much of a deterrent. What's worse is that we've only achieved that with a lot of our personal dignity, time, and money. I don't think we can tolerate much more. We should be expecting more for the time, money, and humiliation we're putting ourselves (and our 6 year-old children) through.
If this is the TSA's best effort and what it believes is the best balance, I want a new TSA.
OK, then why are hijackings down? I have my working hypothesis. I cited some evidence to support it. If you don't agree, then it is up to you to state an alternative one that is supported by more than unsupported statements.
I am not saying the TSA (or in my case CATSA) is perfect or haven't mucked things up sometimes. I'm just saying that I believe that they have been mostly responsible for a dramatic drop in airline hijackings. I cited some statistics. Now it's your turn.....
Your statistics don't unequivocally prove the efficacy of the TSA though. They only show that the TSA employs a cost-benefit method to determine what measures to take.
Since you believe in the efficacy of the TSA so much, the burden is yours to make a clear and convincing case, not mine. I can provide alternative hypotheses, but I am in no way saying that these are provable at the current moment in time. I'm only saying that they are rational objections to your theory.
My hypothesis is essentially the same as Lisa's: the protection is coming from our circumstances rather than our deliberative efforts.
Terrorism is a complex thing. My bet is that as we waged wars in multiple nations, it became more advantageous for fanatics to strike where our military forces were. Without having to gain entry into the country, get past airport security (no matter what odds were), or hijack a plane, terrorists were able to kill over 4,000 Americans in Iraq and nearly 1,500 in Afghanistan. That's almost twice as many as were killed on 9/11.
If I were the leader of a group intent on killing Americans and Westerners in general, I certainly would go down that route rather than hijack planes.
ps there is no proof that it wasn't Lisa's rock. There are some very weird causal relationships in the world. Like shooting wolves causes the Aspen to die off in Wyoming. Or .... overfishing the Salmon in the Pacific changes the mix of trees along the rivers of the BC coast.....
It's pretty clear that it was not the rock. Ecosystems are constantly finding new equilibriums; killing off an herbivore's primary predator should cause a decline in vegetation. That is not surprising, nor is it difficult to prove (you can track all three populations simultaneously). There is also a causal mechanism at work that can explain the effect without the need for new assumptions (Occam's Razor).
The efficacy of the TSA and our security measures, on the other hand, are quite complex and are affected by numerous causes. Changes in travel patterns, other nations' actions, and an enemey's changing strategy all play a big role. You can't ignore all of these and pronounce our security gimmicks (and really, that's what patting down a 6 year-old is) to be so masterfully effective.
While this is true, we can't allow that technicality to wipe the slate clean. Our security as a whole is deficient, even if the TSA on its own might not be responsible for these two particular failures. Our tax dollars are still going to the our mutual safety so we should expect more.
I guess that depends on how you define "not much trouble". We can't know the actual number, since we will never know many actually get through. But they are catching over half the weapons that their own agents try to smuggle through on test/training runs. So that counts as being "some trouble". How much "trouble" is enough? Read my post above about how much risk a "bad person" organization is willing to take on 50/50 odds. My late father made his career "gaming" situations, so I have a bit of a passing knowledge of it. I am certain that the TSA has "gamed" the odds, and the TSA believe that they have reached a reasonable balance between costing the public time, money, and indignities - and - ensuring a reasonable level of safety for the flying public. They may be wrong.... but I would bet money that, to the best of their ability, they believe they have reached a balance.
Well when a fanatic is willing to commit suicide because he believes that he'll be rewarded in heaven, 50/50 odds don't seem to be all that much of a deterrent. What's worse is that we've only achieved that with a lot of our personal dignity, time, and money. I don't think we can tolerate much more. We should be expecting more for the time, money, and humiliation we're putting ourselves (and our 6 year-old children) through.
If this is the TSA's best effort and what it believes is the best balance, I want a new TSA.
OK, then why are hijackings down? I have my working hypothesis. I cited some evidence to support it. If you don't agree, then it is up to you to state an alternative one that is supported by more than unsupported statements.
I am not saying the TSA (or in my case CATSA) is perfect or haven't mucked things up sometimes. I'm just saying that I believe that they have been mostly responsible for a dramatic drop in airline hijackings. I cited some statistics. Now it's your turn.....
Your statistics don't unequivocally prove the efficacy of the TSA though. They only show that the TSA employs a cost-benefit method to determine what measures to take.
Since you believe in the efficacy of the TSA so much, the burden is yours to make a clear and convincing case, not mine. I can provide alternative hypotheses, but I am in no way saying that these are provable at the current moment in time. I'm only saying that they are rational objections to your theory.
My hypothesis is essentially the same as Lisa's: the protection is coming from our circumstances rather than our deliberative efforts.
Terrorism is a complex thing. My bet is that as we waged wars in multiple nations, it became more advantageous for fanatics to strike where our military forces were. Without having to gain entry into the country, get past airport security (no matter what odds were), or hijack a plane, terrorists were able to kill over 4,000 Americans in Iraq and nearly 1,500 in Afghanistan. That's almost twice as many as were killed on 9/11.
If I were the leader of a group intent on killing Americans and Westerners in general, I certainly would go down that route rather than hijack planes.
ps there is no proof that it wasn't Lisa's rock. There are some very weird causal relationships in the world. Like shooting wolves causes the Aspen to die off in Wyoming. Or .... overfishing the Salmon in the Pacific changes the mix of trees along the rivers of the BC coast.....
It's pretty clear that it was not the rock. Ecosystems are constantly finding new equilibriums; killing off an herbivore's primary predator should cause a decline in vegetation. That is not surprising, nor is it difficult to prove (you can track all three populations simultaneously). There is also a causal mechanism at work that can explain the effect without the need for new assumptions (Occam's Razor).
The efficacy of the TSA and our security measures, on the other hand, are quite complex and are affected by numerous causes. Changes in travel patterns, other nations' actions, and an enemey's changing strategy all play a big role. You can't ignore all of these and pronounce our security gimmicks (and really, that's what patting down a 6 year-old is) to be so masterfully effective.
more...
Yvan256
Oct 11, 08:52 AM
I knew it! I just bought an Archos 504
On behalf of all of us who want a true video iPod/PDA/etc, we thank you for your purchase. You've now pushed the true video iPod ahead of schedule. :D
On behalf of all of us who want a true video iPod/PDA/etc, we thank you for your purchase. You've now pushed the true video iPod ahead of schedule. :D
sleepingworker
Apr 9, 01:39 AM
That was painful to watch. Sort of like Jack Ass: The Geek Edition. Of course they should be banned. Gizmodo was interfering with companies trying to present their products.
quagmire
Nov 14, 06:06 PM
Yea, Rust was just as bad, same with Shipment in COD4. Those types of small maps are fun, like once every 50 games or so, just to break the flow a little, and run and gun. And I don't really have a problem with Nuketown itself, per se, but when you have totally abysmal spawns, it just sucks. If the spawns were better, my view of many maps would be much more favorable. I'm looking at you Array and Summit :mad:
I liked Rust because it was a small open map. When they made Rust be a rare map, it made it really enjoyable. It also exposed the hardcore noobs because if you camped on Rust, you are by far the biggest noob of them all( especially on the top of the tower thingy). :D
In MW2, I got into knifing( commando pro+marathon+ light weight+ light weaponry+tactical knife). Terminal and Rust were my favorite maps to go knife on. I hated Afgan and Estate( I would snipe on those maps).
I liked Rust because it was a small open map. When they made Rust be a rare map, it made it really enjoyable. It also exposed the hardcore noobs because if you camped on Rust, you are by far the biggest noob of them all( especially on the top of the tower thingy). :D
In MW2, I got into knifing( commando pro+marathon+ light weight+ light weaponry+tactical knife). Terminal and Rust were my favorite maps to go knife on. I hated Afgan and Estate( I would snipe on those maps).
eyelobes
Mar 17, 08:28 AM
Good for you man!!!
That punk ass stoner gets what he gets. I have a brother and a broth-in-law that are both stoner drop outs and half-ass everything they do. Everyone needs a push to set them straight, be it jail or getting fired for failing to pay attention to detail.
As a 2 time war vet, if the scouts on my team failed to pay attention to detail i would be dead right now. As we always used to say "get your head out of your 4th point of contact before you get someone killed"
That punk ass stoner gets what he gets. I have a brother and a broth-in-law that are both stoner drop outs and half-ass everything they do. Everyone needs a push to set them straight, be it jail or getting fired for failing to pay attention to detail.
As a 2 time war vet, if the scouts on my team failed to pay attention to detail i would be dead right now. As we always used to say "get your head out of your 4th point of contact before you get someone killed"
wordoflife
May 2, 09:41 AM
I kinda liked the fact i could look at where I've been with my phone.
I can see how this update will have "battery life improvements" now that the phone is not going to be tracking our movements 24/7 even when all location services are shut off.
The phone tracked movements through cell towers, not GPS. And your phone is always connected to cell towers anyways so nothing is changing in terms of battery life. Also, nothing is really changing in this update except the fact that you won't be able to access the location file.
I can see how this update will have "battery life improvements" now that the phone is not going to be tracking our movements 24/7 even when all location services are shut off.
The phone tracked movements through cell towers, not GPS. And your phone is always connected to cell towers anyways so nothing is changing in terms of battery life. Also, nothing is really changing in this update except the fact that you won't be able to access the location file.
Gibsonsoup
Apr 11, 06:25 PM
can't understand why it doesn't let me post the right pictures :confused:
They look exactly like the original Apple ones though
They look exactly like the original Apple ones though
hob
Jan 9, 01:52 PM
Very nice, my friend. But if you will allow me to improve your idea...
Ha-ha. Mine's actually set to 10, but I thought I'd extend it so I didn't single-handedly cause the site to crash!
Ha-ha. Mine's actually set to 10, but I thought I'd extend it so I didn't single-handedly cause the site to crash!
lmalave
Oct 3, 12:31 PM
iTV is a definite. Whether or not it's available then, at the very least the final feature set will be specified. As part of that, Apple will probably announce all Macs are updated with 802.11n (already rumored to be the case for iMacs).
I would also rate the iPhone a very high probability. Apple is not stupid and they have to strike now while the iron is hot and the iPod is still at the top of its game. Music phones by SonyEricsson, LG, Samsung, Motorola, etc. may not have made a dent in iPod sales yet, but they are bound to once they improve the crappy media player software and increase capacity (and affordable 2 GB micro/mini SD flash cards are already available).
If Apple is able to deliver an iPhone by early I predict it will sweep aside all competitors (LG Chocolate, SonyEricsson Walkman phone, etc.), and also start taking large chunks of market share of "cool" fashionista-oriented phones like RAZR and Sidekick. Not because Apple is competing on features with the RAZR or Sidekick, but rather because it will become the new "cool" phone, and most people only own one phone, after all.
I would also rate the iPhone a very high probability. Apple is not stupid and they have to strike now while the iron is hot and the iPod is still at the top of its game. Music phones by SonyEricsson, LG, Samsung, Motorola, etc. may not have made a dent in iPod sales yet, but they are bound to once they improve the crappy media player software and increase capacity (and affordable 2 GB micro/mini SD flash cards are already available).
If Apple is able to deliver an iPhone by early I predict it will sweep aside all competitors (LG Chocolate, SonyEricsson Walkman phone, etc.), and also start taking large chunks of market share of "cool" fashionista-oriented phones like RAZR and Sidekick. Not because Apple is competing on features with the RAZR or Sidekick, but rather because it will become the new "cool" phone, and most people only own one phone, after all.
No comments:
Post a Comment