peharri
Sep 18, 07:52 AM
I'm sure I late getting into the argument, and that fanboyism depending on what network youre own will not change, but I really think GSM does have better voice quality than any other network.
(Before I begin, quick terminology comment: I'm going to avoid "CDMA" and use the term "IS-95" instead - I try to avoid using terms like "CDMA" and "TDMA" because it generally confuses people. Many think the next version of GSM, UMTS, is actually IS95, because it incorporates a CDMA air interface called W-CDMA, for instance. Others think GSM is the same thing as the D-AMPS/IS-136 system used by (the various phone companies that became) Cingular until they started moving to GSM because both have a "TDMA" air interface and IS-136 is usually called "TDMA".) In practice, UMTS and IS95 have almost nothing in common, UMTS is a revision of GSM, and GSM has almost nothing in common with IS-136. )
There's no way to compare the two. Both IS-95 and GSM implement a variety of different codecs that are provided differently by different operators. In the area I live, Cingular (GSM) tries to force many phones to use something called AMR-HR, which has "acceptable" voice quality when you have good reception, and drops to barely incomprehensable with any deterioration in signal strength. T-Mobile (GSM) clearly doesn't, and I can talk and listen to someone with both of us sounding like we're on a landline with one bar of signal. On the same phone.
Likewise, Verizon (IS-95) uses some awful bitrate codec for its network where I live (I believe they're heavily oversubscribed here) where pretty much everyone sounds like they're dying from some serious lung problem, and Sprint PCS (IS-95 too) doesn't and generally the call quality, at medium to good reception, seems pretty much ok. Sub-landline, but not seriously so.
With the variety of voice codecs the operators use, you can't really make a fair judgement merely on the basis of network technology. Either the operator's cheap, or it isn't. IS-95 was chosen by many networks on the basis that it's spectrum efficient (ie it's cheap), but on the other hand Sprint PCS was always content with call drops when I used it to handle network overloading rather than seriously compromising on call quality. Cingular's move to GSM has caused problems in that it's using a significantly less spectrum efficient technology than the technology it replaced, so Cingular's had to, in many places, hopefully temporarily, use the crappy half-rate codecs to boost capacity until it can get more towers online.
I wouldn't use voice quality as a way to judge the technologies.
(Before I begin, quick terminology comment: I'm going to avoid "CDMA" and use the term "IS-95" instead - I try to avoid using terms like "CDMA" and "TDMA" because it generally confuses people. Many think the next version of GSM, UMTS, is actually IS95, because it incorporates a CDMA air interface called W-CDMA, for instance. Others think GSM is the same thing as the D-AMPS/IS-136 system used by (the various phone companies that became) Cingular until they started moving to GSM because both have a "TDMA" air interface and IS-136 is usually called "TDMA".) In practice, UMTS and IS95 have almost nothing in common, UMTS is a revision of GSM, and GSM has almost nothing in common with IS-136. )
There's no way to compare the two. Both IS-95 and GSM implement a variety of different codecs that are provided differently by different operators. In the area I live, Cingular (GSM) tries to force many phones to use something called AMR-HR, which has "acceptable" voice quality when you have good reception, and drops to barely incomprehensable with any deterioration in signal strength. T-Mobile (GSM) clearly doesn't, and I can talk and listen to someone with both of us sounding like we're on a landline with one bar of signal. On the same phone.
Likewise, Verizon (IS-95) uses some awful bitrate codec for its network where I live (I believe they're heavily oversubscribed here) where pretty much everyone sounds like they're dying from some serious lung problem, and Sprint PCS (IS-95 too) doesn't and generally the call quality, at medium to good reception, seems pretty much ok. Sub-landline, but not seriously so.
With the variety of voice codecs the operators use, you can't really make a fair judgement merely on the basis of network technology. Either the operator's cheap, or it isn't. IS-95 was chosen by many networks on the basis that it's spectrum efficient (ie it's cheap), but on the other hand Sprint PCS was always content with call drops when I used it to handle network overloading rather than seriously compromising on call quality. Cingular's move to GSM has caused problems in that it's using a significantly less spectrum efficient technology than the technology it replaced, so Cingular's had to, in many places, hopefully temporarily, use the crappy half-rate codecs to boost capacity until it can get more towers online.
I wouldn't use voice quality as a way to judge the technologies.
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.
Chundles
Aug 31, 09:56 PM
Whats the issue with regards to TV shows only available to the USA. Why can't they be made available in the UK and Europe.
Different regions, different distributors and laws.
Different regions, different distributors and laws.
Micjose
Apr 25, 01:44 PM
YESSS! Exactly what i wanted to hear. I'm waiting till the new redesign comes out to buy my First MacBook Pro.. :D
Warbrain
Apr 20, 10:22 AM
So does turning of Locations Services stop the data collection, or just stop applications from accessing it?
Does turning of Location services delete data already in the file?
I guess it works both ways, if accused of a crime you didn't commit, bring your phone to work and prove you were not their. And if you are going to commit a crime, leave your phone at home.
No one has stated if it does or doesn't. Until someone states what happens we can only go with the SLA.
Does turning of Location services delete data already in the file?
I guess it works both ways, if accused of a crime you didn't commit, bring your phone to work and prove you were not their. And if you are going to commit a crime, leave your phone at home.
No one has stated if it does or doesn't. Until someone states what happens we can only go with the SLA.
glitch44
Apr 30, 01:28 PM
Why do they want OS X users to feel as if we were on an iPad!!!???
If I wanted/needed one, I'd buy one. What the hell !!!???????:mad::mad::mad::mad:
Decaf. Look into it.
If I wanted/needed one, I'd buy one. What the hell !!!???????:mad::mad::mad::mad:
Decaf. Look into it.
milo
Mar 30, 12:15 PM
While my gut wants to side with MS on this one, there's a simple test of whether App Store is generic or not.
Before apple created the App Store within iTunes, was the term in use (and specifically "app store", not just "app")? Possibly more importantly, before they applied for the trademark was any company selling apps and calling it by that term?
It probably comes down to prior art - if it truly is a generic term, then someone should be able to provide the example of X used the term in 19XX, before the trademark was filed. Anyone here able to provide an example of the term being used before Apple filed for it?
Before apple created the App Store within iTunes, was the term in use (and specifically "app store", not just "app")? Possibly more importantly, before they applied for the trademark was any company selling apps and calling it by that term?
It probably comes down to prior art - if it truly is a generic term, then someone should be able to provide the example of X used the term in 19XX, before the trademark was filed. Anyone here able to provide an example of the term being used before Apple filed for it?
Huntn
Apr 25, 09:22 AM
Originally Posted by Huntn View Post
I'd say since the high point of post WWII, we as a society in the U.S. have done our best to eradicate The New Deal and move back to reaching for magnificant wealth while screwing each other over?
really? we've been getting LESS progressive since the new deal? I was under the impression that our government is GIGANTIC and tries to babysit us at every turn while simultaneously urinating on the constitution
There is vision and there is execution. Our democratic system of zigging and zagging every 4 to 8 years is hurting us. And no one involved in running government even when conservatives with the stated intent of dismantling government seems to be able to remove the inefficiencies.
I see 3 paths:
1. Anarchy- no government
2. Minimalist government- handles very basics of infrastructure and laws and enforcement. When it comes to social economic issues, every person for them selves.
3. Caretaker government- takes care of everything for us.
I think we should be somewhere between #2 and 3, however this is based on an efficient government which can be argued is an oxymoron. ;) When people in economic power display morals, then less regulation is needed, otherwise you need to regulate the hell out of them. For the last 30 years we have been sliding into the realm of pure unadulterated greed. If you don't have a people oriented government acting as the referee, then you'll find yourself right back in the 1800s with the little people holding up the barrons and Captains of Industry upon their shoulders. That is not equitable imo.
I'd say since the high point of post WWII, we as a society in the U.S. have done our best to eradicate The New Deal and move back to reaching for magnificant wealth while screwing each other over?
really? we've been getting LESS progressive since the new deal? I was under the impression that our government is GIGANTIC and tries to babysit us at every turn while simultaneously urinating on the constitution
There is vision and there is execution. Our democratic system of zigging and zagging every 4 to 8 years is hurting us. And no one involved in running government even when conservatives with the stated intent of dismantling government seems to be able to remove the inefficiencies.
I see 3 paths:
1. Anarchy- no government
2. Minimalist government- handles very basics of infrastructure and laws and enforcement. When it comes to social economic issues, every person for them selves.
3. Caretaker government- takes care of everything for us.
I think we should be somewhere between #2 and 3, however this is based on an efficient government which can be argued is an oxymoron. ;) When people in economic power display morals, then less regulation is needed, otherwise you need to regulate the hell out of them. For the last 30 years we have been sliding into the realm of pure unadulterated greed. If you don't have a people oriented government acting as the referee, then you'll find yourself right back in the 1800s with the little people holding up the barrons and Captains of Industry upon their shoulders. That is not equitable imo.
halhiker
Sep 5, 01:31 AM
I don't really get the point of wireless video unless you can somehow incorporate a pause feature into it. What am I going to do with the video if I have to answer the door or phone or go to the can or get a snack? Do I have to go to my computer and reset the video and hope that when it streams to the TV or whatever it's at the right spot? For me it would be much easier to just move the movie to my iPod, put the iPod in a dock with a remote and watch it that way. Unless maybe the new airport device has it's own remote! Now that might be interesting. :D
Hal
Hal
extraextra
Oct 12, 01:35 PM
That looks nice. If it doesn't have Bono's name/signature/U2-something on it, I might have to buy it!
cardude280
May 3, 11:33 AM
As before, that support is entirely derived from ATI's GPUs and the available number of outputs.
You can get 5 Mini-DisplayPort connectors on a single slot video card.
but i thought half the point of TB was that you would only need one output from the computer, and since we don't have any TB displays (or anything for that matter) how do we know that the ports are limited to one display?
You can get 5 Mini-DisplayPort connectors on a single slot video card.
but i thought half the point of TB was that you would only need one output from the computer, and since we don't have any TB displays (or anything for that matter) how do we know that the ports are limited to one display?
0815
Apr 20, 12:17 PM
Time to check my wifes iPhone backup tonight :rolleyes:
LarryC
Apr 23, 01:55 PM
I am curious about something. Intel is apparently having difficulty dealing with ATI, which is owned by AMD. Is this a problem for Apple that is limited to notebooks only? It seems like the new MBP doesn't have this same problem, except in the 13" model. Is this problem going to affect Apple's desktop machines? Or is it only limited to the very small laptops and perhaps the Mac Mini? I am just curious because it doesn't appear that the MBP 15 & 17" are effected. I do hope that this makes sense. I have been waiting to see the next versions of the Mac Book and the iMac. I would like to have a portable and I don't care or need a laptop that is a quarter of an inch in thickness or if it weighs a pound more than a Mac Book Air.
Ugg
Apr 18, 10:02 AM
I don't know if i can. Give me some time. But doesn't it make sense that if u stop using something that killed disease spreading insects that the insects will continue to spread the disease?
Repelling bugs with Grapefruit (http://www.npr.org/2011/04/18/135468567/repelling-bugs-with-the-essence-of-grapefruit)
Safe Enough To Drink
That's why the CDC is pushing hard to develop a completely natural insect repellent made from a chemical called nootkatone, which is found in Alaska yellow cedar trees and citrus fruit.
Dolan says nootkatone "is nongreasy, dries very quickly, and it has a very pleasant, citrus-y grapefruit odor to it."
He recently demonstrated its effectiveness as a mosquito repellent, rubbing some on his hand and then sticking it into a cage containing 50 hungry mosquitoes. When he holds the treated hand near mosquitoes, they try to get away in the opposite direction as fast as they can.
Even after five minutes, Dolan has no bites on his nootkatone-treated hand.
Nootkatone is also effective against ticks, and scientists think it will work against bed bugs, head lice and other insects, too.
Moreover, nootkatone is so nontoxic you could drink it. In fact, it's already an approved food additive, officially classed as "Generally Considered Safe." It's also a natural ingredient in some foods.
The US became great, not because it relied on old ways of doing things, but because it created new ways that were more efficient.
Malaria has been a big problem for decades and you want to know why? Because it affects mostly poor Africans, people who don't have megabucks to pay for exotic cures. Now I realize that the chemical producers of the world would rather that everyone take their word as gospel and pretend that the harmful effects of DDT, BPA, Benzene, Formaldehyde, PVC amongst others are highly overblown and that if we just believe in the chemical companies and their shills, we'lll be living some sort of magical 50s sort of life.
If you'll read the article, you'll notice that the CDC owns the patents for nootkatone. Business is only interested in helping people when it fattens their bottom line. As a result, when it comes to things like malaria, it often takes government intervention to jump start issues.
So what do you want? A nation that always strives for the best solution or one that is only interested in getting by as long as it makes them money? It doesn't take a genius to see that by constantly supporting outdated technology, the US will soon be left behind.
Once again, what kind of world do you want to live in?
Repelling bugs with Grapefruit (http://www.npr.org/2011/04/18/135468567/repelling-bugs-with-the-essence-of-grapefruit)
Safe Enough To Drink
That's why the CDC is pushing hard to develop a completely natural insect repellent made from a chemical called nootkatone, which is found in Alaska yellow cedar trees and citrus fruit.
Dolan says nootkatone "is nongreasy, dries very quickly, and it has a very pleasant, citrus-y grapefruit odor to it."
He recently demonstrated its effectiveness as a mosquito repellent, rubbing some on his hand and then sticking it into a cage containing 50 hungry mosquitoes. When he holds the treated hand near mosquitoes, they try to get away in the opposite direction as fast as they can.
Even after five minutes, Dolan has no bites on his nootkatone-treated hand.
Nootkatone is also effective against ticks, and scientists think it will work against bed bugs, head lice and other insects, too.
Moreover, nootkatone is so nontoxic you could drink it. In fact, it's already an approved food additive, officially classed as "Generally Considered Safe." It's also a natural ingredient in some foods.
The US became great, not because it relied on old ways of doing things, but because it created new ways that were more efficient.
Malaria has been a big problem for decades and you want to know why? Because it affects mostly poor Africans, people who don't have megabucks to pay for exotic cures. Now I realize that the chemical producers of the world would rather that everyone take their word as gospel and pretend that the harmful effects of DDT, BPA, Benzene, Formaldehyde, PVC amongst others are highly overblown and that if we just believe in the chemical companies and their shills, we'lll be living some sort of magical 50s sort of life.
If you'll read the article, you'll notice that the CDC owns the patents for nootkatone. Business is only interested in helping people when it fattens their bottom line. As a result, when it comes to things like malaria, it often takes government intervention to jump start issues.
So what do you want? A nation that always strives for the best solution or one that is only interested in getting by as long as it makes them money? It doesn't take a genius to see that by constantly supporting outdated technology, the US will soon be left behind.
Once again, what kind of world do you want to live in?
Bob Caruthers
Mar 24, 05:08 PM
I'm right behind you, my iMac G5 had a logic board issue...got it working though on all external drives...talk about slow
I'm working in Safe Boot until whenever the new ones come out.
I have pretty much everything except audio!
I'm working in Safe Boot until whenever the new ones come out.
I have pretty much everything except audio!
epitaphic
Aug 28, 04:00 PM
There's no question that apple will not *ship* merom machines tomorrow. But there's nothing stopping them from making the announcement and taking preorders.
ah yes. just like they did with the eMac back in the day. that was popular... you know, not having a product to ship for weeks.
ah yes. just like they did with the eMac back in the day. that was popular... you know, not having a product to ship for weeks.
dwman
Apr 28, 03:36 PM
This pretty much sums it up.
DavidLeblond
Aug 28, 02:00 PM
If you walked into the Apple Store today and bought a 2GHz MacBook, it'd be the most current.
Until tomorrow.
Well, allegedly. ... More like in my dreams.
Until tomorrow.
Well, allegedly. ... More like in my dreams.
milo
Aug 29, 07:49 AM
.
Dmac77
Apr 25, 12:30 AM
Out in my neck of the woods we have a pretty well strapped police dept and they DO respond to 911 calls about drunk drivers. In fact, in Cali there's signs all over the place telling you to call 911 to report them. lol :)
Glad I don't live where you do :P
Ok, it's obvious you're very confident behind the handling abilities of your car, so hear me out:
* What kind of car is it
* When was the last time you checked your brakes
* How old are your tires, what kind are they, and when was the last time you checked the tire pressure - what was it?
* When was the last time you inspected your tire treads and suspension
I hope you can answer some of these questions.
Admittedly, if you don't do any of the above your car might be unsafe at any speed.
*BMW M5 (my mother's weekend car)
*Brakes were replaced less than a week ago during the car's 100,000 mile service
*Michelin Pilot SuperSport Tires, they are less than a year old, the pressure is 44psi front 48psi rear (per BMW's recommendation), tire pressure was checked less than 48 hours ago when the car last had gas put in it
*Tire treads are inspected every time gas is put in the car, suspension was clean according to our BMW dealership
EDIT: @mrsir2009 - Michigan driving laws specifically state that if you rear end someone, no matter what, you are at fault. You must always keep enough distance between you and the car in front of you to avoid hitting it if they slam on their breaks. My mother has been there and done that. She cut a woman off, breakchecked her, and the woman hit her, the woman was at fault and my Mom even sued her for the cost of the deductible and won, all while admitting that she cut the woman off and breakchecked her.
-Don
Glad I don't live where you do :P
Ok, it's obvious you're very confident behind the handling abilities of your car, so hear me out:
* What kind of car is it
* When was the last time you checked your brakes
* How old are your tires, what kind are they, and when was the last time you checked the tire pressure - what was it?
* When was the last time you inspected your tire treads and suspension
I hope you can answer some of these questions.
Admittedly, if you don't do any of the above your car might be unsafe at any speed.
*BMW M5 (my mother's weekend car)
*Brakes were replaced less than a week ago during the car's 100,000 mile service
*Michelin Pilot SuperSport Tires, they are less than a year old, the pressure is 44psi front 48psi rear (per BMW's recommendation), tire pressure was checked less than 48 hours ago when the car last had gas put in it
*Tire treads are inspected every time gas is put in the car, suspension was clean according to our BMW dealership
EDIT: @mrsir2009 - Michigan driving laws specifically state that if you rear end someone, no matter what, you are at fault. You must always keep enough distance between you and the car in front of you to avoid hitting it if they slam on their breaks. My mother has been there and done that. She cut a woman off, breakchecked her, and the woman hit her, the woman was at fault and my Mom even sued her for the cost of the deductible and won, all while admitting that she cut the woman off and breakchecked her.
-Don
Tom Sawyer
Apr 30, 07:54 PM
Then I wouldn't plan on ever going back to an iMac.
Definitely no plan to. Apple (SJ) is far to enamored with glossy screens to give anyone options on the large displays/iMacs. I'm still surprised they actually brought the matte option back to MBP's.
Definitely no plan to. Apple (SJ) is far to enamored with glossy screens to give anyone options on the large displays/iMacs. I'm still surprised they actually brought the matte option back to MBP's.
Platform
Sep 26, 08:58 AM
That artists rendition posted on the front page is pointless. It's not as though that is the actual design. It looks too Nano-ish, and even the Nano look has changed.
Anyway, I'm not excited about an iPhone. It would need to give me at least one neat feature for this to be worth drooling over.
Anyway, I'm not excited about an iPhone. It would need to give me at least one neat feature for this to be worth drooling over.
macfan70
Sep 5, 02:42 PM
Well, what ever comes out, I hope it's not some upgrade or revamp. I wish Apple really does Think Different and releases new hardware that will make us say " That really is something new. "
But, updates are always welcome.;)
But, updates are always welcome.;)
rmitchell
Sep 13, 09:57 PM
Ok Guys,
I know I've never posted before and I have 0 credibility in the apple rumors field but I've been sitting on something for about a month now that I wasn't sure when to let out.
I have a friend who was at a mobile conference on computing about a month ago who let me in on a demo of the apple iPhone that he saw. It had a covered company logo which he caught a glimpse of (it was a Samsung system.) The kicker on the whole system is the method of display built on the phone.
It has a built in projector that puts the display of the screen on any local area (such as a wall.) That is the secret to the apple iPhone. I'll understand if I'm bashed on here and have no support but I'm just reporting the information that I've been given (admittedly second hand but hopefully I'm on the right track.)
Rob
I know I've never posted before and I have 0 credibility in the apple rumors field but I've been sitting on something for about a month now that I wasn't sure when to let out.
I have a friend who was at a mobile conference on computing about a month ago who let me in on a demo of the apple iPhone that he saw. It had a covered company logo which he caught a glimpse of (it was a Samsung system.) The kicker on the whole system is the method of display built on the phone.
It has a built in projector that puts the display of the screen on any local area (such as a wall.) That is the secret to the apple iPhone. I'll understand if I'm bashed on here and have no support but I'm just reporting the information that I've been given (admittedly second hand but hopefully I'm on the right track.)
Rob
0 comments:
Post a Comment