SmileyBlast!
Apr 13, 02:13 PM
ATV + dock connector is much more realistic.
ATV = All Terrain Vehicle?
Now you are talking. I could see Apple Vehicles.
Way Cool.
ATV = All Terrain Vehicle?
Now you are talking. I could see Apple Vehicles.
Way Cool.
FloatingBones
Nov 17, 03:42 PM
Hey Apple - ya think your user base might be interested in Flash??
The response means that users are interested in viewing videos -- even if those views are encapsulated in a legacy wrapper of Flash. Once content providers have updated their videos, there will be no need for this bridge.
In case you missed the news, there was yet another zero day bug in Adobe Flash (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt). Read that transcript: the bug affects Windows, Mac, Solaris, Linux, and Android (!) devices. Adobe still thinks that quarterly updates of their software are good enough, and the next one isn't scheduled until February of 2011. As Steve Gibson notes in the podcast:
"[Adobe:] how is that quarterly update cycle going for you?"
Apple was not willing to bind the safety and performance of their browser to Adobe Flash. Good choice!
Yeah, you know what's best for us users though - so we should be elated that you are resisting support for it tooth and nail.
Apple approved the app. They are allowing individuals in the marketplace to decide what's best for them.
Hopefully, the websites that provide their videos through a legacy Flash wrapper will soon be providing their users with a choice.
I am elated that iOS Safari has no Flash support. I do not want the CPU suck, the identity suck, the unpredictable behavior, and the exposure to Adobe bugs. If you want those things, feel free to get an Android device.
The response means that users are interested in viewing videos -- even if those views are encapsulated in a legacy wrapper of Flash. Once content providers have updated their videos, there will be no need for this bridge.
In case you missed the news, there was yet another zero day bug in Adobe Flash (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt). Read that transcript: the bug affects Windows, Mac, Solaris, Linux, and Android (!) devices. Adobe still thinks that quarterly updates of their software are good enough, and the next one isn't scheduled until February of 2011. As Steve Gibson notes in the podcast:
"[Adobe:] how is that quarterly update cycle going for you?"
Apple was not willing to bind the safety and performance of their browser to Adobe Flash. Good choice!
Yeah, you know what's best for us users though - so we should be elated that you are resisting support for it tooth and nail.
Apple approved the app. They are allowing individuals in the marketplace to decide what's best for them.
Hopefully, the websites that provide their videos through a legacy Flash wrapper will soon be providing their users with a choice.
I am elated that iOS Safari has no Flash support. I do not want the CPU suck, the identity suck, the unpredictable behavior, and the exposure to Adobe bugs. If you want those things, feel free to get an Android device.
Apple OC
May 1, 11:53 PM
To US its a big deal. It's a blow to the Al-Qaeda that doesn't exist anymore. The current one will still function just as it has for nearly a decade in its cell based way. If anything this will just piss off extremists. Don't think for a second some type of retaliation (most likely attacks in the Middle East) won't come about from this.
are you suggesting we give him a pass? :rolleyes:
are you suggesting we give him a pass? :rolleyes:
iLucas
Apr 29, 02:54 PM
I don't even think .99 for a song is that bad. But .69 is even better!
more...
seble
Apr 15, 07:37 AM
You can 'like' a purchased track from within the music player app now, and post a comment about it. Surprised no one else mentioned this yet... Anyone else spotted any additional changes?
http://instagr.am/p/DKjvV/
I picked up on this before, it was in 4.3.1 for sure
http://instagr.am/p/DKjvV/
I picked up on this before, it was in 4.3.1 for sure
nishioka
Apr 28, 04:19 PM
I LOLed. Episode was a bit too silly IMO.
A bit?? :D
A bit?? :D
more...
iShater
Sep 26, 11:11 AM
I'll bring my systems back online 24/7. I kinda got tires of the locked up core on my macs so I fold only on my pc laptop during the day.
fawlty
Mar 31, 03:12 PM
Presumably there'll be a cheaper version with faux polyurethane?
more...
skunk
Apr 27, 04:14 AM
As long as my daughter is in there, I will have a say who goes in the bathroom.What are you going to do, big boy? Stand outside with a shotgun? Feel up anyone who approaches? What threat do you imagine a transgender person offers to your daughter? The fruit of the tree of knowledge?
BenRoethig
Jul 25, 11:40 AM
Some of us would be willing to accept that. A minitower would consume about as much desk-space as two Mac Mini's. That's more than reasonable IMO.
Or in my case, it would use exactly no desk space since mine neatly tucks it away underneath. While I have no choice but to buy an iMac, a tower like this Core2 Duo based Vector GX (http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,1988081,00.asp) from Velocity Micro would give a much cleaner look with my setup.
Or in my case, it would use exactly no desk space since mine neatly tucks it away underneath. While I have no choice but to buy an iMac, a tower like this Core2 Duo based Vector GX (http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,1988081,00.asp) from Velocity Micro would give a much cleaner look with my setup.
more...
tny
Oct 6, 04:23 PM
You are assuming that the amount of spectrum available will never change. There's a reason they just shut off analog TV. Yes, spectrum is a finite resource, but they're shifting more to mobile voice/data very soon.
You are also assuming that all the frequencies available to each tower are already in use on that tower - that the towers are saturated. I think that's an unlikely assumption, outside very dense areas like Manhattan and DC. (And in Manhattan, you probably don't have the whole "can't get towers approved because of community opposition" problem because the towers are just installed on or in existing buildings, albeit at some expense; and you probably need a denser tower population anyway because of all the ground clutter; so a denser tower population probably already exists).
I imagine that the transceivers used on the towers have channel limits - that each transceiver can only handle a certain number of handsets k, within the limits of the number of available frequency sets n (the phone doesn't just use one frequency; I'm pretty sure they are spread-spectrum devices, so you are better off thinking of frequency sets rather than frequencies), and that k <<< n . That would explain AT&T's claims that their ongoing upgrades will mitigate the problem - they may be upgrading the transceivers on the towers so that each tower can use more of the frequencies theoretically available than has been true so far.
The other cell companies also have to segregate their frequencies from one another. If T-Mobile (the other GSM/3G carrier) isn't having this problem, it means either a. their network utilization is a lot lower, or b. they're doing something right and AT&T is doing something wrong. That's also true with the CDMA carriers, of course, but I think they use different parts of the spectrum - and Verizon is a pretty big network.
It's interesting how cell service works. Here's a simplistic summary:
Only a certain number of users can use a tower at any given time. There is only a certain range of frequencies that can be used. All towers use these same frequencies. This means that each tower must not overlap the others in terms of coverage area and frequenceis. To ensure this, companies actually use different frequency ranges on adjacent towers. Further limiting how many users can use each tower.
[cropped out a lot of the quote]
When I was in NYC I noticed by data speeds were much slower. I didn't make enough calls to have any problems with that though.
You are also assuming that all the frequencies available to each tower are already in use on that tower - that the towers are saturated. I think that's an unlikely assumption, outside very dense areas like Manhattan and DC. (And in Manhattan, you probably don't have the whole "can't get towers approved because of community opposition" problem because the towers are just installed on or in existing buildings, albeit at some expense; and you probably need a denser tower population anyway because of all the ground clutter; so a denser tower population probably already exists).
I imagine that the transceivers used on the towers have channel limits - that each transceiver can only handle a certain number of handsets k, within the limits of the number of available frequency sets n (the phone doesn't just use one frequency; I'm pretty sure they are spread-spectrum devices, so you are better off thinking of frequency sets rather than frequencies), and that k <<< n . That would explain AT&T's claims that their ongoing upgrades will mitigate the problem - they may be upgrading the transceivers on the towers so that each tower can use more of the frequencies theoretically available than has been true so far.
The other cell companies also have to segregate their frequencies from one another. If T-Mobile (the other GSM/3G carrier) isn't having this problem, it means either a. their network utilization is a lot lower, or b. they're doing something right and AT&T is doing something wrong. That's also true with the CDMA carriers, of course, but I think they use different parts of the spectrum - and Verizon is a pretty big network.
It's interesting how cell service works. Here's a simplistic summary:
Only a certain number of users can use a tower at any given time. There is only a certain range of frequencies that can be used. All towers use these same frequencies. This means that each tower must not overlap the others in terms of coverage area and frequenceis. To ensure this, companies actually use different frequency ranges on adjacent towers. Further limiting how many users can use each tower.
[cropped out a lot of the quote]
When I was in NYC I noticed by data speeds were much slower. I didn't make enough calls to have any problems with that though.
shandn
Apr 15, 01:18 PM
So you're assuming that Apple are merging both stores into 1 and that developers have had time to implement universal binaries that run on 2 different frameworks and submitted the result to the app store ?
This is obviously a bug, but it's not what you think it is. ;)
Well, as i said i'm not really into apple products, but i guess apple would instead develop an emulator if something like that were to happen...
Maybe it's a point and click remote thing for apple tv...
This is obviously a bug, but it's not what you think it is. ;)
Well, as i said i'm not really into apple products, but i guess apple would instead develop an emulator if something like that were to happen...
Maybe it's a point and click remote thing for apple tv...
more...
YoNeX
Nov 4, 11:07 AM
I'm on a PPC but plan to go MacTel next year when Adobe releases Universal versions of Creative Suite. I have some questions about VMware & Parallels if you don't mind me adding it to the thread:
1. Do they require Windows partitions, and if so how much disk space is needed?
2. If a partition is needed, can you run the partition on an external drive so as to free up space on your internal? (I'll be using a MacBook Pro so that's why I ask).
3. Can anyone tell me anything about syncing a Palm device with Parallels or VMware? In particular I'm wondering how easily (if at all) I could sync my Treo with Windows apps as well as OS X apps. This would be huge to me.
thx.
1. Currently VMware fusion only allows you to do to create a VMware image. This acts as like a virtual hard drive, so you would then have to partition accordingly. There is a network install, but VMware has not enabled the feature (to my knowledge).
2. See above
3. You should be able to sync with it, because like Parallels and VMware it allows you to connect it to the XP just by checking a tab to tell it to connect to it. So no issues here.
The main feature it is lacking for me right now is the shared folder. This would be very uself for some of the stuff that I would be doing.
1. Do they require Windows partitions, and if so how much disk space is needed?
2. If a partition is needed, can you run the partition on an external drive so as to free up space on your internal? (I'll be using a MacBook Pro so that's why I ask).
3. Can anyone tell me anything about syncing a Palm device with Parallels or VMware? In particular I'm wondering how easily (if at all) I could sync my Treo with Windows apps as well as OS X apps. This would be huge to me.
thx.
1. Currently VMware fusion only allows you to do to create a VMware image. This acts as like a virtual hard drive, so you would then have to partition accordingly. There is a network install, but VMware has not enabled the feature (to my knowledge).
2. See above
3. You should be able to sync with it, because like Parallels and VMware it allows you to connect it to the XP just by checking a tab to tell it to connect to it. So no issues here.
The main feature it is lacking for me right now is the shared folder. This would be very uself for some of the stuff that I would be doing.
Zonz
Dec 31, 05:26 PM
...And you bring religion into it? Seriously? :rolleyes:
Anyway, to say that healthcare doesn't enter into the situation of someone that large is denial, plain and simple. You really shouldn't jump into such deep waters so ill-equipped, my friend. My original post and Knight's reply to yours already explain why this is a issue that affects more than just her.
It sure is. I've never said otherwise. She can eat until she bursts for all I care. But there is a pretty big chasm between being selfish, and not wanting to pay for someone else's self-inflicted stupidity. Though I guess she's backed out of the plan anyway, cleaning up the hot biological mess of someone purposely trying to be "the world's fattest person" should happen on her dime, not mine.
I think you missed the sarcasm in my God reference (God, not religion, but nonetheless IRONY MUCH?)... and no, I read every post and I understood them all, but my argument is not that she isn't a liability. It's that no one here has a right to decide where the line is between what lifestyle is so selfish that it is your personal concern.
I'm ill equipped, huh?
So I think you missed my point. I never said health care doesn't factor in, but my point was... every single person here is being hypocritical!
You can argue all you want, and would be correct to say that every decision, including the choice to be fat, effects everyone else and not just yourself, but to judge her decision so harshly like you are is almost disgraceful.
And just in case, I'll preemptive strike. No I am not arguing out of some personal defense to my own lifestyle. I am not fat, if anything I'm under weight. 5'11'' and 150 lbs.
Anyway, to say that healthcare doesn't enter into the situation of someone that large is denial, plain and simple. You really shouldn't jump into such deep waters so ill-equipped, my friend. My original post and Knight's reply to yours already explain why this is a issue that affects more than just her.
It sure is. I've never said otherwise. She can eat until she bursts for all I care. But there is a pretty big chasm between being selfish, and not wanting to pay for someone else's self-inflicted stupidity. Though I guess she's backed out of the plan anyway, cleaning up the hot biological mess of someone purposely trying to be "the world's fattest person" should happen on her dime, not mine.
I think you missed the sarcasm in my God reference (God, not religion, but nonetheless IRONY MUCH?)... and no, I read every post and I understood them all, but my argument is not that she isn't a liability. It's that no one here has a right to decide where the line is between what lifestyle is so selfish that it is your personal concern.
I'm ill equipped, huh?
So I think you missed my point. I never said health care doesn't factor in, but my point was... every single person here is being hypocritical!
You can argue all you want, and would be correct to say that every decision, including the choice to be fat, effects everyone else and not just yourself, but to judge her decision so harshly like you are is almost disgraceful.
And just in case, I'll preemptive strike. No I am not arguing out of some personal defense to my own lifestyle. I am not fat, if anything I'm under weight. 5'11'' and 150 lbs.
more...
MacBoobsPro
Aug 15, 11:05 AM
More important than an "empty" button I would like to see a restore function in the Trash, where you can highlight one or more files or folders and click the "restore" button.
Ahem... Time Machine!
Doc didnt spend all that time inventing the flux capacitor for nothing you know :D
Ahem... Time Machine!
Doc didnt spend all that time inventing the flux capacitor for nothing you know :D
Megakazbek
Apr 13, 06:36 AM
Waiting for you to change the tone when Apple comes out with widgets and custom personalization.
You sound like I am against it.
You sound like I am against it.
more...
SAD*FACED*CLOWN
Apr 25, 08:04 AM
They won't. Even if this deal gets approved, T-Mobile will remain a separate company. Everything will remain as it is, except the fact that all revenue will go to AT&T.
this is probably what they were saying over at the Cingular offices at the time of that deal...Tmobile will be independent NOW...once the deal is finalized...no more Tmobile just the Death Star
this is probably what they were saying over at the Cingular offices at the time of that deal...Tmobile will be independent NOW...once the deal is finalized...no more Tmobile just the Death Star
parapup
Apr 26, 12:15 PM
Amazon is poised to pwn both Apple and Google on that one.
If MobileMe is any indication, Apple just doesn't get cloud - if they plan on charging for it, Amazon is happy to take their business - they'll sell you plain mp3s for the boot!
Android wins (http://www.androidcentral.com/nielsen-android-americas-most-wanted-platform) in any case!
If MobileMe is any indication, Apple just doesn't get cloud - if they plan on charging for it, Amazon is happy to take their business - they'll sell you plain mp3s for the boot!
Android wins (http://www.androidcentral.com/nielsen-android-americas-most-wanted-platform) in any case!
PCClone
Apr 24, 02:08 PM
When one company acquires another like that, they don't just tear down all the old company's equipment and replace it with their own. If that were the case AT&T would simply skip over the whole mess with getting the deal approved by the US Department of Justice and the FCC and just buy a crapload of equipment to put up themselves with that $39 billion.
If the deal is approved T-Mobile's assets will be integrated into AT&T's network and AT&T is probably having all their handset manufacturers run similar testing on T-Mobile equipment to ensure compatibility.
Apple is not "wasting money" on a cell phone provider that is going away, and T-Mobile is not "getting" the iPhone.
You don't have a clue, but state your opinion as fact. Pretty funny stuff.
If the deal is approved T-Mobile's assets will be integrated into AT&T's network and AT&T is probably having all their handset manufacturers run similar testing on T-Mobile equipment to ensure compatibility.
Apple is not "wasting money" on a cell phone provider that is going away, and T-Mobile is not "getting" the iPhone.
You don't have a clue, but state your opinion as fact. Pretty funny stuff.
ChrisTX
Apr 22, 08:18 PM
I will say the market seems to disagree.
It seems to be 4-4.3 in screens is the sweet spot. 4.5 seems to be 2 big but 4-4.3 people seem to like.
Unless you take into consideration that not a single one of those phones sell even remotely as well as the iPhone.
It seems to be 4-4.3 in screens is the sweet spot. 4.5 seems to be 2 big but 4-4.3 people seem to like.
Unless you take into consideration that not a single one of those phones sell even remotely as well as the iPhone.
Legion93
May 1, 10:20 PM
Mission Accomplished now?
Yes, after 30 years of fighting he's finally dead. I say mission failed.
Yes, after 30 years of fighting he's finally dead. I say mission failed.
zapp
Jul 28, 08:22 AM
$9,500,000,000 - that's just sitting around in cash with no long term debt. I think Apple's got plenty of "stamina"...
31,100,000,000 is alot of stamina too, I remember when m$oft got in the gaming console business there was a lot of this talk, now look at them, they sell the thing for a loss. Now imagine if they did that for the zune, a 60gb video capable for $150.00. Something to think about.........
31,100,000,000 is alot of stamina too, I remember when m$oft got in the gaming console business there was a lot of this talk, now look at them, they sell the thing for a loss. Now imagine if they did that for the zune, a 60gb video capable for $150.00. Something to think about.........
Glideslope
Apr 28, 07:22 PM
Ok.......?
Who cares really?
It's white! That's all I care about :)
It's a Thick Chick Phone. :apple:
Who cares really?
It's white! That's all I care about :)
It's a Thick Chick Phone. :apple:
PghLondon
May 1, 05:27 AM
Of course there is. iOS runs on two currently available Apple smartphone models: 3GS and 4. The iOS that runs on these phones is sufficiently different in feature sets from the iOS that runs on Tablets, media consumption devices, and Apple TVs:
-Larger resolution on tablets
-Communications handled separately - No phone app or visual voicemail on Tablet or iPod Touch
-No installable apps on Apple TV
AppleTV isn't being counted. If it had apps, it would be. For now, while it's running iOS "under the hood", Apple and analysts aren't actually mentioning that or using it in counts.
And the differences between iPad / iPod / iPhone are orders of magnitude less than the differences between the ultra-high and ultra-low ends of what is being counted as Android "phones".
This whole "smartphone OS" is something dreamed up in the last few weeks by Android apologists, after the numbers showed that Apple has the most popular OS and the most popular piece(s) of hardware in the mobile industry.
-Larger resolution on tablets
-Communications handled separately - No phone app or visual voicemail on Tablet or iPod Touch
-No installable apps on Apple TV
AppleTV isn't being counted. If it had apps, it would be. For now, while it's running iOS "under the hood", Apple and analysts aren't actually mentioning that or using it in counts.
And the differences between iPad / iPod / iPhone are orders of magnitude less than the differences between the ultra-high and ultra-low ends of what is being counted as Android "phones".
This whole "smartphone OS" is something dreamed up in the last few weeks by Android apologists, after the numbers showed that Apple has the most popular OS and the most popular piece(s) of hardware in the mobile industry.
ليست هناك تعليقات:
إرسال تعليق