Arcus
Apr 5, 04:02 PM
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)
Is Larry Page retarded? Seriously? Have you heard him speak? I think he is retarded!
You never go full retard though....but this is dam close.
Is Larry Page retarded? Seriously? Have you heard him speak? I think he is retarded!
You never go full retard though....but this is dam close.
zombitronic
Oct 6, 04:47 PM
I think your arugument would be valid if phones were not subsudized and you have to buy them at full price. Because AT&T in this case is paying Apple $400 per phone you should choose a network first.
If ISP were footing the bill for desktop then Verizon add still would work but for cell phones most of the cost of the phone is paid by the networks. Not the other way around.
My original iPhone was not subsidized and I had to buy it at full price. I chose the device with no qualms about what network I was required to use.
While the iPhone is now subsidized, so are many other phones on many other networks. If only certain networks were doing this to add value to choosing their contracts, I could understand your point of choosing the network before the device. Maybe I'm missing something but I don't understand how this changes my argument that the service is just a commodity while the device is the consumer's primary choice.
If ISP were footing the bill for desktop then Verizon add still would work but for cell phones most of the cost of the phone is paid by the networks. Not the other way around.
My original iPhone was not subsidized and I had to buy it at full price. I chose the device with no qualms about what network I was required to use.
While the iPhone is now subsidized, so are many other phones on many other networks. If only certain networks were doing this to add value to choosing their contracts, I could understand your point of choosing the network before the device. Maybe I'm missing something but I don't understand how this changes my argument that the service is just a commodity while the device is the consumer's primary choice.
m-dogg
Nov 24, 09:01 AM
I buy my annual .mac subscription today when it's on sale. Doesn't actually renew until January...
*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.
;)
j-huskisson
Sep 12, 07:43 AM
I just opened iTunes and it ask me if I wanted to update...
Mine's telling me i have the current version (6.0.5)
Mine's telling me i have the current version (6.0.5)
MacRumors
Oct 28, 02:21 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
Apple appears to have pulled the publicly accessible Mac OS 10.4.8 Source Code (Darwin, the open-source foundation of OS X, and XNU, Darwin's open-source kernel), leaving only developers with ADC log-ins with access to the code (public link (http://www.opensource.apple.com/darwinsource/), ADC link (http://www.opensource.apple.com/darwinsource/tarballs/apsl/))
Earlier this week, the OSx86 project (http://osx86project.org/) released a version of the 10.4.8 kernel (http://semthex.freeflux.net/blog/archive/2006/10/24/haleluja-it-s-done.html) that was hailed to be 100% legal according to the APSL and run on any x86 machine. Prior to this release, Apple's code would only run on Apple's hardware due to various dependencies (such as EFI).
template abc party ideas
superhero abc party ideas
pages abc party ideas
Abc+party+outfits+for+guys
lue eyes, and pale skin
Abc+party+outfits+for+guys
Abc+party+outfits+for+
My+life+as+liz+abc+party+
My+life+as+liz+abc+party+
Party pictures of ideas at
to Abc+costume+ideas+for+
grunberg-2005-abc-winter-
lt;3 ABC parties.
Apple appears to have pulled the publicly accessible Mac OS 10.4.8 Source Code (Darwin, the open-source foundation of OS X, and XNU, Darwin's open-source kernel), leaving only developers with ADC log-ins with access to the code (public link (http://www.opensource.apple.com/darwinsource/), ADC link (http://www.opensource.apple.com/darwinsource/tarballs/apsl/))
Earlier this week, the OSx86 project (http://osx86project.org/) released a version of the 10.4.8 kernel (http://semthex.freeflux.net/blog/archive/2006/10/24/haleluja-it-s-done.html) that was hailed to be 100% legal according to the APSL and run on any x86 machine. Prior to this release, Apple's code would only run on Apple's hardware due to various dependencies (such as EFI).
koobcamuk
Apr 5, 06:43 PM
I've often wondered about all of the great ads that I might be missing. ...I'll be downloading this. Thanks, Apple!
:confused::confused::confused:
Seriously?
Exactly what I thought. Some people are just plan weird.
:confused::confused::confused:
Seriously?
Exactly what I thought. Some people are just plan weird.
davepoint
Aug 12, 04:31 PM
surely they wouldn't update the specs only to release something new in a month or so..
justperry
Apr 15, 01:48 PM
I hope this is true... I really would like to have a more rugged case design on the iPhone (planning on getting the next version). I had the 3G iPhone and the back plate always felt flimsy / fragile.
For the antenna - could the antenna placement be put near the apple logo on the back (maybe that is plastic) or -- might there be enough antenna surface to receive through the front?
I also wonder if they could tie an antenna to the bezel on the front of the phone, or integrate it into the aluminum enclosure on the back. Not knowing metallurgy, I am not sure if there is a way to turn aluminum to a receptive material or could the case be of an aluminum alloy to allow reception?
No way Dude.
All of the phones that I see open to see the internals had metal shields in the front to get less radiation from the antenna.
It is still not proven whether or not U can get cancer from radio waves.
But,I do know certain places where radio waves will kill U.
Don't even come close to a very high power antenna from a radio station,a T.L. will even light up if you hold it nearby.
Making an antenna of the aluminium casing is impossible,don't U think Apple and others would have done that long time ago:eek:
For the antenna - could the antenna placement be put near the apple logo on the back (maybe that is plastic) or -- might there be enough antenna surface to receive through the front?
I also wonder if they could tie an antenna to the bezel on the front of the phone, or integrate it into the aluminum enclosure on the back. Not knowing metallurgy, I am not sure if there is a way to turn aluminum to a receptive material or could the case be of an aluminum alloy to allow reception?
No way Dude.
All of the phones that I see open to see the internals had metal shields in the front to get less radiation from the antenna.
It is still not proven whether or not U can get cancer from radio waves.
But,I do know certain places where radio waves will kill U.
Don't even come close to a very high power antenna from a radio station,a T.L. will even light up if you hold it nearby.
Making an antenna of the aluminium casing is impossible,don't U think Apple and others would have done that long time ago:eek:
flopticalcube
Nov 27, 05:48 PM
Sale Day MB 2/120 now shipping! :)
Shipment exception. :(
C'est la vie.
Shipment exception. :(
C'est la vie.
leetlamer
Apr 29, 04:36 PM
For the love of god get rid of the faux leather.
Eidorian
May 3, 11:28 PM
The reason why I didn't buy an Ipad yet. I would only browse on Safari and play games. Something that is available on my Macbook Pro.Since I am the local technology guru, people are just shy of harassing given the constant barrage of questions just asking if I own one. They are amazed that I do not own an iPad or tablet since they are "popular".
I can afford one but the lack of MKV playback is the deal killer. So that makes it $499 to browse the internet.
I can afford one but the lack of MKV playback is the deal killer. So that makes it $499 to browse the internet.
Lancetx
Jan 12, 11:38 PM
There's an old saying that goes...it ain't bragging (or arrogant either for that matter) if you can do it. Well, Steve Jobs and Apple have proven time and time again that they can definitely do it.
TravisGood
Jan 5, 04:53 PM
It's hard to believe that you guys are making this effort to not "spoil".
Your sensitivity to readers who want an embargo on updates till they can view the QT stream first is unprecedented. I can hardly believe you're doing it! The niche purist audience you attract can't help but appreciate it.
Me? I'll be logged on to your live site for up-to-the-minute news!
Keep up the good work. Travis
Your sensitivity to readers who want an embargo on updates till they can view the QT stream first is unprecedented. I can hardly believe you're doing it! The niche purist audience you attract can't help but appreciate it.
Me? I'll be logged on to your live site for up-to-the-minute news!
Keep up the good work. Travis
Jaymes
Mar 28, 03:16 PM
In other words, it is now more fair to everyone because you just need to be in the App Store rather than having to submit your app specifically to be considered.
In other words, it's less fair to everyone, because you have to fork over $0.30 of every $1.00 you make to Apple in order to be part of the Mac App store just to be in the running for the design award.
It's going to be interesting to see if open-source products win any awards whatsoever this year. In the past, several have brought home awards.
But I digress, as the new Big Brother on the block, I had almost forgot that "Apple knows best".
In other words, it's less fair to everyone, because you have to fork over $0.30 of every $1.00 you make to Apple in order to be part of the Mac App store just to be in the running for the design award.
It's going to be interesting to see if open-source products win any awards whatsoever this year. In the past, several have brought home awards.
But I digress, as the new Big Brother on the block, I had almost forgot that "Apple knows best".
arn
Jan 5, 11:19 AM
we can set this up...
stay tuned.
arn
stay tuned.
arn
ipedro
Sep 25, 11:29 AM
I suppose there could be a bit of news here for non-photographers.
As I understand it, Aperture uses OS X's built-in RAW image processing. If I remember rightly, the last Aperture update accompanied an OS X update. So it's possible 10.4.8 could be just around the corner (i.e. sometime this week?)
It's a Photography show .... It baffles my mind that people make far out unfounded predictions and then are disappointed and curse Apple when they don't come true.
The best example of that was the "One More Thing" event where the iPod Hi-Fi and Intel Mac Mini were shown. This event wasn't meant for the general public, so much that it wasn't broadcast to the public.
Now here's another example which Apple doesn't hype about to the public and "darn, all they do is show an update to a photography pro tool at a photography convention... Apple stock will surely fall with this news"
I for one am real happy with the offline feature. I've been using a workaround to save my giant library off my MacBook Pro. The iLife connectivity and Flickr plugin are also very welcome.
Now I'm just hoping that this version of Aperture is a little snappier because even on a fully loaded MBP, I get beachballs all the time.
As I understand it, Aperture uses OS X's built-in RAW image processing. If I remember rightly, the last Aperture update accompanied an OS X update. So it's possible 10.4.8 could be just around the corner (i.e. sometime this week?)
It's a Photography show .... It baffles my mind that people make far out unfounded predictions and then are disappointed and curse Apple when they don't come true.
The best example of that was the "One More Thing" event where the iPod Hi-Fi and Intel Mac Mini were shown. This event wasn't meant for the general public, so much that it wasn't broadcast to the public.
Now here's another example which Apple doesn't hype about to the public and "darn, all they do is show an update to a photography pro tool at a photography convention... Apple stock will surely fall with this news"
I for one am real happy with the offline feature. I've been using a workaround to save my giant library off my MacBook Pro. The iLife connectivity and Flickr plugin are also very welcome.
Now I'm just hoping that this version of Aperture is a little snappier because even on a fully loaded MBP, I get beachballs all the time.
FX120
Apr 9, 12:55 PM
Sounds like MS either is paying Adobe a small fee or they are done being scared. It is not like Acrobat reader is anything more than just a PDF reader. Something the OS as sorely needed built in.
I think that all changed when adobe was forced to publish the specifications for the PDF format a few years back.
My guess is that it has more to do with antitrust regulation, primarily in Europe. I'm surprised that they can even include a calculator as part of Windows and still sell it in the EU.
I think that all changed when adobe was forced to publish the specifications for the PDF format a few years back.
My guess is that it has more to do with antitrust regulation, primarily in Europe. I'm surprised that they can even include a calculator as part of Windows and still sell it in the EU.
fxtech
Mar 29, 05:09 PM
I don't have much confidence in developers who eschew the App Store for their applications anyways, as in almost all cases it is a bad business move. I appreciate the business savvy of developers and companies who realize what a real advantage the app store model is, especially if you have a strong product.
That's pretty narrow minded of you. We sell a successful product for $1000 that uses an advanced licensing system for large facilities to "float" licenses between machines. The "App Store model" would be a horrible move for both us and our customers. Fortunately, since the people who need our tools already know about them (and would likely never turn to the app store to find such tools anyway), this isn't a big deal.
That's pretty narrow minded of you. We sell a successful product for $1000 that uses an advanced licensing system for large facilities to "float" licenses between machines. The "App Store model" would be a horrible move for both us and our customers. Fortunately, since the people who need our tools already know about them (and would likely never turn to the app store to find such tools anyway), this isn't a big deal.
Warbrain
Nov 16, 12:47 PM
this is bull, noway....
but amd would be cheaper I bet...
No it wouldn't. You might pay less for chips, but you will need to wait much longer as AMD doesn't anywhere near the capacity to produce processors like Intel does, therefore making Apple pay more in the end. That's part of the reason Apple went with Intel.
but amd would be cheaper I bet...
No it wouldn't. You might pay less for chips, but you will need to wait much longer as AMD doesn't anywhere near the capacity to produce processors like Intel does, therefore making Apple pay more in the end. That's part of the reason Apple went with Intel.
patrickdunn
Apr 25, 02:39 PM
I any of these were real, wouldn't we see a cease and desist letter?
mw360
Apr 6, 10:05 AM
I see your point, but I think that it's quite uncharitable to question the motives of individuals but let apple have a pass. They are in the position to do whatever they want, and there's no way that they WOULD reimburse those whose apps were rejected for the same function, but my point is that they shouldn't have rejected those apps at all. It's hypocritical of them to reject an app for a reason, and then when they get desperate for their iAd program to catch on more with advertisers (which apparently aren't as excited for the platform as Apple had hoped) they change their mind and create their own app.
And besides, an ad impression is an ad impression. The only iAds that I click on are accidental. If people want to download an app to see what an iAd looks like, they are also getting the best of what the advertisers had hoped for: the chance to make somebody want to use their product. They pay for the option of changing somebody's mind, not to actually do it. They pay to put the advertisement in partial view. Not to actually sell products directly.
It doesn't matter who makes the app, if they are putting the ads in front of people, they deserve the money. That goes for Apple or any of the several individuals that have already created such apps.
With respect, you clearly don't work in advertising. You pay to put ads in front of the right people, not just anyone. Especially not competing advertisers and agencies. Why do you think Google (a) makes so much advertising revenue and (b) collects so much data about its users? Coincidence?
Secondly individuals are just as greedy as corporations, and generally get to operate outside of the spotlight. Apple has a lot to lose if its iAd platform is seen to be poorly targeting users, but an App developer has a lot to gain from indiscriminate iAd spamming. So in this case, yes, for the sake of self interest I'd expect Apple to reimburse advertisers for clicks inside their iAd app, and I'd expect an independent developer of a similar app to laugh all the way to the bank.
I never said btw I'd expect Apple to reimburse developers for their time on rejected apps. Or if I did I didn't mean it.
And besides, an ad impression is an ad impression. The only iAds that I click on are accidental. If people want to download an app to see what an iAd looks like, they are also getting the best of what the advertisers had hoped for: the chance to make somebody want to use their product. They pay for the option of changing somebody's mind, not to actually do it. They pay to put the advertisement in partial view. Not to actually sell products directly.
It doesn't matter who makes the app, if they are putting the ads in front of people, they deserve the money. That goes for Apple or any of the several individuals that have already created such apps.
With respect, you clearly don't work in advertising. You pay to put ads in front of the right people, not just anyone. Especially not competing advertisers and agencies. Why do you think Google (a) makes so much advertising revenue and (b) collects so much data about its users? Coincidence?
Secondly individuals are just as greedy as corporations, and generally get to operate outside of the spotlight. Apple has a lot to lose if its iAd platform is seen to be poorly targeting users, but an App developer has a lot to gain from indiscriminate iAd spamming. So in this case, yes, for the sake of self interest I'd expect Apple to reimburse advertisers for clicks inside their iAd app, and I'd expect an independent developer of a similar app to laugh all the way to the bank.
I never said btw I'd expect Apple to reimburse developers for their time on rejected apps. Or if I did I didn't mean it.
Stridder44
Aug 7, 05:41 PM
So is contrast ratio just mean it can be brighter (700:1 compaired to 400:1)?
curmi
Nov 24, 04:09 AM
Huge saving on airport express. New Airport Ultra Express (802.11n) at Macworld!
Confirmed! :)
Confirmed! :)
No comments:
Post a Comment