ShiftyGray
Apr 20, 10:29 AM
I don't care about this at all.
What could they possibly do with the information, who would want to know, who would have access to it, and why would I mind?
What could they possibly do with the information, who would want to know, who would have access to it, and why would I mind?
timmillwood
Sep 10, 10:46 AM
can they fit one of these into a MBP?
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.
milo
Aug 28, 04:03 PM
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.
Well, assuming they announced and shipped about the same time as the PC companies, there's really not that much to complain about. Don't forget, they did it with the MPB as well.
And if people are really unwilling to wait a couple weeks, nothing is stopping them from buying the yonah models.
Well, assuming they announced and shipped about the same time as the PC companies, there's really not that much to complain about. Don't forget, they did it with the MPB as well.
And if people are really unwilling to wait a couple weeks, nothing is stopping them from buying the yonah models.
mkrishnan
Sep 19, 01:35 PM
Looking at some financials, I think Disney sells on the order of 100M DVD units per quarter, which comes out to about 7-10M units per week? 125k units through the online channel in one week isn't so bad. :) If they hit their $50M revenue target, that means they will see sales on the order of 1% of total home video sales? That's a fair start.
EspressoLove
Apr 23, 01:14 AM
Yes it is a deal breaker. I actually spend quite a bit of time in bed after lights out surfing and reading, keeping up with stuff (I am doing it at this moment) with the brightness at the lowest level +1 to not disturb my wife, and its definitely not enough to see the keyboard.
...
If it is absolutely deal breaker for you then you might look at Glowing fluorescent keyboard stickers (http://www.amazon.com/Glowing-fluorescent-English-keyboard-stickers/dp/B004CEN1VU) ...
I'd think it's not nearly as good as Apple's backlight (and you can't ramp it up, or turn it off :eek:)
For me it would be nice to have KB backlight, but not a big deal
...
If it is absolutely deal breaker for you then you might look at Glowing fluorescent keyboard stickers (http://www.amazon.com/Glowing-fluorescent-English-keyboard-stickers/dp/B004CEN1VU) ...
I'd think it's not nearly as good as Apple's backlight (and you can't ramp it up, or turn it off :eek:)
For me it would be nice to have KB backlight, but not a big deal
jz1492
Nov 13, 04:54 PM
So I guess this puts every iPhone VNC client in violation of Apple's terms as it would be displaying Apple copyrighted images...
I'm on RA's side on this one!
You may be right, but we haven't seen the emails or the actual rejected programs.
Furthermore, "The Client Is Always Right", not because they are, but as a matter of principle. The client is in command.
And I insist, Apple's model makes them the client, which I have to admit brings many benefits to the end user and the platform in general -not so many to the suppliers or developers, except maybe for the fact that it makes the end user more confident to part with their money, of which Apple has the numbers to prove.
I'm on RA's side on this one!
You may be right, but we haven't seen the emails or the actual rejected programs.
Furthermore, "The Client Is Always Right", not because they are, but as a matter of principle. The client is in command.
And I insist, Apple's model makes them the client, which I have to admit brings many benefits to the end user and the platform in general -not so many to the suppliers or developers, except maybe for the fact that it makes the end user more confident to part with their money, of which Apple has the numbers to prove.
iSee
Apr 25, 04:15 PM
I hope I like the new design as much as I like the current unibody design...
I'll probably be looking to replace my original 2006 MBP after this comes out...
I'll probably be looking to replace my original 2006 MBP after this comes out...
Peterkro
Aug 23, 04:49 PM
Creative's stock up 30% in after-hours trading. The $100 million is a drop in the bucket for Apple, but it will certainly help Creative...
Methinks a creative person involved in the negotiations could have made a fortune buying Creative stock at the right time.It would be illegal of course.:rolleyes:
Methinks a creative person involved in the negotiations could have made a fortune buying Creative stock at the right time.It would be illegal of course.:rolleyes:
thejadedmonkey
Sep 26, 12:58 PM
Do you're self a favour and ask for your pac code when the phon is released. A free upgrade is pretty much to be expected, if you dont ask for the pac code their unlikely to give you any other freebies.
You should always ask for the pac code and then wait for their retention team to give you a call back
Jay
What's a pac code?
You should always ask for the pac code and then wait for their retention team to give you a call back
Jay
What's a pac code?
applefanDrew
Apr 30, 03:48 PM
SB + Mediocre GPU = meh :(
A 2560x1440 screen deserves more than some lame mobile gpu.
That display isn't happening this time.
A 2560x1440 screen deserves more than some lame mobile gpu.
That display isn't happening this time.
Glideslope
Apr 4, 11:49 AM
Head Shot. Well done. :apple:
BornAgainMac
Sep 15, 05:48 PM
I thought 10 Mega Pixels were possible with some tech that is suppose to arrive at the end of this year for phones.
I wonder if the new phone was like the original iPod Shuffle. You wear it around your neck. That would be funny. I would like the Star Trek Next Generation phone where you tap it on your chest to call people and it automatically goes into speaker phone. That was sort of like the shuffle concept with simple controls and no screen. Even works with iTunes.
I wonder if the new phone was like the original iPod Shuffle. You wear it around your neck. That would be funny. I would like the Star Trek Next Generation phone where you tap it on your chest to call people and it automatically goes into speaker phone. That was sort of like the shuffle concept with simple controls and no screen. Even works with iTunes.
vitaboy
Aug 24, 05:01 AM
I hope you're joking about that. iTunes is not about making money for apple
It may not be making the kind of money that iPod is making, but iTunes is indeed making money for Apple. Indeed, it has become a significant revenue story for Apple, if only recently.
In fact, contrary to popular belief, iTMS has been marginally profitable for many quarters now, although of course its profit margins are small compared to iPods and Macs.
Just remember - iTunes is profitable and a billion plus song sales a year makes it a Top 10 music retailer in the U.S., behind only the likes of Walmart, Best Buy, Target, and FYE.
iTunes Outsells Traditional Music Stores (http://news.com.com/iTunes+outsells+traditional+music+stores/2100-1027_3-5965314.html)
It's the iTunes wannabes that are neither profitable nor revenue machines! ;-)
It may not be making the kind of money that iPod is making, but iTunes is indeed making money for Apple. Indeed, it has become a significant revenue story for Apple, if only recently.
In fact, contrary to popular belief, iTMS has been marginally profitable for many quarters now, although of course its profit margins are small compared to iPods and Macs.
Just remember - iTunes is profitable and a billion plus song sales a year makes it a Top 10 music retailer in the U.S., behind only the likes of Walmart, Best Buy, Target, and FYE.
iTunes Outsells Traditional Music Stores (http://news.com.com/iTunes+outsells+traditional+music+stores/2100-1027_3-5965314.html)
It's the iTunes wannabes that are neither profitable nor revenue machines! ;-)
JimMacFan
Mar 23, 09:18 AM
What are the odds on a 30" display? I'm thinking it's not likely but would buy one if they built it. Probably unlikely since they did away with the 30" monitors already.
GGJstudios
Apr 17, 03:20 PM
Thanks GGJ.
What about the security sensitive files in /Library? Such as /Library/InputManagers, /Library/Extensions, /Library/LaunchDaemons, /Library/Security, and etc?
I am pretty sure these only have system with write privileges. No?
Sorry, I didn't see your edit:
281785
What about the security sensitive files in /Library? Such as /Library/InputManagers, /Library/Extensions, /Library/LaunchDaemons, /Library/Security, and etc?
I am pretty sure these only have system with write privileges. No?
Sorry, I didn't see your edit:
281785
fall3n
Sep 5, 08:31 PM
oh boy, oh boy, oh boy. I'm stoked. I'm getting me an iMac. woohoo. I'm gonna let my buddy at the computer store know to put one on hold for me as soon as he gets it. yesssssssss.
dagger01
Mar 29, 12:40 PM
"IDC Projects Windows Phone to Top iPhone in Market Share by 2015"
ROFLMFAO...hahahahahahahahaha....wait....wait.....hahahahahahahaha
And donkey's might fly out of my butt. To say that MS would overtake anything in the smartphone market at this point is utterly ludicrous. I want some of what that IDC person is smoking!
ROFLMFAO...hahahahahahahahaha....wait....wait.....hahahahahahahaha
And donkey's might fly out of my butt. To say that MS would overtake anything in the smartphone market at this point is utterly ludicrous. I want some of what that IDC person is smoking!
juicedropsdeuce
Mar 22, 03:11 PM
24 inch useless? Thanks god, for telling us what's what.
Honestly, if it made any sense whatsoever then Apple wouldn't have killed it. Do the math. You're living in the past, kid.
Honestly, if it made any sense whatsoever then Apple wouldn't have killed it. Do the math. You're living in the past, kid.
dime21
Feb 9, 02:10 PM
it's a nice gesture, but anti-virus software on osx is about as useful as tits on a boar.
Di9it8
Oct 27, 03:04 PM
The Greenpeace Apple micro site
http://www.greenpeace.org/apple/
is surely a good thing for Apple.
It is organisations like Greenpeace who are driving the agenda, because goverments and manufacturing companies are too complacent.
They should be welcomed with open arms at Mac Expo:rolleyes:
http://www.greenpeace.org/apple/
is surely a good thing for Apple.
It is organisations like Greenpeace who are driving the agenda, because goverments and manufacturing companies are too complacent.
They should be welcomed with open arms at Mac Expo:rolleyes:
Aldaris
Mar 22, 02:32 PM
I think you'll find that rumors of the Mac Pro's death are greatly exaggerated.
Thunderbolt honestly wouldn't bring very much to a Mac Pro right now. They have access via PCI expansion to drives, etc. that keep pace with and even beat Thunderbolt in some instances. As the tech matures it will outpace others and eventually find its way to the Mac Pro. Yes, the iMacs, and the iToys get more and more powerful with every generation...but then, so do the Pros...they all have a space on Apple's buffet bar.
I agree, I think it'll be great for the portable's and consumer items, to be able to customize certain peripherals to the individual needs, at the moment I have a PowerBook G4, MacBook Pro, Power Mac G4, Power Mac G5, all for certain tasks, I could solve all this with a thunderbolt equipped MacBook pro and Mini... Think of the space saving's there...
The Pro will be around for a lot longer, it just serves a Pro/sumer market, the processors they sport generally come later down the pipe anyway like sandy bridge xeons in Q3/Q4.
Thunderbolt honestly wouldn't bring very much to a Mac Pro right now. They have access via PCI expansion to drives, etc. that keep pace with and even beat Thunderbolt in some instances. As the tech matures it will outpace others and eventually find its way to the Mac Pro. Yes, the iMacs, and the iToys get more and more powerful with every generation...but then, so do the Pros...they all have a space on Apple's buffet bar.
I agree, I think it'll be great for the portable's and consumer items, to be able to customize certain peripherals to the individual needs, at the moment I have a PowerBook G4, MacBook Pro, Power Mac G4, Power Mac G5, all for certain tasks, I could solve all this with a thunderbolt equipped MacBook pro and Mini... Think of the space saving's there...
The Pro will be around for a lot longer, it just serves a Pro/sumer market, the processors they sport generally come later down the pipe anyway like sandy bridge xeons in Q3/Q4.
nemaslov
Sep 26, 11:58 AM
Hey the Cingular deal is only six months exclusive, like the RAZR was. So you can all get it probably many more places afterwards and all of the bugs will be worked out by then.. I use Cingular and LOVE it due to the coverage in San Francisco which is difficult due to the seven hills. May other carriers I tried before including verizon and t mobile were much worse here.
Buy I have an 80GB iPod with 18,ooo songs so this thing will me useless to me. But it sure sounds cool!!
Buy I have an 80GB iPod with 18,ooo songs so this thing will me useless to me. But it sure sounds cool!!
rotobadger
Mar 30, 01:07 PM
What's your point? Are you trying to phrase it in a way that sounds like the two are somehow the same? Apple was awarded the trademark to "app store" and other companies want to use it - whether that trademark holds up we'll have to see.
And what does that have to do with the app store trademark? He doesn't mention "app store" does he?
Good point. The obvious alternative to App Store is Application Store.
Along those same lines, the term ANDROID was in general use and considered generic and not trademarkable. In Star Wars, George Lucas used the term Droid - since it hadn't been used before he was able to trademark the shorter term (which he still holds).
What about the Container Store, which is trademarked? Seems like the difference is whether or not the term is in common use before the trademark is filed.
RoomStore too.
And what does that have to do with the app store trademark? He doesn't mention "app store" does he?
Good point. The obvious alternative to App Store is Application Store.
Along those same lines, the term ANDROID was in general use and considered generic and not trademarkable. In Star Wars, George Lucas used the term Droid - since it hadn't been used before he was able to trademark the shorter term (which he still holds).
What about the Container Store, which is trademarked? Seems like the difference is whether or not the term is in common use before the trademark is filed.
RoomStore too.
