jav6454
May 1, 10:14 PM
Mission Accomplished now?
timinbovey
Apr 26, 07:01 PM
I'm curious to know exactly WHAT "cloud" they're going to store my music in? There IS no CLOUD! Cripes, people, it's the same darn internet it always was. Piles of servers and hard drives, all connected by cables and wires and fiber optics, et. al. right here on EARTH. There's NO CLOUD. Why the HECK they had to start calling it that is what? Basically a Microsoft marketing term, right? So, lets get past that BS right now.
Of COURSE they're going to charge for it. Do you think for a moment that Apple, or anyone else can provide storage for all the songs, videos., etc that users have on their individual devices, AND provide bandwidth for that much streaming, AND maintain it, etc for free? Be real people.
Remembeer, the record labels are DEMANDING that EACH song by EVERY user be uploaded and kept seperate. So if 126,577 people have the SAME exact song on their device, it will have to be uploaded 126,577 times so each has their own secure copy to access. Which also makes me wonder, will Apple (or anyone else) be allowed to have backups available? Or will hundreds of thousands of users and their files have to be re-uploaded when there's a failure?
Basically, this is the SAME THING as uploading your very own music files to your own server, or the server of your choice and accessing them as you choose. In effect, having your own "cloud". I have a web site. As part of the deal, I get unlimited server space and bandwidth. Presently have probably 80 gigs of mp3's there (all of my own creation, no music company stuff) but I could easily upload hundreds of gigs of music there, and have access whenever and where ever I want it, at no cost to me. Of course I don't have a spiffy user interface to facilitate easy retrieval and organizing like iTunes, etc. But still, I could do it easily enough. So could all of you.
This is just another way to get you to pay to listen to music you already own. Except for very specialized situations, I just don't see a need for it.
Of COURSE they're going to charge for it. Do you think for a moment that Apple, or anyone else can provide storage for all the songs, videos., etc that users have on their individual devices, AND provide bandwidth for that much streaming, AND maintain it, etc for free? Be real people.
Remembeer, the record labels are DEMANDING that EACH song by EVERY user be uploaded and kept seperate. So if 126,577 people have the SAME exact song on their device, it will have to be uploaded 126,577 times so each has their own secure copy to access. Which also makes me wonder, will Apple (or anyone else) be allowed to have backups available? Or will hundreds of thousands of users and their files have to be re-uploaded when there's a failure?
Basically, this is the SAME THING as uploading your very own music files to your own server, or the server of your choice and accessing them as you choose. In effect, having your own "cloud". I have a web site. As part of the deal, I get unlimited server space and bandwidth. Presently have probably 80 gigs of mp3's there (all of my own creation, no music company stuff) but I could easily upload hundreds of gigs of music there, and have access whenever and where ever I want it, at no cost to me. Of course I don't have a spiffy user interface to facilitate easy retrieval and organizing like iTunes, etc. But still, I could do it easily enough. So could all of you.
This is just another way to get you to pay to listen to music you already own. Except for very specialized situations, I just don't see a need for it.
logandzwon
May 3, 08:28 AM
store is broken, I can't get into the iMac section to order one =(
nishioka
Apr 24, 12:22 AM
Why?
I thought AT&T's buyout means T-Mobile is going bye-bye?
When one company acquires another like that, they don't just tear down all the old company's equipment and replace it with their own. If that were the case AT&T would simply skip over the whole mess with getting the deal approved by the US Department of Justice and the FCC and just buy a crapload of equipment to put up themselves with that $39 billion.
If the deal is approved T-Mobile's assets will be integrated into AT&T's network and AT&T is probably having all their handset manufacturers run similar testing on T-Mobile equipment to ensure compatibility.
Apple is not "wasting money" on a cell phone provider that is going away, and T-Mobile is not "getting" the iPhone.
I thought AT&T's buyout means T-Mobile is going bye-bye?
When one company acquires another like that, they don't just tear down all the old company's equipment and replace it with their own. If that were the case AT&T would simply skip over the whole mess with getting the deal approved by the US Department of Justice and the FCC and just buy a crapload of equipment to put up themselves with that $39 billion.
If the deal is approved T-Mobile's assets will be integrated into AT&T's network and AT&T is probably having all their handset manufacturers run similar testing on T-Mobile equipment to ensure compatibility.
Apple is not "wasting money" on a cell phone provider that is going away, and T-Mobile is not "getting" the iPhone.
rusty2192
Apr 3, 08:29 AM
Another one from my outing last week. I got some nice shots yesterday, but I'm still working on editing them. I tried avoiding posting this one, but ran out of others. While I am happy with it for myself, I know it is rather (ok, very) cliche to post a duck shot ;)
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5133/5564642341_20e57c806e.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/48874590@N02/5564642341/)
IMG_3102 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/48874590@N02/5564642341/) by Rusty2192 (http://www.flickr.com/people/48874590@N02/), on Flickr
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5133/5564642341_20e57c806e.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/48874590@N02/5564642341/)
IMG_3102 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/48874590@N02/5564642341/) by Rusty2192 (http://www.flickr.com/people/48874590@N02/), on Flickr
splashnader
Jan 27, 07:36 PM
$9.99 taxes in, couldn't say no to that.
http://www.blu-rayaanbieding.nl/discs/youthinrevolt.jpg
I missed seeing it in theaters. That's a great deal for the price.
http://www.blu-rayaanbieding.nl/discs/youthinrevolt.jpg
I missed seeing it in theaters. That's a great deal for the price.
Artful Dodger
Apr 1, 09:06 AM
This is the absolute worst winter in the New England states that I can recall. I am disenchanted by any more snow and look forward to some warmth. The symbolism is in the image!
I understand exactly, seems what misses us you get if your closer to the coast and the other way around, lovely color in the photo to brighten the mood though :)
I understand exactly, seems what misses us you get if your closer to the coast and the other way around, lovely color in the photo to brighten the mood though :)
wovel
May 4, 12:40 AM
A real live AT&T customer care rep! Well that is as official as it gets. Everyone knows that Apple always informs carrier customer care reps of their future plans months in advance...
Oh Wait. I heard from the Cinnabon guy that the US Government called him and officially informed him that Osama Bin Laden is still alive and being held in a secret chamber below Disney World or Disney Land.
Oh Wait. I heard from the Cinnabon guy that the US Government called him and officially informed him that Osama Bin Laden is still alive and being held in a secret chamber below Disney World or Disney Land.
br0adband
Nov 7, 04:04 AM
To be honest, I've had more application crashes and restarts on OSX than I have under XP/Windows in the past 3 years. So much for "crash resistant" - and yes, I've had 4 kernel panics since I got this iMac home; that's more than the number of BSODs I've had under XP in 4 years.
Which means -- as everyone is saying -- that there is something wrong with your computer. I have a MacBook, two Intel iMacs, and a Mac Pro in my house, and they do not crash despite heavy daily use. My poor Mac Pro is running three different operating systems right now using Parallels, with nary a complaint. If you are getting unexplained kernel panics on a clean install of Mac OS X, then you have a hardware problem.
Hardware problems can affect any OS -- I've seen Windows systems that get daily BSODs. It's not because "Windows sucks", it's because there was a sub-par memory chip or somesuch in the system. Likewise Mac OS X crashes, when nobody else is experiencing a problem, are not an indication of the stability of the OS but rather of your hardware.
You're quoting me back to me when all of us (including me) were talking about that other guy that is having hardware problems because his Parallels "sucks." Parallels kicks ass on my C2D 20" iMac - hence the reason I piped up to be the first to say something is wrong with the other guy's machine if he can't get it working right.
On mine, which is stock hardware except for the 2GB of RAM I have in it, Parallels starts up in 4 seconds, boots my XP VM in 9-10, shuts down in 3-4, restarts the same VM in under 5 seconds (have yet to figure that one out, probably because of caching someplace; I don't even see the XP splash screen when it reboots/restarts because it's so fast), suspends in 22-25 seconds, resumes in 30-34, and I have no issues with any hardware at all in my XP VM. I even burn CDs and DVDs from the XP VM over FireWire/USB without hassles (Plextor FireWire/USB external).
So, on a similarly configured piece of hardware, if he's having suspend/resume times that seem to be 4-6x longer than others then, as you said, there is something wrong with the hardware. If none of the rest of us are having said issues, your line of logic would follow and apply to his machine since he's the only one reporting such ridiculously long suspend/resume times among other things.
Parallels works for me. Since I can't post specific benchmark data for Parallels and that other new-on-the-scene virtualization software for Macs <hint, hint> I'll just say this:
I completed the testing I said I was going to do, and Parallels simply lays the smackdown across that other software. And yes I'm well aware that other software is in beta - or pre-beta late alpha as one person put it - and that's fine. But I paid for Parallels, and to use that most famous line about Macs:
It just works.
Oh yeah, it beats that other software even with multi-core CPU support enabled. Go figure.
bb
Parallels sucks but until now its been the only REAL game in town.
Ah... the clarion call of lamers. Might as well bash Windows since it's so pervasive while you're at it. And it's still no excuse for stealing the software and breaking the faith. Bleh...
Which means -- as everyone is saying -- that there is something wrong with your computer. I have a MacBook, two Intel iMacs, and a Mac Pro in my house, and they do not crash despite heavy daily use. My poor Mac Pro is running three different operating systems right now using Parallels, with nary a complaint. If you are getting unexplained kernel panics on a clean install of Mac OS X, then you have a hardware problem.
Hardware problems can affect any OS -- I've seen Windows systems that get daily BSODs. It's not because "Windows sucks", it's because there was a sub-par memory chip or somesuch in the system. Likewise Mac OS X crashes, when nobody else is experiencing a problem, are not an indication of the stability of the OS but rather of your hardware.
You're quoting me back to me when all of us (including me) were talking about that other guy that is having hardware problems because his Parallels "sucks." Parallels kicks ass on my C2D 20" iMac - hence the reason I piped up to be the first to say something is wrong with the other guy's machine if he can't get it working right.
On mine, which is stock hardware except for the 2GB of RAM I have in it, Parallels starts up in 4 seconds, boots my XP VM in 9-10, shuts down in 3-4, restarts the same VM in under 5 seconds (have yet to figure that one out, probably because of caching someplace; I don't even see the XP splash screen when it reboots/restarts because it's so fast), suspends in 22-25 seconds, resumes in 30-34, and I have no issues with any hardware at all in my XP VM. I even burn CDs and DVDs from the XP VM over FireWire/USB without hassles (Plextor FireWire/USB external).
So, on a similarly configured piece of hardware, if he's having suspend/resume times that seem to be 4-6x longer than others then, as you said, there is something wrong with the hardware. If none of the rest of us are having said issues, your line of logic would follow and apply to his machine since he's the only one reporting such ridiculously long suspend/resume times among other things.
Parallels works for me. Since I can't post specific benchmark data for Parallels and that other new-on-the-scene virtualization software for Macs <hint, hint> I'll just say this:
I completed the testing I said I was going to do, and Parallels simply lays the smackdown across that other software. And yes I'm well aware that other software is in beta - or pre-beta late alpha as one person put it - and that's fine. But I paid for Parallels, and to use that most famous line about Macs:
It just works.
Oh yeah, it beats that other software even with multi-core CPU support enabled. Go figure.
bb
Parallels sucks but until now its been the only REAL game in town.
Ah... the clarion call of lamers. Might as well bash Windows since it's so pervasive while you're at it. And it's still no excuse for stealing the software and breaking the faith. Bleh...
chrmjenkins
Apr 22, 04:56 PM
ya no,
any rumors on hspa+?
The Gobi chip in the verizon iphone 4 supports it. If they use that for a universal iphone 5, the question is whether apple/at&t enables it.
any rumors on hspa+?
The Gobi chip in the verizon iphone 4 supports it. If they use that for a universal iphone 5, the question is whether apple/at&t enables it.
chrmjenkins
Apr 28, 12:19 PM
Ouch, Appleguy. I believe you may have made our wolfish friend angry. Now we avenge you.
eldiablojoe
Still night. The death was because of a kamikaze attack.
eldiablojoe
Still night. The death was because of a kamikaze attack.
DotCom2
Apr 14, 12:21 PM
PLEASE have battery drain fix!
PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE!
PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE!
Anonymous Freak
Apr 28, 02:24 PM
Why are you equating "cross-dresser" and "pedophile"?
Also you do realize that gender roles and gender distinctions are purely socially constructed concepts that hold no real barring on reality.
Calling someone "creeeeepy" because they do not fit into your preconceived notion of gender is kind of ****ed up no?
The two were separate qualifiers. I wouldn't imagine that a male pedophile that ISN'T cross-dressing would try to walk into a womens' restroom. I was *NOT* meaning to imply that all cross-dressers are pedophiles.
To me, "transgender" means someone who identifies as the opposite of their birth gender the vast majority of the time. "Cross-dresser" means someone who primarily identifies as one gender, but occasionally dresses as the other gender. Yes, it is possible to have a transgender cross-dresser, someone who primarily identifies as the opposite of their birth gender, but occasionally dresses as their birth gender.
I have no problem with "regular" cross-dressers. But if they identify as their birth gender the majority of the time, they should use their birth gender-labeled restroom. If they identify as the opposite gender the majority of the time, even if they are still physically their birth gender, then I don't have a problem with them using their identified-as restroom.
And, yes, I fully agree that calling someone creepy because they do not fit into preconceived notions of gender is ********* up. People are people, regardless of outward appearances.
Also you do realize that gender roles and gender distinctions are purely socially constructed concepts that hold no real barring on reality.
Calling someone "creeeeepy" because they do not fit into your preconceived notion of gender is kind of ****ed up no?
The two were separate qualifiers. I wouldn't imagine that a male pedophile that ISN'T cross-dressing would try to walk into a womens' restroom. I was *NOT* meaning to imply that all cross-dressers are pedophiles.
To me, "transgender" means someone who identifies as the opposite of their birth gender the vast majority of the time. "Cross-dresser" means someone who primarily identifies as one gender, but occasionally dresses as the other gender. Yes, it is possible to have a transgender cross-dresser, someone who primarily identifies as the opposite of their birth gender, but occasionally dresses as their birth gender.
I have no problem with "regular" cross-dressers. But if they identify as their birth gender the majority of the time, they should use their birth gender-labeled restroom. If they identify as the opposite gender the majority of the time, even if they are still physically their birth gender, then I don't have a problem with them using their identified-as restroom.
And, yes, I fully agree that calling someone creepy because they do not fit into preconceived notions of gender is ********* up. People are people, regardless of outward appearances.
AlphaBob
Jan 30, 10:02 AM
LOL... my friend, lets look at this logically....
100% of our income tax pays the interest on our national debt.
This is absurdly false. In the debt service was approximately $400 billion. In that year personal income taxes amounted to $1044 billion dollars. Corporate taxes amounted to $354 billion dollars, and other taxes (which includes social security) amounted to $1009 billion dollars. The total tax receipts by the Federal government was over $2.3 TRILLION dollars.
The assets OWNED by the United States (it's citizens and the government), excluding those owned by foreign investors, were $62.5 trillion dollars in 2005.
So the total national debt is less than 4% of the net worth of the cournty.
PS: For what it is worth, a measure of a healthy business is a debt to worth ration of 2 to 1. In other words, if the US were a business, it would be doing uncommonly well. Apple would be doing even better!
100% of our income tax pays the interest on our national debt.
This is absurdly false. In the debt service was approximately $400 billion. In that year personal income taxes amounted to $1044 billion dollars. Corporate taxes amounted to $354 billion dollars, and other taxes (which includes social security) amounted to $1009 billion dollars. The total tax receipts by the Federal government was over $2.3 TRILLION dollars.
The assets OWNED by the United States (it's citizens and the government), excluding those owned by foreign investors, were $62.5 trillion dollars in 2005.
So the total national debt is less than 4% of the net worth of the cournty.
PS: For what it is worth, a measure of a healthy business is a debt to worth ration of 2 to 1. In other words, if the US were a business, it would be doing uncommonly well. Apple would be doing even better!
bushman4
Apr 12, 11:04 PM
Iphone 5 looks to be Apples best kept secret yet!
If everyone remembers prior to the Iphone 4 release no info either until the beta version was found in a bar.
This year Apple has doubled up its security and seems as though companies producing the parts fear of losing a contract is keeping everything hush-hush.
Apple not releasing a new IPHONE in June would really pull the stock into the garbage. It would be hard to make up that lost revenue for the quarter.
One thing I've noticed about all these September rumors is that none of them have any substantiation. I repeat none.
If everyone remembers prior to the Iphone 4 release no info either until the beta version was found in a bar.
This year Apple has doubled up its security and seems as though companies producing the parts fear of losing a contract is keeping everything hush-hush.
Apple not releasing a new IPHONE in June would really pull the stock into the garbage. It would be hard to make up that lost revenue for the quarter.
One thing I've noticed about all these September rumors is that none of them have any substantiation. I repeat none.
dethmaShine
Apr 13, 05:29 AM
I heard the iphone 5 is delayed because the HTC Sensation has sent Apple back to the drawing board.
I think HTC needs to find a drawing board and a good one cause all their recent phones have looked almost the same.
Apple must be worried, I know. :rolleyes:
I think HTC needs to find a drawing board and a good one cause all their recent phones have looked almost the same.
Apple must be worried, I know. :rolleyes:
Swarmlord
Oct 23, 12:39 PM
while it would be nice to live in a world where everything Microsoft made could easily be avoided, its certainly not the best solution at all for some people and their jobs/careers/etc. If you need compatibility with Windows, then you need it to get things done. XP will be fine for the vast majority of people right now, but eventually people are going to want to upgrade to Vista for a variety of reasons, and knowing that you'll have to re-boot to run vista for the lower-level versions is an issue. Microsoft isn't the best company, but we live in a world where their products are used by so many people that it can't be avoided.
I know that I can't entirely avoid Vista, but I won't load it on my Mac. I have to use and support it at work though and as far as home use goes, it will wait until MS requires it to get security updates.
As for the previous post concerning backwards compatibility, I don't think that it's too much for Microsoft to test their browser on existing web pages that contain industry standard html, dtml, java, flash, etc. If Mozilla, Firefox, etc. launched a new version that crashed on web pages containing more than a couple jpgs and a paragraph tag, they'd be flayed and MS would be screaming the loudest.
I know that I can't entirely avoid Vista, but I won't load it on my Mac. I have to use and support it at work though and as far as home use goes, it will wait until MS requires it to get security updates.
As for the previous post concerning backwards compatibility, I don't think that it's too much for Microsoft to test their browser on existing web pages that contain industry standard html, dtml, java, flash, etc. If Mozilla, Firefox, etc. launched a new version that crashed on web pages containing more than a couple jpgs and a paragraph tag, they'd be flayed and MS would be screaming the loudest.
maclaptop
Apr 23, 09:26 PM
um. Huh? They don't seem to be winning much in the U.S. What is the source of your conjecture?
What's so great about the rating arrows is you can tell who's got the balls to share honestly, versus the suck ups with high positive ratings for being perfect yes men.
Nothing ever improves without candid feedback. Yes men breed dysfunction and stagnation. Rock on boys..:)
What's so great about the rating arrows is you can tell who's got the balls to share honestly, versus the suck ups with high positive ratings for being perfect yes men.
Nothing ever improves without candid feedback. Yes men breed dysfunction and stagnation. Rock on boys..:)
digitalbiker
Jul 11, 12:58 AM
Apple never intended for iWork to compete with MS Office. Apple merely wanted to fill a niche for those AppleWorks users who didn't need a full blown behemoth Office Suite like MS Office.
It is only the die-hard Apple users that detest MS Office who are suggesting that iWork is a replacement for MS Office.
I have been using Pages and Keynote since Day One. Pages One was almost worthless in my book. Apple should have given away Pages v2 to those who suffered through version 1. Keynote was interesting and useful from version one but still lags significantly behind PowerPoint.
Both Pages 2 and Keynote now make a nice little package at $79.00 for those users who don't need to work in an MS Office environment and don't need all of the revision, collaboration, and integration tools of MS Office.
But come on, let's get real. iWork doesn't really come close to what is offered by a professional business suite like MS Office. It's like saying, Photshop Elements is a replacement for Creative Suite 2.:eek:
It is only the die-hard Apple users that detest MS Office who are suggesting that iWork is a replacement for MS Office.
I have been using Pages and Keynote since Day One. Pages One was almost worthless in my book. Apple should have given away Pages v2 to those who suffered through version 1. Keynote was interesting and useful from version one but still lags significantly behind PowerPoint.
Both Pages 2 and Keynote now make a nice little package at $79.00 for those users who don't need to work in an MS Office environment and don't need all of the revision, collaboration, and integration tools of MS Office.
But come on, let's get real. iWork doesn't really come close to what is offered by a professional business suite like MS Office. It's like saying, Photshop Elements is a replacement for Creative Suite 2.:eek:
ombrenelcielo
Mar 31, 10:26 AM
pretty good!
I like the week view option, and the new integrations.
I like the week view option, and the new integrations.
jettredmont
Oct 23, 10:42 AM
just to clear up the confusion, is this a legal or technical restriction? Can you still do this with the basic edition technically, but illegally. Or are there technical restrictions being applied?
No one will know that until they try installing Windows on a VM.
And, yes, the detection of a VM is simple, given a handful of VM vendors: just look for the VM "hardware" signatures they use. On activation, if any matching hardware is found, pop up a dialog stating "This license of Windows is not applicable to a virtual machine, such as <Parallels or VMWare or Virtual PC>. Activation failed. Please see www.microsoft.com/suckyoudry to enhance your license to allow activation on this virtual machine."
That is precisely what Activation is for: detecting invalid hardware (usually, hardware on which this copy of Windows was not activated, but in thi case also VM hardware) and stopping full use of the product on it. We can't say for certain that they will do this until it happens or someone from MS breaks the code of silence regarding this issue. But they certainly have the means to do it.
No one will know that until they try installing Windows on a VM.
And, yes, the detection of a VM is simple, given a handful of VM vendors: just look for the VM "hardware" signatures they use. On activation, if any matching hardware is found, pop up a dialog stating "This license of Windows is not applicable to a virtual machine, such as <Parallels or VMWare or Virtual PC>. Activation failed. Please see www.microsoft.com/suckyoudry to enhance your license to allow activation on this virtual machine."
That is precisely what Activation is for: detecting invalid hardware (usually, hardware on which this copy of Windows was not activated, but in thi case also VM hardware) and stopping full use of the product on it. We can't say for certain that they will do this until it happens or someone from MS breaks the code of silence regarding this issue. But they certainly have the means to do it.
jav6454
Apr 21, 09:51 AM
Since -aggie- is playing, I'll also play.
AlanAudio
Aug 15, 06:02 PM
You're crazy. :) But one thing I would like to see is a free upgrade to iLife for everyone who upgrades Leopard. Or else some kind of Leopard / iLife buy-together discount. That would be most welcome.
rjf
Obviously we'd all like to get something for nothing, but as the newest OS and the newest iApps both come for free with every new Mac, the boxed versions are effectively upgrades and Apple would feel that they're offering them at reduced prices anyway compared to their full value.
But I'd love to be wrong on this.
Which reminds me. Every time I've bought an OS upgrade ( for as long as I can remember - probably back to OS 7 ) there has been a set of coupons included to prove that I purchased it. Has there ever been a scheme where customers actually get something in exchange for those coupons ?
rjf
Obviously we'd all like to get something for nothing, but as the newest OS and the newest iApps both come for free with every new Mac, the boxed versions are effectively upgrades and Apple would feel that they're offering them at reduced prices anyway compared to their full value.
But I'd love to be wrong on this.
Which reminds me. Every time I've bought an OS upgrade ( for as long as I can remember - probably back to OS 7 ) there has been a set of coupons included to prove that I purchased it. Has there ever been a scheme where customers actually get something in exchange for those coupons ?
mrsir2009
Apr 22, 04:43 PM
Damn that looks scary!