baryon
Apr 7, 09:08 AM
If Windows 8 doesn't have something as simple as Spaces or multiple desktops, then it's an inferior OS.
timerollson
Apr 13, 02:54 PM
Asstel: When you just got's ta get that booty...
Reminds of that commercial for "Aciphex" (pronounced ASS EFFECTS).
Reminds of that commercial for "Aciphex" (pronounced ASS EFFECTS).
hobo.hopkins
May 2, 09:33 AM
I should hope that this update will allay any of the concerns and fears that some panic-stricken people have had lately.
*LTD*
Mar 24, 03:47 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8F190)
Happy Birthday, iOS.
;)
Happy Birthday, iOS.
;)
prady16
Oct 11, 09:45 AM
I am leaning towards a new iPod product before the end of the year for two reasons:
1) Zune is being release, Apple needs to steal the limelight here.
2) The last iPod update was a huge deal for the Nano and a non-event for the 5G iPod.
Thats a good call!
1) Zune is being release, Apple needs to steal the limelight here.
2) The last iPod update was a huge deal for the Nano and a non-event for the 5G iPod.
Thats a good call!
samiwas
Mar 4, 03:57 PM
Minimum wages = unemployment, lower growth
child labor laws = limits free will and opportunities for youngsters
max hours per week = limits free will, opportunity for higher personal revenue
workplace safety = bureaucracy, red tape, lower growth
Holy effin' Shizzle batman! You don't believe this. Come on. Fo' reals? I mean really...come on. I know it, and you know it...you're trolling. There is no way you actually believe that stuff.
Minimum wages = employer must pay at the very least a human wage...not a slave wage. If the employer cannot afford to pay people fairly, their business should fail. Isn't that what the free market is all about? You produce or you fail?
Child Labor Laws = really??? Limits free will?? Opportunities for youngsters? Do you really think that if child labor laws were done away with in this country that some warehouse wouldn't have the 6-year-old kid of some nearly-homeless family out running a meat slicer for $4 a day? Do you REALLY think that kind of thing wouldn't happen? And that something like that is an opportunity for that 6-year-old? You are truly a piece of work. Oh right, I keep forgetting...you're a troll.
Max hours per week does not limit free will. An employer is certainly allowed to let an employee work 100 hours a week if they so want to. I know because I've done it on many occasions. I had a 140-hour week a while back. It's perfectly legal. But you have to PAY OVERTIME. If you want to exploit your workers, you pay them for it. You have the free will to work them overtime, they have the free will to accept that overtime, and then you pay them for it. Don't like it, don't do it...free will, baby.
Workplace safety should not be required? Bwaahahaha. Now, I most certainly do not follow most safety rules in my line of work, because a lot of them are pretty silly. But to do away with required safety procedures for many occupations is just an amazing concept. That you actually believe that employers will willingly pay more if they are not required to in order to keep their employees safe is one of the more laughable things ever.
Don't be naive. The goals are the same, more wealth, health, prosperity, and safety for all. Conservatives simply disagree with your methods. They realize that a hand-out is NEVER the same as a hand-up, and that wealth earned is not generally earned at the expense of others, but rather to their benefit.
So being paid overtime for working crazy hours is a HAND OUT? Really?
Cutting wages and pay requirements and removing safety requirements means more wealth and safety for ALL? OK. Hold on, let me comprehend that. Wait, I can't because it's the stupidest thing ever uttered.
Yes. it has been decided. He's a <censored>swell guy</censored>. There is no one who actually thinks like this.
*edit - while I meant what I said, it's not worth getting banned over.
child labor laws = limits free will and opportunities for youngsters
max hours per week = limits free will, opportunity for higher personal revenue
workplace safety = bureaucracy, red tape, lower growth
Holy effin' Shizzle batman! You don't believe this. Come on. Fo' reals? I mean really...come on. I know it, and you know it...you're trolling. There is no way you actually believe that stuff.
Minimum wages = employer must pay at the very least a human wage...not a slave wage. If the employer cannot afford to pay people fairly, their business should fail. Isn't that what the free market is all about? You produce or you fail?
Child Labor Laws = really??? Limits free will?? Opportunities for youngsters? Do you really think that if child labor laws were done away with in this country that some warehouse wouldn't have the 6-year-old kid of some nearly-homeless family out running a meat slicer for $4 a day? Do you REALLY think that kind of thing wouldn't happen? And that something like that is an opportunity for that 6-year-old? You are truly a piece of work. Oh right, I keep forgetting...you're a troll.
Max hours per week does not limit free will. An employer is certainly allowed to let an employee work 100 hours a week if they so want to. I know because I've done it on many occasions. I had a 140-hour week a while back. It's perfectly legal. But you have to PAY OVERTIME. If you want to exploit your workers, you pay them for it. You have the free will to work them overtime, they have the free will to accept that overtime, and then you pay them for it. Don't like it, don't do it...free will, baby.
Workplace safety should not be required? Bwaahahaha. Now, I most certainly do not follow most safety rules in my line of work, because a lot of them are pretty silly. But to do away with required safety procedures for many occupations is just an amazing concept. That you actually believe that employers will willingly pay more if they are not required to in order to keep their employees safe is one of the more laughable things ever.
Don't be naive. The goals are the same, more wealth, health, prosperity, and safety for all. Conservatives simply disagree with your methods. They realize that a hand-out is NEVER the same as a hand-up, and that wealth earned is not generally earned at the expense of others, but rather to their benefit.
So being paid overtime for working crazy hours is a HAND OUT? Really?
Cutting wages and pay requirements and removing safety requirements means more wealth and safety for ALL? OK. Hold on, let me comprehend that. Wait, I can't because it's the stupidest thing ever uttered.
Yes. it has been decided. He's a <censored>swell guy</censored>. There is no one who actually thinks like this.
*edit - while I meant what I said, it's not worth getting banned over.
ct2k7
Apr 23, 05:28 PM
I'd have to disagree. There are a lot of ways to keep tabs on someone if you wish to do them harm. The issue is whether the (as yet unknown) purpose of this data is useful enough to justify it's being there in the state it's in. There is no immediate way it gives anyone any special or expedient means of causing another harm. You'll need a lot of contingencies and variables come together to form specific cases. I really don't see that happening. That said, the reasons I've seen so far aren't that nefarious. It actually makes sense to be tracked in this way, especially in light of the argument that it's a caching mechanism in order to make it easier to switch from tower to tower. I can believe this. I don't believe there's any evil behind it. Nor do I for the moment believe this is easily accessible by anyone other than physically by the user/owner of the phone. And then it's likely not easy for the average person.
Said paedophile *before* this information has been able to track children without problems using other means, I'd wager. Likely easier means, though I'm not well-versed in the specific modus operandi of paedophiles. I suspect I'll need forensics/law enforcement training to get a complete understanding.
Besides, your example is based upon pure conjecture. First assumption is they are able to hack into their phone. Is hacking into iPhones remoely a big problem out in the wild? Not that I've heard or seen.
What I'm saying is take the "wait and see" aproach before we begin to vilify and condemn Apple as self-serving, careless data-mining opportunists.
So it's a plea for sanity. But I've noticed that whenever Apple's quarterly report rolls around and it's usually stellar news, the insanity of our loveable contrarians ramps up, purely for the purpose of being contrarians, as if we need to "balance out" all the enthusiasm with careful doses of negativity so we're not *too* positive. I'm not referring to you, roadbloc, by the way.
So in any case, this is my position, and I'll say it's the same position I'd take if it were Google and MS.
Read the first line.
Hack the computers, not the iPhones.
Said paedophile *before* this information has been able to track children without problems using other means, I'd wager. Likely easier means, though I'm not well-versed in the specific modus operandi of paedophiles. I suspect I'll need forensics/law enforcement training to get a complete understanding.
Besides, your example is based upon pure conjecture. First assumption is they are able to hack into their phone. Is hacking into iPhones remoely a big problem out in the wild? Not that I've heard or seen.
What I'm saying is take the "wait and see" aproach before we begin to vilify and condemn Apple as self-serving, careless data-mining opportunists.
So it's a plea for sanity. But I've noticed that whenever Apple's quarterly report rolls around and it's usually stellar news, the insanity of our loveable contrarians ramps up, purely for the purpose of being contrarians, as if we need to "balance out" all the enthusiasm with careful doses of negativity so we're not *too* positive. I'm not referring to you, roadbloc, by the way.
So in any case, this is my position, and I'll say it's the same position I'd take if it were Google and MS.
Read the first line.
Hack the computers, not the iPhones.
robecq
Apr 25, 12:49 PM
Fake, the hand looks all wrong. He has creepier thumbs than Megan fox!!!:eek:
itgoesforfun
Nov 24, 03:39 PM
Thanks , let us know man!
I wont be going until way later so I wont have a way to confirm until tonite.
It's really great that Apple doesn't give their employees the proper information. I called the Glendale store and received a yes I can use the discounts together(Corporate). I went to the store and was told i cannot combine the discounts, but that option is available online. Apparently I was the 10th person who encountered that fun situation within 90 minutes.
I wont be going until way later so I wont have a way to confirm until tonite.
It's really great that Apple doesn't give their employees the proper information. I called the Glendale store and received a yes I can use the discounts together(Corporate). I went to the store and was told i cannot combine the discounts, but that option is available online. Apparently I was the 10th person who encountered that fun situation within 90 minutes.
Coolerking
Sep 12, 08:37 AM
Yes, you can dream. Dream it you ********** dreamers.
LOL! Nice
LOL! Nice
marksman
May 3, 03:35 PM
Contract terms require "consideration" from both parties to be legally binding. Consideration is something you provide to the other party (i.e., money from you, data services from your carrier).
What consideration are the carriers offering you for tethering? You're already paying $X for Y GB of data used on your phone. It doesn't matter to the carrier if your Netflix app is using it, or your tethering app is sending the data to your laptop. Nothing changes on their end, they just send the data that you've already paid for to your phone, and your phone handles the rest.
You're right, it is black and white. It's a scam aimed at exploiting consumers like yourself who don't know any better, with an illegal contract term. I hope this goes to court soon, before the carriers in Canada (where I am) try to pull the same BS.
They are offering you more bandwidth to use a higher bandwidth service like tethering.
The consideration is very clear. Thanks for quoting the premise for contract law, but claiming there is no consideration there is ridiculous.
People who tether use more bandwidth, so the cost associated with their usage is more expensive. The carriers can either charge those people for tethering or they can raise the price for EVERYONE.
They choose to charge the people who tether. It is a perfectly reasonable choice on their part.
Hey a cable line comes into my house with all the channels on it. I can just jimmy off a filter and get all the channels without paying any more. They are already delivering it to my house, why can't I just get all of them since they are there anyways and I am paying for cable right?
You are not paying for tethering unless you are paying for tethering. The math is simple. People who tether use more bandwidth. Wireless providers set their data prices based on AVERAGE usage. Tethering makes the average usage go up, so the revenue to cover those costs has to come from somewhere.
So they can either charge EVERYONE more or charge the people who tether more.. Again they choose the later.
What consideration are the carriers offering you for tethering? You're already paying $X for Y GB of data used on your phone. It doesn't matter to the carrier if your Netflix app is using it, or your tethering app is sending the data to your laptop. Nothing changes on their end, they just send the data that you've already paid for to your phone, and your phone handles the rest.
You're right, it is black and white. It's a scam aimed at exploiting consumers like yourself who don't know any better, with an illegal contract term. I hope this goes to court soon, before the carriers in Canada (where I am) try to pull the same BS.
They are offering you more bandwidth to use a higher bandwidth service like tethering.
The consideration is very clear. Thanks for quoting the premise for contract law, but claiming there is no consideration there is ridiculous.
People who tether use more bandwidth, so the cost associated with their usage is more expensive. The carriers can either charge those people for tethering or they can raise the price for EVERYONE.
They choose to charge the people who tether. It is a perfectly reasonable choice on their part.
Hey a cable line comes into my house with all the channels on it. I can just jimmy off a filter and get all the channels without paying any more. They are already delivering it to my house, why can't I just get all of them since they are there anyways and I am paying for cable right?
You are not paying for tethering unless you are paying for tethering. The math is simple. People who tether use more bandwidth. Wireless providers set their data prices based on AVERAGE usage. Tethering makes the average usage go up, so the revenue to cover those costs has to come from somewhere.
So they can either charge EVERYONE more or charge the people who tether more.. Again they choose the later.
wigga69uk
Sep 12, 08:29 AM
http://www.apple.com/de/quicktime/win.html
bottom left of page
bottom left of page
Christian247
Apr 15, 01:55 PM
looks like an iphone casket.
Awesome!!!
Awesome!!!
FriarNurgle
Apr 8, 01:24 PM
Bet they are lowering the price and want to avoid refunding money to so many people.
just.in.time
Mar 25, 02:42 AM
Geeze time flies!!! HB OS X!
Started with a used PowerBook 5300cs running 7.6.1, and quickly (about 2 years) walked it up through all the versions to 9.1 as I could afford to upgrade the ram. Got my first experience of OS X on a PowerBook G3 Pismo 500mhz, with 10.0.4. I'd have to say 10.2.8 really marked OS X becoming a mature system, it was by far more stable than all versions of X prior to it. Used every release since, and they just get better, now with Snow Leopard on the main machine, a MacBook Pro 13"
Still rocking 9.1 on a PowerBook 2400c hooked up to a Bose SoundDock and using iTunes 2 to stream internet radio (running as I type this).
Started with a used PowerBook 5300cs running 7.6.1, and quickly (about 2 years) walked it up through all the versions to 9.1 as I could afford to upgrade the ram. Got my first experience of OS X on a PowerBook G3 Pismo 500mhz, with 10.0.4. I'd have to say 10.2.8 really marked OS X becoming a mature system, it was by far more stable than all versions of X prior to it. Used every release since, and they just get better, now with Snow Leopard on the main machine, a MacBook Pro 13"
Still rocking 9.1 on a PowerBook 2400c hooked up to a Bose SoundDock and using iTunes 2 to stream internet radio (running as I type this).
Sedulous
Apr 23, 09:59 PM
Wow, this thread is crazy OT.
Windows 8. Hopefully it has an even bigger system tray for all those little crapware programs that run in windows.
Windows 8. Hopefully it has an even bigger system tray for all those little crapware programs that run in windows.
spazzcat
May 4, 05:24 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
Are you living under a rock? Everything they shown is happening today with the iPad.
Are you living under a rock? Everything they shown is happening today with the iPad.
twoodcc
Apr 9, 11:22 PM
I'm doin' all the ppd I can without spending more money on hardware right now:D I would like to replace 5 machines with a new Mac Pro when they come out (4 really slow and my current Mac Pro). It's h**l waiting for Apple sometimes :eek: Hurry up Apple!! :apple:
What I want: Mac Pro with 12-16 cores, 24-32 threads, 2-3Ghz, 24 gigs of fast ddr3 ram, same case design outside plus usb 3.0, inside room for 3-4 2.5 inch ssd's in raid 0, 4 3.5 inch sata 2.0 or 3.0 (interchangable) and support for 3 GTX 295/480 cards.
Price $4-5k I'm not asking too much am I?
What I really want: Mac Pro with 64 cores, 256 threads, 3-4Ghz, 32 gigs of fast memristor (http://www.zdnet.co.uk/news/emerging-tech/2010/04/09/memristor-discovery-could-lead-to-faster-hpc-40088582/) memory ON CHIP, 64 gigs of ddr3 ram, and a few other things in an anodized aluminum case :p
dang. yeah, not asking for much huh :cool:
but don't be surprised if you don't get half of that, and it costs $6k.
this is one of the main things that bothers me about apple. i just don't understand why they wait so long to update the mac pros like this. at least announce something
What I want: Mac Pro with 12-16 cores, 24-32 threads, 2-3Ghz, 24 gigs of fast ddr3 ram, same case design outside plus usb 3.0, inside room for 3-4 2.5 inch ssd's in raid 0, 4 3.5 inch sata 2.0 or 3.0 (interchangable) and support for 3 GTX 295/480 cards.
Price $4-5k I'm not asking too much am I?
What I really want: Mac Pro with 64 cores, 256 threads, 3-4Ghz, 32 gigs of fast memristor (http://www.zdnet.co.uk/news/emerging-tech/2010/04/09/memristor-discovery-could-lead-to-faster-hpc-40088582/) memory ON CHIP, 64 gigs of ddr3 ram, and a few other things in an anodized aluminum case :p
dang. yeah, not asking for much huh :cool:
but don't be surprised if you don't get half of that, and it costs $6k.
this is one of the main things that bothers me about apple. i just don't understand why they wait so long to update the mac pros like this. at least announce something
radiohead14
Apr 16, 04:45 AM
I bet Google try to sell to the label the idea of free advertisement supported music, and Google get to keep 70% of the revenue.:eek:
EricNau
Oct 3, 05:46 PM
I'm expecting more Leopard features, more movie studios for iTunes, iLife '07, iWork '07, the release of "iTV," and perhaps Core 2 Duo in the MacBook Pros, (if not sooner); I believe the MacBooks will keep Core Duo.
I seriously doubt we'll see the iPhone or "True" Video iPod.
I seriously doubt we'll see the iPhone or "True" Video iPod.
Eddyisgreat
Apr 15, 04:34 PM
wow the iOS/Apple closed ecosystem must really be the WORSE THANG EVAR if google is trying to trying to do it.
zoozx
Jan 5, 05:09 PM
Any bets that James Brown gets used in the apple event in some way.
Talk about thinking different.
The guy made music out of a word like popcorn.
RIP JB.......:cool:
Talk about thinking different.
The guy made music out of a word like popcorn.
RIP JB.......:cool:
takao
Jan 12, 09:13 AM
so far i haven't seen much from "os x " on the iPhone except widgets which is hardly something which defines OS X for me
what revolutionary things does it really have what others don't have ? eyecandy and perhaps easier syncing ? a proximity sensor ? perhaps photo managment and Wlan (but without VOIP)
does the iphone sync with outlook ? if not: say good bye to the business market
it's a nice product, don't get me wrong, but it's expensive for a phone
what revolutionary things does it really have what others don't have ? eyecandy and perhaps easier syncing ? a proximity sensor ? perhaps photo managment and Wlan (but without VOIP)
does the iphone sync with outlook ? if not: say good bye to the business market
it's a nice product, don't get me wrong, but it's expensive for a phone
tdhurst
Jan 12, 05:28 PM
Obviously.:rolleyes: I was responding to the idea that is was somehow ironic (and funny) that such a low-tech device could disrupt such a high-tech show. There are many other low-tech ways to cause problems for exhibitors. You can't have an open, accessible show floor and protect against everyone's idea of a "prank." Exhibitors have to be able to trust that attendees, especially press credentialed attendees, won't make them look foolish in order to drive traffic to their blogs.
Anyway, I hope you took notice of the real point of my comment:
That's nothing to laugh about.
This is more about the prank being done by a Gizmodo employee than the prank itself. If some Joe Blow attendee had done this, the blowback wouldn't have been as bad.
Credentialed people are held to a higher standard. They are trusted to cover the event, not affect the outcome of it. Any blogger or press member should be embarrassed by this kind of behavior. As a writer and an event planner, I'm pissed in every way imaginable.
Anyway, I hope you took notice of the real point of my comment:
That's nothing to laugh about.
This is more about the prank being done by a Gizmodo employee than the prank itself. If some Joe Blow attendee had done this, the blowback wouldn't have been as bad.
Credentialed people are held to a higher standard. They are trusted to cover the event, not affect the outcome of it. Any blogger or press member should be embarrassed by this kind of behavior. As a writer and an event planner, I'm pissed in every way imaginable.
0 comments:
Post a Comment