BenRoethig
Sep 26, 07:12 AM
Podcast is a generic term now. This is complete B.S.
MacBandit
Sep 15, 12:23 PM
Originally posted by scem0
I dont see how anyone can say this when I can get a 2.8 GHz custom built speed-demon for 1,300 after shopping around, and I cant get **** from apple for 1,300. Well I could get something, but nothing that compares speed-wise to the pentium 4.
Does this include everything that comes standard on a Mac box?
I dont see how anyone can say this when I can get a 2.8 GHz custom built speed-demon for 1,300 after shopping around, and I cant get **** from apple for 1,300. Well I could get something, but nothing that compares speed-wise to the pentium 4.
Does this include everything that comes standard on a Mac box?
macUser2007
Apr 19, 04:27 PM
Nothing, directly. I was responding to a previous comment as you can see. There is an indirect connection to the cartoonist issue. My feeling is that there's a general failure to understand why Apple has a restrictive policy regarding what types of apps can appear in the app store. My post addressed the issue regarding the prohibition of pornography, instead of the issue of what defines an app with defamatory content as was the case with the cartoonist. There's also, in my opinion, a failure to appreciate that the lack of consistency in the app approval process is a result of Apple being unable to anticipate every scenario and nuance that is presented by certain apps, and the fact that Apple hires people to review apps. You can't realistically expect different people to always agree on situations that are slightly different. In order to respond to the explosion of submitted apps, Apple must have had to hire a lot of new reviewers. That means that you may have less control over the quality and experience level of the people that you have working as reviewers.
This is a whole lot of excuses, for a policy which is simply inexcusable.
There are many other companies which sell applications and content, which don't resort to such draconian measures. When I download a new version of Firefox on my desktop, I don't get a warning that it may provide access to inappropriate content. Neither Apple, nor MS arbitrarily ban desktop applications from being purchased or distributed.
Apple wants to be a publishing distributor. If they can object to and ban the cartoon today, why not object to and ban an article in The Economist tomorrow?
Apple has become Big Brother. It wants to control every purchase and every download, so it doesn't miss a single dollar you may otherwise spend outside the walled garden. And these are the predictable consequences.
This is a whole lot of excuses, for a policy which is simply inexcusable.
There are many other companies which sell applications and content, which don't resort to such draconian measures. When I download a new version of Firefox on my desktop, I don't get a warning that it may provide access to inappropriate content. Neither Apple, nor MS arbitrarily ban desktop applications from being purchased or distributed.
Apple wants to be a publishing distributor. If they can object to and ban the cartoon today, why not object to and ban an article in The Economist tomorrow?
Apple has become Big Brother. It wants to control every purchase and every download, so it doesn't miss a single dollar you may otherwise spend outside the walled garden. And these are the predictable consequences.
bobringer
Apr 15, 08:19 AM
This lot on these boards are amazing. Incredible what this place has devolved into.
If you people were all here 14 years ago, I guess you would have TORN INTO Apple for hiring Tim Cook from the "beige" PC maker?
If you people were all here 14 years ago, I guess you would have TORN INTO Apple for hiring Tim Cook from the "beige" PC maker?
more...
TechEnthu
Apr 19, 12:20 PM
Who cares about Expose. Give me Multi-Touch Gesturing like I have on iPad 2. 4-5 finger swipe accross apps, 4-5 finger swipe up to show the mult-tasking pane; 4-5 finger pinch-close to get to the home screen........What can beat that??????
I love those on iPad too, but it's really a bit more difficult (and less ergonomic) to use 4- and 5-finger gestures on current iPhones' screen size. Imagine putting, or just actually try, 5 huge fingers on the screen! Hahaha. But putting it in doesn't hurt! They did put Shake to Shuffle in! :p
I'd care to have shake to undo change to sth else, or available for user to alter, though. :D
I love those on iPad too, but it's really a bit more difficult (and less ergonomic) to use 4- and 5-finger gestures on current iPhones' screen size. Imagine putting, or just actually try, 5 huge fingers on the screen! Hahaha. But putting it in doesn't hurt! They did put Shake to Shuffle in! :p
I'd care to have shake to undo change to sth else, or available for user to alter, though. :D
thisisahughes
Apr 1, 04:16 PM
HEHE, I giggled cause I thought u were being sarcastic about The Weather Channel letting you down... I forgot Time Warner's 11% marketshare is still a big chunk, I just didn't make the connection cause to me TWC is The Weather Channel... which would be cool if they streamed live, hehe.
Understandable, but we are in a Time Warner Cable related thread.
Where I live it's either Time Warner Cable or DirecTV.. and DirecTV is satellite. I obviously went with the former, like anyone should if they can.
I would like to see The Weather Channel stream also, that would be great. You're right.
Understandable, but we are in a Time Warner Cable related thread.
Where I live it's either Time Warner Cable or DirecTV.. and DirecTV is satellite. I obviously went with the former, like anyone should if they can.
I would like to see The Weather Channel stream also, that would be great. You're right.
more...
nodrog6
Nov 11, 02:26 AM
those were friggin awesome. i love how they are funny even though they're in japanese
bretm
Apr 16, 03:03 PM
I can't say I am a fan of Adobe Flash as I am a big supporter of an open web, but I must say that if cross-compiled apps are inferior then the customers in the app store will certainly vote with their dollars to favor the natively written apps.
However, I can see Apple putting this new restriction in their license agreement so as to protect themselves in case the Adobe folks find some way to sneak things onto the iPhone via their cross-compiling tools. Apple is protecting their turf, but by error on the side of caution they set themselves up for bad PR even if they intend to be more lax in acting on those restrictions.
Here is another example of that occurring.... certainly Apple is choosing to reserve the right to bend the rules where they see fit. But without the strict wording in the developer agreement they really wouldn't have a leg to stand on. They are doing the same with pornography by revoking/rejecting all those junk porn apps that polluted the app store while still allowing the "main stream" stuff from established publishers.
On one hand, its Apple's store and if they don't want to pollute their shelves with garbage then I applaud them. However, somebody is going to cry foul since there is not another legitimate store for iPhone apps, and I wonder if this will eventually blow-up as some sort of new anti-trust thing.
Here's what I think the cross-compiler issue is. Adobe had the same sort of problem before they bought flash, with their app that made flash files. It was called LiveMotion and it was great. The problem with that app though, was that Macromedia controlled flash, and adobe could only reverse engineer it after the latest version had been released. So, the features of Flash 7 couldn't be realized by the Adobe LiveMotion app until waaaay after the release of Flash 7. Usually near Flash 8, etc. Adobe was essentially always a version behind. Not such a big deal with apps made for desktops and laptops. But if Apple wants to control the experience and have all it's apps updated very quickly for new OS updates, they'd have to reveal all the new features to Adobe way beforehand so that all the people making apps via Adobe's compilier could update them quickly. And of course Apple would be reliant on those developers actually desiring to pay Adobe for an upgrade to flash, which usually only comes out every year and a half or so. Much slower than updates to iPhone and it's OS. So instead, if all the developers are using Apple's tools, Apple can simply slide them a free SDK update and have them recompile. Since updating apps is so simple this way, Apple can easily require that the developers recompile in a certain time frame. Pretty hard to do for the developers that would be going through Flash, and if Adobe didn't update their tools, then the devs couldn't update, and you've got a mess and the only people losing would be the iPhone users, and then of course Apple.
Not saying it's right or wrong. Just saying that's where Apple's coming from. I really don't think they are trying to piss off Adobe in particular. Why should they be angry at Adobe anyway? They're the ones that didn't allow flash. Adobe should be angry at Apple.
However, I can see Apple putting this new restriction in their license agreement so as to protect themselves in case the Adobe folks find some way to sneak things onto the iPhone via their cross-compiling tools. Apple is protecting their turf, but by error on the side of caution they set themselves up for bad PR even if they intend to be more lax in acting on those restrictions.
Here is another example of that occurring.... certainly Apple is choosing to reserve the right to bend the rules where they see fit. But without the strict wording in the developer agreement they really wouldn't have a leg to stand on. They are doing the same with pornography by revoking/rejecting all those junk porn apps that polluted the app store while still allowing the "main stream" stuff from established publishers.
On one hand, its Apple's store and if they don't want to pollute their shelves with garbage then I applaud them. However, somebody is going to cry foul since there is not another legitimate store for iPhone apps, and I wonder if this will eventually blow-up as some sort of new anti-trust thing.
Here's what I think the cross-compiler issue is. Adobe had the same sort of problem before they bought flash, with their app that made flash files. It was called LiveMotion and it was great. The problem with that app though, was that Macromedia controlled flash, and adobe could only reverse engineer it after the latest version had been released. So, the features of Flash 7 couldn't be realized by the Adobe LiveMotion app until waaaay after the release of Flash 7. Usually near Flash 8, etc. Adobe was essentially always a version behind. Not such a big deal with apps made for desktops and laptops. But if Apple wants to control the experience and have all it's apps updated very quickly for new OS updates, they'd have to reveal all the new features to Adobe way beforehand so that all the people making apps via Adobe's compilier could update them quickly. And of course Apple would be reliant on those developers actually desiring to pay Adobe for an upgrade to flash, which usually only comes out every year and a half or so. Much slower than updates to iPhone and it's OS. So instead, if all the developers are using Apple's tools, Apple can simply slide them a free SDK update and have them recompile. Since updating apps is so simple this way, Apple can easily require that the developers recompile in a certain time frame. Pretty hard to do for the developers that would be going through Flash, and if Adobe didn't update their tools, then the devs couldn't update, and you've got a mess and the only people losing would be the iPhone users, and then of course Apple.
Not saying it's right or wrong. Just saying that's where Apple's coming from. I really don't think they are trying to piss off Adobe in particular. Why should they be angry at Adobe anyway? They're the ones that didn't allow flash. Adobe should be angry at Apple.
more...
IPPlanMan
Mar 23, 04:44 PM
Nick Justice sounds like Nick Fury's cousin! :D
This brings "There's an app for that" to a whole new level... Go Army!:cool:
This brings "There's an app for that" to a whole new level... Go Army!:cool:
david77
Mar 13, 02:36 PM
Not fine for me. I've tried resetting multiple times. Nothing works.
more...
MacRy
Mar 17, 02:15 AM
�6/gallon here in he UK, or �1.32/L :mad:
ThomasJL
Jun 24, 05:10 PM
I really hope the iPhone comes to T-Mobile USA. I am using an unofficially unlocked and jailbroken 1st generation iPhone on T-Mobile right now. The service has been wonderful.
AT&T is horrendous. I was a former customer, and they would overcharge me every month. It took approximately 3 calls every month, lasting at least 45 minutes each, to solve the problem.
AT&T is horrendous. I was a former customer, and they would overcharge me every month. It took approximately 3 calls every month, lasting at least 45 minutes each, to solve the problem.
more...
DrJohnnyN
Mar 7, 05:28 PM
:apple:
Why wait outdoors (Knox) when you can wait indoors (Northpark)?
Why wait outdoors (Knox) when you can wait indoors (Northpark)?
NewGenAdam
Apr 12, 03:03 PM
What about denying somebody a job because of their, say, intelligence? Charisma? Any number of things that are largely predetermined?
Surely it would be unfair to judge somebody by their intelligence because so much of it is down to parental intelligence and wealth; how much they can teach you and how much they can pay for the best educations. (D's A)
In theory I suppose we should only judge people for things which are entirely their own doing; things which are neither a product of their genes or upbringing. But then, taking those away, what remains?
Not much really. In practice, I fear people are at least in some part judged for merits in which their efforts play a smaller part. Like natural intelligence, or sporting ability. Is this wrong? Perhaps on some abstract moral level, but I think it's probably permissible unless someone wants to call me a senseless bigot.
Surely it would be unfair to judge somebody by their intelligence because so much of it is down to parental intelligence and wealth; how much they can teach you and how much they can pay for the best educations. (D's A)
In theory I suppose we should only judge people for things which are entirely their own doing; things which are neither a product of their genes or upbringing. But then, taking those away, what remains?
Not much really. In practice, I fear people are at least in some part judged for merits in which their efforts play a smaller part. Like natural intelligence, or sporting ability. Is this wrong? Perhaps on some abstract moral level, but I think it's probably permissible unless someone wants to call me a senseless bigot.
more...
-SD-
Jan 19, 05:15 PM
I'd get one just for Zelda, Pilotwings and Starfox. But not at �230! That's ridiculous for a handheld machine that's primarily aimed at kids. Especially with the current global financial situation.
The 3 - 5 hour battery life is pathetic and the 3D effect can apparently cause headaches. Nine to 12 months after release, when Nintendo inevitably release the new 3DS+, with a much increased battery life for a much more reasonable price I'll consider it. But only if I can have a play with one for a few hours first to make sure my head doesn't explode from the 3D effect.
Anyway, have fun with Pilotwings. See you summer 2012.
:apple:
The 3 - 5 hour battery life is pathetic and the 3D effect can apparently cause headaches. Nine to 12 months after release, when Nintendo inevitably release the new 3DS+, with a much increased battery life for a much more reasonable price I'll consider it. But only if I can have a play with one for a few hours first to make sure my head doesn't explode from the 3D effect.
Anyway, have fun with Pilotwings. See you summer 2012.
:apple:
iSimx
Mar 28, 08:23 AM
Hoping Lion will be launched then! :)
more...
oTaRu
Oct 6, 10:46 AM
4" to 4.5" retina display is most welcome! :D
Zaty
Apr 3, 12:09 PM
In my opinion, Pages is not all that bad. It needs some tweaking and Apple has to fix some bugs. I'm sure Pages 2 will be a great app for everyone who wants to do basic wordprocessing and publishing without the limitations of TextEdit. I guess most people are disappointed with Pages because of the following two reasons:
a) Pages wasn't finished when it was released
b) Pre-MWSF rumours were talking about an MS Office replacement or killer so many people think of Pages as being a replacement for Word. But I think Pages was never intended to replace Word, it's more like iMovie vs. FCP/FCE.
a) Pages wasn't finished when it was released
b) Pre-MWSF rumours were talking about an MS Office replacement or killer so many people think of Pages as being a replacement for Word. But I think Pages was never intended to replace Word, it's more like iMovie vs. FCP/FCE.
Deimo
Nov 2, 03:30 PM
The important pieces to note about the marketshare is that this definitely is coming from switchers, not from upgraders. If you look at the data, you will see that it's broken up between MacOS and MacIntel. The data for MacOS is just PPC people, and that actually remained constant throughout the year:
http://marketshare.hitslink.com/chartfx62/temp/CFT1102_0428382CEA7.gif
while the marketshare for MacIntel has been a nice parabolic curve:
http://marketshare.hitslink.com/chartfx62/temp/CFT1102_04293606D2A.gif
for full information go here:http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=2
http://marketshare.hitslink.com/chartfx62/temp/CFT1102_0428382CEA7.gif
while the marketshare for MacIntel has been a nice parabolic curve:
http://marketshare.hitslink.com/chartfx62/temp/CFT1102_04293606D2A.gif
for full information go here:http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=2
ThunderSkunk
Apr 1, 10:43 AM
TV is trash anyway. Who has time left to waste watching commercials & shodily slapped together shows?
Have time to kill? Do something constructive on Inkpad or iDraw.
Want some light entertainment on while you do something productive? Netflix
Want something cheap and raunchy? Youpr0n
There is nothing TV does that one of these other things doesn't do better.
Have time to kill? Do something constructive on Inkpad or iDraw.
Want some light entertainment on while you do something productive? Netflix
Want something cheap and raunchy? Youpr0n
There is nothing TV does that one of these other things doesn't do better.
MacIllini
Nov 2, 03:02 PM
definitely a lot of switchers in my book. I know at least 5 friends who have switched in the past year, and 3 more (including myself) who will be switching by the end of the year :p
jessica.
Sep 24, 05:21 PM
I'd get
http://shinza.com/product_info.php?products_id=45
http://shinza.com/product_info.php?products_id=45
mstrze
Apr 4, 11:36 AM
I agree that you're taxing the wrong thing. If you tax mileage rather than gas, you're not encouraging higher fuel economy the same way a gas tax would. The ones who burn more fuel should brunt the burden. It's a lot easier to get a more fuel efficient vehicle than it is to make your necessary commute shorter.
But these taxes are historically for funding the construction and upkeep of the highways, not to curb gas usage or to spur efficiency.
A car that gets 60 mpg will do just as much 'damage' to a road surface as a car that get 8 mpg....but the 50mpg car will pay much, MUCH less for upkeep of that road than the other in a gas-tax based situation.
But these taxes are historically for funding the construction and upkeep of the highways, not to curb gas usage or to spur efficiency.
A car that gets 60 mpg will do just as much 'damage' to a road surface as a car that get 8 mpg....but the 50mpg car will pay much, MUCH less for upkeep of that road than the other in a gas-tax based situation.
bedifferent
Feb 19, 09:36 PM
And Republicans are reknowned for being on the bread-line?! :confused::D
Yeah, didn't you know? Bush lost MILLIONS in oil investments and Cheney is practically broke from the no-bid contracts Halliburton got during their administration. In fact, Condoleezza Rice had a hard time buying thousands of dollars in Ferragamo shoes on Fifth Ave while on vacation during Katrina, "How Condi Rice Spent the Storm" (http://www.counterpunch.org/mabry05152007.html).
Yeah, didn't you know? Bush lost MILLIONS in oil investments and Cheney is practically broke from the no-bid contracts Halliburton got during their administration. In fact, Condoleezza Rice had a hard time buying thousands of dollars in Ferragamo shoes on Fifth Ave while on vacation during Katrina, "How Condi Rice Spent the Storm" (http://www.counterpunch.org/mabry05152007.html).
No comments:
Post a Comment