Benjamins
Mar 31, 02:53 PM
What the heck are you talking about. Google is building upon the technology. Apple did a great job advancing the technology which pushed everyone else to do the same. Its called competition its been happening for years and in every industry.
so what Apple FAD are you talking about?
It's technology when it's Google.
It's a FAD when it's Apple?
What the **** are you talking about?
so what Apple FAD are you talking about?
It's technology when it's Google.
It's a FAD when it's Apple?
What the **** are you talking about?
Neb154
Aug 7, 03:39 PM
I'm real excited for the new iChat and Spaces, along with these new "top secret features..." They better be good!
The finder is definately my bet for something to be revamped, along with probably iLife which will be revamped for leopard.
Edit : Also something more with virtualization (boot camp area) as they did not touch that really.
The finder is definately my bet for something to be revamped, along with probably iLife which will be revamped for leopard.
Edit : Also something more with virtualization (boot camp area) as they did not touch that really.
bretm
Apr 25, 03:54 PM
Ladies Ladies... they are storing information that should be private(yes, indeed), but let's not blow this out of proportion.
THEY ARE NOT FOLLOWING YOU!!!
The OS or iOS collects & stores this information like many platforms for specific reasons... Android, does indeed do the very same type of stored information of the 3 cell-tower's estimation of location.
The really REALLY bad news is that this information is stored in your iPhone & as well as the actual device(Mac or PC) you sync your iPhone too. The information get's logged correctly... but we are talking about Privacy.
THE iPHONE IS JUST NOT AS SECURE AS IT SHOULD BE!!!
The file should be stored(for technical specific reasons), but not with this lack of diligence on user privacy...
APPLE, you need a way to log this info in a much more secure atmosphere if the iOS does truly need this information for specific reasons.
I don't get this either. If someone can get the file off your computer, then they can get any file off your computer. Email, web browsing history, address book, whatever. My phone is password protected and so is my computer.
THEY ARE NOT FOLLOWING YOU!!!
The OS or iOS collects & stores this information like many platforms for specific reasons... Android, does indeed do the very same type of stored information of the 3 cell-tower's estimation of location.
The really REALLY bad news is that this information is stored in your iPhone & as well as the actual device(Mac or PC) you sync your iPhone too. The information get's logged correctly... but we are talking about Privacy.
THE iPHONE IS JUST NOT AS SECURE AS IT SHOULD BE!!!
The file should be stored(for technical specific reasons), but not with this lack of diligence on user privacy...
APPLE, you need a way to log this info in a much more secure atmosphere if the iOS does truly need this information for specific reasons.
I don't get this either. If someone can get the file off your computer, then they can get any file off your computer. Email, web browsing history, address book, whatever. My phone is password protected and so is my computer.
camomac
Jul 20, 02:39 PM
eight cores + Tiger = Octopussy?!?
haha, then Doctor Q's signature could be-
"Oh do pay attention 007. In the wrong hands, this Octopussy could be very dangerous."
LOL.:D
haha, then Doctor Q's signature could be-
"Oh do pay attention 007. In the wrong hands, this Octopussy could be very dangerous."
LOL.:D
kdarling
Apr 20, 09:49 AM
No they wouldn't. They have to prove likelihood of confusion, not actual confusion. Actual confusion is evidence of likelihood of confusion, but it's not necessary.
Yes sir, that's why I explicitly said "could" have to provide proof, because I read of cases where evidence of actual confusion ended up being one of the methods used.
Thank you, as always, for making the clarification in any case.
Yes sir, that's why I explicitly said "could" have to provide proof, because I read of cases where evidence of actual confusion ended up being one of the methods used.
Thank you, as always, for making the clarification in any case.
mcrain
Apr 27, 10:47 AM
Stay classy Faux News:
Oh, it gets better. Apparently, the release of the birth certificate proving them wrong somehow demonstrates that the "birthers" were NOT kooks. :rolleyes:
President Obama reversed course today and answered critics, led by reality show host Donald Trump, who have called for him to release his original birth certificate.
Until now, the White House has stood by the president�s certificate of live birth, a health department document that attests to the existence of an actual birth certificate. The document has less information, but is valid proof of citizenship.
...
The president will address the press on the issue this morning just one day after his press secretary upbraided a reporter for even asking about such a thing.
...
Case in point: In a snappish press conference on Tuesday, Press Secretary Jay Carney gave a belittling answer to CNN�s Ed Henry for asking why the president doesn�t put the doubts over his nativity to rest by releasing his long-form birth certificate.
Carney told Henry that Americans would be �appalled� by the question and that he should be talking about serious issues involving the economy and foreign affairs.
...
Carney painted Obama into a corner by suggesting that he can�t deal with the distraction of answering the question about his birth certificate because he is working constantly to revive the economy and oversee three wars. How can he help Winfrey, raise money or even play golf by that standard?
Democrats long championed the idea of branding Republicans as kooks for believing that the president might not have been born in Hawaii. It explains why liberal outlets have given such lavish attention to Trump, who has embraced the issue.
But when a Gallup poll shows that only 38 percent of Americans are convinced of the president�s place of birth, the strategy of branding Republicans as �birthers� looks dubious. The fact that Obama has drawn a hard line against releasing his birth certificate amid such doubts was an unsustainable position amid legitimate inquiries from legitimate journalists like Henry. FauxNews (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/04/27/birther-strategy-backfires/)
Oh, it gets better. Apparently, the release of the birth certificate proving them wrong somehow demonstrates that the "birthers" were NOT kooks. :rolleyes:
President Obama reversed course today and answered critics, led by reality show host Donald Trump, who have called for him to release his original birth certificate.
Until now, the White House has stood by the president�s certificate of live birth, a health department document that attests to the existence of an actual birth certificate. The document has less information, but is valid proof of citizenship.
...
The president will address the press on the issue this morning just one day after his press secretary upbraided a reporter for even asking about such a thing.
...
Case in point: In a snappish press conference on Tuesday, Press Secretary Jay Carney gave a belittling answer to CNN�s Ed Henry for asking why the president doesn�t put the doubts over his nativity to rest by releasing his long-form birth certificate.
Carney told Henry that Americans would be �appalled� by the question and that he should be talking about serious issues involving the economy and foreign affairs.
...
Carney painted Obama into a corner by suggesting that he can�t deal with the distraction of answering the question about his birth certificate because he is working constantly to revive the economy and oversee three wars. How can he help Winfrey, raise money or even play golf by that standard?
Democrats long championed the idea of branding Republicans as kooks for believing that the president might not have been born in Hawaii. It explains why liberal outlets have given such lavish attention to Trump, who has embraced the issue.
But when a Gallup poll shows that only 38 percent of Americans are convinced of the president�s place of birth, the strategy of branding Republicans as �birthers� looks dubious. The fact that Obama has drawn a hard line against releasing his birth certificate amid such doubts was an unsustainable position amid legitimate inquiries from legitimate journalists like Henry. FauxNews (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/04/27/birther-strategy-backfires/)
supafly1703
Jul 27, 09:43 AM
C'mon Steve, wow us...
aaronsullivan
Apr 11, 11:43 AM
To me this means 4G and Verizon/AT&T hardware convergence. Both, good news.
My biggest concern is the next iOS version. Will it be delayed to coincide with the hardware? With little info, I'd guess/hope no. If it's impressive enough it can fight competition using software enhanced iPhone 4 for awhile. Without the big iOS update seems a long stretch to 2012.
Either way, I'll personally be sticking with my iPhone 4 'til late June 2012 anyway for contract reasons.
How about this for the iPhone 5
5 4 3 2 1
iPhone 5, 4G (4 cameras), 3D, 2 carriers, 1 easy choice.
Yeah, that's why I'm not in marketing. :o/
My biggest concern is the next iOS version. Will it be delayed to coincide with the hardware? With little info, I'd guess/hope no. If it's impressive enough it can fight competition using software enhanced iPhone 4 for awhile. Without the big iOS update seems a long stretch to 2012.
Either way, I'll personally be sticking with my iPhone 4 'til late June 2012 anyway for contract reasons.
How about this for the iPhone 5
5 4 3 2 1
iPhone 5, 4G (4 cameras), 3D, 2 carriers, 1 easy choice.
Yeah, that's why I'm not in marketing. :o/
intlplby
Nov 28, 09:05 PM
the way i see it, MP3 players have been the single biggest factor in increasing sales of music (as well as song piracy) so in a way the ipod is driving the purchase of CDs, not CDs driving the purchase of iPods
both items feed each other
Music increases iPod sales and iPod sales increase music sales... it's a feedback loop
Universal owes Apple money on the same logic......
both items feed each other
Music increases iPod sales and iPod sales increase music sales... it's a feedback loop
Universal owes Apple money on the same logic......
bokdol
Aug 18, 09:48 AM
I know if it is it will work, what i'm asking is, is it? Or is that not known at this time?
http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2006/06/27/woodcrest_servers_are_covertown_servers/
i guess it will be
http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2006/06/27/woodcrest_servers_are_covertown_servers/
i guess it will be
noisycats
Mar 22, 05:10 PM
x
jmbear
Nov 29, 12:39 PM
See, that's the catch-22 for new artists. The labels are the ones that get tunes played on the radio. In the 50's and 60's they would strong-arm their stuff in, but I'm sure even nowadays they provide incentives (read: bribes) to get new stuff on the air. Especially if they think the band is really good and will make it in the long run. And don't fool yourself into thinking a new band can get huge without radio.
The internet can become the new radio. I am quite fond of looking for pre-made playlists, I will get the songs on LimeWire, listen to them, the ones I like, I buy legally, the ones I don�t I delete them. You don�t get commercials, just music. I am not saying that radio is going to dissapear completely. TV didn�t kill it. But its importance will diminish.
The problem is that the labels get the artists by the balls when they sign them up to ridiculous contracts. Your 1-4 examples look pretty good on paper, but in order to sell any significant number of copies of their music, anyone wanting it (but doesn't know it yet) has to wade through tons of (what that persons sees as) crap just to get any exposure to something they'll consider good. I'm sure there's a lot of music in the indie catalog that I would just love, but I don't have the time to wade through it all to find it. Instead, I'll listen to the radio and when I hear something I like, I'll try to pay attention to who it is. I may or may not end up buying it, or checking out what else they do, but without radio exposure, most good indie bands don't have a chance in hell of selling to anyone except those that happen to be in the bar where they're playing one weekend..
iTMS could potentially change this. There are some people that will do all the research for you (as in what is good music), then ratings will allow you to get the good songs! It�s similar (and somebody will flame me for saying this) to researching a product on Amazon or CNET, you usually look for a LCD screen, all the results pop, and you will go for the ones with the highest ratings, read the comments and eventually make up your mind. Some day you will look up for electronic music (which I love), all the DJ�s will pop, you will pick the highest rated songs or playlists (because most people like a song because other people like it), listen to their songs for free (yeah, just like radio), and then buy them if you want.
Now, if you take a look at already established and popular bands, that's a different story. Someone mentioned huge bands like Pink Floyd. Their last couple of CDs didn't need a big label to sell. People were going to buy it if they like Floyd no matter what. And in a case of that kind of popularity, the radio stations were going to play them with or without a major label. The same could be applied to other huge (classic) rock bands, as well as established artists in other music styles (country, rap, R&B, blues, etc...). Another example would be someone like Eric Clapton. He could put one out on "Clapton Records" and would sell nearly, if not exactly, the same number of CDs as he will on a major label..
I agree record labels + good music = superstars like Calpton, Floyd, U2 etc... But these bands became popular in a different time (before the internet). Internet is changing the record labels� business model, and that is what they afraid of. The new wait of creating bands and distributing their music is not as profitable for them as it used to.
Unfortunately, the number of artists (of any type of music) that could dismiss the labels and still sell as many CDs and get the same radio exposure are limited. And any new band is going to go nowhere without radio (or MTV/VH1) exposure.
Internet is offering them exposure. Right now MTV and VH1 are still popular. But YouTube, Yahoo!, MSN could become the new MTV and VH1.
Not really relevant, but interesting to think about is that most of you have probably seen the video of the ruma ruma guy (I can�t link it because I am at work and the proxie does not allow me to visit YouTube). But how many have actually seen the video for the song? YouTube made that fat kid a star, and most people probably know his face better than the guys that sing the song. Exposure.
In the end, I don't see the labels going away totally any time soon. They're in cahoots with the big FM music stations and in general, they do a good job of promoting new good bands that sign up. It's just a shame that there's really nothing to keep them from raping the artists. If there were just some way for new bands to get exposure to the masses without having to sell their souls to the labels then things would be better. Unfortunately, the Internet can only go so far in helping a new band with this.
I agree, they won�t go away anytime soon, but change is coming, and change will be good for artists and consumers, not for the record labels.
Sorry for my weird grammar or mispells, I am not a native english speaker, I don�t have a spell checker on this computer (in english at least) and I am too lazy to proof read what I wrote lol :)
The internet can become the new radio. I am quite fond of looking for pre-made playlists, I will get the songs on LimeWire, listen to them, the ones I like, I buy legally, the ones I don�t I delete them. You don�t get commercials, just music. I am not saying that radio is going to dissapear completely. TV didn�t kill it. But its importance will diminish.
The problem is that the labels get the artists by the balls when they sign them up to ridiculous contracts. Your 1-4 examples look pretty good on paper, but in order to sell any significant number of copies of their music, anyone wanting it (but doesn't know it yet) has to wade through tons of (what that persons sees as) crap just to get any exposure to something they'll consider good. I'm sure there's a lot of music in the indie catalog that I would just love, but I don't have the time to wade through it all to find it. Instead, I'll listen to the radio and when I hear something I like, I'll try to pay attention to who it is. I may or may not end up buying it, or checking out what else they do, but without radio exposure, most good indie bands don't have a chance in hell of selling to anyone except those that happen to be in the bar where they're playing one weekend..
iTMS could potentially change this. There are some people that will do all the research for you (as in what is good music), then ratings will allow you to get the good songs! It�s similar (and somebody will flame me for saying this) to researching a product on Amazon or CNET, you usually look for a LCD screen, all the results pop, and you will go for the ones with the highest ratings, read the comments and eventually make up your mind. Some day you will look up for electronic music (which I love), all the DJ�s will pop, you will pick the highest rated songs or playlists (because most people like a song because other people like it), listen to their songs for free (yeah, just like radio), and then buy them if you want.
Now, if you take a look at already established and popular bands, that's a different story. Someone mentioned huge bands like Pink Floyd. Their last couple of CDs didn't need a big label to sell. People were going to buy it if they like Floyd no matter what. And in a case of that kind of popularity, the radio stations were going to play them with or without a major label. The same could be applied to other huge (classic) rock bands, as well as established artists in other music styles (country, rap, R&B, blues, etc...). Another example would be someone like Eric Clapton. He could put one out on "Clapton Records" and would sell nearly, if not exactly, the same number of CDs as he will on a major label..
I agree record labels + good music = superstars like Calpton, Floyd, U2 etc... But these bands became popular in a different time (before the internet). Internet is changing the record labels� business model, and that is what they afraid of. The new wait of creating bands and distributing their music is not as profitable for them as it used to.
Unfortunately, the number of artists (of any type of music) that could dismiss the labels and still sell as many CDs and get the same radio exposure are limited. And any new band is going to go nowhere without radio (or MTV/VH1) exposure.
Internet is offering them exposure. Right now MTV and VH1 are still popular. But YouTube, Yahoo!, MSN could become the new MTV and VH1.
Not really relevant, but interesting to think about is that most of you have probably seen the video of the ruma ruma guy (I can�t link it because I am at work and the proxie does not allow me to visit YouTube). But how many have actually seen the video for the song? YouTube made that fat kid a star, and most people probably know his face better than the guys that sing the song. Exposure.
In the end, I don't see the labels going away totally any time soon. They're in cahoots with the big FM music stations and in general, they do a good job of promoting new good bands that sign up. It's just a shame that there's really nothing to keep them from raping the artists. If there were just some way for new bands to get exposure to the masses without having to sell their souls to the labels then things would be better. Unfortunately, the Internet can only go so far in helping a new band with this.
I agree, they won�t go away anytime soon, but change is coming, and change will be good for artists and consumers, not for the record labels.
Sorry for my weird grammar or mispells, I am not a native english speaker, I don�t have a spell checker on this computer (in english at least) and I am too lazy to proof read what I wrote lol :)
blahblah100
Mar 31, 03:54 PM
It's because of the Buy One Get One option. Nothing more. People choose that option because it makes financial sense and if they don't really care about the OS or the phone, they will choose the one that fits their check books. If Apple was to OK ATT and VZ to do a Buy One Get One on the iPhone, there would be no comparison. It would be game over for Android.
-LanPhantom
Ironically, most of the people on this forum said iPhone on Verizon would be game over for Android.
This 'game over for Android' reminds me a lot of the 'this is the year of desktop linux' stuff that has been said every year for the last 9.
-LanPhantom
Ironically, most of the people on this forum said iPhone on Verizon would be game over for Android.
This 'game over for Android' reminds me a lot of the 'this is the year of desktop linux' stuff that has been said every year for the last 9.
Rt&Dzine
Apr 27, 12:25 PM
Maybe the certificate is legitimate, but I think the original short form would have been more convincing. I like Obama, but I loathe his extreme liberalism.
What does his so-called liberalism have to do with his birth certificate?
What does his so-called liberalism have to do with his birth certificate?
Lord Appleseed
Apr 7, 11:19 PM
When you are as HUGE as best buy, and you are selling a product as huge as the iPad, it makes sense to create a demand. People do this all the time. You can't get it now, so the second it becomes available to you, you buy it in fear that you might have to wait another month. This happens all the time with a lot of products.
That makes not much sense to me, for I as customer would just go to the next Store/Retailer/Whatever that might have an iPad. Best Buy isn't the only one out there.
But maybe I just can't see the greater idea behind this so called "strategy".
That makes not much sense to me, for I as customer would just go to the next Store/Retailer/Whatever that might have an iPad. Best Buy isn't the only one out there.
But maybe I just can't see the greater idea behind this so called "strategy".
JoeG4
Mar 31, 02:56 PM
lol damn what a bunch of crap.
Google is saying that Honeycomb was designed for tablets, not for mobile phones - and if you've actually used a honeycomb tablet you'd see that yea.. it's more of a computer/tablet thing than a phone thing.
The phone OS isn't that much of an iOS ripoff. Samsung ripped Apple's "grid of rounded off square icons" off but if you look at vanilla Android it doesn't really have that look.
That and home screens with icons in a grid are nothing new.
Google is saying that Honeycomb was designed for tablets, not for mobile phones - and if you've actually used a honeycomb tablet you'd see that yea.. it's more of a computer/tablet thing than a phone thing.
The phone OS isn't that much of an iOS ripoff. Samsung ripped Apple's "grid of rounded off square icons" off but if you look at vanilla Android it doesn't really have that look.
That and home screens with icons in a grid are nothing new.
twoodcc
Apr 9, 06:48 PM
good to hear. hopefully apple adopts the new processors soon. the macbook airs really need a processor update
Dunepilot
Nov 29, 08:13 AM
Stopping short of a foul-mouthed tirade against Universal and the other majors ... just.
Vinyl and FairplayAAC only for me these days. Screw these jokers.
Vinyl and FairplayAAC only for me these days. Screw these jokers.
McKellar
Sep 19, 02:04 AM
What is wrong with you people? Meroms in other brands of laptops haven't, or are only *just* starting to ship, and you people wail that Apple is doomed, when in the worst case scenario, they'll be a few days behind Dell. If they don't ship by next month, then sure, complain, but really, most of those who moan that Apple is "OMG SO OUTDATED MEROM MBPS SHOULD HAVE BEEN RELEASED 2 MONTHS AGO!!!" are out of touch with reality.
-aggie-
Jun 22, 08:08 AM
I'm tired of wading through all these posts. I didn't see it mentioned, but does anyone know if the Shack is carrying the 32GB iPhone 4?
LegendKillerUK
Apr 6, 11:37 AM
You sure as hell can.
By game I mean a modern title at full settings. Otherwise it's just 'making do'.
By game I mean a modern title at full settings. Otherwise it's just 'making do'.
braddouglass
Apr 6, 12:46 PM
Rev D. has no overheating issues. My CPU doesn't go over 70�C when watching 1080p Flash video in fullscreen. The fan sometimes kicks in but it's still very comfortable to use on your lap, since it's barely even warm. Older MBAs suffered from overheating, that is true.
Shouldn't the flash HD have a significant role in overheating? I would think with the Flash HD with no moving parts it would be hard to over heat unless you sit there blocking the fan the whole time. :confused:
Shouldn't the flash HD have a significant role in overheating? I would think with the Flash HD with no moving parts it would be hard to over heat unless you sit there blocking the fan the whole time. :confused:
Mattie Num Nums
Apr 19, 02:46 PM
Are you talking about the Newton, troll?
http://www.thocp.net/hardware/pictures/pda/apple_newton_sml.jpg
I had a Casio Personal Diary in the late 80's that had the exact same grid.
Im not a troll either without Apple I wouldn't have a job.
http://www.thocp.net/hardware/pictures/pda/apple_newton_sml.jpg
I had a Casio Personal Diary in the late 80's that had the exact same grid.
Im not a troll either without Apple I wouldn't have a job.
iVoid
Apr 27, 11:24 AM
Well, I think it's good that Apple is addressing this issue (although I wonder if they'll release an update for the 3G, since they are no longer doing iOS upgrades for it and the original iPhone).
But their statement: "The iPhone is not logging your location" is ridiculous. They are logging your location. For a long time. In an insecure way.
Outside of the PR butt saving double-speak, this is a good move by Apple to address this issue.
But their statement: "The iPhone is not logging your location" is ridiculous. They are logging your location. For a long time. In an insecure way.
Outside of the PR butt saving double-speak, this is a good move by Apple to address this issue.
No comments:
Post a Comment