srl7741
Sep 13, 02:26 PM
Found a nice new image that looks pretty good. Source (http://interfacelift.com/wallpaper_beta/downloads/date/any/)
.
.
maclaptop
Apr 27, 06:10 PM
In the full interview, Jobs discusses why it took Apple nearly a week to respond to the issue, noting that the company needed to take the time to investigate the situation and figure out how best to relate the information to the public.
What a load of crap, they've always tracked users, as have all the other makers. This is not unique to Apple, nor is it unique to any smartphone brand or model.
The only surprise would be to those who do not read the EULA.
You bought it, you signed for it, you had a chance to read the EULA.
If you failed to, because "it was too long and complicated" sorry but that's on you.
Me?
I could give a flip, it's part of the connected web experience of my daily life. I don't have anything to hide and even if I did, there's no hiding anything these days anyway.
Anyone thinking differently, is either going to one hell of a lot of trouble to hide, or is simply in denial.
What a load of crap, they've always tracked users, as have all the other makers. This is not unique to Apple, nor is it unique to any smartphone brand or model.
The only surprise would be to those who do not read the EULA.
You bought it, you signed for it, you had a chance to read the EULA.
If you failed to, because "it was too long and complicated" sorry but that's on you.
Me?
I could give a flip, it's part of the connected web experience of my daily life. I don't have anything to hide and even if I did, there's no hiding anything these days anyway.
Anyone thinking differently, is either going to one hell of a lot of trouble to hide, or is simply in denial.
mikethewxguy
Apr 22, 11:28 AM
https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/_RNK_AQ8fnEA/TbGrk_8_KrI/AAAAAAAAABg/K6WEcSPuq9g/s800/Screen%20shot%202011-04-22%20at%208.22.33%20PM.png
Direct link: http://img443.imageshack.us/i/jordancarverbeach5.jpg/
Direct link: http://img443.imageshack.us/i/jordancarverbeach5.jpg/
rickvanr
Nov 4, 12:17 PM
PROTEUS, www.proteusx.com
- visually appealing multi-proticol IM program
- also incredibly stable due to a local dameon
- visually appealing multi-proticol IM program
- also incredibly stable due to a local dameon
more...
simsaladimbamba
Mar 27, 02:09 PM
If Premiere Pro is installed on a Mac with FCS on it, it will be able to play ProRes footage.
For Windows you need this: http://support.apple.com/downloads/Apple_ProRes_QuickTime_Decoder_1_0_for_Windows
For Windows you need this: http://support.apple.com/downloads/Apple_ProRes_QuickTime_Decoder_1_0_for_Windows
Reventon
Aug 1, 09:01 PM
My screen shot, which is of course from the ending battle between the Enterprise and the Reliant in Star Trek II.
more...
d4rkc4sm
Apr 27, 04:01 PM
yawn. how many more stories about this stupid "location tracking".
Ollie N
Nov 3, 04:08 PM
As far as I know, this is a limit on ATT's end not the iPhone itself
O I guess I call them about that then
O I guess I call them about that then
more...
alent1234
Mar 23, 10:02 AM
Its never a good thing when the guy behind the reason we buy Mac's leaves. :(
For the user who mentioned that he was behind OS X flaws (you mentioned iTunes bloat) - you are wrong. iTunes isn't run directly by the Mac OS development team, it has its own department. There's probably a little crossover however generally he wouldn't have much input on iTunes.
since almost no one buys a Mac and almost everyone buys an idevice, no one cares about him leaving.
the world has moved past computers being the center of personal computing
For the user who mentioned that he was behind OS X flaws (you mentioned iTunes bloat) - you are wrong. iTunes isn't run directly by the Mac OS development team, it has its own department. There's probably a little crossover however generally he wouldn't have much input on iTunes.
since almost no one buys a Mac and almost everyone buys an idevice, no one cares about him leaving.
the world has moved past computers being the center of personal computing
rdfine79
May 3, 02:44 AM
I'd like to know, as well. My choice between a 3G-capable iPad or a Wi-Fi model rests largely on how capably the location services work on the iPad. I'll be using a Wi-Fi model tethered to a phone, if this app works as well as advertised.
more...
asphalt-proof
Apr 21, 09:47 AM
That isn't entirely true. iPhone 1,1 (and soon iPhone 1,2) users can't run all apps. Anything that requires 4.0 (probably 4.3~5.0 for iPhone 1,2) won't run. Neither will things that require a certain amount of horsepower (say like Infinity Blade).
REALLY? You're going to throw a 3 and 4 year old phone into the argument? Fine. How many old Android phones can run all the available apps. Heck, how many Android phones less than a year old run all the apps available?:rolleyes:
REALLY? You're going to throw a 3 and 4 year old phone into the argument? Fine. How many old Android phones can run all the available apps. Heck, how many Android phones less than a year old run all the apps available?:rolleyes:
Gavroche62
Jan 11, 01:37 AM
It does raise the bar for other manufacturers, but this isn't the portable media player market. In business you either have to be the first, or the cheapest (neither applies to iPhone), simply being the best doesn't cut it. Apple and its devotees have argued for ages that MacOS is so superior to Windows it's ridiculous, but they've never managed to even put a dent in Microsoft's market share.
With the iPod Apple was able to hog 60% of the market before the competition even woke up, but here they're up against Nokia, SonyEricsson, Motorola, Siemens, Blackberry, Palm/Treo, HP and a bunch of other giants with well established distribution channels and deals with every carrier on earth. I hope for Apple's sake they've patented the crap out of this thing because the first SonyEricsson iPhone killer is probably being designed as we speak.
You're right this isn't the portable media market - those devices are primitive compared to what's being offered here and yet the heavy weights were NEVER able to even dent THAT market. You would think the likes of SONY, HP MOTOROLA, M$SOFT and all the other consumer electronics giants, with all of their resources, could come up with something smart enough to compete with the iPod over the years, right? Wrong! The iPod was revolutionary in its design and usability (and not the first portable media device by the way). Paired with the best online music store experience distanced it even further from the rest. That's what revolutionary means: a new playing field - a new system - a new product. Apple does this better than anyone in the world. I'm not sure the competition is just Nokia, SonyEricsson, and Motorola any more. Listen closely, Apple is attempting to reinvent the mobile phone by marrying what we traditionally associate with a smartphone (smartERphone actually) under a totally new "human friendly" and intuitive package. Those things tend to have mass appeal.
If it ends up just being yet another slick mobile smartphone then yes, the competition will be a bear. On the other hand, if the mobile connectivity paradigm is changing as Apple wants it to, then its an (almost) level playing field again. Some may even argue that Apple has another head start on some of those technologies (mobile OS X for one - the best desktop OS now the best mobile OS)
In the end, we all win. Competition is great. So lets just sit back, watch the race and hope the world doesn't meltdown before we can play with all of these toys.
With the iPod Apple was able to hog 60% of the market before the competition even woke up, but here they're up against Nokia, SonyEricsson, Motorola, Siemens, Blackberry, Palm/Treo, HP and a bunch of other giants with well established distribution channels and deals with every carrier on earth. I hope for Apple's sake they've patented the crap out of this thing because the first SonyEricsson iPhone killer is probably being designed as we speak.
You're right this isn't the portable media market - those devices are primitive compared to what's being offered here and yet the heavy weights were NEVER able to even dent THAT market. You would think the likes of SONY, HP MOTOROLA, M$SOFT and all the other consumer electronics giants, with all of their resources, could come up with something smart enough to compete with the iPod over the years, right? Wrong! The iPod was revolutionary in its design and usability (and not the first portable media device by the way). Paired with the best online music store experience distanced it even further from the rest. That's what revolutionary means: a new playing field - a new system - a new product. Apple does this better than anyone in the world. I'm not sure the competition is just Nokia, SonyEricsson, and Motorola any more. Listen closely, Apple is attempting to reinvent the mobile phone by marrying what we traditionally associate with a smartphone (smartERphone actually) under a totally new "human friendly" and intuitive package. Those things tend to have mass appeal.
If it ends up just being yet another slick mobile smartphone then yes, the competition will be a bear. On the other hand, if the mobile connectivity paradigm is changing as Apple wants it to, then its an (almost) level playing field again. Some may even argue that Apple has another head start on some of those technologies (mobile OS X for one - the best desktop OS now the best mobile OS)
In the end, we all win. Competition is great. So lets just sit back, watch the race and hope the world doesn't meltdown before we can play with all of these toys.
more...
Designer Dale
Aug 11, 12:39 AM
These can be found but no replicas seem to be on the open market. The ones that showed up on a Google search were originals and priced $200 and up. Each.
Dale
Dale
HarryPot
May 5, 09:47 AM
How do you define a criminal act?
Criminal: a person who has committed a crime
Crime: an action or omission that constitutes an offense that may be prosecuted by the state and is punishable by law; illegal activities
1. Are the terrorists captured during firefights with US soldiers criminals or soldiers, and why?
2. If North Korea launched a missile against the USA tomorrow, is that a criminal act or an act of war, and why?
3. If Al Qaeda launched a missile against the USA tomorrow, is that a criminal act or an act of war, and why?
4. When the USA dropped nuclear bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in WW2, was that a criminal act or an act of war, and why?
5. When the Allied forces raised Dresden to the ground in WW2, was that a criminal act or an act of war, and why?
I don't really see your point here. But...
1. Saying a terrorist is a criminal or a soldiers is quite irrelevant. A terrorist in the USA who is trying to explode a bomb is a criminal. Also, being a soldier doesn't means you can't be a criminal.
2. Again, an act of war can be at the same time a criminal act. Suppose country X and Y are both countries in Europe, and X attacks Y because they felt like doing it, that is an act of war AND a criminal act. If Y attacks back, that is also an act of war, but not a criminal act, because they are defending themselves.
3. Same as #2. The only thing that could change is your perception of an "act of war". Is it only considered act of war when it happens between two countries? Or a group not related to any government attacking a country is also an act of war?
4. It depends. Was the USA defending themselves, or were they just doing it without any reason behind? This is a completely new topic, but if it helps for anything, Japan was the one who attacked first, without any real reason behind.
5. Same as #4.
If you justify torture to prevent death of innocent people, where do you draw the line? 1,000 people, 100 people, 1 person?
If it were up to me, one person would be enough. The line is not in the amount of people being saved, but in the fact that the person (criminal) who is behind this attack plans, has become a treat to the security of your people.
What if the person you are torturing is innocent?
I did said that I wouldn't support torturing innocent people.
What if your torture helps the terrorists recruit more terrorists and the result is more, not less, bloodshed?
What if not doing so (torture) means that the terrorist group achieves their objective, and continue doing the same again and again?
So lets do medical testing on criminals, thats ok right?
No, because what the criminals did has nothing to do with medical diseases. In the other hand, they did made something against the law in formulating or being part of a terrorist plan, of which they have knowledge. And that knowledge might lead you to prevent this terrorist act to be executed.
Criminal: a person who has committed a crime
Crime: an action or omission that constitutes an offense that may be prosecuted by the state and is punishable by law; illegal activities
1. Are the terrorists captured during firefights with US soldiers criminals or soldiers, and why?
2. If North Korea launched a missile against the USA tomorrow, is that a criminal act or an act of war, and why?
3. If Al Qaeda launched a missile against the USA tomorrow, is that a criminal act or an act of war, and why?
4. When the USA dropped nuclear bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in WW2, was that a criminal act or an act of war, and why?
5. When the Allied forces raised Dresden to the ground in WW2, was that a criminal act or an act of war, and why?
I don't really see your point here. But...
1. Saying a terrorist is a criminal or a soldiers is quite irrelevant. A terrorist in the USA who is trying to explode a bomb is a criminal. Also, being a soldier doesn't means you can't be a criminal.
2. Again, an act of war can be at the same time a criminal act. Suppose country X and Y are both countries in Europe, and X attacks Y because they felt like doing it, that is an act of war AND a criminal act. If Y attacks back, that is also an act of war, but not a criminal act, because they are defending themselves.
3. Same as #2. The only thing that could change is your perception of an "act of war". Is it only considered act of war when it happens between two countries? Or a group not related to any government attacking a country is also an act of war?
4. It depends. Was the USA defending themselves, or were they just doing it without any reason behind? This is a completely new topic, but if it helps for anything, Japan was the one who attacked first, without any real reason behind.
5. Same as #4.
If you justify torture to prevent death of innocent people, where do you draw the line? 1,000 people, 100 people, 1 person?
If it were up to me, one person would be enough. The line is not in the amount of people being saved, but in the fact that the person (criminal) who is behind this attack plans, has become a treat to the security of your people.
What if the person you are torturing is innocent?
I did said that I wouldn't support torturing innocent people.
What if your torture helps the terrorists recruit more terrorists and the result is more, not less, bloodshed?
What if not doing so (torture) means that the terrorist group achieves their objective, and continue doing the same again and again?
So lets do medical testing on criminals, thats ok right?
No, because what the criminals did has nothing to do with medical diseases. In the other hand, they did made something against the law in formulating or being part of a terrorist plan, of which they have knowledge. And that knowledge might lead you to prevent this terrorist act to be executed.
more...
C14ru5
Sep 27, 02:08 AM
I have .Mac, but I probably won't be using this feature, disregarding some rare exceptions.
The reason: I prefer using the old Apple paradigm of "one application - one task". Yeah, I know, I like my habits from the outdated old century. I've never completely felt comfortable with web applications, since they don't have keyboard shortcuts that are analogous to the rest of the system. But with more and more applications moving to the web, I admit that I'm fighting a losing battle.
Yes, I'm aware that gmail and .mac have well-functioning autosave features, but that doesn't comfort me well when I try to move to the beginning of a line using command-leftarrow and end up wasting my concentration on the whole "gah! my document disappeared!"-idea. And I haven't even begun talking about command-Q�
Visionaries have been talking about the browser replacing the OS as our main UI for many years, but I still don't think the conventions are mature enough for [me, at least] to do my serious tasks in browsers - yet.
The reason: I prefer using the old Apple paradigm of "one application - one task". Yeah, I know, I like my habits from the outdated old century. I've never completely felt comfortable with web applications, since they don't have keyboard shortcuts that are analogous to the rest of the system. But with more and more applications moving to the web, I admit that I'm fighting a losing battle.
Yes, I'm aware that gmail and .mac have well-functioning autosave features, but that doesn't comfort me well when I try to move to the beginning of a line using command-leftarrow and end up wasting my concentration on the whole "gah! my document disappeared!"-idea. And I haven't even begun talking about command-Q�
Visionaries have been talking about the browser replacing the OS as our main UI for many years, but I still don't think the conventions are mature enough for [me, at least] to do my serious tasks in browsers - yet.
Borjan
Dec 11, 10:45 AM
Where are you based?
I'm looking for a keyboard and mouse... except I'm in London, and it doesn't make much sense to ship one from the States...
I'm looking for a keyboard and mouse... except I'm in London, and it doesn't make much sense to ship one from the States...
more...
MShock
Mar 23, 11:19 AM
I wonder if Serlett's departure means more web focus since the new guy focused on the cloud? A new filesystem, being able to run web apps outside the browser, and a new UI would be nice for OSX� an internet layer built in using webkit (if that is possible) would be 3 nice new features, and with the new guy Ferengi or Fedenrigh or whatever� it could be possible?
ritchey555
Oct 19, 08:14 AM
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=370400
igranger
Dec 21, 06:26 PM
Does anybody understand why Metal Gear Solid 4 was on the PS3, and then was on the Xbox 360? I feel ripped off. The Wii has a larger installed base. I feel so ripped off I'm refusing to give Konami any props. I'm just giving props to PC games. I'm not upset.
Vegasman
Apr 4, 02:05 PM
Apple does allow opt-in, just not opt-out. So the problem lies with the FT.
Not really.
The terms with FT are that if you want to use their service you must provide them with the information. Then you can choose what you allow them to do with this information.
If Apple does not want to allow FT to work that way they are effectively saying they don't want to do business with FT. And this is why FT is "holding out."
Apple doesn't like the T&C's of FT.
FT does not like the T&C's of Apple.
So they are choosing not to do business with each other. Happens all the time.
Apple users are the only ones that lose here.
Not really.
The terms with FT are that if you want to use their service you must provide them with the information. Then you can choose what you allow them to do with this information.
If Apple does not want to allow FT to work that way they are effectively saying they don't want to do business with FT. And this is why FT is "holding out."
Apple doesn't like the T&C's of FT.
FT does not like the T&C's of Apple.
So they are choosing not to do business with each other. Happens all the time.
Apple users are the only ones that lose here.
datamonger128
Mar 31, 12:43 PM
Why is this thread still open? Christmas was three months ago.
DerfBWH
Nov 26, 11:22 AM
This has been available for months now - I nearly purchased one around September. Crazy that people are just realizing this.
canadadude
Mar 13, 02:41 PM
Any porn sites that allow airplay? Or is it too early?
Daedalus256
Dec 12, 09:36 PM
I don't see why not. They're practically the same except for the obvious differences like the AGP slot, etc. Hmmm, I'm not sure if that agp slot will give you troubles. I'd say go ahead and try it.