QuarterSwede
Apr 25, 01:45 PM
Ah, the perfect storm! A (probable) bug that does not clip the data the way Google does it, a story that gets reported months ago and then it forgotten, a new story that appears and blows it way out of proportion, news articles that imply Apple is SPYING ON YOU (even though Apple does not get this information), and lots of ignorance spewed all over the Web.
Natually this leads to stupid lawsuits. This is America, dammit!
*sigh* This is turning into another Antennagate, misinformation and all. Steve is going to have to do more than that email to get people to shut up about what is a very small issue that is being exploded into a very large misinformation campaign.
Pretty well said.
Natually this leads to stupid lawsuits. This is America, dammit!
*sigh* This is turning into another Antennagate, misinformation and all. Steve is going to have to do more than that email to get people to shut up about what is a very small issue that is being exploded into a very large misinformation campaign.
Pretty well said.
unlinked
Apr 6, 02:28 PM
I guess it wouldn't hurt their future sales to announce international release dates. Several people I know have ordered or bought an iPad 2 simply because it is available (even with order backlogs) compared to Honeycomb tablets.
Here in continental Europe, all I saw so far was an announcement for the second quarter, which can slip to whenever...
Those of you who already got it - is it worth the wait?
I'm thinking of passing on the Xoom at this stage and picking up one of the many other honeycomb tablets instead. Apparently the EEE pad transformer will be launched in Europe in a few days. I saw some reports the Xoom was launched in Canada today with only a few hundred units available. Bit of a joke really.
Here in continental Europe, all I saw so far was an announcement for the second quarter, which can slip to whenever...
Those of you who already got it - is it worth the wait?
I'm thinking of passing on the Xoom at this stage and picking up one of the many other honeycomb tablets instead. Apparently the EEE pad transformer will be launched in Europe in a few days. I saw some reports the Xoom was launched in Canada today with only a few hundred units available. Bit of a joke really.
Dark K
Jun 22, 03:24 PM
Nevermind my previous post, I just pass by my local Radioshack, and I think that every Radioshack will be getting the iPhones, why? I do not live in the states, I live in Puerto Rico, and by that being said, one of the sellers told me that they already receive the phones, just like Walmart, he even told me that the store has 8 (6 16GB black and 2 32GB black) iPhone 4s. Now is just a matter of time and wait.
mactoday
Apr 6, 10:56 AM
What is the obsession with back-lit keys?
Do you actually look at the keyboard when you're typing?
It's ****ing great option while working at night in bed.
Do you actually look at the keyboard when you're typing?
It's ****ing great option while working at night in bed.
kenaustus
Jul 20, 08:52 PM
If Intel designates Kentsfield as a desktop processor it will make its way into Mac Pros as fast as the competition can deliver their desktop versions. Apple is now one of the "Intel Big Boys" and there will be continual (internal & external) pressure not to be left behind.
I would also think Apple is getting ready for Kentsfield - they have had the same pre-release information that the other Intel Big Boys have received.
I think that the surprise will be next month when Steve J is talking about Leopard. He'll mention something like, "You might have read a bit about a new chip from Intel called Kentsfield. You might like to know that Leopard is designed to take full advantage of Kentsfield when it's released." He really doesn't need to say anything else - that alone will drive MS nuts.
With a quad core arriving rather fast I believe that Apple may be looking at the headless range. Right now there is only the mini and (upcoming) Pro. Lots of room in between the two and that room gets bigger with Kentsfield. It presents a very good argument for a mid range headless to fill the gap.
SInce the mini has been out for a while there will be a lot of users that "switched" to a Mac because of the mini and now went something more powerful - without loosing their investment in their display. If the Pro is overkill then APple is going to loose the upgrade. Others, like me, use a PB with a large display - mine is the 23". I don't want a huge tower under the table and I don't see the value of moving to a mini. I'll reach for the credit card after Kentsfield is released IF there is a mid-range that excites me.
I would also think Apple is getting ready for Kentsfield - they have had the same pre-release information that the other Intel Big Boys have received.
I think that the surprise will be next month when Steve J is talking about Leopard. He'll mention something like, "You might have read a bit about a new chip from Intel called Kentsfield. You might like to know that Leopard is designed to take full advantage of Kentsfield when it's released." He really doesn't need to say anything else - that alone will drive MS nuts.
With a quad core arriving rather fast I believe that Apple may be looking at the headless range. Right now there is only the mini and (upcoming) Pro. Lots of room in between the two and that room gets bigger with Kentsfield. It presents a very good argument for a mid range headless to fill the gap.
SInce the mini has been out for a while there will be a lot of users that "switched" to a Mac because of the mini and now went something more powerful - without loosing their investment in their display. If the Pro is overkill then APple is going to loose the upgrade. Others, like me, use a PB with a large display - mine is the 23". I don't want a huge tower under the table and I don't see the value of moving to a mini. I'll reach for the credit card after Kentsfield is released IF there is a mid-range that excites me.
Bill McEnaney
Mar 3, 10:05 AM
And I don't see the point in being sexually attracted to anyone of the opposite sex, but since society tells me it's "normal" I live with it nonetheless. It's all a matter of perception and experience. You have yours, I have mine and they're both normal to us.
Sure, different people have different experiences. That's partly why some people feel same-sex attractions and why others feel opposite-sex attractions. Macaroony doesn't see any point in opposite-sex attractions. I don't see any point in same-sex attractions. Here are two videos that explain what I believe about why some people feel same-sex attractions. I think the speaker works for NARTH.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFAJXvxcGrk&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UziWSdC8Zhw&feature=related
Pedophilia is immoral - no matter man or woman. Please do not put both homosexuality and pedophilia into the same boat. There are plenty of grown men who abuse underage girls, it's when they happen to be gay that elevates the problem and lazily ties it to homosexuality.
Just as no one chooses to feel same-sex attractions, no one chooses to be a pedophile. I know some pedophiles. But some pedophiles do choose to molest children. I don't want to conflate pedophilia and immoral actions that some pedophiles do because they're pedophiles.
Many people ignore the difference between homosexuality and homosexual acts. Many Christians insist that homosexuality is immoral. But homosexuality is a property, not an action. Nor is it a sin of omission. Homosexuality the property is morally indifferent. Homosexual acts are, I think, immoral. An action can be immoral, even if someone doesn't deserve any blame for doing it.
No, I shouldn't put homosexuality and pedophilia in the same boat. I mentioned the Catholic Church's homosexual-abuse because skunk seems to think my opinions about sexual morality are feelings, not beliefs that are either true or false. Even psychotherapists I've talked with have agreed that feelings are neither truths nor falsehoods. Feelings are neither of those, but there are truths about feelings and there are falsehoods about them. If I only feel that homosexual acts are immoral, should some government outlaw feeling that way?
The phrase "a fact" is ambiguous. It can mean "a truth." It can also mean "a set of actual set of circumstances." There are truths about feelings, and there are feelings about truths. But my feelings aren't truths. Even if moral relativism is true, there are still objective truths about whether some society or other considers some action morally acceptable. And some relativists still hold a self-inconsistent belief when they believe that since every belief is relative to some context or other, there's no such thing as absolute truth. In one sense of the phrase "absolute truth," a truth is absolute when it's true about every context. In that sense of the phrase "absolute truth," I imply a self-contradiction myself when I say that since every truth is relative to some context or other, I imply that it's an absolute truth that there's no absolute truth.
In another sense of the phrase "absolute truth," a truth is absolute when it's true whether anyone believes it or not. Even if I'm mistaken when I believe that homosexual sex is gravely immoral, it's still true that either they're moral or not moral.
Too often, people who feel same-sex attractions suffer needlessly partly because they, others, or both ignore important distinctions. Unfortunately, people often ignore them when their feelings determine too much of what those people believe.
Immoral behavior continues partly because of moral relativism. Instead of conforming our minds to reality, we try to conform reality to our minds. Moral relativists talk as though an action is moral if and only if someone believes that it's moral. Some moral relativists even insist that if you believe that homosexual acts are morally acceptable, and I believe they're immoral, then we're both right. A moral relativist might say the same about the morality or immorality of gay-bashing. But someone is right when he thinks that gay-bashing is morally right, should a court punish him for gay-bashing someone?
Sure, different people have different experiences. That's partly why some people feel same-sex attractions and why others feel opposite-sex attractions. Macaroony doesn't see any point in opposite-sex attractions. I don't see any point in same-sex attractions. Here are two videos that explain what I believe about why some people feel same-sex attractions. I think the speaker works for NARTH.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFAJXvxcGrk&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UziWSdC8Zhw&feature=related
Pedophilia is immoral - no matter man or woman. Please do not put both homosexuality and pedophilia into the same boat. There are plenty of grown men who abuse underage girls, it's when they happen to be gay that elevates the problem and lazily ties it to homosexuality.
Just as no one chooses to feel same-sex attractions, no one chooses to be a pedophile. I know some pedophiles. But some pedophiles do choose to molest children. I don't want to conflate pedophilia and immoral actions that some pedophiles do because they're pedophiles.
Many people ignore the difference between homosexuality and homosexual acts. Many Christians insist that homosexuality is immoral. But homosexuality is a property, not an action. Nor is it a sin of omission. Homosexuality the property is morally indifferent. Homosexual acts are, I think, immoral. An action can be immoral, even if someone doesn't deserve any blame for doing it.
No, I shouldn't put homosexuality and pedophilia in the same boat. I mentioned the Catholic Church's homosexual-abuse because skunk seems to think my opinions about sexual morality are feelings, not beliefs that are either true or false. Even psychotherapists I've talked with have agreed that feelings are neither truths nor falsehoods. Feelings are neither of those, but there are truths about feelings and there are falsehoods about them. If I only feel that homosexual acts are immoral, should some government outlaw feeling that way?
The phrase "a fact" is ambiguous. It can mean "a truth." It can also mean "a set of actual set of circumstances." There are truths about feelings, and there are feelings about truths. But my feelings aren't truths. Even if moral relativism is true, there are still objective truths about whether some society or other considers some action morally acceptable. And some relativists still hold a self-inconsistent belief when they believe that since every belief is relative to some context or other, there's no such thing as absolute truth. In one sense of the phrase "absolute truth," a truth is absolute when it's true about every context. In that sense of the phrase "absolute truth," I imply a self-contradiction myself when I say that since every truth is relative to some context or other, I imply that it's an absolute truth that there's no absolute truth.
In another sense of the phrase "absolute truth," a truth is absolute when it's true whether anyone believes it or not. Even if I'm mistaken when I believe that homosexual sex is gravely immoral, it's still true that either they're moral or not moral.
Too often, people who feel same-sex attractions suffer needlessly partly because they, others, or both ignore important distinctions. Unfortunately, people often ignore them when their feelings determine too much of what those people believe.
Immoral behavior continues partly because of moral relativism. Instead of conforming our minds to reality, we try to conform reality to our minds. Moral relativists talk as though an action is moral if and only if someone believes that it's moral. Some moral relativists even insist that if you believe that homosexual acts are morally acceptable, and I believe they're immoral, then we're both right. A moral relativist might say the same about the morality or immorality of gay-bashing. But someone is right when he thinks that gay-bashing is morally right, should a court punish him for gay-bashing someone?
twoodcc
Aug 18, 08:32 PM
NO WAY!! that would be awesome
yeah...please share a video if you can
yeah...please share a video if you can
Reach9
Mar 22, 03:12 PM
Someone give Android's UI and Playbook's UI huge recognition so Apple will change it's old grid-like UI.
Mr. Gates
Jun 8, 11:20 PM
You mean "The Shack"
They are pretty much ONLY a phone store now
They lost the Mojo
Boycott them
They are pretty much ONLY a phone store now
They lost the Mojo
Boycott them
KnightWRX
Apr 20, 01:46 PM
They don't need to amend. This is a federal pleading so the standard is whether it puts Samsung on notice. This is a different standard than state courts, where they would have to be much more specific. Eventually they will have to prove which models are accused. Looks to me like the complaint is fine.
So all that is left is to discuss the actual merit of the trade dress claim, of course, something that will in the end be up to the judge.
We can use pictures all we want, something tells me Samsung is just going to bring in devices into the courtroom. Pictures can be misleading as certain angles/shots might make ressemblances show up that aren't quite there.
Also, it remains to be seen how much the judge will accept generic things like "rounded corner", since I don't think I've ever had a phone without rounded corners and how much in the end, he decides that the devices to ressemble or not each other.
Do you know of someone that looked up the icon trademarks on the USPTO site ? Did Apple even register them (I know you don't have to, unless you want punitive damages) ?
So all that is left is to discuss the actual merit of the trade dress claim, of course, something that will in the end be up to the judge.
We can use pictures all we want, something tells me Samsung is just going to bring in devices into the courtroom. Pictures can be misleading as certain angles/shots might make ressemblances show up that aren't quite there.
Also, it remains to be seen how much the judge will accept generic things like "rounded corner", since I don't think I've ever had a phone without rounded corners and how much in the end, he decides that the devices to ressemble or not each other.
Do you know of someone that looked up the icon trademarks on the USPTO site ? Did Apple even register them (I know you don't have to, unless you want punitive damages) ?
bdkennedy1
Aug 7, 04:09 PM
heh... they give MS so much crap for photocopying, but if anything, this is more or less taking a page out of MS's book with System Restore. Granted, it looks like it will be better, but still, MS had this kind of thing first.
I wouldn't say this was copying. A way to backup and restore your files is just common sense. Even if Microsoft didn't have a restore feature, Apple would have come up with it anyway.
I wouldn't say this was copying. A way to backup and restore your files is just common sense. Even if Microsoft didn't have a restore feature, Apple would have come up with it anyway.
rdowns
Apr 27, 09:38 AM
I wish these people would just be honest and tell the American people their real motivation; we don't want a n***** in the White House.
balamw
Apr 6, 04:40 PM
I should say that I do own an Android device. I own an original Nook, and will probably pick up a 4-7" device at some point to play with in a generation or two.
B
B
aafuss1
Aug 6, 05:31 PM
Why sell a new keyboard for front row, if you can sell a new Mac to the same person? Including the sensor in the Cinema Displays would enable Apple to sell more of their display, on which they probably have a very good profit margin (when you compare to other manufacturers).
They could also just put it into the tower. Even if that is under the desk, it might not be that much of a problem. In my experience the sensor responds very nicely to the remote even if the line of sight between them is somewhat obstructed.
However the best solution I think, was suggested by someone on these forums. I don't know, whether it has been quoted here already, because I did not go through all the messages. This poster suggested to combine the sensor with an external iSight. That could be connected to any monitor and would probably have a good IR reception because of beeing on top of the monitor and thus very exposed.
Apple would make the IR and iSight work on XP-first under Boot Camp and on PC's
They could also just put it into the tower. Even if that is under the desk, it might not be that much of a problem. In my experience the sensor responds very nicely to the remote even if the line of sight between them is somewhat obstructed.
However the best solution I think, was suggested by someone on these forums. I don't know, whether it has been quoted here already, because I did not go through all the messages. This poster suggested to combine the sensor with an external iSight. That could be connected to any monitor and would probably have a good IR reception because of beeing on top of the monitor and thus very exposed.
Apple would make the IR and iSight work on XP-first under Boot Camp and on PC's
adamfilip
Jul 14, 02:42 PM
more importantly then dual optical is being able to support 4 hard drives then!
Sequin
Apr 11, 02:35 PM
I don't mind waiting till September, but not till next year. I still have the iPhone 3 and have been putting off getting a new one till 5.
BoyBach
Nov 29, 12:56 PM
We might hate to admit it as Apple fans, but Apple needs the labels for the iTunes store to work just as much as the label needs Apple.
Not true. Apple doesn't need the iTunes Store since all iPods are full of stolen music! ;)
Not true. Apple doesn't need the iTunes Store since all iPods are full of stolen music! ;)
Abyssgh0st
Apr 28, 11:54 AM
Yikes. I just read through this entire thread and it was quite the read.
1. I still find it hard to accept that there are numbskulls out there who doubt that the freaking PRESIDENT of the UNITED STATES was not born here. Seriously? And then to claim it's not about race? Then what is it about, his politics? Just because you don't like what he does or says? Yeah right.
2. Conservatives really have tunnel vision. They focus on static topics such as homosexuals, abortion, marijuana, etc. They fail to realize that because these things will never disappear, they should still lobby against them. They think that they should never 'lay down' and not let 'evil' prevail. They are seriously wrong, especially since these issues don't actually effect them. It is ignorance on their parts because instead of fighting issues that can change (wars, spending, healthcare), they focus on the few that are not going anywhere (at least not a regression, they will only become more prevalent), rather than the sea of issues that are malleable.
1. I still find it hard to accept that there are numbskulls out there who doubt that the freaking PRESIDENT of the UNITED STATES was not born here. Seriously? And then to claim it's not about race? Then what is it about, his politics? Just because you don't like what he does or says? Yeah right.
2. Conservatives really have tunnel vision. They focus on static topics such as homosexuals, abortion, marijuana, etc. They fail to realize that because these things will never disappear, they should still lobby against them. They think that they should never 'lay down' and not let 'evil' prevail. They are seriously wrong, especially since these issues don't actually effect them. It is ignorance on their parts because instead of fighting issues that can change (wars, spending, healthcare), they focus on the few that are not going anywhere (at least not a regression, they will only become more prevalent), rather than the sea of issues that are malleable.
Zadillo
Aug 27, 05:17 PM
No, you're putting words in my mouth. People can be intelligent and still not get the essence of a reoccuring joke.
Who here doesn't get the "essence" of the joke? Really, I think you must think that the "PowerBook G5" is a lot more clever than it actually is. People "get" the joke, they got it the first few hundred times someone posted "PowerBook G5 next tuesday?".
The humor of the recurring nature of the joke was already worn out a long time ago, and it has long since passed the phase where many people find it funny just because it is repeated so often.
Recurring jokes lose their humor for many people precisely because they get beaten into the ground. That's the problem with recurring jokes.
Just because someone finds a recurring joke that has been beaten into the ground to not be funny doesn't mean they don't "grasp" the concept of it.
-Zadillo
Who here doesn't get the "essence" of the joke? Really, I think you must think that the "PowerBook G5" is a lot more clever than it actually is. People "get" the joke, they got it the first few hundred times someone posted "PowerBook G5 next tuesday?".
The humor of the recurring nature of the joke was already worn out a long time ago, and it has long since passed the phase where many people find it funny just because it is repeated so often.
Recurring jokes lose their humor for many people precisely because they get beaten into the ground. That's the problem with recurring jokes.
Just because someone finds a recurring joke that has been beaten into the ground to not be funny doesn't mean they don't "grasp" the concept of it.
-Zadillo
Butters
Aug 11, 11:28 AM
Ill only buy it if stupid little spoilt english kids dont buy it, i dont mean posh english kids but yobbish ones, I want it to be the coolest thing in the world. The nano has become the essential for yobbish teenage boys and girls in the uk and I just want those stupid turds to stick to their quote "amazing black v3's with itunes and video" which dont actually have itunes and video!!!!!!!!!!! :mad: :mad: :mad: Im not ageist because im 16.....
I agree with that
I agree with that
raymondso
Sep 19, 10:24 AM
35 mins til 9......the apple store is still healthy ....new product update unlikely to happen :(
Macaroony
Mar 3, 04:08 AM
I'm sorry, Bill, but your logic has one big flaw.
If you decided to live celibately while other heterosexuals are open to have sex in a [monogamous] relationship, that's fine by me but what you're implying is that every homosexual should be celibate, so what's the point of being attracted to the same-sex at all in your logic?
I believe you have to label yourself asexual from now on, since not having or craving sex makes you neither a homosexual nor heterosexual.
If you decided to live celibately while other heterosexuals are open to have sex in a [monogamous] relationship, that's fine by me but what you're implying is that every homosexual should be celibate, so what's the point of being attracted to the same-sex at all in your logic?
I believe you have to label yourself asexual from now on, since not having or craving sex makes you neither a homosexual nor heterosexual.
bobber205
Apr 27, 05:10 PM
Oh, I thought his administration was the one that dropped the F-bomb on live TV.
Or that he was the one who fabricated a "healthcare crisis" so that he could ram through legislation that doesn't even kick in for years
I thought he was the one who is always on the news whining about why nothing ever goes his way.
He is the inexperienced child. And if he hadn't been born in the US, that would have been great news
F-bomb makes you a "kid". Ok "Mom". :p
Are you REALLY saying we don't have a healthcare crisis. Ok....
Or that he was the one who fabricated a "healthcare crisis" so that he could ram through legislation that doesn't even kick in for years
I thought he was the one who is always on the news whining about why nothing ever goes his way.
He is the inexperienced child. And if he hadn't been born in the US, that would have been great news
F-bomb makes you a "kid". Ok "Mom". :p
Are you REALLY saying we don't have a healthcare crisis. Ok....
manu chao
Apr 25, 02:00 PM
... sorry, but in what ways do I benefit by having apple track my whereabouts to the day and meter? why isn't there an opt-in (apart from the general 'eat **** or die' TOU) or at least an opt-out for this? why is it so easy to access the data?
And any cellular provider is tracking and storing your whereabouts equally.
The difference is that MSP might storing this for billing purposes or even because it is mandated by law (for use by law enforcement). If Apple has no need for these data (which they do not have if they are not transmitted to them), they should not store them.
And any cellular provider is tracking and storing your whereabouts equally.
The difference is that MSP might storing this for billing purposes or even because it is mandated by law (for use by law enforcement). If Apple has no need for these data (which they do not have if they are not transmitted to them), they should not store them.
