TheMacBookPro
Apr 25, 09:36 AM
LOL at people who think Android just collects location data without the user's knowledge.
When you turn on Location Data you have to press Agree to the Location Consent popup, which says you agree to let Google collect anonymous location data. Disable it if you want.
Where do people get the idea that Google collects location data regardless of whether or not you selected Agree on the popup?
I don't see any location consent popups on my iPhones here.
When you turn on Location Data you have to press Agree to the Location Consent popup, which says you agree to let Google collect anonymous location data. Disable it if you want.
Where do people get the idea that Google collects location data regardless of whether or not you selected Agree on the popup?
I don't see any location consent popups on my iPhones here.
scottsjack
Apr 21, 04:03 PM
As an MP owner it of course sounds great to me. I really get sick hearing about iToys, some of which I own and love. If Apple would produce both the traditional Mac Pro and a rack mount version each configured to their specific duties that would be the best. As a mat screen user it's either Mac Pro, Mac mini or Windows for me. In spite of the fact that Windows 7 is pretty great to use I'd MUCH, MUCH rather stay with Mac.
MatthewAMEL
May 6, 12:46 AM
This is about the dumbest thing I have ever seen on MacRumors.
It's not April Fools, right?
It's not April Fools, right?
yankeedoodle
Nov 22, 02:16 AM
Wasn't it exactly the same story with the iPod?
Yep. And Palm doen't even know how to make a PDA right... Sorry, just my 2 cents and as much as I hate Microsoft: If there is one single thing that Microsoft's dullness department has overlooked so far it's the Pocket PC... Have a look at them next time you are in a store, compare them; have a look at their multitasking features, watch online TV on them -- they are by far not perfect and tend to crash (that's the Microsoft part in it) -- but they are still worlds better than any Palm out there.
I wish Apple would not only enter the phone business but also come back into the PDA market and show the Microsoft folks how to do it the Apple way. The Newton was fantastic and much ahead of it's time. In 1993 people just didn't know how to handle a PDA and didn't know how to integrate it into their daily workflow. Today, we are used to carry our iPods around wherever we go -- so if Apple could manage to enter the phone and PDA business via the iPod as a well known, emotionally positive vector (people buy the iPod because they want to listen to music and find out that it can also do much more than just play back U2 tracks), they could have a tremendous success.
Yep. And Palm doen't even know how to make a PDA right... Sorry, just my 2 cents and as much as I hate Microsoft: If there is one single thing that Microsoft's dullness department has overlooked so far it's the Pocket PC... Have a look at them next time you are in a store, compare them; have a look at their multitasking features, watch online TV on them -- they are by far not perfect and tend to crash (that's the Microsoft part in it) -- but they are still worlds better than any Palm out there.
I wish Apple would not only enter the phone business but also come back into the PDA market and show the Microsoft folks how to do it the Apple way. The Newton was fantastic and much ahead of it's time. In 1993 people just didn't know how to handle a PDA and didn't know how to integrate it into their daily workflow. Today, we are used to carry our iPods around wherever we go -- so if Apple could manage to enter the phone and PDA business via the iPod as a well known, emotionally positive vector (people buy the iPod because they want to listen to music and find out that it can also do much more than just play back U2 tracks), they could have a tremendous success.
MikeTheC
Nov 25, 10:46 PM
All this talk about Palm needing to modernize their OS, or it is outdated, or needing to re-write is absolutely hilarious.
On a phone, I want to use its features quickly and easily. When I have to schedule an appointment, I want to enter that appointment as easily as possible. When I want to add something to my to-do list, I want to do it easily and quickly. And first and foremost, I want to be able to look up a contact and dial it as quickly as possible.
A phone is not a personal computer. I couldn't care less about multitasking, rewriting, "modern" OSes (whatever "modern" means). "Modern" features and look is just eye candy and/or toys. A mobile phone is a gadget of convenience, and it should be convenient to use. Even PalmOS 1.0 was convenient. It was just as easy to use its contact and calendar features as any so-called "modern" OS is today.
I would really like to know how "modernizing" the OS on my phone would help me look up contacts, dial contacts, enter to-do list entries, and entering calendar entries any better that I could today.
Again, I repeat: a phone is not a personal computer. There's no point in treating it as such.
The same point could largely be made about cars, but I don't think either of us would want to be driving a Model T or Model A Ford these days, would we?
The term "Modern" as applied to operating systems has little to do with the interface per se. It primarily concerns the underpinnings of the OS and how forward-looking and/or open-ended it is. Older operating systems, if you want to look at it in this way, were very geared to the hardware of their times, and every time you added a new hardware feature or some new kind of technology came out, you wound up making this big patchwork of an OS, in which you had either an out-dated or obsolete "core" around which was stuck, somewhat unglamorously, lots of crap to allow it to do stuff it wasn't really designed for. Then, you wound up having to write patches for the patches, etc., ad infinitum.
Apple tried to go the internal development route, but that didn't work because their departmental infrastructure was eating them from the inside out at the time and basically poisoned all of their new projects. They considered BeOS because it was an incredibly modern OS at the time that was very capable, unbelievably good at multitasking, memory protection, multimedia tasks, etc. However, that company was so shaky that when Apple decided not to go with them, they collapsed. One of the products which was introduced and sold and almost immediately recalled that used a version of BeOS was Sony's eVilla (you just have to love that name -- try pronouncing it out loud to get the full effect).
Ultimately, they went with NeXT's BSD- and Mach-Kernel-based NeXTStep (which after a bunch of time and effort and -- since lots of it is based on Open Source software, there were a healthy amount of community contributions to) and hence we now have Mac OS X.
I'll leave it to actual developers and/or coders here to better explain and refine (and/or correct) what I've said here, should you wish greater detail beyond what I am able to -- and therefore have -- provided above.
The whole point of going with a modern OS implemented for an imbedded market (i.e. "Mac OS X Mobile") is it gives you much more direct (and probably better implemented and/or better-grounded) access to modern technologies. Everything from basic I/O tasks that reside in the Kernel to audio processing to doing H.264 decoding to having access to IPv4 or IPv6, are all examples of things which a modern OS could do a better job of providing and/or backing.
From what I understand, PalmOS is something that was designed to first and foremost give you basic notepad and daily organizer functionality. When they wrote, as you say, PalmOS 1.0, they happened to implement a way for third parties to write software that could run on it. This has been both a benefit and a bane of PalmOS's existence. First off, they now have the same issues of backwards-compatibility and storage space and memory use/abuse that a regular computer OS has. I said it was both a benefit and a bane; but there's actually two parts to the "bane" side. The first I've already mentioned, but the second is the fact that since apps have been written which can do darn near any conceivable task, people keep wanting more and more and more. And this then goes back to the "patchwork" I described earlier in talking about "older" computer OSs.
Then people want multimedia, and color screens, and apps to take advantage of it, and they want Palm to incorporate DSPs so they can play music, and of course that brings along with it all of the extra patching to then allow for the existence of, and permit the use of, an on-board DSP. And now you want WiFi? Well, shoot, now we gotta have IPv4 as well, and support for TCP/IP, none of which was ever a part of the original concept of PalmOS.
And even if you don't want or need any of those features in your own PDA, I'm sorry but that's really just too bad. Go live in a cave if you like, but if you buy a new PDA, guess what: you're gonna get all that stuff.
And at some point, all of this stretches an "older" OS just a bit too far, or it becomes a bit absurd with all the hoops and turns and wiggling that PalmOne's coders have to go through, so then they say, "Aw **** it, let's just re-write the thing."
Apple comes to this without any of *that* sort of legacy. Doubtless there will be no Newton code on this thing anywhere, but what Apple's got is Mac OS X, which means they also have the power (albeit somewhat indirectly) of an Open Source OS -- Linux. And in case you weren't aware, there are already numerous "imbedded" implementations of Linux -- phones, PDAs, game systems, kiosks, etc. -- all of which are data points and collective experience opportunities which ALREADY EXIST that Apple can exploit.
So no, having a "modern" OS is not a bad thing. It's actually a supremely awesome thing. What you're concerned about is having something that is intuitive AND efficient AND appropriate to the world of telephone interfaces for the user interface on the device you'd go and buy yourself.
All I can say, based on past performance, is give Apple a chance.
Now, here's a larger picture thought to ponder...
If Apple goes to market with the iPhone, then this is going to open up (to some extent) the viability of a F/OSS community cell phone. And this is a really good thing as well because it represents a non-commercial, enthusiast entrance into what up until now has been a totally proprietary, locked-down OS-based product world. It has the potential to do to cell phones what Linux has inspired in Mac OS X.
On a phone, I want to use its features quickly and easily. When I have to schedule an appointment, I want to enter that appointment as easily as possible. When I want to add something to my to-do list, I want to do it easily and quickly. And first and foremost, I want to be able to look up a contact and dial it as quickly as possible.
A phone is not a personal computer. I couldn't care less about multitasking, rewriting, "modern" OSes (whatever "modern" means). "Modern" features and look is just eye candy and/or toys. A mobile phone is a gadget of convenience, and it should be convenient to use. Even PalmOS 1.0 was convenient. It was just as easy to use its contact and calendar features as any so-called "modern" OS is today.
I would really like to know how "modernizing" the OS on my phone would help me look up contacts, dial contacts, enter to-do list entries, and entering calendar entries any better that I could today.
Again, I repeat: a phone is not a personal computer. There's no point in treating it as such.
The same point could largely be made about cars, but I don't think either of us would want to be driving a Model T or Model A Ford these days, would we?
The term "Modern" as applied to operating systems has little to do with the interface per se. It primarily concerns the underpinnings of the OS and how forward-looking and/or open-ended it is. Older operating systems, if you want to look at it in this way, were very geared to the hardware of their times, and every time you added a new hardware feature or some new kind of technology came out, you wound up making this big patchwork of an OS, in which you had either an out-dated or obsolete "core" around which was stuck, somewhat unglamorously, lots of crap to allow it to do stuff it wasn't really designed for. Then, you wound up having to write patches for the patches, etc., ad infinitum.
Apple tried to go the internal development route, but that didn't work because their departmental infrastructure was eating them from the inside out at the time and basically poisoned all of their new projects. They considered BeOS because it was an incredibly modern OS at the time that was very capable, unbelievably good at multitasking, memory protection, multimedia tasks, etc. However, that company was so shaky that when Apple decided not to go with them, they collapsed. One of the products which was introduced and sold and almost immediately recalled that used a version of BeOS was Sony's eVilla (you just have to love that name -- try pronouncing it out loud to get the full effect).
Ultimately, they went with NeXT's BSD- and Mach-Kernel-based NeXTStep (which after a bunch of time and effort and -- since lots of it is based on Open Source software, there were a healthy amount of community contributions to) and hence we now have Mac OS X.
I'll leave it to actual developers and/or coders here to better explain and refine (and/or correct) what I've said here, should you wish greater detail beyond what I am able to -- and therefore have -- provided above.
The whole point of going with a modern OS implemented for an imbedded market (i.e. "Mac OS X Mobile") is it gives you much more direct (and probably better implemented and/or better-grounded) access to modern technologies. Everything from basic I/O tasks that reside in the Kernel to audio processing to doing H.264 decoding to having access to IPv4 or IPv6, are all examples of things which a modern OS could do a better job of providing and/or backing.
From what I understand, PalmOS is something that was designed to first and foremost give you basic notepad and daily organizer functionality. When they wrote, as you say, PalmOS 1.0, they happened to implement a way for third parties to write software that could run on it. This has been both a benefit and a bane of PalmOS's existence. First off, they now have the same issues of backwards-compatibility and storage space and memory use/abuse that a regular computer OS has. I said it was both a benefit and a bane; but there's actually two parts to the "bane" side. The first I've already mentioned, but the second is the fact that since apps have been written which can do darn near any conceivable task, people keep wanting more and more and more. And this then goes back to the "patchwork" I described earlier in talking about "older" computer OSs.
Then people want multimedia, and color screens, and apps to take advantage of it, and they want Palm to incorporate DSPs so they can play music, and of course that brings along with it all of the extra patching to then allow for the existence of, and permit the use of, an on-board DSP. And now you want WiFi? Well, shoot, now we gotta have IPv4 as well, and support for TCP/IP, none of which was ever a part of the original concept of PalmOS.
And even if you don't want or need any of those features in your own PDA, I'm sorry but that's really just too bad. Go live in a cave if you like, but if you buy a new PDA, guess what: you're gonna get all that stuff.
And at some point, all of this stretches an "older" OS just a bit too far, or it becomes a bit absurd with all the hoops and turns and wiggling that PalmOne's coders have to go through, so then they say, "Aw **** it, let's just re-write the thing."
Apple comes to this without any of *that* sort of legacy. Doubtless there will be no Newton code on this thing anywhere, but what Apple's got is Mac OS X, which means they also have the power (albeit somewhat indirectly) of an Open Source OS -- Linux. And in case you weren't aware, there are already numerous "imbedded" implementations of Linux -- phones, PDAs, game systems, kiosks, etc. -- all of which are data points and collective experience opportunities which ALREADY EXIST that Apple can exploit.
So no, having a "modern" OS is not a bad thing. It's actually a supremely awesome thing. What you're concerned about is having something that is intuitive AND efficient AND appropriate to the world of telephone interfaces for the user interface on the device you'd go and buy yourself.
All I can say, based on past performance, is give Apple a chance.
Now, here's a larger picture thought to ponder...
If Apple goes to market with the iPhone, then this is going to open up (to some extent) the viability of a F/OSS community cell phone. And this is a really good thing as well because it represents a non-commercial, enthusiast entrance into what up until now has been a totally proprietary, locked-down OS-based product world. It has the potential to do to cell phones what Linux has inspired in Mac OS X.
PeterQVenkman
Apr 18, 02:55 PM
Or what? You'll release the dogs? Or the bees? Or the dogs with bees in their mouth and when they bark they shoot bees at you?
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/a2/Robotic_Richard_Simmons.png
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/a2/Robotic_Richard_Simmons.png
JoshRtek
Aug 7, 07:33 PM
Everyone's been complaining about the nVidia GeForce 7300 GT...
All I want to know is how it compares to the ATI Radeon x800xt? I currently have one in my PC and it has served me well for almost 2 years; I can play any game that's out today (maybe not at huge resolutions, but with all options turned on). Anyone?
All I want to know is how it compares to the ATI Radeon x800xt? I currently have one in my PC and it has served me well for almost 2 years; I can play any game that's out today (maybe not at huge resolutions, but with all options turned on). Anyone?
adbe
Mar 29, 02:48 PM
Or perhaps the entire debacle at Foxconn has fallen on deaf ears?
;)
Foxconn is Taiwanese.
;)
Foxconn is Taiwanese.
bryanc
Jul 24, 09:58 AM
I'm going to be using my laptop for teaching in the fall, which means some fairly strenuous 3D molecular rendering, large movies, wireless internet and standard keynote (all simultaneously, of course), as well as the standard day-to-day chores.
I could manage with my ageing G4 AlBook (it continues to run like a champ, but it's a bit slow for the 3D molecular rendering, and it staggers a little with the big animations) but it occurred to me that, even with daily backups, should I have a catastrophic system failure, I couldn't get a replacement in time for the next lecture. So I've decided to buy a new laptop, and keep my venerable G4 AlBook as a backup system.
But I want any new system to be 64-bit, and otherwise as 'future-proof' as possible, so I'm going to hold out for the new merom-based MBPs. I'm really excited about the possibility of going top-of-the-line for the first time ever. I'm hoping for a system that looks like this:
17" anodized black MBP, with 2.66 GHz Core 2 Duo CPU, 1 GB RAM, a 7200 rpm 120 GB HD, 802.11n, and a blu-ray Superdrive. Should be just over $3k with my educational discount, right?
Cheers
I could manage with my ageing G4 AlBook (it continues to run like a champ, but it's a bit slow for the 3D molecular rendering, and it staggers a little with the big animations) but it occurred to me that, even with daily backups, should I have a catastrophic system failure, I couldn't get a replacement in time for the next lecture. So I've decided to buy a new laptop, and keep my venerable G4 AlBook as a backup system.
But I want any new system to be 64-bit, and otherwise as 'future-proof' as possible, so I'm going to hold out for the new merom-based MBPs. I'm really excited about the possibility of going top-of-the-line for the first time ever. I'm hoping for a system that looks like this:
17" anodized black MBP, with 2.66 GHz Core 2 Duo CPU, 1 GB RAM, a 7200 rpm 120 GB HD, 802.11n, and a blu-ray Superdrive. Should be just over $3k with my educational discount, right?
Cheers
Peace
Jul 30, 10:32 PM
The Verizon Chocolate cellphone is made by LG Electronics of Korea.
http://www.lg.co.kr/english/index.jsp
http://www.lg.co.kr/english/index.jsp
iMacZealot
Jul 29, 09:01 PM
I read somehwere that the iPhone has been ready to go for a while, the problem is all the greedy scum bag cell providers want to get paid $1 every time a customer puts a song on their phone, where as apple wants people to load up their phone for free just like they do with an iPod. Without the providers on board, you won't get [Retail $350, with 2 Year Plan $50] for the phone, you'll just get [Price $350].
Anyway I'm on verizon and its been nothing but problems with them for the past year or so. Their 'can you hear me now' network has turned into the 'what? hello? HELLO? *click*' network. I'll be happy to switch if the new phone is not on verizon.
I know. My brother travels a ton (new day, new state) and he even says that he has awful problems with it. Sprint works pretty well, but just too expensive, especially internationally.
As for the iPhone, that is the problem. For example, in the case of the ROKR, Apple wanted users to add their music for free from their comp. They went to other companies where they wanted people to pay $2-3 for a song. Maybe this new iPhone will not be music related, but Apple has become to be synonymous with music.
(Sorry this is my third post in fifteen minutes)
Anyway I'm on verizon and its been nothing but problems with them for the past year or so. Their 'can you hear me now' network has turned into the 'what? hello? HELLO? *click*' network. I'll be happy to switch if the new phone is not on verizon.
I know. My brother travels a ton (new day, new state) and he even says that he has awful problems with it. Sprint works pretty well, but just too expensive, especially internationally.
As for the iPhone, that is the problem. For example, in the case of the ROKR, Apple wanted users to add their music for free from their comp. They went to other companies where they wanted people to pay $2-3 for a song. Maybe this new iPhone will not be music related, but Apple has become to be synonymous with music.
(Sorry this is my third post in fifteen minutes)
CIA
Apr 21, 10:19 PM
Yah CIA, I think you'd be surprised with what little you can get by on these days in smaller boxes and with Thunderbolt.
And I agree with you, I hate tapes...lol. I wish we would go to 1 damn standard but we know that is how people make their money...no standards. I'm so sick of all the formats and all the output formats. I just want 1080p and that's it. Burn the rest. ;)
Ya, you know what, it is OLD and Slow, and Legacy. Because that's what small (under 20) staff TV stations usually have. We're not WNBC, we are a small town TV station that is held together by ducktape and fishing wire. I would LOVE a brand new station with cutting edge equipment, but that's just not in the cards when we are fighting to stay above water. So we use what we have available and it works. I didn't buy that whole setup all at once. (yes, it's my PERSONAL setup, since when started I refused to use the PC based Avid system.) It was pieced together over the last few years as we slimmed staff over the recession and sold off Avid machines to buy new macs. Thunderbolt is awesome, but right now it's 1998 all over again, when my first DV deck and Premiere running B&W G3 system cost $10,000 put together. Is there a single SHIPPING thunderbolt device yet? No, and the first few that do ship will cost a zillion dollars that we don't have. I love the promise of thunderbolt, but I'm more excited for 2014 thunderbolt when devices are cheap and plentiful. Right now hard drives are cheap, tape is cheap, and legacy firewire cases are all over the place. It's old, legacy, but here and essentially free. If I was swimming in cash it would be a different story.
So for the moment I'd prefer a single big box that does the job of many less expensive boxes that add up in cost to more then the one box. I need a box that I can add to over the years since buying new $2,000 machines every year is out of the question. Our Edit bay is 2 Mac Pro's, and a pair of 27" 2.93 iMac i7's. A G4 for Cold Storage, and a G5 for when interns need to learn the basics of Final Cut. (also a few OLD HP Avid Workstations from 2003 or 2004.)
And I agree with you, I hate tapes...lol. I wish we would go to 1 damn standard but we know that is how people make their money...no standards. I'm so sick of all the formats and all the output formats. I just want 1080p and that's it. Burn the rest. ;)
Ya, you know what, it is OLD and Slow, and Legacy. Because that's what small (under 20) staff TV stations usually have. We're not WNBC, we are a small town TV station that is held together by ducktape and fishing wire. I would LOVE a brand new station with cutting edge equipment, but that's just not in the cards when we are fighting to stay above water. So we use what we have available and it works. I didn't buy that whole setup all at once. (yes, it's my PERSONAL setup, since when started I refused to use the PC based Avid system.) It was pieced together over the last few years as we slimmed staff over the recession and sold off Avid machines to buy new macs. Thunderbolt is awesome, but right now it's 1998 all over again, when my first DV deck and Premiere running B&W G3 system cost $10,000 put together. Is there a single SHIPPING thunderbolt device yet? No, and the first few that do ship will cost a zillion dollars that we don't have. I love the promise of thunderbolt, but I'm more excited for 2014 thunderbolt when devices are cheap and plentiful. Right now hard drives are cheap, tape is cheap, and legacy firewire cases are all over the place. It's old, legacy, but here and essentially free. If I was swimming in cash it would be a different story.
So for the moment I'd prefer a single big box that does the job of many less expensive boxes that add up in cost to more then the one box. I need a box that I can add to over the years since buying new $2,000 machines every year is out of the question. Our Edit bay is 2 Mac Pro's, and a pair of 27" 2.93 iMac i7's. A G4 for Cold Storage, and a G5 for when interns need to learn the basics of Final Cut. (also a few OLD HP Avid Workstations from 2003 or 2004.)
Dagless
Apr 10, 11:19 AM
Brackets; 12.
48/2; 24.
*12.
=288.
Lots of votes for 2! Am I wrong?
48/2; 24.
*12.
=288.
Lots of votes for 2! Am I wrong?
LordJohnWhorfin
Nov 22, 02:57 AM
There's absolutely no reason for concern. It's not like Palm has any market share left to worry about.
Mac Fly (film)
Nov 22, 09:28 AM
HEY! who's he calling a "PC guy"??! :mad:
Exactly, Mac guys are though. Actually nobody is walking anywhere, very bad analogy. Apple isn't going to walk in, they're are going to use their thought processes, thier leadership, thier skills, thier talents, thier expirence, and their knowhow, to proove there's a reason why Apple makes things better then the other, and they will once again be proven right, I hope.
Exactly, Mac guys are though. Actually nobody is walking anywhere, very bad analogy. Apple isn't going to walk in, they're are going to use their thought processes, thier leadership, thier skills, thier talents, thier expirence, and their knowhow, to proove there's a reason why Apple makes things better then the other, and they will once again be proven right, I hope.
err404
Apr 5, 01:23 PM
Honestly, I hope Toyota tells Apple to stuff it.
Too late. They already agreed to pull it.
I was more disappointed in Cydia's public response to the request. If the want to appear more legitimate, they should assume that conversations with 'clients' are confidential.
BTW - Apple can reasonably be expected to want iOS to be portrayed in a specific light. I think it's fine for Apple to have asked for the take down, so long as they did not threaten to take action against Toyota.
Too late. They already agreed to pull it.
I was more disappointed in Cydia's public response to the request. If the want to appear more legitimate, they should assume that conversations with 'clients' are confidential.
BTW - Apple can reasonably be expected to want iOS to be portrayed in a specific light. I think it's fine for Apple to have asked for the take down, so long as they did not threaten to take action against Toyota.
Nuc
Jul 21, 02:08 PM
It would be nice if they released the MBP before WWDC so that I can take advantage of the tax free holiday and the student discount here in NC...
Nuc
Nuc
opeter
May 6, 02:53 AM
Actually you all forget something: Windows 8 (or whatever it will be) is being made for ARM too ... :)
nuckinfutz
May 7, 11:32 AM
OK, I'll grant you that MobileMe doesn't suck as much as I make it sound. I just don't like it and so I don't use it anymore. Fair enough.
But, I think you misunderstand how Google's ads work. They aren't indexing and storing your emails in some data bank to sell off to ad companies. They do simple pattern matching on the text in your email to figure out which ads are most relevant and then displays those to you. The ad companies don't have access to your emails and can't read them, etc. I'm not being capitalized. If I don't want the ads I can pay $50 / year, or I can take the ads for free. That's just business, I enter into that in full agreement. And I trust Google just as much (if not more) than some random schmo ISP that would give me shoddy email service and just as much privacy as Google does but without the ads.
Point taken but what kind of FOOL am I to trade my privacy to Google for a paltry $6 at any level?
Where you go, who you speak to and how you communicate is of tremendous value and I recommend that people think about actual value. We're moving from this era where the expectation should be that Cloud services at a basic level should be incorporated into the product without the vendor resorting to advertisements.
Google and Facebook have both come out with disturbing revelations about how they feel about consumer privacy. I think the beauty of the web is that no company is irreplaceable. I could continue to get email, online calendar, pictures, documents and more without Google and that's a great feeling.
But, I think you misunderstand how Google's ads work. They aren't indexing and storing your emails in some data bank to sell off to ad companies. They do simple pattern matching on the text in your email to figure out which ads are most relevant and then displays those to you. The ad companies don't have access to your emails and can't read them, etc. I'm not being capitalized. If I don't want the ads I can pay $50 / year, or I can take the ads for free. That's just business, I enter into that in full agreement. And I trust Google just as much (if not more) than some random schmo ISP that would give me shoddy email service and just as much privacy as Google does but without the ads.
Point taken but what kind of FOOL am I to trade my privacy to Google for a paltry $6 at any level?
Where you go, who you speak to and how you communicate is of tremendous value and I recommend that people think about actual value. We're moving from this era where the expectation should be that Cloud services at a basic level should be incorporated into the product without the vendor resorting to advertisements.
Google and Facebook have both come out with disturbing revelations about how they feel about consumer privacy. I think the beauty of the web is that no company is irreplaceable. I could continue to get email, online calendar, pictures, documents and more without Google and that's a great feeling.
lkrupp
Apr 7, 10:14 AM
I'd rather have Apple ( or ANY company for that matter ) compete rather than having it throttle its competition.
When a compay has no competition it often gets lazy and uninnovative. Is this what you want with Apple?
So you want Apple to be forced by the government to reduce its manufacturing, tell its customers "sorry, no iPad for you" because the competition needs to catch up? How stupid is that?:rolleyes:
When a compay has no competition it often gets lazy and uninnovative. Is this what you want with Apple?
So you want Apple to be forced by the government to reduce its manufacturing, tell its customers "sorry, no iPad for you" because the competition needs to catch up? How stupid is that?:rolleyes:
peharri
Aug 2, 03:29 PM
"So, with the new Core 2 Duo based Xserve, and Leopard's November release, this is going to be the best year for Macintosh ever. One last thing. I'd like you to take a look at this."
As Steve says this, a flunky wheels a large object covered by a black sheet onto the stage, and then departs. Steve smiles at the crowd, winks, and then lifts the sheet off with the flair of a magician. The audience goes "Woo" at what appears to be a huge, glowing, apple.
"It's really neat isn't it? The surface isn't glass, it's actually solid man-made diamond. That's right. Diamond. The light inside is generated by passing electricity through a gas field generating plasma."
Sparks appear to fly from the center of the apple - four feet high excluding stem and just as wide - to the sides, while the center flows different colours... red, blue, red again, green, white, bright bright white, the apple suddenly "turns off" but then begins to glow red again. The apple hums and occasionally crackles.
"Now, the stem of the apple is actually titanium plated, and you can reposition it in any direction you want. And, of course, it's low power, the entire apple uses less electricity than a night light. It's controlled using Airport. Let me demonstrate."
Steve walks to the computer console while the audience begins to get puzzled and restless.
"You can make the entire thing green just by clicking on a button... there"
The apple turns green, varying the shades between the very dark and the black. Lightning continues to spark from the center to the sides.
"Good for you who like granny-smiths. We can also make a golden delicious..."
...the apple turns yellow. There's a crackling noise, but it's somehow comforting.
"...or even go for red."
The apple flashes red, and then changes back to random colours. Finally, a click of a mouse, and the colours line up into stripes, reminding everyone of the classic Apple logo. There is confused applause from the audience.
"We have these in a variety of sizes. You can get this four foot model for just $399, from the Apple Store right now. Yes, we're selling it today, in sizes of 3 feet, four feet, and eight feet. Thanks for coming to see us today, see you next year!"
With that, the master salesman leaves the stage, his audience stunned.
Within minutes, the entire first run of 1,500,000 4' apples is completely sold out.
By Christmas, the entire country will have huge glowing apples in every home.
By July, apples will be exchanged as a symbol of peace. Iraqis will proudly have huge glowing apples placed on every home, symbolising the return to tranquility in that forsaken region.
In Apple will withdraw the iPod. Nobody needs it any more. Nobody wants it. A huge, useless, glowing apple will be all anyone will want.
As Steve says this, a flunky wheels a large object covered by a black sheet onto the stage, and then departs. Steve smiles at the crowd, winks, and then lifts the sheet off with the flair of a magician. The audience goes "Woo" at what appears to be a huge, glowing, apple.
"It's really neat isn't it? The surface isn't glass, it's actually solid man-made diamond. That's right. Diamond. The light inside is generated by passing electricity through a gas field generating plasma."
Sparks appear to fly from the center of the apple - four feet high excluding stem and just as wide - to the sides, while the center flows different colours... red, blue, red again, green, white, bright bright white, the apple suddenly "turns off" but then begins to glow red again. The apple hums and occasionally crackles.
"Now, the stem of the apple is actually titanium plated, and you can reposition it in any direction you want. And, of course, it's low power, the entire apple uses less electricity than a night light. It's controlled using Airport. Let me demonstrate."
Steve walks to the computer console while the audience begins to get puzzled and restless.
"You can make the entire thing green just by clicking on a button... there"
The apple turns green, varying the shades between the very dark and the black. Lightning continues to spark from the center to the sides.
"Good for you who like granny-smiths. We can also make a golden delicious..."
...the apple turns yellow. There's a crackling noise, but it's somehow comforting.
"...or even go for red."
The apple flashes red, and then changes back to random colours. Finally, a click of a mouse, and the colours line up into stripes, reminding everyone of the classic Apple logo. There is confused applause from the audience.
"We have these in a variety of sizes. You can get this four foot model for just $399, from the Apple Store right now. Yes, we're selling it today, in sizes of 3 feet, four feet, and eight feet. Thanks for coming to see us today, see you next year!"
With that, the master salesman leaves the stage, his audience stunned.
Within minutes, the entire first run of 1,500,000 4' apples is completely sold out.
By Christmas, the entire country will have huge glowing apples in every home.
By July, apples will be exchanged as a symbol of peace. Iraqis will proudly have huge glowing apples placed on every home, symbolising the return to tranquility in that forsaken region.
In Apple will withdraw the iPod. Nobody needs it any more. Nobody wants it. A huge, useless, glowing apple will be all anyone will want.
LondonCentral
Apr 20, 04:39 AM
�499 for a white iPhone 5 and you can count me in, again. I've just sold my iPhone 4.
Now to carry on avoiding all the Verizon/AT&T nonsense on here. :rolleyes:
Now to carry on avoiding all the Verizon/AT&T nonsense on here. :rolleyes:
kalsta
May 5, 03:22 PM
You're not stepping out onto the moon this time.
Talking about the cost of swtiching, I might just add� Stepping out onto the moon cost a pretty penny too. I guess beating the Soviets to bragging rights in space was more important than implementing common sense on the ground.
Ultimately I think it comes down to the fact that the US is one of the few countries that had a great deal of popular sovereignty determine the outcome of whether or not we should switch to the metric system. � Americans also tend not to have a great deal of respect for the sciences (scientific literacy is appallingly low) so it makes it a tougher pitch to the everyday person.
Hang on� You're not distancing yourself from the illiterate masses now? I thought you agreed with them? ;)
Not to mention that Australia in the 1970s was 13 million people, or about 24 times smaller than the current US population.
Well, I assume the US population ain't getting any smaller the longer you put it off.
Talking about the cost of swtiching, I might just add� Stepping out onto the moon cost a pretty penny too. I guess beating the Soviets to bragging rights in space was more important than implementing common sense on the ground.
Ultimately I think it comes down to the fact that the US is one of the few countries that had a great deal of popular sovereignty determine the outcome of whether or not we should switch to the metric system. � Americans also tend not to have a great deal of respect for the sciences (scientific literacy is appallingly low) so it makes it a tougher pitch to the everyday person.
Hang on� You're not distancing yourself from the illiterate masses now? I thought you agreed with them? ;)
Not to mention that Australia in the 1970s was 13 million people, or about 24 times smaller than the current US population.
Well, I assume the US population ain't getting any smaller the longer you put it off.
Stevamundo
Dec 14, 10:25 PM
I don't, either. That's why I'm polite enough to make sure my PC friends are running anti-virus software, to protect them from malware, no matter where it may come from.
Eventually Macs will get viruses too.
What's the big deal? It's free and it runs well on my Mac. It's just extra protection for my Mac and for my PC friends.
Eventually Macs will get viruses too.
What's the big deal? It's free and it runs well on my Mac. It's just extra protection for my Mac and for my PC friends.