zedsdead
Apr 15, 12:58 PM
It's fake. If Apple chooses to use the ipads design with the next iPhone, then it will have the plastic black bar like the 3G version. The apple logo is not enough for all the antenea, just the wi-fi probably.
nomik2
Mar 17, 09:46 AM
As for the Karma, I found a iPhone 4 at Macy's 2-days before shopping with my girlfriend, and I didn't think twice about not turning it in. I made this woman's day when she got it back. So I figured hey, maybe that was a little something I got for doing something honest a few days before
So I killed someone last week, but its ok cuz I helped an old lady cross the street last year.
So I killed someone last week, but its ok cuz I helped an old lady cross the street last year.
applebum
Aug 5, 12:09 PM
I was thinking, ( always a dangerous activity).
There IS one thing that could make me switch over to the cross platform compatibility side of this argument.
That would be if the CC of Norway enforced it ACROSS THE BOARD!
My first MP3 player was a Creative Zen Micro. The only reason I have an iPod is because when I switched to Macs, the nice people at Creative Labs informed me that their sync software DID NOT SUPPORT MAC OS.
I can't even access Sony's Connect music store on my Mac. I'm told I need to "upgrade to Internet Explorer 5.5 or higher". (Upgrade to IE??? Bwahahahahaha!!! Those silly wabbits. :D)
I have a couple of programs I used in my PC days that are completely useless now, they won't run on Mac OS. Why not? I bought them! I paid for them! What right do these software companies have to lock me into a single platform?
I have, at last count, 317 files on my comp with the extension .xls. If I should decide I prefer to use Lotus, will I be able to open these files as is? Or will I have to take the time to convert them to XML format? Will I lose any of the custom formatting these files contain? ( I honestly don't know. I'm just beginning to learn the ODF stuff. Beside, current version of Lotus appears to be Windows only!) And these files aren't something I paid for, they are my own creations!
I'd be more than willing to see Apple surrender some iPod sales, (given the quality of the product, I don't think it would be much), if it would remove the single largest block against switching to Mac OS; the availabilty of software! Then the OS's could compete on other planes; features, ease of use, quality of computing experience, stability, etc. All of which would be, dare I say, good for the consumer?
Maybe I'm just a silly dreamer, but imagine the boon to Mac and Linux users if all these software development companies were forced to make their products interoperable, with the same functionality, and price.
What a beautiful place the world would be! :cool:
dsnort - finally, someone has hit the nail on the head. A standard DRM does not help ALL consumers - only those using Windows. This is why I see these rules/laws as fluff. There has to be 2 parts to any law before I will see it as positive. First - the law must insist on OS Neutrality. Meaning, if you want to have an online music store, it must work on Linux, Mac, and Windows. You make a music player, then it must have drivers or work on Linux, Mac and Windows. Once you have that, then let's get a universal DRM that is used by all these music stores and all these music players. Until both things happen, these laws do not help all consumers. And isn't what these laws are supposed to do - help the consumer???
My household has nothing but Macs. If these "laws" were enacted and we suddenly had a universal DRM, it would NOT help me as a consumer. I would still only be able to use iTunes, as none of the other big music stores (Sony, Yahoo, Napster, Real, Microsoft, Walmart) work on a Mac. I could perhaps buy a different player, but that would only help if that player had drivers or software that would work on a Mac.
These "laws" seemed to be created by Windows using politicians who don't truly understand what it would take to be fair to ALL consumers. It seems that they only care about whether Windows users get all the bells, whistles, and benefits. So I say leave it the way it is until it will help everyone.
There IS one thing that could make me switch over to the cross platform compatibility side of this argument.
That would be if the CC of Norway enforced it ACROSS THE BOARD!
My first MP3 player was a Creative Zen Micro. The only reason I have an iPod is because when I switched to Macs, the nice people at Creative Labs informed me that their sync software DID NOT SUPPORT MAC OS.
I can't even access Sony's Connect music store on my Mac. I'm told I need to "upgrade to Internet Explorer 5.5 or higher". (Upgrade to IE??? Bwahahahahaha!!! Those silly wabbits. :D)
I have a couple of programs I used in my PC days that are completely useless now, they won't run on Mac OS. Why not? I bought them! I paid for them! What right do these software companies have to lock me into a single platform?
I have, at last count, 317 files on my comp with the extension .xls. If I should decide I prefer to use Lotus, will I be able to open these files as is? Or will I have to take the time to convert them to XML format? Will I lose any of the custom formatting these files contain? ( I honestly don't know. I'm just beginning to learn the ODF stuff. Beside, current version of Lotus appears to be Windows only!) And these files aren't something I paid for, they are my own creations!
I'd be more than willing to see Apple surrender some iPod sales, (given the quality of the product, I don't think it would be much), if it would remove the single largest block against switching to Mac OS; the availabilty of software! Then the OS's could compete on other planes; features, ease of use, quality of computing experience, stability, etc. All of which would be, dare I say, good for the consumer?
Maybe I'm just a silly dreamer, but imagine the boon to Mac and Linux users if all these software development companies were forced to make their products interoperable, with the same functionality, and price.
What a beautiful place the world would be! :cool:
dsnort - finally, someone has hit the nail on the head. A standard DRM does not help ALL consumers - only those using Windows. This is why I see these rules/laws as fluff. There has to be 2 parts to any law before I will see it as positive. First - the law must insist on OS Neutrality. Meaning, if you want to have an online music store, it must work on Linux, Mac, and Windows. You make a music player, then it must have drivers or work on Linux, Mac and Windows. Once you have that, then let's get a universal DRM that is used by all these music stores and all these music players. Until both things happen, these laws do not help all consumers. And isn't what these laws are supposed to do - help the consumer???
My household has nothing but Macs. If these "laws" were enacted and we suddenly had a universal DRM, it would NOT help me as a consumer. I would still only be able to use iTunes, as none of the other big music stores (Sony, Yahoo, Napster, Real, Microsoft, Walmart) work on a Mac. I could perhaps buy a different player, but that would only help if that player had drivers or software that would work on a Mac.
These "laws" seemed to be created by Windows using politicians who don't truly understand what it would take to be fair to ALL consumers. It seems that they only care about whether Windows users get all the bells, whistles, and benefits. So I say leave it the way it is until it will help everyone.
arn
Apr 5, 03:41 PM
why does macrumors link to the appshopper description of the app instead of the actual apple link?
Seems like a useless middle step
The practice was started when straight itunes linking was awkward, as iTunes had to be installed, and people browsing from work would get dead-ended into an "Install iTunes please". It's perhaps less useful these days since Apple now does offer a web preview without itunes installed, so it may be just as easy to link using normal links again.
arn
Seems like a useless middle step
The practice was started when straight itunes linking was awkward, as iTunes had to be installed, and people browsing from work would get dead-ended into an "Install iTunes please". It's perhaps less useful these days since Apple now does offer a web preview without itunes installed, so it may be just as easy to link using normal links again.
arn
more...
gr8ful
Jan 15, 04:23 PM
I agree with 'CWallace', I'm pleased with what Apple released today. A few minor gripes, but pleased overall. I believe many of you are suffering from "overhype hangover".
Had this been an unannounced unveiling of new products and software by Apple without all of the pre-hype, I think many of you would not be as harsh. But with months to hope, wish, and speculate and given the vivid imaginations of those in this forum, you were doomed to be disappointed.
Had this been an unannounced unveiling of new products and software by Apple without all of the pre-hype, I think many of you would not be as harsh. But with months to hope, wish, and speculate and given the vivid imaginations of those in this forum, you were doomed to be disappointed.
eric_n_dfw
Oct 28, 06:16 PM
Apple doesn't sell operating systems for profit, they sell HARDWARE.
Yep. And you can tell when Apple is selling software for profit like any of the Final Cut Suite app's. Not only do they require a HUGE key to be entered at install/first run, it also locks it with unique info to the machine where it was installed. (Just try migrating a Final Cut Pro installation from one machine to another.)
Yep. And you can tell when Apple is selling software for profit like any of the Final Cut Suite app's. Not only do they require a HUGE key to be entered at install/first run, it also locks it with unique info to the machine where it was installed. (Just try migrating a Final Cut Pro installation from one machine to another.)
more...
SchneiderMan
Apr 9, 01:21 AM
How did you get beats for $80?
Probably knockoffs. Or as many here would say, the owner just wanted to get rid of them because no one wanted to purchase them :p
Got my MacBook Air 13" an ultra-violet RadTech Sleevz sleeve.
http://www.gadgetmac.com/storage/product-images/Screen%20shot%202011-04-07%20at%2010.56.42%20PM.png?__SQUARESPACE_CACHEVERSION=1302299615195
Probably knockoffs. Or as many here would say, the owner just wanted to get rid of them because no one wanted to purchase them :p
Got my MacBook Air 13" an ultra-violet RadTech Sleevz sleeve.
http://www.gadgetmac.com/storage/product-images/Screen%20shot%202011-04-07%20at%2010.56.42%20PM.png?__SQUARESPACE_CACHEVERSION=1302299615195
jonnysods
Apr 8, 05:28 PM
This is funny. Welp, glad I don't buy stuff at Best Buy.
It's my 'try before I buy store', as we don't have an Apple Store in our city.
It's my 'try before I buy store', as we don't have an Apple Store in our city.
more...
gravytrain84
Mar 17, 11:38 AM
Congrats
http://i96.photobucket.com/albums/l178/akg0186/6686a935.png
http://i96.photobucket.com/albums/l178/akg0186/6686a935.png
TequilaBoobs
Nov 27, 05:00 PM
If you purchased an item that was listed as a Black Friday Apple sale items at one of the Apple Retail Stores, I urge you to check you receipt to see if you got the sale price. I was at the Apple Chicago Michigan Ave. Store on Friday and purchased two sale items (the Nike+ ipod adapter and the Ingroove Neoprene sleeve for the Macbook). While both items were listed as sale items on the in store flyer and on the Apple web site, when I checked out with an Apple associate using a handheld terminal I was charged the FULL PRICE of these items.:eek: Since I discovered this when I got home, I called the Apple Store to request a refund. after a bit of an arguement, i was told i would get a refund in a few days. Today I got a refund on the Nike+ item, but not on the Ingroove sleeve. Looks like I will be calling the apple store again. :mad:
I can only imagine the thousands of people who thought that they were getting an item at the sale price and were actually charged full price.:mad:
i think it only happened to you.:confused:
I can only imagine the thousands of people who thought that they were getting an item at the sale price and were actually charged full price.:mad:
i think it only happened to you.:confused:
more...
Nukey
Sep 24, 09:09 AM
What a bunch of losers. That guy probably worked really hard on his presentation, and to have it screwed up by a bunch of wannabe-journalists trying to act "cool" for their "blog" is ridiculous. If I were in charge of any of these types of events I'd show these guys the door, permanently. People who think it was funny obviously haven't been on the presenter side of things before.
WeegieMac
Sep 28, 12:24 PM
Nice one, Steve ... he's worked for it.
We're here for a good time, not for a long time.
We're here for a good time, not for a long time.
more...
snberk103
Apr 12, 11:10 PM
Without context .... who knows? The story has been updated to state that the TSA does not do drug tests.... which makes sense. If there is another test, then it's possible that it's an explosive test.
She (the little girl) may have the chemical signature for explosives on her. There are lots of innocent ways this could happen, from borrowing the sweater of her friend, whose father works in a mine, to using a fabric softener that uses a chemical that is similar to one of the many chemicals that can combined with others to make a bomb.
If the TSA has a chemical sniffer at that security station, and that sniffer is indicating the presence of a possible explosive.... do you really want a TSA staffer making judgement calls on who needs to be double-checked and who gets a bye?
We don't know what happened.... there is no context.... who knows....
She (the little girl) may have the chemical signature for explosives on her. There are lots of innocent ways this could happen, from borrowing the sweater of her friend, whose father works in a mine, to using a fabric softener that uses a chemical that is similar to one of the many chemicals that can combined with others to make a bomb.
If the TSA has a chemical sniffer at that security station, and that sniffer is indicating the presence of a possible explosive.... do you really want a TSA staffer making judgement calls on who needs to be double-checked and who gets a bye?
We don't know what happened.... there is no context.... who knows....
milo
Oct 3, 06:02 PM
Okay, you've got me. Pirating stuff is fun and nobody will ever get to you. And if they do it's still fun since you don't get a criminal record. And if you got one then it would be totally unfair. Man, I am a total idiot for even considering to buy stuff. You know, pay money for it.
Don't put words in our mouths. If you're going to make the moral argument against piracy, make it. I just don't agree with trying to fearmonger by saying that the feds are going to bust your door down and impound your hard drives.
Don't confuse condoning piracy with pointing out incorrect statements.
Don't put words in our mouths. If you're going to make the moral argument against piracy, make it. I just don't agree with trying to fearmonger by saying that the feds are going to bust your door down and impound your hard drives.
Don't confuse condoning piracy with pointing out incorrect statements.
more...
Macopotamus
May 3, 02:29 PM
I'm not surprised by this, it's pressure from the carriers.
BTW the AT&T link doesn't work.
BTW the AT&T link doesn't work.
Awakener
Apr 17, 08:05 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-gb) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
Android is "closed"... an open system would be a Linux one where you can chop and change every part of the system right down to the kernel. Not gonna happen with mobile devices without hacking IMO.
Agreed.
Plus Android devices seem loaded with uninstallable Google services.
But I don't trust Google's motives. When Android stands on its own then it might be something great.
Android is "closed"... an open system would be a Linux one where you can chop and change every part of the system right down to the kernel. Not gonna happen with mobile devices without hacking IMO.
Agreed.
Plus Android devices seem loaded with uninstallable Google services.
But I don't trust Google's motives. When Android stands on its own then it might be something great.
more...
MagnusVonMagnum
May 1, 10:55 AM
The fact that you say they have "zero to do with anything I said" shows just how little you understand. You really think that locking down an OS has nothing to do with software or computer engineering? I can't even begin to come up with a response, as your level of shared knowledge is just too low.
Dude, honestly, WTF are you going on about? You throw abstract generic words around like "software and computer engineering" that encompass literally the ENTIRE computer market and then tell people they don't know WTF they're talking about. Sorry, but I have to laugh. You demonstrate no knowledge about the subject and your reponses are pretty much, "I won't even bother to argue because you're a 5-year old". ROTFLMAO. Nothing says "clueless" to me quite like throwing insults and giving no valid arguments what-so-ever on a given topic. I've got two degrees in electronic engineering so you calling me a 5-year old is so utterly absurd, it's a joke.
What Apple does with iOS and OSX uses engineering, but there is no technology 'god' up there demanding that Apple head in the direction of closed systems, non-professional features, etc. There is no template that forces Apple to go in a given direction. More advanced engineering doesn't mean more closed. Learn the difference for goodness sake!
Apple is making these decisions based on business decisions with some 'control' factors thrown-in based on their CEO's personality. Engineering simply accommodates/implements the business decisions taken. It is not responsible for those decisions in any way. They could accommodate improvements with or without open/closed. Yes, it has 'something' to do with it, but it's completely irrelevant to the conversation here because implementing or creating a vision technologically is still not a business decision whether to do something or not (in this case whether to pursue real technological improvements to OSX or spend their time dumbing down the interface and/or making it more like the iPad/iPhone. Those are 'lateral' steps at best, not engineering breakthroughs.
Dude, honestly, WTF are you going on about? You throw abstract generic words around like "software and computer engineering" that encompass literally the ENTIRE computer market and then tell people they don't know WTF they're talking about. Sorry, but I have to laugh. You demonstrate no knowledge about the subject and your reponses are pretty much, "I won't even bother to argue because you're a 5-year old". ROTFLMAO. Nothing says "clueless" to me quite like throwing insults and giving no valid arguments what-so-ever on a given topic. I've got two degrees in electronic engineering so you calling me a 5-year old is so utterly absurd, it's a joke.
What Apple does with iOS and OSX uses engineering, but there is no technology 'god' up there demanding that Apple head in the direction of closed systems, non-professional features, etc. There is no template that forces Apple to go in a given direction. More advanced engineering doesn't mean more closed. Learn the difference for goodness sake!
Apple is making these decisions based on business decisions with some 'control' factors thrown-in based on their CEO's personality. Engineering simply accommodates/implements the business decisions taken. It is not responsible for those decisions in any way. They could accommodate improvements with or without open/closed. Yes, it has 'something' to do with it, but it's completely irrelevant to the conversation here because implementing or creating a vision technologically is still not a business decision whether to do something or not (in this case whether to pursue real technological improvements to OSX or spend their time dumbing down the interface and/or making it more like the iPad/iPhone. Those are 'lateral' steps at best, not engineering breakthroughs.
takao
Nov 30, 05:54 AM
IMO the spy plane is way better then the RC car. The RC car really only benefits you and you might only get one or two kills with it. Where as the spy plan helps your whole team and I find it so much easier to get kills with spy planes up. Rarely do people bother to shoot down spy planes as well.
too true .. and the sr-71 can really be a game changer
interesting though is that even if you carry around a rocket launcher that you still carry a sidearm for the "second chance" perk
too true .. and the sr-71 can really be a game changer
interesting though is that even if you carry around a rocket launcher that you still carry a sidearm for the "second chance" perk
ghostface147
May 2, 09:53 AM
Screenshot fail :) build number in Quicklook titlebar.
Buahahahahaha.....too funny.
Buahahahahaha.....too funny.
pete0302
Jan 15, 02:13 PM
The reason I was anticipating a new MacBook Pro is because as of right now, I have someone interested in purhasing my Powerbook. And it would have been perfect timing.
GFLPraxis
Apr 13, 12:13 PM
The secret service might get lucky and stop a terrorist organisation before they do any harm, but they can do nothing to prevent a nutter getting on a plane if he doesn't have any record. It's up to the airport security to limit the weapons available to him on the plane, it's the best they can do.
And it's up to everyone to decide what the 'best balance' is between privacy and safety. One thing is certain - the TSA (or any other airport authorities around the world) are always wrong: searches like this are wrong/if a weapon slips through and is used in a hijacking they're wrong.
Let me give you a REAL scenario. I used to use my laptop backpack to carry my lunch to work and I was at the airport heading out of town. What I didn't know is that one of my butter knives had slid down under the lining of the backpack. Of course I went in security and was pulled to the side where I was professionally patted down. They then pulled me off to the side to further inspect the bag. I told them the story and they allowed me to slip it in an envelope to mail it home.
1. It worked as they did catch a potential weapon.
2. They were profesional about it the entire time (Boston TSA).
3. If you cooperate with them it is generally no big deal.
People that are making this difficult simply like to complain for the sake of complaining. Take the bus....
Put a big, thick, security door between the cockpit and the passengers that can take a stronger blast than the plane's hull.
Problem solved; the risk of a man with a knife on a plane is identical to that same man on a public train or bus.
No ridiculous pat-downs and feeling up of children needed. Allow profiling and leave the metal detectors in place (similar security to our local courthouse) to prevent casual idiots, and have the security door to minimize damage from an organized attempt (if they can't hijack the plane, and can only kill the people on board, it's not worth the trouble; they can just go blow up a bus), and you've got a pretty good balance of security.
And it's up to everyone to decide what the 'best balance' is between privacy and safety. One thing is certain - the TSA (or any other airport authorities around the world) are always wrong: searches like this are wrong/if a weapon slips through and is used in a hijacking they're wrong.
Let me give you a REAL scenario. I used to use my laptop backpack to carry my lunch to work and I was at the airport heading out of town. What I didn't know is that one of my butter knives had slid down under the lining of the backpack. Of course I went in security and was pulled to the side where I was professionally patted down. They then pulled me off to the side to further inspect the bag. I told them the story and they allowed me to slip it in an envelope to mail it home.
1. It worked as they did catch a potential weapon.
2. They were profesional about it the entire time (Boston TSA).
3. If you cooperate with them it is generally no big deal.
People that are making this difficult simply like to complain for the sake of complaining. Take the bus....
Put a big, thick, security door between the cockpit and the passengers that can take a stronger blast than the plane's hull.
Problem solved; the risk of a man with a knife on a plane is identical to that same man on a public train or bus.
No ridiculous pat-downs and feeling up of children needed. Allow profiling and leave the metal detectors in place (similar security to our local courthouse) to prevent casual idiots, and have the security door to minimize damage from an organized attempt (if they can't hijack the plane, and can only kill the people on board, it's not worth the trouble; they can just go blow up a bus), and you've got a pretty good balance of security.
Willis
Jan 8, 01:04 PM
well, its currently 'exporting' it... taking a while though.
adversus
Apr 8, 01:02 PM
It's still pretty ******.
If I walk into a Best Buy and to buy a product that's for sale, knowing full well they have it in stock but they just want to "hold it" for something, I'd be pissed.
If I walk into a Best Buy and to buy a product that's for sale, knowing full well they have it in stock but they just want to "hold it" for something, I'd be pissed.
NebulaClash
Apr 29, 01:37 PM
These naysayers have been moaning and groaning about iOS forever. They will continue to do so forever. In the meantime the rest of the world will get on with using some great software (many of it free) and getting a lot of things done.
I'm glad Apple is pushing things forward. The last thing I want to see is OS X stagnate. Since we are now in the post-PC era, ideas from iOS are precisely what need to be explored. It won't be too many more years from now when the majority of consumer-level computing devices will be tablets running iOS-type gestures. It will be the expected thing to be able to support finger gestures to do common tasks. Any OS that cannot handle this will be considered old-fashioned.
Apple is doing the right thing by getting the future into OS X. They don't want to be left behind.
I'm glad Apple is pushing things forward. The last thing I want to see is OS X stagnate. Since we are now in the post-PC era, ideas from iOS are precisely what need to be explored. It won't be too many more years from now when the majority of consumer-level computing devices will be tablets running iOS-type gestures. It will be the expected thing to be able to support finger gestures to do common tasks. Any OS that cannot handle this will be considered old-fashioned.
Apple is doing the right thing by getting the future into OS X. They don't want to be left behind.
No comments:
Post a Comment