Moyank24
Apr 25, 03:12 AM
i thought this from my first post, but his join date is 08, and he's a regular. that is what has me thinking that what he is saying is really how he thinks/acts.
I don't doubt that he goes around cutting people off at dangerous speeds. That screams of trying to make himself feel like less of a loser.
It's all the other crap that I think is BS...the money, connected family members, SAT score, all of the volunteering, Harvard. Complete lies. The kid is sitting in his basement listening to death metal (no offense to those who like that kind of music) as we speak and cursing all of the girls in his class because nobody would be caught dead at Prom with him.
I don't doubt that he goes around cutting people off at dangerous speeds. That screams of trying to make himself feel like less of a loser.
It's all the other crap that I think is BS...the money, connected family members, SAT score, all of the volunteering, Harvard. Complete lies. The kid is sitting in his basement listening to death metal (no offense to those who like that kind of music) as we speak and cursing all of the girls in his class because nobody would be caught dead at Prom with him.
mox358
Sep 4, 09:51 PM
They might want to make money off of the millions of people who watch TV outside of the US (where they don't sell their TV shows). They also don't have to provide for every TV possibility, just as EyeTV doesn't cover all options (and I agree with others that EyeTV is a good solution, but why not have a true Apple alternative?).
Very good counterpoint. But then to protect their TV show sales in the U.S. if they leave out the tuner here, and include in it other countries that would look really bad.
The obvious solution is not to include one from the start. If people want one, then sell them the EyeTV on the Apple store. Makes Apple's base hardware cheaper (which looks good in advertisements), keeps all their hardware the same in different countries (which looks good to investors and the public doesn't feel like they're getting screwed), and still offer the option to those who want it while keeping a Mac supporting company happy (by not stepping on their toes and killing them).
I don't think a TV tuner/Media mac is a bad idea, I just don't think its gonna happen for the reasons I mentioned. I could be wrong though, I'm just speculating. I haven't had a chance to take any crappy camera phone pictures of un-announced Apple products in shady elevators lately:D
Very good counterpoint. But then to protect their TV show sales in the U.S. if they leave out the tuner here, and include in it other countries that would look really bad.
The obvious solution is not to include one from the start. If people want one, then sell them the EyeTV on the Apple store. Makes Apple's base hardware cheaper (which looks good in advertisements), keeps all their hardware the same in different countries (which looks good to investors and the public doesn't feel like they're getting screwed), and still offer the option to those who want it while keeping a Mac supporting company happy (by not stepping on their toes and killing them).
I don't think a TV tuner/Media mac is a bad idea, I just don't think its gonna happen for the reasons I mentioned. I could be wrong though, I'm just speculating. I haven't had a chance to take any crappy camera phone pictures of un-announced Apple products in shady elevators lately:D
finalcut
Apr 19, 08:19 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 2.3.3; en-gb; Nexus S Build/GRI40) AppleWebKit/533.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile Safari/533.1)
I wonder what will happen here. Form the "who's suing who" infrographics I've seen, Samsung remained pretty much untouched until now.
I agree with you, mainly because, usually, Samsung develop their own stuff themself and are not known to copy others. But that time, damn Samsung, how can they say they did not!
I wonder what will happen here. Form the "who's suing who" infrographics I've seen, Samsung remained pretty much untouched until now.
I agree with you, mainly because, usually, Samsung develop their own stuff themself and are not known to copy others. But that time, damn Samsung, how can they say they did not!
MarcelV
Aug 31, 03:09 PM
Iand who has been feverishly building bandwidth and capability to deliver full length full resolution movies...Google has.
Google is buying up Dark Fiber. That means no end points into homes like Verizons FIOS has. The bottleneck for full length high resolution movies will be from decentralized distribution centers to the homes. Dark Fiber is helping, but not by much.
Google is buying up Dark Fiber. That means no end points into homes like Verizons FIOS has. The bottleneck for full length high resolution movies will be from decentralized distribution centers to the homes. Dark Fiber is helping, but not by much.
Thanatoast
Sep 15, 05:46 PM
Glad to hear that they're considering making 2 or 3 different phones. That way I can get my smartphone while others can get their regular phones.
kntgsp
Apr 23, 03:18 AM
As long as it doesnt shudder with the OS X animations and it plays 1080p smoothly, why does it matter? Do people really game on an Air?
Because people are stupid, that's why.
No one realistically games on a Macbook Air. And the SNB IGP is actually very capable. Their GMA offerings have generally always been crap but the 3000 is quite the opposite.
That said, the main use for the Air is as an ultraportable. And the improved battery life and lowered heat output are major advantages for an ultraportable that only a moron would ignore.
Because people are stupid, that's why.
No one realistically games on a Macbook Air. And the SNB IGP is actually very capable. Their GMA offerings have generally always been crap but the 3000 is quite the opposite.
That said, the main use for the Air is as an ultraportable. And the improved battery life and lowered heat output are major advantages for an ultraportable that only a moron would ignore.
samiwas
Apr 18, 04:56 PM
Of course that is ridiculous, and I totally agree there should be a line, but where do we draw it? Who gets to draw it?
Ummm...that was pretty much the point....:confused:
The line should be drawn by universal standard workers laws that prevent an employer from needlessly abusing their employees (timewise) without just compensation.
For instance, when I'm working on a union job (yeah, those awful unions protecting workers and stuff), anything over 8 hours a day is time+half. Anything between midnight and 6am is double-time. More than 40 hours in a 7-day period is time+half. Sunday is time+half. The employer has a right to decide when he wants his job done, and he can pay the price for it. The problem is that most employers choose ridiculous timelines and budgets, and the people working for them are stuck having to work the hours to complete something beyond their control. Without some sort of workers protection laws, this will only get worse and worse.
Of course, there are jobs that have to get done in a certain amount of time (as I referenced above), and some people may alter their speed and go slower to push into that overtime (of course this happens...I've seen it firsthand and abhor the practice). But that's no different than an employer dumping a new workload onto someone on Friday afternoon and saying "Yeeeaahh...I'm gonna need you to go ahead and come in tomorrow. Oh, and I almost forgot, I'm also gonna need you to go ahead and come in on Sunday, too, okay? We, uh, lost some people this week, and, uh, we have to sort of play catch up. Thanks!"
So, do you prefer a world where the employer has all the control and can make his employees do whatever he wants for whatever he wants to pay (or they can quit/be fired), or a world where employees have some sort of power to require fair compensation for extraordinary work periods? I know which I prefer, and I'm pretty sure I know which you prefer.
What about a hotshot stock trader making a killing working 80+ hours a week on salary. Should we be allowed to work this much without overtime?
I realize it is an obscure analogy, but it is valid nonetheless.
What does the hotshot trader making a killing have to do with anything? What if the trader is working 80 hours a week and not making a killing? Is the trader WANTING to work 80 hours, or is his firm requiring him to work 80 hours? Are they compensating him or is he just working for the man making the killing for his company but not really seeing the results for himself? I guess if someone WANTS to work 80 hours for free, you can let them...but it should never be a required part of the job.
Ummm...that was pretty much the point....:confused:
The line should be drawn by universal standard workers laws that prevent an employer from needlessly abusing their employees (timewise) without just compensation.
For instance, when I'm working on a union job (yeah, those awful unions protecting workers and stuff), anything over 8 hours a day is time+half. Anything between midnight and 6am is double-time. More than 40 hours in a 7-day period is time+half. Sunday is time+half. The employer has a right to decide when he wants his job done, and he can pay the price for it. The problem is that most employers choose ridiculous timelines and budgets, and the people working for them are stuck having to work the hours to complete something beyond their control. Without some sort of workers protection laws, this will only get worse and worse.
Of course, there are jobs that have to get done in a certain amount of time (as I referenced above), and some people may alter their speed and go slower to push into that overtime (of course this happens...I've seen it firsthand and abhor the practice). But that's no different than an employer dumping a new workload onto someone on Friday afternoon and saying "Yeeeaahh...I'm gonna need you to go ahead and come in tomorrow. Oh, and I almost forgot, I'm also gonna need you to go ahead and come in on Sunday, too, okay? We, uh, lost some people this week, and, uh, we have to sort of play catch up. Thanks!"
So, do you prefer a world where the employer has all the control and can make his employees do whatever he wants for whatever he wants to pay (or they can quit/be fired), or a world where employees have some sort of power to require fair compensation for extraordinary work periods? I know which I prefer, and I'm pretty sure I know which you prefer.
What about a hotshot stock trader making a killing working 80+ hours a week on salary. Should we be allowed to work this much without overtime?
I realize it is an obscure analogy, but it is valid nonetheless.
What does the hotshot trader making a killing have to do with anything? What if the trader is working 80 hours a week and not making a killing? Is the trader WANTING to work 80 hours, or is his firm requiring him to work 80 hours? Are they compensating him or is he just working for the man making the killing for his company but not really seeing the results for himself? I guess if someone WANTS to work 80 hours for free, you can let them...but it should never be a required part of the job.
Piggie
Apr 15, 03:14 PM
And no BluRay. ;)
Ah, remember, the general consumer is not interested in the specs of BluRay, a nice 720p is plenty good enough so we are told.
Only geeks worry about such specs.
free coloring pages for adults
printable coloring pages for
printable coloring pages
free coloring pages for adults
free coloring pages for adults
printable coloring pages for
free coloring pages for adults
coloring pages for adults
free coloring pages for adults
printable coloring pages for
free coloring pages for adults
Ah, remember, the general consumer is not interested in the specs of BluRay, a nice 720p is plenty good enough so we are told.
Only geeks worry about such specs.
dante@sisna.com
Sep 19, 02:31 PM
wow! impressive.
I guess people value convenience over quality. That's great for Apple. That confirms it will be a success.
For me I rather buy DVDs or wait for hi definition downloads, but I guess many people out there are satisfy with lower quality.
Can't wait for ITV tough.
Neither -- My download on my 4MB cable connection (real speed) took about 50 minutes AND the quality was outstanding on my 30" cinema display -- looked the same as DVD to me. No defects, no artifacts. Crisp Color.
I will order again. Way nicer than storing DVD's.
I guess people value convenience over quality. That's great for Apple. That confirms it will be a success.
For me I rather buy DVDs or wait for hi definition downloads, but I guess many people out there are satisfy with lower quality.
Can't wait for ITV tough.
Neither -- My download on my 4MB cable connection (real speed) took about 50 minutes AND the quality was outstanding on my 30" cinema display -- looked the same as DVD to me. No defects, no artifacts. Crisp Color.
I will order again. Way nicer than storing DVD's.
racer1441
Apr 4, 12:38 PM
Good on the cop. Criminals are scum. Got what he deserved.
HecubusPro
Sep 19, 01:59 PM
I'd gladly wait overnight for a solid 1080p movie that played in quicktime. Don't need the DVD features (or frickin' ads). Just give me the movie.
I would be exstatic to get a 720p movie, and like you, I would certainly have no problem waiting the time it would take to download it. I just want HD downloadable content from iTMS, which is why the iTV has me so excited. I may hold off on getting that HD-DVD player until I learn more about it.
I would be exstatic to get a 720p movie, and like you, I would certainly have no problem waiting the time it would take to download it. I just want HD downloadable content from iTMS, which is why the iTV has me so excited. I may hold off on getting that HD-DVD player until I learn more about it.
emon878
Mar 23, 06:51 PM
Do a poll macrumors.... Us 6 want them pulled Now!!... the others not quoted want them to stay on the App Store for no real good or beneficial reason
I'll give you a reason many people that use this are drivers who aren't drunk and just want to avoid the hassle. Like others have said if you are drunk enough this would be hard to use.
I'll give you a reason many people that use this are drivers who aren't drunk and just want to avoid the hassle. Like others have said if you are drunk enough this would be hard to use.
joeboy_45101
Aug 23, 07:07 PM
Well, I guess we can be relieved that this lawsuit didn't become something worse.
As much as I think this is a BS patent and lawsuit at least Apple can continue to sell iPods. Just imagine if Apple lost the lawsuit and Creative denied them use of the patented technology.
BS as it all is, I'm just relieved that its over. :o
As much as I think this is a BS patent and lawsuit at least Apple can continue to sell iPods. Just imagine if Apple lost the lawsuit and Creative denied them use of the patented technology.
BS as it all is, I'm just relieved that its over. :o
LagunaSol
Apr 4, 12:50 PM
I'm not a gun control advocate. I own a gun. But I laugh at the absurd notion of being a hero when threatened.
So, um...what are you going to do with your gun when threatened? :confused:
These glorified stories of what would have happened in situation X if someone had had a gun are laughable. It doesn't work like that.
How do you know?
So, um...what are you going to do with your gun when threatened? :confused:
These glorified stories of what would have happened in situation X if someone had had a gun are laughable. It doesn't work like that.
How do you know?
AppleScruff1
Apr 20, 01:06 PM
If Steve says it's good, then all will be forgiven.
KnightWRX
Apr 19, 09:17 AM
They have plenty of patents. It wasn't until the 90s that the patent madness really started with software. Google is also leading the bidding for a large portfolio of mobile patents to protect them against Apple and Microsoft.
Actually, they don't have the Nortel patents yet. A good read if you really believe Google is "patently strong" :
http://fosspatents.blogspot.com/2011/01/google-is-patently-too-weak-to-protect.html
Actually, they don't have the Nortel patents yet. A good read if you really believe Google is "patently strong" :
http://fosspatents.blogspot.com/2011/01/google-is-patently-too-weak-to-protect.html
JGowan
Mar 22, 02:18 PM
The new 27-inch model will be my father's first computer (he'll turn 78 this June 1st) � I would've bought him one long ago, but he stills works for Union Pacific Railroad (conductor) and is never home. He says however, that he's ready and wants an iMac.
This is going to be a great BDay for him!
This is going to be a great BDay for him!
Uragon
Mar 30, 01:08 PM
The real question is why MS is so bothered about Apple using 'App Store'. Historically MS (almost) never used the word App, instead using the word Programs. Surely MS can come up with many alternatives that describe their own store equally well, if not better. Why fight with Apple over this? I can only conclude that it is to spite Apple, or to ride Apple's coat tails yet again.
Even if MS is right, logically, linguistically, I find their attitude over this rather puerile. PR-wise it says to me "Apple, if we can't imitate you, we'll sue you"
MS sinks lower in my opinion by the day.
Completely agree with you. Not sure why Microsoft making this a BIG deal.
Even if MS is right, logically, linguistically, I find their attitude over this rather puerile. PR-wise it says to me "Apple, if we can't imitate you, we'll sue you"
MS sinks lower in my opinion by the day.
Completely agree with you. Not sure why Microsoft making this a BIG deal.
macquariumguy
Apr 19, 01:06 PM
I too am exempt. We don't clock in, but do put down hours worked on our contracts (because that is what the customer wants). Functionally I am an hourly employee, because if I do not work a full 40 hours I don't get 40 hours worth of pay.
From that description, you don't sound like an exempt employee to me. I'm not a labor lawyer, but if I was in your shoes I think I'd be reading up on the subject. There are rules that employers are supposed to follow.
What I don't get is if I did 40 hours worth of work, but in 35 hours I still would only get paid for 35 hours. I thought being on salary would remove that.
Heh, if you can do it in 35 hours then it is not 40 hours worth of work, is it? :)
From that description, you don't sound like an exempt employee to me. I'm not a labor lawyer, but if I was in your shoes I think I'd be reading up on the subject. There are rules that employers are supposed to follow.
What I don't get is if I did 40 hours worth of work, but in 35 hours I still would only get paid for 35 hours. I thought being on salary would remove that.
Heh, if you can do it in 35 hours then it is not 40 hours worth of work, is it? :)
cmaier
Nov 13, 05:13 PM
No, VNC displaying the entire screen from the computer and Apple has a built in VNC server in their OS. This is a matter of taking the icon images themselves and using them for another purpose in a client/server application rather than in an app running on the mac itself. It is a clear case of copyright infringement. RA could have avoided all of this by simply providing their own licensed icons.
@guet: You should read what you wrote. You are proving yourself wrong with your own points. They are licensed for use on a mac, not for distribution to a client machine be it an iphone, Blackberry or Android.
You say that but it's not necessarily true. One of my apps was rejected for depicting an image of an Apple product. Not a copyrighted file, mind you. Just a little icon, drawn by me, that looked like an Apple product. It was rejected for depicting an Apple trademark.
@guet: You should read what you wrote. You are proving yourself wrong with your own points. They are licensed for use on a mac, not for distribution to a client machine be it an iphone, Blackberry or Android.
You say that but it's not necessarily true. One of my apps was rejected for depicting an image of an Apple product. Not a copyrighted file, mind you. Just a little icon, drawn by me, that looked like an Apple product. It was rejected for depicting an Apple trademark.
steve_hill4
Sep 14, 08:39 AM
Having just seen Sony's soon to be launched line-up, (Sony Rep showing us all sneak previews of models we'll be getting), I think Apple need Core 2 Duo in the MBPs very soon and may be getting them in the MacBook no later than MWSF, possibly even November.
As for Aperture 2, I just wonder what extra features it will offer. It would be a shame if it turned out to be merely an update.
As for Aperture 2, I just wonder what extra features it will offer. It would be a shame if it turned out to be merely an update.
theBB
Sep 26, 10:00 PM
When was the last time Think Secret had a rumor that turned out to be true? Who cares what TS claims, this rumor about "Cingular only" is not worth losing sleep over.
Nevertheless, Apple is taking longer than I thought they would in bringing a phone to market. It does not seem like it will be introduced by Christmas and that's a pity.
Nevertheless, Apple is taking longer than I thought they would in bringing a phone to market. It does not seem like it will be introduced by Christmas and that's a pity.
Cougarcat
Apr 30, 03:58 PM
Apple really needs to get on the SATA-3 bandwagon. There are already plenty of SSD choices that can utilize the higher throughput, and more drives are on the way.
Not to mention the fact that most motherboards out there today all have SATA-3 and have for a while now.
2011 MBPs are Sata III. The 2011 iMac will definitely have it.
Not to mention the fact that most motherboards out there today all have SATA-3 and have for a while now.
2011 MBPs are Sata III. The 2011 iMac will definitely have it.
n-abounds
Sep 8, 02:44 PM
Right. You won't get the full 64 bit native benfits of Leopard without either a G5 or a Core 2 Duo processor.
It'll still run on a G4 just fine.
Yea thanks, I really have no idea what 64-bit and 32-bit is about...all I know is that Core Duo didn't support it...
Now I'm buying a new mac soon- thinking of going with 17inch iMac. Will a 128MB video card be enough for Vista to run perfectly? I want as many features as possible...
It'll still run on a G4 just fine.
Yea thanks, I really have no idea what 64-bit and 32-bit is about...all I know is that Core Duo didn't support it...
Now I'm buying a new mac soon- thinking of going with 17inch iMac. Will a 128MB video card be enough for Vista to run perfectly? I want as many features as possible...
0 comments:
Post a Comment