bigpics
Mar 23, 11:37 PM
One more vote to keep the old gal around.
And another to keep giving it facelifts that:
a) Improve what it already does (without destroying its core philosophy),
b) Add new functions extending those functions (e.g., people have mentioned updating the DAC, allowing bluetooth and HD video out, etc. and faster syncing if TB will accomplish that (FW sustained transfer rates are faster than USB, but agree the FW port's not coming back on its own).
Plus etc., etc. and so forth as (generally) eloquently already laid down elsewhere.
c) Keep it a part of the modern Apple ecosystem via serving iDevices and ATV's as others have suggested and in many other clever, not unfeasible ways.
d) Keep it looking fresh and up-to-date. It does appear that the screen could be made larger without compromising the click-wheel functionality.
Another reason to have a lot of music/media BTW is not that you're a "hoarder" as someone suggested, but to include music that's not your fave but may be perfect when you have guest riders in your car - people of different ages and backgrounds and tastes so you can DJ for all (and at parties too). Call me a people pleaser but, hey.....
And if I have an 16 or even 32GB iPhone, I have little use for a Touch, but just as much a need for a Classic. My iPod Photo 60 is still looking/running like new and has been my car music server for years. But it's too low in capacity for me, so breaking 200GB + some of the above refinements would likely tip me.
There's also an aspect that hasn't been in this thread - and the "tech specs" on Apple.com no longer mention either target disk mode - nor using it to load up general files, but I remember an earlier gen being usable as an external hard drive that was also an iPod in the bargain!
One that a photographer, e.g., could have in a pocket to download pics from a DSLR to free up an SD card for more shooting in the field. Or today, back up an entire maxxed out MBAir for that matter. Voila: A mini Time Machine + all of the above.
If it does still allow that, add it to the marketing. It's an iPod. It's a mini-media server. It's an external HD. Music, Movies, Videos, Podcasts, Photos, Games, Storage, Backup. In less than 5 ounces.
What's not to like for 2 and a half Ben Franks??
Finally I get a kick out of the people dissing people who prefer uncompressed music. The ONLY advantage of compression is to store more files/GB and it ALWAYS degrades the quality of the recording. Always. And you're championing this as preferable because......?????
Apple already has algorithms for optimizing file size on the Mac side when maxxing out files to be placed on an iDevice. With our multi-terabyte setups, why wouldn't we want the best originals available?
And most who want uncompressed music (and those who want better than CD's already dumbed-down wave forms) actually CAN discern the diff (tho' some only think they can, as tests have shown, to be frank).
But seriously, guys, you remind me of people who've been conditioned to think a McDouble is a gastronomic improvement on the T-bone steak. Sheesh.
:rolleyes:
And another to keep giving it facelifts that:
a) Improve what it already does (without destroying its core philosophy),
b) Add new functions extending those functions (e.g., people have mentioned updating the DAC, allowing bluetooth and HD video out, etc. and faster syncing if TB will accomplish that (FW sustained transfer rates are faster than USB, but agree the FW port's not coming back on its own).
Plus etc., etc. and so forth as (generally) eloquently already laid down elsewhere.
c) Keep it a part of the modern Apple ecosystem via serving iDevices and ATV's as others have suggested and in many other clever, not unfeasible ways.
d) Keep it looking fresh and up-to-date. It does appear that the screen could be made larger without compromising the click-wheel functionality.
Another reason to have a lot of music/media BTW is not that you're a "hoarder" as someone suggested, but to include music that's not your fave but may be perfect when you have guest riders in your car - people of different ages and backgrounds and tastes so you can DJ for all (and at parties too). Call me a people pleaser but, hey.....
And if I have an 16 or even 32GB iPhone, I have little use for a Touch, but just as much a need for a Classic. My iPod Photo 60 is still looking/running like new and has been my car music server for years. But it's too low in capacity for me, so breaking 200GB + some of the above refinements would likely tip me.
There's also an aspect that hasn't been in this thread - and the "tech specs" on Apple.com no longer mention either target disk mode - nor using it to load up general files, but I remember an earlier gen being usable as an external hard drive that was also an iPod in the bargain!
One that a photographer, e.g., could have in a pocket to download pics from a DSLR to free up an SD card for more shooting in the field. Or today, back up an entire maxxed out MBAir for that matter. Voila: A mini Time Machine + all of the above.
If it does still allow that, add it to the marketing. It's an iPod. It's a mini-media server. It's an external HD. Music, Movies, Videos, Podcasts, Photos, Games, Storage, Backup. In less than 5 ounces.
What's not to like for 2 and a half Ben Franks??
Finally I get a kick out of the people dissing people who prefer uncompressed music. The ONLY advantage of compression is to store more files/GB and it ALWAYS degrades the quality of the recording. Always. And you're championing this as preferable because......?????
Apple already has algorithms for optimizing file size on the Mac side when maxxing out files to be placed on an iDevice. With our multi-terabyte setups, why wouldn't we want the best originals available?
And most who want uncompressed music (and those who want better than CD's already dumbed-down wave forms) actually CAN discern the diff (tho' some only think they can, as tests have shown, to be frank).
But seriously, guys, you remind me of people who've been conditioned to think a McDouble is a gastronomic improvement on the T-bone steak. Sheesh.
:rolleyes:
takepillsdie
Jan 13, 09:21 PM
Can't wait for the macbook icare! gonna be so sweet!!:cool:
jonhaxor
Jan 1, 08:32 PM
Wouldn't it make sense to put an HD tuner in the new displays along with the iSight? .. that would make it pretty easy to rip videos and sync onto the video iPod and i'm guessing you could have an iTV app that's as easy to use as iTunes .. change the TV/monitor market in much the same way that they helped to change the home stereo market .. hrrm.
Huntn
Apr 9, 10:25 PM
I don't remember what I learned on. :confused: But I can drive a stick on both sides of the road (U.S./England/Japan). When I married my wife she could not drive a stick and that is all we had, a 1975 Fiat Spyder. We lived on a hill in California. When she first started driving it, she would back out of the driveway and all the way down to the bottom of the hill before taking off back up the hill. She does much better now. :D
8CoreWhore
May 2, 04:58 PM
Apple sees the benefit of unifying how things work across OS X and iOS.
There are tons of people that don't know how to install or uninstall apps on their PC, but they do on their iPhone or iPad. By unifying, those people feel comfortable buying a Mac.
There are tons of people that don't know how to install or uninstall apps on their PC, but they do on their iPhone or iPad. By unifying, those people feel comfortable buying a Mac.
vvv
Nov 28, 07:29 PM
I know someone brought it up earlier, but XBOX people, XBOX. When the XBOX first came out, people said it was too big, that they didn't know what they were doing, that they would fail, and it had a pretty, ok very rocky start. And now the XBOX 360 looks like it may very well dominate this generation.....
Faithful, justinbieber mpsqaoy
For justin justin bieber my
justin bieber 2011 tour dates
Last Login: 4/11/2011
justin bieber 2011 tour dates
Justin+ieber+2011+tour+
Justin+ieber+tour+dates+
Justin+ieber+tour+dates+
Justin Bieber#39;s UK Tour dates
justin bieber tour dates
Justinbieber world uk leads
Justin+ieber+tour+dates+
justin bieber 2011 tour dates united states. Last Login: 3/16/2011; Last Login: 3/16/2011. slackpacker. Apr 25, 02:25 PM
Evangelion
Jul 20, 11:36 AM
I have used Linux before, admit that I gave up with linux with Suse 9. The point I was trying to make with the package manager is that its not easy to go out and find something, every time you either have to find a package for your specific distribution or have it "built" for your distro. If you look at the way the mac works now I can drag the aduim icon to a remote drive, and from almost any machine that meets the basic specs I can then double click that app, even if its on a network drive, it will run, can you say the same for Linux?
Yes I can. Like I said, I just fire up the package-manager, find the app in question and click "Install". That really is all there is to it. No need to browse the web, looking for installers to download.
By unification I meant giving a constant user experience with singal points of administration, management ect. Some of my previous sessions with linux the applications did not always fully adhere to guidelines that were set out by KDE, whatever theme i choose, it didnt adapt to it for example.
Things are different these days. You are basing your judgement on SUSE9, which was released three years ago. During that three years, Linux has made HUGE progress. Things are chaning for the better, and they are changing FAST. I would say that Linux has changed more during the last three years than it did during the five years before 2003.
Note: that is NOT a bad thing for Apple. I bet that Apple would much rather co-exists with Linux than with Windows. There could never be a monopoly Linux could exploit to harm competitors, Microsoft could do that, and they have done it. Linux is open and follows established standards, Microsoft does not, if they can get away with it. Linux has no interest in destroying competitors, Microsoft does.
I fully admit im not a linux guru, and that things very likely have changed, but my perception is that every distro comes with a boat load of software on the DVD or via download, if you want to get something thats not listed it becomes a bit more difficult.
Well, SUSE does ship with tons of apps on the DVD (mainly so that it could be used wby people without broadband). But if you look at Ubuntu for example, it ships with relatively few apps. In a way, they have selected "best of breed"-apps for their distro. But if the user wants to have some additional piece of software, he can just fire up the package-manager, where he can choose from 16.000 pieces of software. The app the user is looking for is most likely listed there. If he's installing a piece of commercial software, they usually ship with nice installers that are not one bit harder to use than the ones in OS X or Windows.
There is the issue of building your own kernel
You have no need to do that. Seriously. I haven't built my own kernels in years. And when I did, it was because I wanted to do it, not because I had to do it.
Just because you CAN compile your own kernel does not mean that you are required to do so. The possibility is there for power-users.
The mac advantage is that its a bit easier to get, install and run applications than windows, and IMO linux as well.
I disagree. In Linux all the apps I could even want were just few mouse-clicks away. On OS X (and on Windows) I have to hunt for those apps in internet, only to find out that I'm expected to pay for them. I had none of those problems in Linux.
why is there a few big distros out there after years of linux development, why are there so many niche ones, and why do linux users argue with others over their favorite distro?
There are several distros, because one distro can't do it all. Want an OS that can be tweaked and customized to your exact needs and for your specific hardware? Obviously Ubuntu is not ideal then, but Gentoo is. Want a distro that "just works"? Ubuntu would be a good choice then. Want a distro with rock-solid reliablity? Try Debian. Want to run Red Hat servers, but don't want to pay for support? Use CentOS.
All those distros exist because there are users who find them to be better for their needs than the other distros are. And there's nothing wrong with that, since one size does not fit all. No-one could tell the users that "from now on, there will be just one distro". And even if someone could say that, the users who were unhappy with the "one true distro" could start their own distro if they wanted to.
Why do users argue which distro is best? For the same reason why Mac-users tell Linux and Windows-users that OS X is the best? For the same reason why BMW-drivers tell others that BMW is better than Merc is? People like to rationalise their choice of OS.
Diversity and flexability is one of the strenghts of Linux, its users know that, and having a single distro that does everything will counter that strength, they also know that.
They know that there can't be one distro that "does everything". Ubuntu wants to be easy to use OS that just works. Gentoo wnts to be as customizable, flexible and powerful as possible. It would be very, very hard for single OS to offer both of those ideoogies in one package. It would en up being "jack of all trades, master of none".
Take Mandrake (Mandiva these days) and Red Hat for example. Years ago Red Hat decided to use GNOME as their default desktop. There were bunch of Red Hat users who liked the distro, but liked KDE more than GNOME. So they took Red Hat, replaced GNOME with KDE and voila: Mandrake was born. From that point te two started to diverge. as independted OS'es.
Yes I can. Like I said, I just fire up the package-manager, find the app in question and click "Install". That really is all there is to it. No need to browse the web, looking for installers to download.
By unification I meant giving a constant user experience with singal points of administration, management ect. Some of my previous sessions with linux the applications did not always fully adhere to guidelines that were set out by KDE, whatever theme i choose, it didnt adapt to it for example.
Things are different these days. You are basing your judgement on SUSE9, which was released three years ago. During that three years, Linux has made HUGE progress. Things are chaning for the better, and they are changing FAST. I would say that Linux has changed more during the last three years than it did during the five years before 2003.
Note: that is NOT a bad thing for Apple. I bet that Apple would much rather co-exists with Linux than with Windows. There could never be a monopoly Linux could exploit to harm competitors, Microsoft could do that, and they have done it. Linux is open and follows established standards, Microsoft does not, if they can get away with it. Linux has no interest in destroying competitors, Microsoft does.
I fully admit im not a linux guru, and that things very likely have changed, but my perception is that every distro comes with a boat load of software on the DVD or via download, if you want to get something thats not listed it becomes a bit more difficult.
Well, SUSE does ship with tons of apps on the DVD (mainly so that it could be used wby people without broadband). But if you look at Ubuntu for example, it ships with relatively few apps. In a way, they have selected "best of breed"-apps for their distro. But if the user wants to have some additional piece of software, he can just fire up the package-manager, where he can choose from 16.000 pieces of software. The app the user is looking for is most likely listed there. If he's installing a piece of commercial software, they usually ship with nice installers that are not one bit harder to use than the ones in OS X or Windows.
There is the issue of building your own kernel
You have no need to do that. Seriously. I haven't built my own kernels in years. And when I did, it was because I wanted to do it, not because I had to do it.
Just because you CAN compile your own kernel does not mean that you are required to do so. The possibility is there for power-users.
The mac advantage is that its a bit easier to get, install and run applications than windows, and IMO linux as well.
I disagree. In Linux all the apps I could even want were just few mouse-clicks away. On OS X (and on Windows) I have to hunt for those apps in internet, only to find out that I'm expected to pay for them. I had none of those problems in Linux.
why is there a few big distros out there after years of linux development, why are there so many niche ones, and why do linux users argue with others over their favorite distro?
There are several distros, because one distro can't do it all. Want an OS that can be tweaked and customized to your exact needs and for your specific hardware? Obviously Ubuntu is not ideal then, but Gentoo is. Want a distro that "just works"? Ubuntu would be a good choice then. Want a distro with rock-solid reliablity? Try Debian. Want to run Red Hat servers, but don't want to pay for support? Use CentOS.
All those distros exist because there are users who find them to be better for their needs than the other distros are. And there's nothing wrong with that, since one size does not fit all. No-one could tell the users that "from now on, there will be just one distro". And even if someone could say that, the users who were unhappy with the "one true distro" could start their own distro if they wanted to.
Why do users argue which distro is best? For the same reason why Mac-users tell Linux and Windows-users that OS X is the best? For the same reason why BMW-drivers tell others that BMW is better than Merc is? People like to rationalise their choice of OS.
Diversity and flexability is one of the strenghts of Linux, its users know that, and having a single distro that does everything will counter that strength, they also know that.
They know that there can't be one distro that "does everything". Ubuntu wants to be easy to use OS that just works. Gentoo wnts to be as customizable, flexible and powerful as possible. It would be very, very hard for single OS to offer both of those ideoogies in one package. It would en up being "jack of all trades, master of none".
Take Mandrake (Mandiva these days) and Red Hat for example. Years ago Red Hat decided to use GNOME as their default desktop. There were bunch of Red Hat users who liked the distro, but liked KDE more than GNOME. So they took Red Hat, replaced GNOME with KDE and voila: Mandrake was born. From that point te two started to diverge. as independted OS'es.
zoozx
Sep 6, 10:29 AM
Please explain to me who would buy a mini and why?
I just don't get it when a imac is close in price with a monitor.
What am I missing?
I just don't get it when a imac is close in price with a monitor.
What am I missing?
LERsince1991
Mar 1, 09:06 AM
Just a few more images from the iphone as I got the braided sleeving yesterday and fitted it all today, even neater lol :P
http://img845.imageshack.us/img845/6905/img0283.jpg
http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/4329/img0298z.jpg
http://img824.imageshack.us/img824/7519/img0297ny.jpg
http://img687.imageshack.us/img687/4659/img0280ib.jpg
http://img845.imageshack.us/img845/6905/img0283.jpg
http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/4329/img0298z.jpg
http://img824.imageshack.us/img824/7519/img0297ny.jpg
http://img687.imageshack.us/img687/4659/img0280ib.jpg
gr8whtd0pe
Jan 22, 06:57 PM
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5006/5376952280_30d1c125e5_z.jpg
it's been gone for a while.
I feel your pain man. I have a 2 year old myself.
They all ready sit in Recaro's ;)
Seriously though, we've got a 3rd on the way, so we had to go to something large enough to fit 3 car seats.
Never heard of that brand.
it's been gone for a while.
I feel your pain man. I have a 2 year old myself.
They all ready sit in Recaro's ;)
Seriously though, we've got a 3rd on the way, so we had to go to something large enough to fit 3 car seats.
Never heard of that brand.
barkomatic
Apr 21, 12:48 PM
I could see this as a concern for politicians and celebrities whose locations might be used as fodder for tabloid gossip. Maybe a couple going through a divorce could use the data to substantiate an affair.
bigpics
Mar 23, 11:37 PM
One more vote to keep the old gal around.
And another to keep giving it facelifts that:
a) Improve what it already does (without destroying its core philosophy),
b) Add new functions extending those functions (e.g., people have mentioned updating the DAC, allowing bluetooth and HD video out, etc. and faster syncing if TB will accomplish that (FW sustained transfer rates are faster than USB, but agree the FW port's not coming back on its own).
Plus etc., etc. and so forth as (generally) eloquently already laid down elsewhere.
c) Keep it a part of the modern Apple ecosystem via serving iDevices and ATV's as others have suggested and in many other clever, not unfeasible ways.
d) Keep it looking fresh and up-to-date. It does appear that the screen could be made larger without compromising the click-wheel functionality.
Another reason to have a lot of music/media BTW is not that you're a "hoarder" as someone suggested, but to include music that's not your fave but may be perfect when you have guest riders in your car - people of different ages and backgrounds and tastes so you can DJ for all (and at parties too). Call me a people pleaser but, hey.....
And if I have an 16 or even 32GB iPhone, I have little use for a Touch, but just as much a need for a Classic. My iPod Photo 60 is still looking/running like new and has been my car music server for years. But it's too low in capacity for me, so breaking 200GB + some of the above refinements would likely tip me.
There's also an aspect that hasn't been in this thread - and the "tech specs" on Apple.com no longer mention either target disk mode - nor using it to load up general files, but I remember an earlier gen being usable as an external hard drive that was also an iPod in the bargain!
One that a photographer, e.g., could have in a pocket to download pics from a DSLR to free up an SD card for more shooting in the field. Or today, back up an entire maxxed out MBAir for that matter. Voila: A mini Time Machine + all of the above.
If it does still allow that, add it to the marketing. It's an iPod. It's a mini-media server. It's an external HD. Music, Movies, Videos, Podcasts, Photos, Games, Storage, Backup. In less than 5 ounces.
What's not to like for 2 and a half Ben Franks??
Finally I get a kick out of the people dissing people who prefer uncompressed music. The ONLY advantage of compression is to store more files/GB and it ALWAYS degrades the quality of the recording. Always. And you're championing this as preferable because......?????
Apple already has algorithms for optimizing file size on the Mac side when maxxing out files to be placed on an iDevice. With our multi-terabyte setups, why wouldn't we want the best originals available?
And most who want uncompressed music (and those who want better than CD's already dumbed-down wave forms) actually CAN discern the diff (tho' some only think they can, as tests have shown, to be frank).
But seriously, guys, you remind me of people who've been conditioned to think a McDouble is a gastronomic improvement on the T-bone steak. Sheesh.
:rolleyes:
And another to keep giving it facelifts that:
a) Improve what it already does (without destroying its core philosophy),
b) Add new functions extending those functions (e.g., people have mentioned updating the DAC, allowing bluetooth and HD video out, etc. and faster syncing if TB will accomplish that (FW sustained transfer rates are faster than USB, but agree the FW port's not coming back on its own).
Plus etc., etc. and so forth as (generally) eloquently already laid down elsewhere.
c) Keep it a part of the modern Apple ecosystem via serving iDevices and ATV's as others have suggested and in many other clever, not unfeasible ways.
d) Keep it looking fresh and up-to-date. It does appear that the screen could be made larger without compromising the click-wheel functionality.
Another reason to have a lot of music/media BTW is not that you're a "hoarder" as someone suggested, but to include music that's not your fave but may be perfect when you have guest riders in your car - people of different ages and backgrounds and tastes so you can DJ for all (and at parties too). Call me a people pleaser but, hey.....
And if I have an 16 or even 32GB iPhone, I have little use for a Touch, but just as much a need for a Classic. My iPod Photo 60 is still looking/running like new and has been my car music server for years. But it's too low in capacity for me, so breaking 200GB + some of the above refinements would likely tip me.
There's also an aspect that hasn't been in this thread - and the "tech specs" on Apple.com no longer mention either target disk mode - nor using it to load up general files, but I remember an earlier gen being usable as an external hard drive that was also an iPod in the bargain!
One that a photographer, e.g., could have in a pocket to download pics from a DSLR to free up an SD card for more shooting in the field. Or today, back up an entire maxxed out MBAir for that matter. Voila: A mini Time Machine + all of the above.
If it does still allow that, add it to the marketing. It's an iPod. It's a mini-media server. It's an external HD. Music, Movies, Videos, Podcasts, Photos, Games, Storage, Backup. In less than 5 ounces.
What's not to like for 2 and a half Ben Franks??
Finally I get a kick out of the people dissing people who prefer uncompressed music. The ONLY advantage of compression is to store more files/GB and it ALWAYS degrades the quality of the recording. Always. And you're championing this as preferable because......?????
Apple already has algorithms for optimizing file size on the Mac side when maxxing out files to be placed on an iDevice. With our multi-terabyte setups, why wouldn't we want the best originals available?
And most who want uncompressed music (and those who want better than CD's already dumbed-down wave forms) actually CAN discern the diff (tho' some only think they can, as tests have shown, to be frank).
But seriously, guys, you remind me of people who've been conditioned to think a McDouble is a gastronomic improvement on the T-bone steak. Sheesh.
:rolleyes:
MacPhyle
Aug 19, 11:29 PM
Regardless of what Bluetooth will be meant for on the iPod -- Sirius, transmission to Bluetooth headphones, or just syncing with Bluetooth Macs -- what I'm looking forward to is a bigger screen. I think Bluetooth is a logical step since iMacs now have Bluetooth built in, but I don't expect iPods to go Bluetooth until at least 2 more major upgrades. First the larger screen, then Bluetooth, maybe. I am just crossing my fingers that when Apple does put Bluetooth in iPods, they don't eliminate other means of connectivity. Keep iPods compatible with non-Bluetooth Macs, Apple, please!
quagmire
Mar 7, 09:57 AM
But prior to that the Mk1 was the same in both the U.S. & Europe.
Was only a young kid when that Focus was around.......
Anyway, when the current US Focus debuted back in 1999 I believe it was, it wasn't a bad car. In typical bad Ford fashion, it was left to rot on the vine. It got a heavy redesign/MCE for the 2008/9 MY I believe it was, but it was too late. The 2012 Focus is so much better. Although I prefer the Chevy Cruze.
So far this generation of world cars are going fairly well. The Buick Regal is selling in China and in the US fairly well( with the Regal being the Opel Insignia). The Cruze isn't doing too badly either. I don't know the exact number of Cruze sales in Europe, but I heard it was decent. They just sold 18,000 units in February in the US. Holden survives as it is today due to its export business. World cars can be done. They just have to be implemented correctly.
Was only a young kid when that Focus was around.......
Anyway, when the current US Focus debuted back in 1999 I believe it was, it wasn't a bad car. In typical bad Ford fashion, it was left to rot on the vine. It got a heavy redesign/MCE for the 2008/9 MY I believe it was, but it was too late. The 2012 Focus is so much better. Although I prefer the Chevy Cruze.
So far this generation of world cars are going fairly well. The Buick Regal is selling in China and in the US fairly well( with the Regal being the Opel Insignia). The Cruze isn't doing too badly either. I don't know the exact number of Cruze sales in Europe, but I heard it was decent. They just sold 18,000 units in February in the US. Holden survives as it is today due to its export business. World cars can be done. They just have to be implemented correctly.
ThunderSkunk
Apr 3, 12:52 AM
Yeah great, it's very wonderful.
Now try to take some video on your mac and get it onto your magical thousand dollar iPad2 for use in iMovie. Try to work on a song you created in Garageband on your mac in Garageband on the iPad2.
What's that? A BIG OL CLUSTERBANG OF TECHNOLOGY IN THE WAY!!!
Now try to take some video on your mac and get it onto your magical thousand dollar iPad2 for use in iMovie. Try to work on a song you created in Garageband on your mac in Garageband on the iPad2.
What's that? A BIG OL CLUSTERBANG OF TECHNOLOGY IN THE WAY!!!
yg17
Mar 19, 11:16 PM
For the sake of consistency with the App Store and its censorship policies, it should be removed for containing offensive, disgusting content.
I don't think it should be removed, and I don't think many other apps that have been removed should be removed. I just think Apple should censor consistently or not censor at all.
I don't think it should be removed, and I don't think many other apps that have been removed should be removed. I just think Apple should censor consistently or not censor at all.
Ravich
Mar 20, 10:13 PM
Maybe Apple should ban all religious apps.
That's for apple to decide.
In a way, religion is very like homeopathy, since it pretends that something non-existant has the ability to cure/help/heal etc.
I'll say it again: homeopathy is not directly harmful. Ex-gay therapy is.
Like homeopathy, religion can encourage one to do nothing of value ('let's pray for Japan', 'let's try to cure cancer with just water') rather than something physical which actually has an effect. It could be construed as being dangerous and damaging in that sense.
Again: how is that directly harmful? Directly. Harmful.
That's for apple to decide.
In a way, religion is very like homeopathy, since it pretends that something non-existant has the ability to cure/help/heal etc.
I'll say it again: homeopathy is not directly harmful. Ex-gay therapy is.
Like homeopathy, religion can encourage one to do nothing of value ('let's pray for Japan', 'let's try to cure cancer with just water') rather than something physical which actually has an effect. It could be construed as being dangerous and damaging in that sense.
Again: how is that directly harmful? Directly. Harmful.
kelving525
Sep 30, 09:36 AM
I like the Grip Vue also, the one thing I don't like about this case is the little strip on the front that goes across (above) the docking port.
Mine (night sky) is a bit floppy there and feels like it could get worse with pulling the device in and out of pockets, backpacks, etc. I can see it tearing easily if snagged.
I understand that TPU is claimed to be quite durable and elastic, but I don't like being concerned about a $25 piece of formed plastic :(
I may return it just on this 'flaw.'
Crazy?
I know exactly how you feel! I thought it was going to break!
Mine (night sky) is a bit floppy there and feels like it could get worse with pulling the device in and out of pockets, backpacks, etc. I can see it tearing easily if snagged.
I understand that TPU is claimed to be quite durable and elastic, but I don't like being concerned about a $25 piece of formed plastic :(
I may return it just on this 'flaw.'
Crazy?
I know exactly how you feel! I thought it was going to break!
Prom1
Mar 1, 12:48 AM
Don't quote all the pictures! haha.
I played tenor too! :)
Edited out all but one picture; hehe sorry about that.
wicked you play Sax too?! I haven't played for years but i promised to buy an Alto this year - come Hell or High water!
A small part of me has fallen asleep since I last played.
I played tenor too! :)
Edited out all but one picture; hehe sorry about that.
wicked you play Sax too?! I haven't played for years but i promised to buy an Alto this year - come Hell or High water!
A small part of me has fallen asleep since I last played.
SeaFox
Dec 28, 02:23 AM
Here is your quote SeaFox.
You are an condescending individual and take my post out of context.
You can't please all of the people all of the time.
"I wouldn't hold my breath on the word processing and web surfing. WebTV showed surfing the internet on a TV sucked because trying to read normal-sized text from six feet away was hard, and bumping the text size up would goof up the page layout generally. Same reason word processing would be silly."
I stand by the statement. WebTV failed because at the time everyone had CRT TVs, which are much blurrier than a computer monitor. Even if you are using a new plasma screen set you have to account for how you use your device. One sits in front of their monitor by a couple feet. This makes 12 point text readable. Now, step back from this thread about six feet or so, however far you usually sit from your TV, and you'll see why. Even if you're viewing the screen at the real resolution of the HD set (1920x1080 for the real nice sets) you're still not going to be wanting to read long passages to text from your TV. Kinda like people don't like reading books in their entirety one screen at a time in Acrobat.
When you ask a home entertainment device to perform the functions of a regular computer you're adding all sorts of complexity and starting down a slippery slope. Let's say Apple added the ability to view Word files to the iTV. Someone would complain that they couldn't edit them. Same with iMovie files. Now you have to add that functionality. Then someone would say "well, what about image files? I can already watch my iPhoto library, why can't I do color and brightness/contrast correction?"
This is exactly the same thing that comes up about the iPod and the Apple Phone. Yeah, the iPod has no built-in FM tuner, no voice memo ability, no built in recording ability, built in FM transmitter for the car, ect. And adding these features would make the interface more complicated, when one of the things that makes the iPod such a hit is it's simplicity. Why do current music playing phones suck? Because the player functionality is hidden under a bunch of unintuitive menus, just like most of the other bells and whistles that may have influenced you to buy the phone to begin with. It's the current state of overly complicated interface design that gets people excited about Apple entering the cell phone market.
Edit: Also, one last point. If you put too much functionality into the iTV that is normally relegated to a regular Mac, then charge less for the iTV, you're going to eat into sales of the Mac Mini. Apple wouldn't do this, and this is the main reason I don't think you'll see the ability to open Word files or surf the Net with the iTV, that and it just sounds like a weird feature to have in a set top box.
If you've got your Mini hooked up to your TV and its working good for you I applaud you. The iTV is clearly not aiming for your type of consumer. I've read articles about setting up Minis as PVR's with HD sets, and invariably the indivdulal has some difficulty finding a monitor resolution and refresh rate the HD set will play along with at first, and actual use of the device is hobbled by needing a wireless keyboard or similar. Apple is aiming for the average TV watching consumer with the iTV, who I can tell you from personal experience are not nearly as smart.
You are an condescending individual and take my post out of context.
You can't please all of the people all of the time.
"I wouldn't hold my breath on the word processing and web surfing. WebTV showed surfing the internet on a TV sucked because trying to read normal-sized text from six feet away was hard, and bumping the text size up would goof up the page layout generally. Same reason word processing would be silly."
I stand by the statement. WebTV failed because at the time everyone had CRT TVs, which are much blurrier than a computer monitor. Even if you are using a new plasma screen set you have to account for how you use your device. One sits in front of their monitor by a couple feet. This makes 12 point text readable. Now, step back from this thread about six feet or so, however far you usually sit from your TV, and you'll see why. Even if you're viewing the screen at the real resolution of the HD set (1920x1080 for the real nice sets) you're still not going to be wanting to read long passages to text from your TV. Kinda like people don't like reading books in their entirety one screen at a time in Acrobat.
When you ask a home entertainment device to perform the functions of a regular computer you're adding all sorts of complexity and starting down a slippery slope. Let's say Apple added the ability to view Word files to the iTV. Someone would complain that they couldn't edit them. Same with iMovie files. Now you have to add that functionality. Then someone would say "well, what about image files? I can already watch my iPhoto library, why can't I do color and brightness/contrast correction?"
This is exactly the same thing that comes up about the iPod and the Apple Phone. Yeah, the iPod has no built-in FM tuner, no voice memo ability, no built in recording ability, built in FM transmitter for the car, ect. And adding these features would make the interface more complicated, when one of the things that makes the iPod such a hit is it's simplicity. Why do current music playing phones suck? Because the player functionality is hidden under a bunch of unintuitive menus, just like most of the other bells and whistles that may have influenced you to buy the phone to begin with. It's the current state of overly complicated interface design that gets people excited about Apple entering the cell phone market.
Edit: Also, one last point. If you put too much functionality into the iTV that is normally relegated to a regular Mac, then charge less for the iTV, you're going to eat into sales of the Mac Mini. Apple wouldn't do this, and this is the main reason I don't think you'll see the ability to open Word files or surf the Net with the iTV, that and it just sounds like a weird feature to have in a set top box.
If you've got your Mini hooked up to your TV and its working good for you I applaud you. The iTV is clearly not aiming for your type of consumer. I've read articles about setting up Minis as PVR's with HD sets, and invariably the indivdulal has some difficulty finding a monitor resolution and refresh rate the HD set will play along with at first, and actual use of the device is hobbled by needing a wireless keyboard or similar. Apple is aiming for the average TV watching consumer with the iTV, who I can tell you from personal experience are not nearly as smart.
flottenheimer
Mar 26, 12:12 PM
Very, very, very nice.
For a split second it almost convinced me to sell the family WII. Unfortunately my kids would miss Mario, Kirby, Klonoa and all the other Nintendo heroes way too much if I did that.
For a split second it almost convinced me to sell the family WII. Unfortunately my kids would miss Mario, Kirby, Klonoa and all the other Nintendo heroes way too much if I did that.
Spoony
Apr 26, 02:07 PM
apple created a storefront they called "app store"
amazon creates a store front that does the same t hing called the "appstore"
apple wins in this situation.
ding ding ding. I agree.
The store is called the App Store. You can't copy someones store name.
I can't call my store Target or Walmart. The names are already taken and famous. It's like cyber squatting on Madonna.com. you can't b/c madonna is already mega famous. She could just take it from you.
McDonalds can't sue Burger King for the name b/c they are way different but sell similar products.
If Burger Kind called their Store Mcdonalds but put in a lowercase D now I think McDonalds would and should sue the crap out of them.
Reminds me of coming to america. they've got the Big Mac, We've got the big Mic.
amazon creates a store front that does the same t hing called the "appstore"
apple wins in this situation.
ding ding ding. I agree.
The store is called the App Store. You can't copy someones store name.
I can't call my store Target or Walmart. The names are already taken and famous. It's like cyber squatting on Madonna.com. you can't b/c madonna is already mega famous. She could just take it from you.
McDonalds can't sue Burger King for the name b/c they are way different but sell similar products.
If Burger Kind called their Store Mcdonalds but put in a lowercase D now I think McDonalds would and should sue the crap out of them.
Reminds me of coming to america. they've got the Big Mac, We've got the big Mic.
whooleytoo
Jul 20, 05:47 AM
And since just about all OEM's wil preload Vista on their machines, the sales-numbers will be HUGE.
I think this is the key - once Vista comes out what OEM will be able to continue selling PCs with XP installed? Even if Vista's hardware requirements were a Core 2 Duo with 2GB RAM, they'd build every PC with a minimum of a Core 2 Duo with 2GB RAM, because they can't afford not to be on the Vista bandwagon.
I think this is the key - once Vista comes out what OEM will be able to continue selling PCs with XP installed? Even if Vista's hardware requirements were a Core 2 Duo with 2GB RAM, they'd build every PC with a minimum of a Core 2 Duo with 2GB RAM, because they can't afford not to be on the Vista bandwagon.
sc00byr00
Mar 23, 03:22 PM
Yippeee!
No comments:
Post a Comment