lotones
Apr 30, 01:35 PM
btw- does anyone know why the current version is named Windows 7? Why 7?
Because it took them 7 years to get it right.
Because it took them 7 years to get it right.
Arcus
Oct 28, 11:10 PM
And now somebody is probably thinking im going to do this the illegal way.. But NO, several of my friends run OSX so no problem in getting OSX.
Thye paid for it . You didnt. How is your friends having OSX helping you get it legally.
Thye paid for it . You didnt. How is your friends having OSX helping you get it legally.
longofest
Oct 2, 03:32 PM
Think about this: Apple is in hot water with some European countries for the "monopoly" Apple has with its iPod and iTunes Store.
Could DVD Jon's venture help alleviate some of those country's worries?
-Aaron-
Good point. Of note, I'm not aware of any pending lawsuits against Navio.
Also the article had a decent point. This all could help push Apple's hardware sales (aka, push iTV sales), which are the crutch of it all for Apple. Of course, I'm sure Apple won't be too crazy if hackers end up doing a bang-up job and ruin the experience for the end user (hence the reason why Apple hasn't allowed UI themes in OSX??? Let's not go there...)
Could DVD Jon's venture help alleviate some of those country's worries?
-Aaron-
Good point. Of note, I'm not aware of any pending lawsuits against Navio.
Also the article had a decent point. This all could help push Apple's hardware sales (aka, push iTV sales), which are the crutch of it all for Apple. Of course, I'm sure Apple won't be too crazy if hackers end up doing a bang-up job and ruin the experience for the end user (hence the reason why Apple hasn't allowed UI themes in OSX??? Let's not go there...)
marksman
May 3, 03:35 PM
Contract terms require "consideration" from both parties to be legally binding. Consideration is something you provide to the other party (i.e., money from you, data services from your carrier).
What consideration are the carriers offering you for tethering? You're already paying $X for Y GB of data used on your phone. It doesn't matter to the carrier if your Netflix app is using it, or your tethering app is sending the data to your laptop. Nothing changes on their end, they just send the data that you've already paid for to your phone, and your phone handles the rest.
You're right, it is black and white. It's a scam aimed at exploiting consumers like yourself who don't know any better, with an illegal contract term. I hope this goes to court soon, before the carriers in Canada (where I am) try to pull the same BS.
They are offering you more bandwidth to use a higher bandwidth service like tethering.
The consideration is very clear. Thanks for quoting the premise for contract law, but claiming there is no consideration there is ridiculous.
People who tether use more bandwidth, so the cost associated with their usage is more expensive. The carriers can either charge those people for tethering or they can raise the price for EVERYONE.
They choose to charge the people who tether. It is a perfectly reasonable choice on their part.
Hey a cable line comes into my house with all the channels on it. I can just jimmy off a filter and get all the channels without paying any more. They are already delivering it to my house, why can't I just get all of them since they are there anyways and I am paying for cable right?
You are not paying for tethering unless you are paying for tethering. The math is simple. People who tether use more bandwidth. Wireless providers set their data prices based on AVERAGE usage. Tethering makes the average usage go up, so the revenue to cover those costs has to come from somewhere.
So they can either charge EVERYONE more or charge the people who tether more.. Again they choose the later.
What consideration are the carriers offering you for tethering? You're already paying $X for Y GB of data used on your phone. It doesn't matter to the carrier if your Netflix app is using it, or your tethering app is sending the data to your laptop. Nothing changes on their end, they just send the data that you've already paid for to your phone, and your phone handles the rest.
You're right, it is black and white. It's a scam aimed at exploiting consumers like yourself who don't know any better, with an illegal contract term. I hope this goes to court soon, before the carriers in Canada (where I am) try to pull the same BS.
They are offering you more bandwidth to use a higher bandwidth service like tethering.
The consideration is very clear. Thanks for quoting the premise for contract law, but claiming there is no consideration there is ridiculous.
People who tether use more bandwidth, so the cost associated with their usage is more expensive. The carriers can either charge those people for tethering or they can raise the price for EVERYONE.
They choose to charge the people who tether. It is a perfectly reasonable choice on their part.
Hey a cable line comes into my house with all the channels on it. I can just jimmy off a filter and get all the channels without paying any more. They are already delivering it to my house, why can't I just get all of them since they are there anyways and I am paying for cable right?
You are not paying for tethering unless you are paying for tethering. The math is simple. People who tether use more bandwidth. Wireless providers set their data prices based on AVERAGE usage. Tethering makes the average usage go up, so the revenue to cover those costs has to come from somewhere.
So they can either charge EVERYONE more or charge the people who tether more.. Again they choose the later.
more...
dacreativeguy
Apr 15, 03:55 PM
The contours of the back are very angular. You can actually see the "plane" lines. By comparison, the iPad planes flow together and the back is more rounded. Since Apple has had this type of shape since the first MacBook Air, and most recently with the iPad, I doubt that they'd go to something as angular as this.
Looks like a student model shop project, and then they used photoshop to add the graphics.
Looks like a student model shop project, and then they used photoshop to add the graphics.
Corndog5595
Dec 10, 07:21 PM
As mentioned, the spawning is terrible. IMO worse than in MW2 (which seemed hard to believe at first)
They shouldn't spawn anywhere near me. I hate spawning near the enemies too and die within 5 seconds of spawning. Personally, I'd rather wait 5-10 seconds for a spawning point to open up instead of dying right away.
Then you get those times when you want to spawn near enemies, and you find yourself sprinting for 5 minutes just to get killed once you get to where you're going.
They shouldn't spawn anywhere near me. I hate spawning near the enemies too and die within 5 seconds of spawning. Personally, I'd rather wait 5-10 seconds for a spawning point to open up instead of dying right away.
Then you get those times when you want to spawn near enemies, and you find yourself sprinting for 5 minutes just to get killed once you get to where you're going.
more...
buckers
Apr 29, 02:18 PM
Steve really likes magic. Is he a magician?
Define magician ;)
Define magician ;)
rezenclowd3
Apr 6, 06:35 PM
Purchased another "ticket" to have my brother partake in this event with me as he is going to be visiting at just the right dates!
That and another helmet so that I can give him back his motorcycle helmet.
That and another helmet so that I can give him back his motorcycle helmet.
more...
psychofreak
Jan 9, 03:29 PM
Actually someone at Apple took the spoiler off the keynote URL page:
So, it's not here anymore:
http://www.apple.com/quicktime/qtv/mwsf07/
But it is everywhere else on the site.
Very nice of them.
Doesn't work...
So, it's not here anymore:
http://www.apple.com/quicktime/qtv/mwsf07/
But it is everywhere else on the site.
Very nice of them.
Doesn't work...
Snowy_River
Nov 17, 03:45 PM
Apple did not have a version of OS X running in it's labs. Intel has had every version running on their chips since the early 1990s when they first entered into discussions about using Intel chips. Intel some of the best software programmers in the world, wrt making an OS work on Intel chips. Apple got the OS X port from Intel to speed up the process of introducing the chips.
Link?
This is the first I've heard the story put that way. I've many times heard it said that Apple has kept versions of the Mac OS running on different CPUs in their labs, especially since the switch to OS X. Do you have any evidence to back up your supposition?
Link?
This is the first I've heard the story put that way. I've many times heard it said that Apple has kept versions of the Mac OS running on different CPUs in their labs, especially since the switch to OS X. Do you have any evidence to back up your supposition?
more...
AidenShaw
Oct 17, 10:57 AM
I saw a post of a guy online who actually hooked up his Samsung to a massive HP 60"(?) monitor that actually takes 1080p/24 scan signal (I guess a lot of TVs will take only 1080i and will upscale it to 1080p inside the TV) and he says Bluray is great! Do people actually have this sort of monitor?
Yes, I have the Samsung 46" LN-S4696D (http://www.samsung.com/Products/TV/LCDTV/LNS4696DXXAA.asp?page=Specifications), connected to both a Samsung BD player and a Core 2 Duo Media Center Edition mini-tower with a Quadro FX graphics card and HD tuners.
It does 1080p native, as well as native 1920x1080 on the PC.
Some of the Blu-ray Discs are simply amazing (House of Flying Daggers is superb), although others just make the shortcomings of the original production more apparent. (Kind of like a CD of an old live concert, where the CD perfectly reproduces the hiss and noise in the master tape.)
Yes, I have the Samsung 46" LN-S4696D (http://www.samsung.com/Products/TV/LCDTV/LNS4696DXXAA.asp?page=Specifications), connected to both a Samsung BD player and a Core 2 Duo Media Center Edition mini-tower with a Quadro FX graphics card and HD tuners.
It does 1080p native, as well as native 1920x1080 on the PC.
Some of the Blu-ray Discs are simply amazing (House of Flying Daggers is superb), although others just make the shortcomings of the original production more apparent. (Kind of like a CD of an old live concert, where the CD perfectly reproduces the hiss and noise in the master tape.)
k8to
Nov 17, 11:44 AM
To software, AMD and Intel are compatable parts. They aren't identical, but most software won't care at all. So this wouldn't be a "switch" like IBM to x86. Nothing disruptive.
The question is, of course, where is the lower-power AMD cpu. Tulatins are not _bad_ chips for power efficiency, but they're certainly bested by core 2 duo. The lack of any strong competition makes this rumour just that.
The question is, of course, where is the lower-power AMD cpu. Tulatins are not _bad_ chips for power efficiency, but they're certainly bested by core 2 duo. The lack of any strong competition makes this rumour just that.
more...
ksteele
Sep 25, 03:37 PM
Aperture 1.1.2 runs just fine on my 2 year old 17" Powerbook G4 (1.5Ghz / 1.5GB ram).
I have heard that the graphics hardware on this laptop helps a lot.
It is not as fast doing edits as my my former PhotoMechanic/Bridge/ACR/iView workflow but good enough and has the advantages of a faster workflow when all is said and done.
I've ported 5500 of my D2X raw images into the library. I use a second 23" Cinema Display.
I have heard that the graphics hardware on this laptop helps a lot.
It is not as fast doing edits as my my former PhotoMechanic/Bridge/ACR/iView workflow but good enough and has the advantages of a faster workflow when all is said and done.
I've ported 5500 of my D2X raw images into the library. I use a second 23" Cinema Display.
milo
Oct 6, 10:23 AM
Apple needs to start working on a new business model while the studios are still suing their customers and the TV boom is still on. If they dont they're going to be beaten overseas. Enough with the legal rhetoric damn it, evolve your business model or you'll lose.
Beaten overseas by who? Who is making it big selling TV shows overseas?
good lord, if anyone actually got through reading all this, can there be any doubt left that all consumers want is DRM-free content??? There's a simple rule that exists - the more complicated the DRM you put on your content, the less likely that people are going to buy it. Hence, people are downloading music and movies for free, and ripping Netflix DVDs to their hard drives to burn their own copies.
You can't put the genie back in the bottle. Until there's DRM-free movies and music for sale online, so-called pirated downloads will continue to dwarf legal downloads. End of story.
Wow, that's incredibly naive. People don't get free content because the free content is "simpler". It's because they're too cheap to pay. If people want no drm, they can just buy cd's and dvd's and rip them. People who download free content, or rip rented discs are just cheapskates who are stealing.
There IS DRM free music for sale online. And in contrast to your theory, people are still stealing it.
Whom are you kidding? Nobody cares that Fairplay's DRM is better than other DRM. Do you think it being "successful" (and that word ONLY applies comparing it to other pay services, not overall downloads) has anything to do with the fact that 70% of all mp3 players are ipods, and only work with the itms?
But if iTunes' DRM was annoying to users, it never would have made it to 70%. Users absolutely care about DRM. But they're not aware of it unless it's too restrictive or inconvenient - if you give them *bad* DRM they will totally notice it and hate it.
Beaten overseas by who? Who is making it big selling TV shows overseas?
good lord, if anyone actually got through reading all this, can there be any doubt left that all consumers want is DRM-free content??? There's a simple rule that exists - the more complicated the DRM you put on your content, the less likely that people are going to buy it. Hence, people are downloading music and movies for free, and ripping Netflix DVDs to their hard drives to burn their own copies.
You can't put the genie back in the bottle. Until there's DRM-free movies and music for sale online, so-called pirated downloads will continue to dwarf legal downloads. End of story.
Wow, that's incredibly naive. People don't get free content because the free content is "simpler". It's because they're too cheap to pay. If people want no drm, they can just buy cd's and dvd's and rip them. People who download free content, or rip rented discs are just cheapskates who are stealing.
There IS DRM free music for sale online. And in contrast to your theory, people are still stealing it.
Whom are you kidding? Nobody cares that Fairplay's DRM is better than other DRM. Do you think it being "successful" (and that word ONLY applies comparing it to other pay services, not overall downloads) has anything to do with the fact that 70% of all mp3 players are ipods, and only work with the itms?
But if iTunes' DRM was annoying to users, it never would have made it to 70%. Users absolutely care about DRM. But they're not aware of it unless it's too restrictive or inconvenient - if you give them *bad* DRM they will totally notice it and hate it.
more...
The Scotsman
Jan 12, 06:36 PM
Look, people--
There is nothing amazingly new or innovative technology-wise in the iPhone. Everything in it has been done before, and it does not even employ some of the latest (3G) features that its competition does.
Niether did the original iPod. Grasshopper, go and learn from Thread #500. People thought that product was "crippled" by high price and no new technology ("An overpriced HDD-based mp3 player with a B&W LCD display? Who cares?").
I predict that Apple will have 20% of the entire cell phone market and 50+% of the high-end communication device within three years of its June release. That will mean 150-200 million units.
In the intervening six months before formal release, or shortly thereafter, some of the smaller issues will be attended to (like the ability to at least open and review MS files, sync'ing issues, interfacing w/iTunes Store, what have you). The rest won't matter.
Apple does not sell products, people. They sell personal productivity, great user experiences, wow and chic. This phone phone meets all of those criteria. For consumer devices like these, a streamlined and intuitive user experience is like money in the bank. The only thing innovative about the iPod is the stupid click-wheel, and yet 75% of the ENTIRE aac/mp3 player market is controlled by ONE COMPANY. The one with the click-wheel.
So it is with this product. If the final build quality of the unit proves durable, reliable, and cosmetically superior, and the unit functions as billed, it will not only make a huge forray into that giant market, but essentially create a new one.
Right now, the "smartphone" is really a piece of business equipment. Apple just invented the quintessential "consumer" version of the same product. It doesn't matter that it is expensive or lacks some high-end features. If is actually works as effortlessly and seamlessly as billed, it will become another cultural icon. Apple marketing will see to it that everyone on the planet is aware of how "cool" this device is.
I'm glad to be on record here. I hope that when this thread is reviewed three years from now, everyone is talking about the foolish naysayers of Thread #3245138 (or whatever this one is).
I agree with your predictions but I do not think it will be got with the 1st gen iPhone. iPod was not good until a range started and I think the phone will be the same.
There is nothing amazingly new or innovative technology-wise in the iPhone. Everything in it has been done before, and it does not even employ some of the latest (3G) features that its competition does.
Niether did the original iPod. Grasshopper, go and learn from Thread #500. People thought that product was "crippled" by high price and no new technology ("An overpriced HDD-based mp3 player with a B&W LCD display? Who cares?").
I predict that Apple will have 20% of the entire cell phone market and 50+% of the high-end communication device within three years of its June release. That will mean 150-200 million units.
In the intervening six months before formal release, or shortly thereafter, some of the smaller issues will be attended to (like the ability to at least open and review MS files, sync'ing issues, interfacing w/iTunes Store, what have you). The rest won't matter.
Apple does not sell products, people. They sell personal productivity, great user experiences, wow and chic. This phone phone meets all of those criteria. For consumer devices like these, a streamlined and intuitive user experience is like money in the bank. The only thing innovative about the iPod is the stupid click-wheel, and yet 75% of the ENTIRE aac/mp3 player market is controlled by ONE COMPANY. The one with the click-wheel.
So it is with this product. If the final build quality of the unit proves durable, reliable, and cosmetically superior, and the unit functions as billed, it will not only make a huge forray into that giant market, but essentially create a new one.
Right now, the "smartphone" is really a piece of business equipment. Apple just invented the quintessential "consumer" version of the same product. It doesn't matter that it is expensive or lacks some high-end features. If is actually works as effortlessly and seamlessly as billed, it will become another cultural icon. Apple marketing will see to it that everyone on the planet is aware of how "cool" this device is.
I'm glad to be on record here. I hope that when this thread is reviewed three years from now, everyone is talking about the foolish naysayers of Thread #3245138 (or whatever this one is).
I agree with your predictions but I do not think it will be got with the 1st gen iPhone. iPod was not good until a range started and I think the phone will be the same.
snberk103
Apr 15, 02:38 PM
...
If your argument is that security changes post 9/11 have made things better than the previous decade, I think showing it via statistics will be shaky at best. Zero passenger-carrying hijacks in the U.S. in the decade before 9/11 followed by zero passenger-carrying hijacks in the U.S. in the decade after 9/11 is not a statistic you can make a very solid conclusion off of.
...
My only claim is that something the TSA is doing is working to help prevent hijackings. This was in response to some arguments that nothing airport security was doing was in fact useful. If you go back, you will see I quoted both TSA and European stats, not just TSA. And that while there may have been no passenger hijackings in the 90s in the USA, there were a couple in Europe, and one in Japan. And then nothing in Europe and Japan or the USA since 9/11. Which I believe is due to increased airport security, similar to what the TSA does.
That's all I'm saying. I'm not advocating for the current screening, just refuting some baseless arguments that it's a total waste of money ("baseless" as in - "it's my opinion, and I'm not presenting any evidence to support it"). Opinions are fine, and everyone is entitled to them. Just don't expect me to accept an opinion as fact, if I can support my opposing opinion with at least some evidence.
(I'm using Japan and Europe 'cause they also have a tradition of terrorist organizations targeting their planes, and because they "harmonized" their screening standards to the TSA. No choice, if they wanted to continue flying their planes into or over US airspace. Other countries may have also harmonized (like Canada) but either they don't have a tradition of terrorism, or I don't have enough info about them.)
If your argument is that security changes post 9/11 have made things better than the previous decade, I think showing it via statistics will be shaky at best. Zero passenger-carrying hijacks in the U.S. in the decade before 9/11 followed by zero passenger-carrying hijacks in the U.S. in the decade after 9/11 is not a statistic you can make a very solid conclusion off of.
...
My only claim is that something the TSA is doing is working to help prevent hijackings. This was in response to some arguments that nothing airport security was doing was in fact useful. If you go back, you will see I quoted both TSA and European stats, not just TSA. And that while there may have been no passenger hijackings in the 90s in the USA, there were a couple in Europe, and one in Japan. And then nothing in Europe and Japan or the USA since 9/11. Which I believe is due to increased airport security, similar to what the TSA does.
That's all I'm saying. I'm not advocating for the current screening, just refuting some baseless arguments that it's a total waste of money ("baseless" as in - "it's my opinion, and I'm not presenting any evidence to support it"). Opinions are fine, and everyone is entitled to them. Just don't expect me to accept an opinion as fact, if I can support my opposing opinion with at least some evidence.
(I'm using Japan and Europe 'cause they also have a tradition of terrorist organizations targeting their planes, and because they "harmonized" their screening standards to the TSA. No choice, if they wanted to continue flying their planes into or over US airspace. Other countries may have also harmonized (like Canada) but either they don't have a tradition of terrorism, or I don't have enough info about them.)
more...
Corndog5595
Dec 4, 08:02 PM
My list of maps and how much I like them on a scale of one to five:
Horses Mating Human. horse
horses mating with cows.
bowens
Aug 9, 12:29 PM
I would love to have an Apple display, but I just can't make myselft spend $700 for a 20". I bought a 19" LCD a few months ago for $139. It's also got a 3 year warranty.
a17inchFuture
Sep 12, 02:34 AM
So what do people think the resolution will be, for the movies? They better be more than the current tv shows and videos.
And honestly, I'd be upset if they only had higher resolution for movies, without upgrading the tv shows' as well.
EDIT: also, anyone notice the convenient home release date of disney's The Wild, as tomorrow? I would be tempted to check the quality out with a CG flick, especially one I haven't seen, that coincidentally stars the vocal talent of Eddie Izzard.
And honestly, I'd be upset if they only had higher resolution for movies, without upgrading the tv shows' as well.
EDIT: also, anyone notice the convenient home release date of disney's The Wild, as tomorrow? I would be tempted to check the quality out with a CG flick, especially one I haven't seen, that coincidentally stars the vocal talent of Eddie Izzard.
joeshmo2010
May 3, 02:49 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
Love using tetherme cracked on iphone 4 to use personal hotspot with my unlimited data. :)
Love using tetherme cracked on iphone 4 to use personal hotspot with my unlimited data. :)
Simmias
May 3, 10:37 PM
I love my iPad 2, but I don't care for the ads. I like the overall message, but the narrator's inflections really bug me for some reason - a little too sappy. Also, the use of the word "magic" (wink, wink) in this ad and the previous one smacks of Steve Jobs thumbing his nose at critics. No matter how successful the iPad is, we will still cringe at his calling it magical.
bushido
May 3, 03:18 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; de-de) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
lol america
lol america
davelanger
Apr 8, 05:03 PM
I wonder what the special promotion is.
They want to get rid of all their ipad 2 stock because the ipad 3 will be out for xmas.
They want to get rid of all their ipad 2 stock because the ipad 3 will be out for xmas.
Highland
Aug 3, 10:24 PM
1. Agreed. The only situation governing bodies should step in is in extreme cases. The dead pixel thing is really just a case of Apple trying to push their luck I think. Quite a few manufacturers do that with dead pixels.
2. :)
3. The iPod isn't a monopoly, but iTMS might be considered one soon, driven by the fact that it only operates with it's own player (which isn't really any better than the competition). I'm not arguing that iTMS or the iPod is bad. In fact, I think they're both great and might be considered the saviour of the recording industry if we get this DRM mess fixed.
4. Apple's agreement with users can be changed at any point (according to Apple). That's illegal in some countries, plain and simple. The changes to the situation in Norway might be only "from now onwards", but the iTMS agreement still says they can shift the rules for songs purchased dating back to the launch of iTMS.
5. Yes and no. Sure, we all vote with our dollars, but when the only players are big companies and the four major labels are all working only with a small selection of online stores, we're not left with enough choices to show how we'd like things done. If you like an artist then you have to put up with whatever's served.
Another example of how things have been done well in the past for the music industry is the current situation with cover songs. It works really well. Anyone can cover anyone, but the original artist gets paid 100% of the song writing royalties (publishing), while the new performer gets all the mechanical royalties (physical sales). It works, and it's law. I doubt a system like that would be put in place today. Today it'd be all like "I own this song so no one else can touch it!". We all need to mature a little and look at this from a more positive angle for everyone, rather than short term greed.
6. Yep, time will tell. Although I think you probably do agree that CDs will die, it's just a matter of time, and what they're replaced with. I can't see another physical audio format being introduced and having any mainstream success though.
2. :)
3. The iPod isn't a monopoly, but iTMS might be considered one soon, driven by the fact that it only operates with it's own player (which isn't really any better than the competition). I'm not arguing that iTMS or the iPod is bad. In fact, I think they're both great and might be considered the saviour of the recording industry if we get this DRM mess fixed.
4. Apple's agreement with users can be changed at any point (according to Apple). That's illegal in some countries, plain and simple. The changes to the situation in Norway might be only "from now onwards", but the iTMS agreement still says they can shift the rules for songs purchased dating back to the launch of iTMS.
5. Yes and no. Sure, we all vote with our dollars, but when the only players are big companies and the four major labels are all working only with a small selection of online stores, we're not left with enough choices to show how we'd like things done. If you like an artist then you have to put up with whatever's served.
Another example of how things have been done well in the past for the music industry is the current situation with cover songs. It works really well. Anyone can cover anyone, but the original artist gets paid 100% of the song writing royalties (publishing), while the new performer gets all the mechanical royalties (physical sales). It works, and it's law. I doubt a system like that would be put in place today. Today it'd be all like "I own this song so no one else can touch it!". We all need to mature a little and look at this from a more positive angle for everyone, rather than short term greed.
6. Yep, time will tell. Although I think you probably do agree that CDs will die, it's just a matter of time, and what they're replaced with. I can't see another physical audio format being introduced and having any mainstream success though.
No comments:
Post a Comment