nunes013
Mar 25, 11:41 PM
If they start pumping out release candidates now, I think late July is is too far away. WWDC early June is more likely.
Major OS releases have historically been $129. I don't think that'll happen this time--$99 or $79 makes more sense (Apple likes people to upgrade, and their software prices aren't as high as they used to be). But that's just me speculating.
i was thinking and kind of hoping for that. wwdc release and them saying that it is a great price. apple has definitely been done a lot with pricing lately with the ipad starting at $500, snow leopard and ilife prices pretty cheap and maybe mobileme coming down in price. apple is getting better with pricing imo. they are more reasonable for many things lately.
Major OS releases have historically been $129. I don't think that'll happen this time--$99 or $79 makes more sense (Apple likes people to upgrade, and their software prices aren't as high as they used to be). But that's just me speculating.
i was thinking and kind of hoping for that. wwdc release and them saying that it is a great price. apple has definitely been done a lot with pricing lately with the ipad starting at $500, snow leopard and ilife prices pretty cheap and maybe mobileme coming down in price. apple is getting better with pricing imo. they are more reasonable for many things lately.
bedifferent
Apr 27, 08:56 AM
For the paranoid people who don't understand the issue and believe everything our media tells us to fear (coughFoxNewscough), here's something amusing for the mindless:
"Meat with eyes" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yNGWn-aWn5g)
"Meat with eyes" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yNGWn-aWn5g)
bedifferent
Apr 27, 10:03 AM
I find your statement back to him a bit hypocritical and quite judgmental. Why are his panties in a twist but not yours?
Your initial reply to him was harsh to begin with and he replied logically. Agree to disagree. Leave it at that.
He commented to my post, not the other way around.
My comment, #75 (again, no mention of him):
There's a nuclear disaster in Japan and treacherous weather throughout, people are jobless and homeless and the dollar's in the sh***er and our Supreme Court ruled that companies can give unlimited financial aid to any politician putting business interests in our government and people are worried about Apple possibly tracking them on their iDevice?
Let 'em, my life is BORING, they wouldn't be interested :p
His comment to me:
None of which are affecting my day to day life. However, since you say I can't go on living my life until all other worldly issues are resolved, I will be waiting for a e-mail letting me know when I can resume going about my daily routine.
Until then, I will stay fixed in front of my computer screen. :rolleyes:
This argument that we shouldn't worry about anything because bigger things are going on has got to stop. It's the most disingenuous comment you can make.
So this comment was logical and not insulting and personal?
I made no mention of or to him in my initial post, so this means your comment should be addressed to him, not me… and how does this involve you?
I made a comment, directed to no one, that many agreed with, but one person made personal slams at me and why are we discussing this?
/end of discussion, this is juvenile
Your initial reply to him was harsh to begin with and he replied logically. Agree to disagree. Leave it at that.
He commented to my post, not the other way around.
My comment, #75 (again, no mention of him):
There's a nuclear disaster in Japan and treacherous weather throughout, people are jobless and homeless and the dollar's in the sh***er and our Supreme Court ruled that companies can give unlimited financial aid to any politician putting business interests in our government and people are worried about Apple possibly tracking them on their iDevice?
Let 'em, my life is BORING, they wouldn't be interested :p
His comment to me:
None of which are affecting my day to day life. However, since you say I can't go on living my life until all other worldly issues are resolved, I will be waiting for a e-mail letting me know when I can resume going about my daily routine.
Until then, I will stay fixed in front of my computer screen. :rolleyes:
This argument that we shouldn't worry about anything because bigger things are going on has got to stop. It's the most disingenuous comment you can make.
So this comment was logical and not insulting and personal?
I made no mention of or to him in my initial post, so this means your comment should be addressed to him, not me… and how does this involve you?
I made a comment, directed to no one, that many agreed with, but one person made personal slams at me and why are we discussing this?
/end of discussion, this is juvenile
canyonblue737
Apr 27, 07:58 AM
That's good enough for me.
Apple's only screw up here was keeping the infinite database forever on your phone and backed up to your Mac. Their was no reason to back it up to the computer and no reason to keep the data on the phone after it was passed to Apple (encrypted, de-identified etc.) but I suspect the reason was simply "we weren't doing anything bad with it so we never even considered we should delete it later."
Good job Apple. Now let's move on to someone else, like freakin' Sony and their Playstation network.
Apple's only screw up here was keeping the infinite database forever on your phone and backed up to your Mac. Their was no reason to back it up to the computer and no reason to keep the data on the phone after it was passed to Apple (encrypted, de-identified etc.) but I suspect the reason was simply "we weren't doing anything bad with it so we never even considered we should delete it later."
Good job Apple. Now let's move on to someone else, like freakin' Sony and their Playstation network.
alent1234
Apr 11, 02:42 PM
That is what the 49$ 3GS is for...
My buddy just got one the other day. Why cause it was 49 bucks...
and i got an HTC INspire for $20 that is better than my old 3GS
My buddy just got one the other day. Why cause it was 49 bucks...
and i got an HTC INspire for $20 that is better than my old 3GS
Willis
Sep 13, 07:37 PM
One could run a Folding@Home process on each core :D
ooooor.... use multiple cores to do one fold... 4 days like my g5 would cut down to like 16 hours... thats mental. awesome... but god damn mental!!
ooooor.... use multiple cores to do one fold... 4 days like my g5 would cut down to like 16 hours... thats mental. awesome... but god damn mental!!
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?
ninjadex
Mar 31, 02:44 PM
What so many fail to realize is iOS was made for the iPad from the get-go. It's been mentioned many times that what became the iPad was in development longer than the original iPhone.
This goes to show that iOS conceptualization is light years ahead of Android. It's so obvious Google is scrambling, and seems to be making this stuff as they go along, without any sense of a master design guiding the way.
This goes to show that iOS conceptualization is light years ahead of Android. It's so obvious Google is scrambling, and seems to be making this stuff as they go along, without any sense of a master design guiding the way.
MattSepeta
Apr 27, 02:35 PM
Are you calling me a liar? I literally went to WhiteHouse.gov, opened the file in Illustrator, and moved the text around myself. :rolleyes:
Some things never change. Laughably bias.
Anyway, like I said, I'm sure there's an explanation... are there any graphic designers here who can help?
I already explained it to you.
When you scan things in, depending on the software, you are often given an option to "auto-inscribe" or something, I cant recall the term. The software then attempts to read the document and embed real type into the PDF, rarely succeeding. I'm assuming that the pieces that came through just happened to be the clearest to read.
EDIT: They probably DO want the controversy to continue! If I was in his shoes I would be eating it up. Every story on a right-wing birther makes the centerists even more alienated from the right.
Some things never change. Laughably bias.
Anyway, like I said, I'm sure there's an explanation... are there any graphic designers here who can help?
I already explained it to you.
When you scan things in, depending on the software, you are often given an option to "auto-inscribe" or something, I cant recall the term. The software then attempts to read the document and embed real type into the PDF, rarely succeeding. I'm assuming that the pieces that came through just happened to be the clearest to read.
EDIT: They probably DO want the controversy to continue! If I was in his shoes I would be eating it up. Every story on a right-wing birther makes the centerists even more alienated from the right.
Full of Win
Mar 25, 10:56 PM
Just one step closer to 10.7.3, the first release I would ever think to use.
GuitarDTO
Mar 31, 04:43 PM
Man do these stories bring out the ignoranus fanboys. IMO if you have never owned both an Android phone and an iPhone, you shouldn't be allowed to comment because 99% just can't be objective about it.
Now, I'll hop on my pedestal and say I owned the original Moto Droid, and now own an iPhone. The ability to customize your experience on a droid is what I found so attractive, and Google isn't taking that away, so IMO this story is nothing but good for Android. Better control, more polish, yet the same customization capability that the majority of everyday users want. All of the iBoys tooting their horns and patting each other are doing so for absolutely no reason.
With that said, the polish of the iPhone is what I love the most about it, and if I could pair that polish with Androids ability for personalization of my device without jailbreaking and their much superior notification system, it would be the perfect phone. The next device to get it all right gets my money, whether its apple or Google.
Now, I'll hop on my pedestal and say I owned the original Moto Droid, and now own an iPhone. The ability to customize your experience on a droid is what I found so attractive, and Google isn't taking that away, so IMO this story is nothing but good for Android. Better control, more polish, yet the same customization capability that the majority of everyday users want. All of the iBoys tooting their horns and patting each other are doing so for absolutely no reason.
With that said, the polish of the iPhone is what I love the most about it, and if I could pair that polish with Androids ability for personalization of my device without jailbreaking and their much superior notification system, it would be the perfect phone. The next device to get it all right gets my money, whether its apple or Google.
Prom1
Aug 6, 03:28 AM
My Predictions:
Mac Pro:
-Fastest pro Mac ever shipped
-Hard drives, BTO 750gb, perpendicular recording
-New displays with HDMI, iSight & IR, even brighter
-Wireless-WiMax or 802.11n-whatever's ready first, otherwise BT 2.0+EDR, AE
-Multiple graphics card in a SLI/Crossfire like mode for extremely powerful graphics and stereo 3D, Quadro FX5500 and maybe also first Mac to be supported by the new Quadro Plex. 256MB std, 512MB BTO
-HD Audio
Isight on displays built-in but I only want that with higher resolution with Auto Focus ability.
> New displays with a thinner bezel around the LCD; higher contrast ratio 1200:1 minimum; denser pixel count, DLP technology with LEDs or with Zenon technology for the DLP; but more richer BLACK!
> BTO Bluetooth 2.0+EDR has been on the PowerBooks for at least 2 generations & on the MB+MBP!
> WiMax although sweet its long away; HUGE battery gobbler. 2 years minimum.
> I'd love for the MacBookPRO lineup to be more PRO with DUAL HDD configuration but without creating more heat.
> THe MBP should be equal in computing & graphical performance as the cheapest MacPro!
Mac Pro:
-Fastest pro Mac ever shipped
-Hard drives, BTO 750gb, perpendicular recording
-New displays with HDMI, iSight & IR, even brighter
-Wireless-WiMax or 802.11n-whatever's ready first, otherwise BT 2.0+EDR, AE
-Multiple graphics card in a SLI/Crossfire like mode for extremely powerful graphics and stereo 3D, Quadro FX5500 and maybe also first Mac to be supported by the new Quadro Plex. 256MB std, 512MB BTO
-HD Audio
Isight on displays built-in but I only want that with higher resolution with Auto Focus ability.
> New displays with a thinner bezel around the LCD; higher contrast ratio 1200:1 minimum; denser pixel count, DLP technology with LEDs or with Zenon technology for the DLP; but more richer BLACK!
> BTO Bluetooth 2.0+EDR has been on the PowerBooks for at least 2 generations & on the MB+MBP!
> WiMax although sweet its long away; HUGE battery gobbler. 2 years minimum.
> I'd love for the MacBookPRO lineup to be more PRO with DUAL HDD configuration but without creating more heat.
> THe MBP should be equal in computing & graphical performance as the cheapest MacPro!
PBF
Apr 11, 11:05 PM
If they delay iPhone 5 until Fall/Winter, then they'd better release the white iPhone 4 some time in Spring as promised by Phil Schiller. :mad:
Multimedia
Aug 18, 10:31 AM
If one were to buy a mac pro now, is the processor upgradeable to Clovertown in the future, or is that not really worth it even if it is, because you would need a faster FSB, meaning a new logic board, to take advantage of its power?I'm sure you know this. But just a reminder that you would be dealing with an extremely fragile and tricky upgrade process that could destroy your motherboard or fry the processor without the latest cooling system from Apple. Just my own caution against attempting this. Not worth the risk I think. There will be a better video card with the Dual Clovertown Mac Pro as well as other changes to the system fixing bugs discovered between now and then. Too many changes in the works for me to want to fool with such a complex system.
cwedl
Jul 27, 09:49 AM
at last, I may be able to build a system that will run Vista well!
hulugu
Apr 27, 11:19 PM
Can you name ONE person here who suggested its a forgery?
Right, you typically dig through government documents looking for goofy layers (or object) and you're just asking questions about this one document which happens to prove that Obama was born in the United States.
What I find remarkable is you were one of the ones arguing that all Obama has to do is show the long-form document and now that the White House has, you're still arguing about the document. It's a fair question to wonder why there are layers in a document, but you can't honestly say that such a question doesn't lead down a path that would logically come to the conclusion that a document was a forgery.
Am I a liar? I have no idea if you're doing it right, or if you are even using Illustrator, or if the PDF was replaced with a single-layer/object one. Just do a Google search for 'obama birth certificate layers' and you'll see that I'm not the only one who downloaded a file with multiple layers or objects or whatever.
It seems like it changes depending on the settings and edition of Creative Suite you have.
I'm quite sure that my rare posts in this forum have little to do with what you and your army think of this forum...besides, my milkshake brings all the boys to the yard.
Yeah it does. ;)
It'd be fascinating to see how much people cared about 'layers' if the documents in question related to Bush's National Guard deployment or something similar. ;) Haha, no bias here boys!
The difference between me and you is that I'd want an explanation in either account. ;)
Those hypotheticals make for easy arguments. You do have a bias against Obama and you should just admit it. When a document comes around that runs counter to your worldview make sure you ask the same kinds of questions.
Right, you typically dig through government documents looking for goofy layers (or object) and you're just asking questions about this one document which happens to prove that Obama was born in the United States.
What I find remarkable is you were one of the ones arguing that all Obama has to do is show the long-form document and now that the White House has, you're still arguing about the document. It's a fair question to wonder why there are layers in a document, but you can't honestly say that such a question doesn't lead down a path that would logically come to the conclusion that a document was a forgery.
Am I a liar? I have no idea if you're doing it right, or if you are even using Illustrator, or if the PDF was replaced with a single-layer/object one. Just do a Google search for 'obama birth certificate layers' and you'll see that I'm not the only one who downloaded a file with multiple layers or objects or whatever.
It seems like it changes depending on the settings and edition of Creative Suite you have.
I'm quite sure that my rare posts in this forum have little to do with what you and your army think of this forum...besides, my milkshake brings all the boys to the yard.
Yeah it does. ;)
It'd be fascinating to see how much people cared about 'layers' if the documents in question related to Bush's National Guard deployment or something similar. ;) Haha, no bias here boys!
The difference between me and you is that I'd want an explanation in either account. ;)
Those hypotheticals make for easy arguments. You do have a bias against Obama and you should just admit it. When a document comes around that runs counter to your worldview make sure you ask the same kinds of questions.
ergle2
Sep 14, 01:17 PM
True (today anyway; in the NT era they were indeed separate platforms though. Which brings me to my next point..)
Point of total (and obnoxious) pedantry here -- XP and W2K3 Server aren't strictly the same codebase; The latter was a huge rewrite job with some fairly significant internal changes.
XP 64bit is based on W2K3, and Vista originally started out on the XP code base and then was scrapped, and was started over using the W2K3 codebase.
It doesn't invalidate your point in any way and the latter is most definitely descended from the former, but unlike previous products they weren't released in parallel. I mention it purely because I find it interesting, and it's also an example of how Windows is "evolving", so to speak.
I think people who say stuff like that are exhibiting a syndrome common to Mac folk who've never spent any time in the PC world -- they take negative comments they remember regarding versions of Windows or the PC experience from about 5 years back and assume they apply to today. XP, for example, really was for the most part a window-dressing of Windows 2000, but that is not the case for Vista. You see similar statements regarding "blue screens of death", overall system stability, etc, which suggest they haven't seen or used a PC since the late 90s/early 00's.
This is very common on both sides of the divide. Many Mac-only people seem to think Windows is still stuck in the Win9x days, and many of the Windows-only types seem to think MacOS is still in the 8.x days.
I guess it's a little like when your friend has kids and you don't see them for a few years, and you're surprised that instead of still being little kids they're teenagers... :)
Point of total (and obnoxious) pedantry here -- XP and W2K3 Server aren't strictly the same codebase; The latter was a huge rewrite job with some fairly significant internal changes.
XP 64bit is based on W2K3, and Vista originally started out on the XP code base and then was scrapped, and was started over using the W2K3 codebase.
It doesn't invalidate your point in any way and the latter is most definitely descended from the former, but unlike previous products they weren't released in parallel. I mention it purely because I find it interesting, and it's also an example of how Windows is "evolving", so to speak.
I think people who say stuff like that are exhibiting a syndrome common to Mac folk who've never spent any time in the PC world -- they take negative comments they remember regarding versions of Windows or the PC experience from about 5 years back and assume they apply to today. XP, for example, really was for the most part a window-dressing of Windows 2000, but that is not the case for Vista. You see similar statements regarding "blue screens of death", overall system stability, etc, which suggest they haven't seen or used a PC since the late 90s/early 00's.
This is very common on both sides of the divide. Many Mac-only people seem to think Windows is still stuck in the Win9x days, and many of the Windows-only types seem to think MacOS is still in the 8.x days.
I guess it's a little like when your friend has kids and you don't see them for a few years, and you're surprised that instead of still being little kids they're teenagers... :)
samcraig
Apr 27, 08:15 AM
A lot of people are upset over this. But, no one seems to care that the US Government can snoop on any electronic communication it wants for well over 10 years now: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Echelon_(signals_intelligence)
Data transmissions, cell phone calls, you name it. I think we're trying to cook the wrong goose if you ask me.
I think ALL the gooses should be cooked. No one should get the free pass.. so I don't think it's wrong to call Apple out on this.
I thought looking at my location histories was interesting. I, too, have no delusions that I cannot be tracked (cell phone, credit card purchases, etc.) I wonder if all the paranoids realize that any GPS camera encodes that information in the image. Share that photo online and anyone can get the metadata with location of photograph.
You wanna be connected, you can't be truly anonymous.
You wanna be anonymous, sell you computer, smart phone, cut up credit cards, and move to an undocumented shack in the middle of nowhere with no utilities.
Sharing a photo is actively giving out a location. Just like foursquare, tweeting and updating facebook. This issue is about giving out data which is involuntary, non encrypted and not being able to turn it off.
And as for the latter half of your statement - it's a dangerous/slippery slope to start being apathetic about your right to privacy. Once it's all out there - it's that much harder to get it back.
And again - there's a difference between voluntarily and involuntarily releasing of private information.
Data transmissions, cell phone calls, you name it. I think we're trying to cook the wrong goose if you ask me.
I think ALL the gooses should be cooked. No one should get the free pass.. so I don't think it's wrong to call Apple out on this.
I thought looking at my location histories was interesting. I, too, have no delusions that I cannot be tracked (cell phone, credit card purchases, etc.) I wonder if all the paranoids realize that any GPS camera encodes that information in the image. Share that photo online and anyone can get the metadata with location of photograph.
You wanna be connected, you can't be truly anonymous.
You wanna be anonymous, sell you computer, smart phone, cut up credit cards, and move to an undocumented shack in the middle of nowhere with no utilities.
Sharing a photo is actively giving out a location. Just like foursquare, tweeting and updating facebook. This issue is about giving out data which is involuntary, non encrypted and not being able to turn it off.
And as for the latter half of your statement - it's a dangerous/slippery slope to start being apathetic about your right to privacy. Once it's all out there - it's that much harder to get it back.
And again - there's a difference between voluntarily and involuntarily releasing of private information.
bob5820
Sep 13, 04:57 PM
if it follows typical intel transitions price point replace. So the same price as woodcrests. They might introduce faster ones though that cost more. We'll see before the end of the year. According to tha Anandtech article its likely that the Clovertown family will be clocked slower then the Woodcrests
marksman
Apr 11, 01:20 PM
The iPhone 4 is still the best smartphone in the market, so not surprising.
As for people expecting a 4" screen on the next iPhone dream on. They are not going to make an iPhone with a bigger screen.]]
The people who are saying this is bad for apple are clearly spec chasers.. Which is not what 99% of all iPhone customers are.... They buy into apple for the experience of the UI, the device and the ecosystem. None of that changes or goes away... None of that experience stops existing because some sucky android phone has a better CPU.
The iPhone 4 runs everything that is available for it really well... That some commodity android handset maker has to beef up their spec sheet because they can't compete where it really counts doesn't matter.
The reality is the iPhone doesn't get surpassed until the next iPhone comes out...
Again I am amazed at how many people here think a 4" screen is the wave of the future. It is not.
As for people expecting a 4" screen on the next iPhone dream on. They are not going to make an iPhone with a bigger screen.]]
The people who are saying this is bad for apple are clearly spec chasers.. Which is not what 99% of all iPhone customers are.... They buy into apple for the experience of the UI, the device and the ecosystem. None of that changes or goes away... None of that experience stops existing because some sucky android phone has a better CPU.
The iPhone 4 runs everything that is available for it really well... That some commodity android handset maker has to beef up their spec sheet because they can't compete where it really counts doesn't matter.
The reality is the iPhone doesn't get surpassed until the next iPhone comes out...
Again I am amazed at how many people here think a 4" screen is the wave of the future. It is not.
Lord Blackadder
Nov 28, 09:49 PM
It would be a nice idea.
Nice. idea. For whom, you greedy scum? :mad:
**** them and their greed. I shall say no more.
Nice. idea. For whom, you greedy scum? :mad:
**** them and their greed. I shall say no more.
SevenInchScrew
Aug 18, 10:14 PM
OK, relating to my earlier posts, after seeing this picture, my expectations of the actual driving and racing in the game are now at a stratospheric level. Having 200 cars with this level of detail is great, but I hope the actual on-track experience has increased as much, if not more. Fingers crossed.... tightly.
{Click to huge-size}
http://i38.tinypic.com/2s7u992.jpg
{Click to huge-size}
http://i38.tinypic.com/2s7u992.jpg
appleguy123
Feb 28, 06:32 PM
Where did I say he could not have an opinion? All I said was that his opinion should have no bearing on my life.
Agreed, but when you air your opinions in public, others have the right to challenge them.
I acknowledge that I misspoke. Opinions like this should be checked. Carry on.
Agreed, but when you air your opinions in public, others have the right to challenge them.
I acknowledge that I misspoke. Opinions like this should be checked. Carry on.
princealfie
Nov 29, 08:58 AM
Time for Apple to change the paradigm again. I think it's time for Apple to start putting together a music production house. Offer musicians the ability to go direct to iTunes with all the marketing necessary to promote their catalogs. I'm not very familiar with the music industry, but I "think" Apple is quite prepared to create their own studios, handle their own promotion/marketing and already have a HIGHLY efficient distribution system in place. Granted, they are not supposed to be creating music according to their Apple Music agreement, but if they just bought Apple Music outright it would make a great fit, eh?
B
Perhaps we need to have a iTube website eh?
B
Perhaps we need to have a iTube website eh?
