solvs
Jan 10, 11:45 PM
All of this to gain what?:(
Attention. Or to make a lame joke that went way too far. I would be more shocked if they weren't banned from CES, and probably others. I doubt they'll get banned from Macworld this late in the game, especially after having come clean instead of someone else finding out and outing them, but they'll probably be watched more. Anything goes wrong, they'll be the first to be blamed, even if it's just a copycat. I wouldn't be surprised to find those affected not wanting to advertise anytime soon either, nor sending them products for awhile. Free advertising or not. Businesses aren't really known to have senses of humors about such things. A prank is a prank, but this is big business here and they're supposed to be professionals. There goes any credibility they had left.
They may not get any punishment for it, but if they want to make sure something similar (or worse) doesn't happen again, I'm sure they'll be more careful, but I'm also thinking those affected might want to make an example of the pranksters and the site.
Attention. Or to make a lame joke that went way too far. I would be more shocked if they weren't banned from CES, and probably others. I doubt they'll get banned from Macworld this late in the game, especially after having come clean instead of someone else finding out and outing them, but they'll probably be watched more. Anything goes wrong, they'll be the first to be blamed, even if it's just a copycat. I wouldn't be surprised to find those affected not wanting to advertise anytime soon either, nor sending them products for awhile. Free advertising or not. Businesses aren't really known to have senses of humors about such things. A prank is a prank, but this is big business here and they're supposed to be professionals. There goes any credibility they had left.
They may not get any punishment for it, but if they want to make sure something similar (or worse) doesn't happen again, I'm sure they'll be more careful, but I'm also thinking those affected might want to make an example of the pranksters and the site.
jamdr
Jan 11, 11:48 PM
Wow, I just watched the keynote and my god this guy is hard to stand. I've watched previous keynotes and he never seemed this bad. The charisma he's displayed in the past has been replaced with smugness. He acted like the iPhone was the second coming of christ and we were so lucky that he existed to bring it upon us.
When really, this is probably the single worst keynote for Mac users that he has ever given. No hardware updates. No 10.5 preview. Not even iLife and iWork '07! Plus, very people I know are going to be interested in spending $600 + $60 a month or more to use this phone while plenty of us would love to spend $300 or $400 or even more on a full-screen video iPod. God, I wish this keynote was all some nightmare and in the real one Apple actually gave us something we wanted.
When really, this is probably the single worst keynote for Mac users that he has ever given. No hardware updates. No 10.5 preview. Not even iLife and iWork '07! Plus, very people I know are going to be interested in spending $600 + $60 a month or more to use this phone while plenty of us would love to spend $300 or $400 or even more on a full-screen video iPod. God, I wish this keynote was all some nightmare and in the real one Apple actually gave us something we wanted.
david6545
Oct 4, 04:59 AM
This is what I'm waiting for before considering a Core 2 Mac purchase. However, the current version of the Merom is drop-in replaceable with the Core Duo, so it's strange for Apple to not have something ready for the holidays. I believe they'll quietly update the MacBooks and MacBook Pros sometime in November with Core 2s.
Or the remaining tuesdays/Wednesdays in October. But probably not much more than the processor, I'm afraid.
Or the remaining tuesdays/Wednesdays in October. But probably not much more than the processor, I'm afraid.
ten-oak-druid
Apr 15, 10:05 PM
iPhone did nothing new. It just took some popular features and combined them. It was more of a game changer due to it being made by apple.
The iphone defined the real smart phone we know today.
The iphone defined the real smart phone we know today.
iJon
Jul 21, 10:19 AM
I love the way that every time Apple show an image or video of one of their employees "holding" another phone to demonstrate this signal attenuation, they always appear to be literally crushing the phone in their hand. Whereas, with the i4, you just sit it comfortably in the pocket of your palm.
Apple has become the new Microsoft. They have lost that connection they had with their customers where they would strive to please. Now they just sit back like the rest and go "well you bought it, it's your problem."
"If you don't want an iPhone 4 don't buy it. If you bought one and you don't like it, bring it back."
Apple has become the new Microsoft. They have lost that connection they had with their customers where they would strive to please. Now they just sit back like the rest and go "well you bought it, it's your problem."
"If you don't want an iPhone 4 don't buy it. If you bought one and you don't like it, bring it back."
m-dogg
Sep 8, 04:29 PM
I agree that his comments were inappropriate for that particular venue, but I'm doubtful that people decided not to donate money to hurricane victims.
Edit: I forgot which thread I was posting in. I assume that jarednt1 was referring to Kanye West's comments during the fundraiser show last Friday night, or whenever that was. Of course, I don't imagine that Kanye West's comments (if any) at the Apple Keynote had much impact on donations to hurricane victims either. ;)
I watched that NBC benefit last week where Kanye made his bush comments. afterwards on the local news they had a reporter at a call center nearby that was one of several taking the calls from that. they talked briefly about Kanye's comments and said that people did actually call back after his comments saying they wanted to cancel their donation because of what he said.
I thought his comments were inappropriate for the fund raising forum he was participating in, but I was much more surprised & saddened that people actually called back and said they didn't want to donate to those in need becasue of what some musician said about the president...
Edit: I forgot which thread I was posting in. I assume that jarednt1 was referring to Kanye West's comments during the fundraiser show last Friday night, or whenever that was. Of course, I don't imagine that Kanye West's comments (if any) at the Apple Keynote had much impact on donations to hurricane victims either. ;)
I watched that NBC benefit last week where Kanye made his bush comments. afterwards on the local news they had a reporter at a call center nearby that was one of several taking the calls from that. they talked briefly about Kanye's comments and said that people did actually call back after his comments saying they wanted to cancel their donation because of what he said.
I thought his comments were inappropriate for the fund raising forum he was participating in, but I was much more surprised & saddened that people actually called back and said they didn't want to donate to those in need becasue of what some musician said about the president...
Snowy_River
Jan 9, 04:21 PM
How long does it usually take before they post the stream? I'm dying to watch it!
hob
Jan 5, 03:29 PM
Although the data transferred may be the same or more with on-demand streams, when it's live there will be much higher simultaneous usage. With high-end hosting in general, simultaneous usage is the killer and not really total bandwidth usage. With the popularity of Apple these days the number of simultaneous streams could be extremely high (I mean, if MacRumors gets 100,000 visitors simultaneously think what Apple would get themselves).
I don't think expense is the issue here.
Apple can either:
1. Offer the stream only to the stores
2. Pay for massive bandwidth. Have you seen the profit from last quarter alone?! The people watching would most probably have bought an apple product of 5 recently!
I don't think expense is the issue here.
Apple can either:
1. Offer the stream only to the stores
2. Pay for massive bandwidth. Have you seen the profit from last quarter alone?! The people watching would most probably have bought an apple product of 5 recently!
the Western zoo
Sep 12, 07:37 AM
The danish store gives me the black screen... though at first it said bad link as well... I can't really help to be negative and say that the movie thingie will be a us only at first... I'm all most sure of it!
It took two years for iTunes Music Store to come to DK so why should the movie bussiness be any easier than the music buss...??
It took two years for iTunes Music Store to come to DK so why should the movie bussiness be any easier than the music buss...??
rcread
Aug 1, 10:13 AM
This is just one more reason why socialism doesn't work. It takes away the incentive of a company to put a product in the country, and the consumers ultimately suffer.
sdugoten
May 4, 08:59 AM
There is a big difference between paying more for service that costs the carriers more and paying for a service/feature that doesn't cost the carriers anything.
America is HUGE compared to Hong Kong to Europe so it costs the carriers far more to get coverage.
Perhaps you might want to compare ..say San Fran or Newyork city to Hong Kong. City to City comparison seems reasonable, right? America is huge, However I don't see a reason why they can't invest enough money to get San Fran with better connection speed at a lower cost given the population is dense enough to cover the cost. Japan is big enough? Their land line speed and 3G network is pretty damn fast and cheap.
My whole point is...getting 50 states all cover with uber 3G speed at low cost is tough, but getting a city such as San Fran or Newyork city should't be hard. They are not doing it because it's just no incentive to do so. Competition is the key.
America is HUGE compared to Hong Kong to Europe so it costs the carriers far more to get coverage.
Perhaps you might want to compare ..say San Fran or Newyork city to Hong Kong. City to City comparison seems reasonable, right? America is huge, However I don't see a reason why they can't invest enough money to get San Fran with better connection speed at a lower cost given the population is dense enough to cover the cost. Japan is big enough? Their land line speed and 3G network is pretty damn fast and cheap.
My whole point is...getting 50 states all cover with uber 3G speed at low cost is tough, but getting a city such as San Fran or Newyork city should't be hard. They are not doing it because it's just no incentive to do so. Competition is the key.
Hovey
Jul 21, 10:49 AM
I hate to add to this whole tiresome "debate" but it does amuse me how a video of an iPhone 4 losing signal is proof *positive* of a design flaw whereas a similar video of a different smartphone is no proof at all!
I have an iPhone 4, its the best phone I have ever had and by a mile! I'm happy with it and frankly I'm pretty much sick and tired of folks telling me I'm mad or stupid for saying so!
Keith
Yes there does seem to be a double standard when it comes to online video credibility.
I have an iPhone 4, its the best phone I have ever had and by a mile! I'm happy with it and frankly I'm pretty much sick and tired of folks telling me I'm mad or stupid for saying so!
Keith
Yes there does seem to be a double standard when it comes to online video credibility.
MagicBoy
Mar 24, 08:08 PM
Windows has been downhill since DOS.
Pardon? Want to try that again?
Pardon? Want to try that again?
nwcs
May 4, 09:48 AM
I don't know any medical staff that actually uses one on the job. You simply can't input information on the thing while on the go and holding it in your other hand.
You clearly don't know much about the medical world. Here's one link just to get things going:
http://www.healthcareitnews.com/news/physician-mobile-use-grows-45-percent
Oh, and here's the story about a hospital that just ordered 1800 iPads...
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/story/2011/04/20/ottawa-ipads-hospital374.html
You clearly don't know much about the medical world. Here's one link just to get things going:
http://www.healthcareitnews.com/news/physician-mobile-use-grows-45-percent
Oh, and here's the story about a hospital that just ordered 1800 iPads...
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/story/2011/04/20/ottawa-ipads-hospital374.html
Ger Teunis
Apr 29, 03:15 PM
nevermind
Timepass
Aug 1, 04:26 PM
I have always thought Apple would eventually open up it's DRM of their own free will. At this time, there is no serious competitor to the iPod/iTunes combo. Should serious competition arise, perhaps sometime Zune, the iPods inability to play music from other sources will be a competitive disadvantage.
However, as a philosophical issue, I have a problem with any government interfering like this in a free market! Sometimes such interference is necessary to prevent harm to the public, but I don't see where this is the case with the iPod. It doesn't cause injury to the user, ( if you heed the volume warnings ), and there are alternatives. Those who don't like iPod/iTunes locking them in to one player are fully free to use the alternatives!]
It is a fine line. But really apple is flirting with needing the goverment to step in. Goverment waits to long to do anything and the damage is permant and compition is hurt for years to come. A good example is M$ got nailed for it but that didnt change the fact that it made the software the domante force on the market and they didnt have to give up the market share they took.
a completely free market is bad plan and simple. So is the other direction of the goverment controling everything. it has to be a balance bettween the 2. I am of the opinan that it is getting to the point in just DRM that it is getting close to the time where the goverment needs to step in and help clean up some of the mess before it gets out of hand and all they can do at most is damage control. Right now there is still time to prevent the damanage from happening. Apple got there market share power and now they are getting near to virtual monoploly standing in both the mp3 player market and online music store. Once you cross those lines and become a virtual monoploly in a market the rules change. No longer is using the power in one market to effect the other legal. (so Apple cannt use iTMS to effect ipod sales and ipod to effect iTMS sales as it does now.)
I also like to point out as people say pull out of those country you have to rememeber that they are just the first countries to pass these laws and THEY WILL NOT BE THE LAST. So should apple pull out of every country that pass those laws. Some how I think that is stupid idea. I expect in the next few years to see all of the EU have laws forcing open DRM and now you are talking about a large enough market that it really will effect the bottom line. And at some point the US is going to pass laws forcing open DRM. Now think about it. Apple can burn there bridges now or releliez this is where the market is heading weather they like it or not. Now either move now and deal or pay the price in permate damage down the road.
However, as a philosophical issue, I have a problem with any government interfering like this in a free market! Sometimes such interference is necessary to prevent harm to the public, but I don't see where this is the case with the iPod. It doesn't cause injury to the user, ( if you heed the volume warnings ), and there are alternatives. Those who don't like iPod/iTunes locking them in to one player are fully free to use the alternatives!]
It is a fine line. But really apple is flirting with needing the goverment to step in. Goverment waits to long to do anything and the damage is permant and compition is hurt for years to come. A good example is M$ got nailed for it but that didnt change the fact that it made the software the domante force on the market and they didnt have to give up the market share they took.
a completely free market is bad plan and simple. So is the other direction of the goverment controling everything. it has to be a balance bettween the 2. I am of the opinan that it is getting to the point in just DRM that it is getting close to the time where the goverment needs to step in and help clean up some of the mess before it gets out of hand and all they can do at most is damage control. Right now there is still time to prevent the damanage from happening. Apple got there market share power and now they are getting near to virtual monoploly standing in both the mp3 player market and online music store. Once you cross those lines and become a virtual monoploly in a market the rules change. No longer is using the power in one market to effect the other legal. (so Apple cannt use iTMS to effect ipod sales and ipod to effect iTMS sales as it does now.)
I also like to point out as people say pull out of those country you have to rememeber that they are just the first countries to pass these laws and THEY WILL NOT BE THE LAST. So should apple pull out of every country that pass those laws. Some how I think that is stupid idea. I expect in the next few years to see all of the EU have laws forcing open DRM and now you are talking about a large enough market that it really will effect the bottom line. And at some point the US is going to pass laws forcing open DRM. Now think about it. Apple can burn there bridges now or releliez this is where the market is heading weather they like it or not. Now either move now and deal or pay the price in permate damage down the road.
SilentPanda
Apr 21, 12:20 PM
I would imagine this thread is getting a lot of -1 votes simply because the feature is new and people want to point at the thread to show that the system will mostly produce negative votes.
balamw
Oct 2, 07:10 PM
Perhaps DVD Jon's business model in this instance primarily revolves around getting Apple to pay him off...
LOL. I am a bit surprised that they haven't made him a job offer already w/ decent options.
B
LOL. I am a bit surprised that they haven't made him a job offer already w/ decent options.
B
SuperCachetes
Apr 17, 09:23 AM
You completely missed the point. Let me be more specific for comprehension purposes. There is no way to teach the persecution of all peoples throughout the history of our planet with the way the school system is today. So where should the line be drawn? You never answered the question. Do gays deserve more attention than say slavery or the holocaust? It appears to me that you feel that a select few individuals, that may have been gay, deserve more attention than the plight of entire civilizations or race of people?
And this is not ignorance. Pointing out the sexuality of a person that made a contribution to society is irrelevant. Completely and utterly irrelevant! Do people remember Einstein for being a Jew or as the father of modern physics? You would prefer he was remembered as a Jew first?
I doubt Lee missed your point; maybe your point is just undefendable. For example, explain how you can prove that adding a bit of content about modern history will somehow force something else out of the curriculum. That there are a finite amount of class hours isn't good enough.
As we march through history, we have to condense more and more of it into a class. It wasn't that long ago that we added the space program to our description of modern history. Then JFK. MLK. Civil rights. Space shuttles. John Hinckley Jr. Fall of communism. Berlin Wall. Iraq. 9/11. Tsunamis. Egypt. What did these things take the place of or force out of the curriculum?
Incidentally, when I came through school many years ago, it was mentioned that Einstein was a Jew. It's not irrelevant - it's part of his story and part of who he was. In my classes, it wasn't swept under the rug, but neither was it mentioned "first" nor did it make me want to convert to Judaism. Adding a facet to our understanding of a person in history is not promotion.
Most people here really don't get that accomplishments aren't being promoted so much as the homosexuality of the historical figures.
You really don't get that it's not promotion. There is a big swath of gray area between promotion and concealment. The GLBT struggle for equality is part of our culture whether you are involved in it or not. It should be entered into the records.
And this is not ignorance. Pointing out the sexuality of a person that made a contribution to society is irrelevant. Completely and utterly irrelevant! Do people remember Einstein for being a Jew or as the father of modern physics? You would prefer he was remembered as a Jew first?
I doubt Lee missed your point; maybe your point is just undefendable. For example, explain how you can prove that adding a bit of content about modern history will somehow force something else out of the curriculum. That there are a finite amount of class hours isn't good enough.
As we march through history, we have to condense more and more of it into a class. It wasn't that long ago that we added the space program to our description of modern history. Then JFK. MLK. Civil rights. Space shuttles. John Hinckley Jr. Fall of communism. Berlin Wall. Iraq. 9/11. Tsunamis. Egypt. What did these things take the place of or force out of the curriculum?
Incidentally, when I came through school many years ago, it was mentioned that Einstein was a Jew. It's not irrelevant - it's part of his story and part of who he was. In my classes, it wasn't swept under the rug, but neither was it mentioned "first" nor did it make me want to convert to Judaism. Adding a facet to our understanding of a person in history is not promotion.
Most people here really don't get that accomplishments aren't being promoted so much as the homosexuality of the historical figures.
You really don't get that it's not promotion. There is a big swath of gray area between promotion and concealment. The GLBT struggle for equality is part of our culture whether you are involved in it or not. It should be entered into the records.
hatersgonnahate
Apr 13, 02:55 PM
Delivered today.
thought about getting those but im getting the samson 3i's instead. lmk how they are
thought about getting those but im getting the samson 3i's instead. lmk how they are
TrulyYuki
Apr 8, 03:06 PM
http://img825.imageshack.us/img825/4150/photoapr0834035pm.jpg (http://img825.imageshack.us/i/photoapr0834035pm.jpg/)
8GB of ram and a 1TB 2.5 HD
installing the HD into your macbook pro? i'd like to know how that goes. i've seen some issues with the 1tb drives not fitting just right. (too thick)
highest I've ever been able to install is a 750GB.
8GB of ram and a 1TB 2.5 HD
installing the HD into your macbook pro? i'd like to know how that goes. i've seen some issues with the 1tb drives not fitting just right. (too thick)
highest I've ever been able to install is a 750GB.
frenchroast
Sep 28, 08:00 PM
They also forgot to mention that it will be machined out of a solid block of aluminum billet.
SilentPanda
Apr 21, 12:03 PM
It may be that the backend has a different value stored than what displayed in your cached version. Honestly I know about as much of the system as you do. I haven't seen that behavior exhibited but I do thank you for bringing it up so that it can be looked into.
Eraserhead
May 7, 02:47 AM
Not sure what's medically relevant about owning or not owning a gun, but still, why penalize a doctor for asking and not, say, a teacher, clergyman, mechanic, dry cleaner, etc.? It doesn't make any sense.
Because guns are dangerous, and people who are mentally unstable shouldn't be allowed to have them.
Exactly the same applies to driving.
Because guns are dangerous, and people who are mentally unstable shouldn't be allowed to have them.
Exactly the same applies to driving.
No comments:
Post a Comment