RedTomato
Mar 28, 01:22 PM
I'm not a legal expert at all but I would think that since the Xbox can only connect with connect360 if you have access to both systems (xbox360 and the mac) then that should be evidence enough?
You might well be right, but good luck trying to explain anything novel and technical to the police if it doesn't involve war-driving or hasn't been featured in the tabloids.
With the best will in the world, it may also be hard for them to accept your word for it in this matter without independent certified experts or a pre-existing writeup in their manual.
Wait 10 years, then try again, and you'll have a new generation of young coppers who all played with xbox when they were kids and will understand you perfectly.
You might well be right, but good luck trying to explain anything novel and technical to the police if it doesn't involve war-driving or hasn't been featured in the tabloids.
With the best will in the world, it may also be hard for them to accept your word for it in this matter without independent certified experts or a pre-existing writeup in their manual.
Wait 10 years, then try again, and you'll have a new generation of young coppers who all played with xbox when they were kids and will understand you perfectly.
charlituna
Dec 20, 10:31 AM
Correct. Some numbers to back that up.
China Mobile (GSM) = 558M subscribers (World's largest carrier)
. . .
However, China Mobile's GSM network is 2G.
Yes I'm well aware of China Mobile's vast GSM Edge network. But this is a 3g phone. So that 558 Million actually doesn't count given that it would be like giving the phone to T-Mobile knowing that they can't support 3g. And Apple doesn't pull moves like that since it would open them up for lawsuits (if someone unlocks on their own, that's on them).
The real numbers to look at are 152 Million valid GSM 3g subscribers against 178 Million CDMA customers. And no contract prohibiting having a phone for both. So again, if this is about making money, why didn't they make a CDMA phone for that second group. Assuming they are open to having a CDMA iphone at all.
China Mobile (GSM) = 558M subscribers (World's largest carrier)
. . .
However, China Mobile's GSM network is 2G.
Yes I'm well aware of China Mobile's vast GSM Edge network. But this is a 3g phone. So that 558 Million actually doesn't count given that it would be like giving the phone to T-Mobile knowing that they can't support 3g. And Apple doesn't pull moves like that since it would open them up for lawsuits (if someone unlocks on their own, that's on them).
The real numbers to look at are 152 Million valid GSM 3g subscribers against 178 Million CDMA customers. And no contract prohibiting having a phone for both. So again, if this is about making money, why didn't they make a CDMA phone for that second group. Assuming they are open to having a CDMA iphone at all.
JoeG4
Mar 11, 10:17 AM
Yeah, not to mention Sony's use of chicklet keyboa... err.. wait, Apple took that idea from them and not the other way around. ;)
Yea lol.
The click wheel iPod? Anyone remember the Jog Dial fad? Friggin FAX MACHINES were coming with the dang thing.
Yea lol.
The click wheel iPod? Anyone remember the Jog Dial fad? Friggin FAX MACHINES were coming with the dang thing.
Sedulous
May 3, 05:15 PM
I don't really get this... You already pay fees for the data - why do they care for how you use it?
I have been wondering the same thing. How can providers dictate how data is utilized by a customer? The data block is bough and paid for, the phone does the routing, so then how is an additional fee justified?
I have been wondering the same thing. How can providers dictate how data is utilized by a customer? The data block is bough and paid for, the phone does the routing, so then how is an additional fee justified?
Applejuiced
Apr 15, 03:53 PM
That doesnt look right.
Square on the sides instead of the way it is now.
And whats that wide slot on the side?
Also theres traces of photoshop usage on those pics they say.
Square on the sides instead of the way it is now.
And whats that wide slot on the side?
Also theres traces of photoshop usage on those pics they say.
z4n3
Mar 25, 05:13 AM
To complement my earlier screen shots from 2001 and I just found my original upgrade CD! from 10.0 to 10.1 love the way it states "Requires Mac OS X" quite a funny comparison when you look at in just 10 years OS X has gone from a 650Mb CD to a 8Gb Apple USB Drive :eek:
0010101
Oct 29, 01:34 AM
The problem with Apple making a 'PC' version of OSX is that they'd have to write it to work with a million different combinations of hardware.. one of the reasons XP is such a crappy OS.
Since Apple builds the hardware, they build the OS to work with that hardware. That's what makes it so stable and reliable.
Now, Apple could, in theory, start a 'OSX Compliant' program, telling third party hardware vendors like Dell or HP that if they use a specific logic board chipset, video chipset, etc that OSX would run as well on such a PC as a Mac, but all that would do is kill Apples hardware sales, because most folks would opt for the ballsed out clone instead of the neutered Apple.
That's why licencing nearly killed Apple.. because the clone companies were building a better, faster box for much less money, and cutting too deep into their hardware sales (which they're making alot more than 20% on).
Another good reason for Apple to keep OSX on their hardware is Microsoft, who would probably quit releasing OSX versions of their popular Word and Excel software if Apple were to try and go head to head with them in the OS market.
Even animals know better than to $#it where they eat.
Despite Apples superior OS, I doubt they'll ever gain much more than 20% of the market, because when it comes down to it, people in general are going to buy what is inexpensive and familure, and has the best range of software available.
Software companies are going to write software for the largest audience possible.. and that's going to continue to be the Winblows platform.
Why hasn't there been a 'universal' version of Photoshop yet? Because the hard core digital imaging people are hanging on to their G5's. The 'casual' and 'consumer' users can use their software just fine under Rosetta on their Intel Macs.
There isn't any incentive for Adobe to port their flagship product yet.. because customers don't have any real incentive to buy it yet.
Since Apple builds the hardware, they build the OS to work with that hardware. That's what makes it so stable and reliable.
Now, Apple could, in theory, start a 'OSX Compliant' program, telling third party hardware vendors like Dell or HP that if they use a specific logic board chipset, video chipset, etc that OSX would run as well on such a PC as a Mac, but all that would do is kill Apples hardware sales, because most folks would opt for the ballsed out clone instead of the neutered Apple.
That's why licencing nearly killed Apple.. because the clone companies were building a better, faster box for much less money, and cutting too deep into their hardware sales (which they're making alot more than 20% on).
Another good reason for Apple to keep OSX on their hardware is Microsoft, who would probably quit releasing OSX versions of their popular Word and Excel software if Apple were to try and go head to head with them in the OS market.
Even animals know better than to $#it where they eat.
Despite Apples superior OS, I doubt they'll ever gain much more than 20% of the market, because when it comes down to it, people in general are going to buy what is inexpensive and familure, and has the best range of software available.
Software companies are going to write software for the largest audience possible.. and that's going to continue to be the Winblows platform.
Why hasn't there been a 'universal' version of Photoshop yet? Because the hard core digital imaging people are hanging on to their G5's. The 'casual' and 'consumer' users can use their software just fine under Rosetta on their Intel Macs.
There isn't any incentive for Adobe to port their flagship product yet.. because customers don't have any real incentive to buy it yet.
Jimmni
Apr 4, 08:20 AM
I really don't get why you didn't just knock at the door of the house and explain that your Xbox was stolen and since it's been connecting to your internet connection you know it's in their house. They'll not be able to tell there's no way you could know for certain. If the parents knew, then at least it would spook them, and if they didn't they'd probably be glad to return your property and give their kid a severe kick up the backside. The police very rarely get things done in situations like this, though it sounds like you at least got a cop who really did try.
KeriJane
Apr 9, 12:50 PM
Let's see....
They're FINALLY going to some sort of UNIX thing.... Like Apple did.
Theyre FINALLY getting some sort of responsible backup system.... Like Apple did...
They're FINALLY going to self-contained applications, like Apple...
They're FINALLY building in PDF support like Apple
Etc, etc....
Why not just skip 8 and 9 and call it Windows 10? Or WINDOWS X.... Just like SURPRISE! Apple did! :p
All of which are necessary and seriously overdue. But how can anyone say it's not just another cheap ripoff of Apple yet again?
My big question is... How is MS going to maintain strict control and ownership of a UNIX core?
Isn't that why they've been sticking with their inferior, outdated and disasterously defective proprietary MS technology up until now?
Have Fun,
Keri
They're FINALLY going to some sort of UNIX thing.... Like Apple did.
Theyre FINALLY getting some sort of responsible backup system.... Like Apple did...
They're FINALLY going to self-contained applications, like Apple...
They're FINALLY building in PDF support like Apple
Etc, etc....
Why not just skip 8 and 9 and call it Windows 10? Or WINDOWS X.... Just like SURPRISE! Apple did! :p
All of which are necessary and seriously overdue. But how can anyone say it's not just another cheap ripoff of Apple yet again?
My big question is... How is MS going to maintain strict control and ownership of a UNIX core?
Isn't that why they've been sticking with their inferior, outdated and disasterously defective proprietary MS technology up until now?
Have Fun,
Keri
MacRumors
Jul 21, 09:01 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/iphone/2010/07/21/apple-targets-nokia-with-new-signal-attenuation-video/)
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2010/07/21/095823-nokia_signal_attenuation.jpg
full-ody-tattoos_1
Crazy Full Body Tattoo Design
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2010/07/21/095823-nokia_signal_attenuation.jpg
thestaton
Nov 25, 12:11 AM
I picked up an 80 gig iPod & .mac with a whopping 68 bucks off with the govt discount.
not to bad.
not to bad.
tdhurst
Jan 12, 09:23 PM
See, loaded. You're warping what I'm saying so you can brush me off and continue to scapegoat gizmodo for something completely separate.
Think about this.
Did I ever say gizmodo probably wasn't going to get banned?
Did I actually say the opposite?
Did I bring up Wired anywhere in this thread or link them to various pranks?
Was I actually trying to make you look at the statement that implied blind faith in print media as being a bastion of truth and being isolated from such pranking?
Wait...how am I scapegoating Gizmodo? I was questioning your statement:
Full Body Tattoo Pictures Page
Original Male full body Tattoo
He has a full on tribal design
So you want a tattoo.
Full Body Tribal Tattoo
full body dragon tattoos
full body yakuza tattoo
Think about this.
Did I ever say gizmodo probably wasn't going to get banned?
Did I actually say the opposite?
Did I bring up Wired anywhere in this thread or link them to various pranks?
Was I actually trying to make you look at the statement that implied blind faith in print media as being a bastion of truth and being isolated from such pranking?
Wait...how am I scapegoating Gizmodo? I was questioning your statement:
jrtc27
Apr 30, 12:59 PM
Do you mean you like the change, or the reverse of the change?
You only have to look at the second screen shot to see why the slider was potentially confusing�
Image (http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/29/162642-lion_subpane_slider_old_500.jpg)
When there are only two options, the inactive option looks a lot like a depressed button.
Apple's always fiddling with this. You have to wonder why they didn't just stick with the old tabbed interface, which is arguably the most instantly recognisable way of switching window views. I guess there's a bit more flexibility in buttons, in terms of their placement� or maybe they're just trying to think different.
I mean I like the change away from the slider. The slider was confusing (I'm a techie, and I was confused at first when I saw videos and screenshots), and the squarer buttons look better than the old style in Snow Leopard, especially with the two shades of grey - they are much more modern and much subtler.
You only have to look at the second screen shot to see why the slider was potentially confusing�
Image (http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/29/162642-lion_subpane_slider_old_500.jpg)
When there are only two options, the inactive option looks a lot like a depressed button.
Apple's always fiddling with this. You have to wonder why they didn't just stick with the old tabbed interface, which is arguably the most instantly recognisable way of switching window views. I guess there's a bit more flexibility in buttons, in terms of their placement� or maybe they're just trying to think different.
I mean I like the change away from the slider. The slider was confusing (I'm a techie, and I was confused at first when I saw videos and screenshots), and the squarer buttons look better than the old style in Snow Leopard, especially with the two shades of grey - they are much more modern and much subtler.
thegreatluke
Aug 7, 07:59 PM
What school. I logged in under education and it is $649 for the 20".
Apple is usually slow to update things like Education pricing etc.
The Edu price will go down within a few days. :)
Apple is usually slow to update things like Education pricing etc.
The Edu price will go down within a few days. :)
razzmatazz
Sep 12, 07:36 AM
Does this mean we won't be seeing iTunes 7.0? I mean if they were releasing a new iTunes wouldn't they make the changes on the new release?
-hh
Oct 19, 01:05 PM
Let's do this math...
$1,810,330 - $94,070.00 = $1,716,260.00 stock worth.
I have not sold one share. Now who is laughing. Thank you iPod.
Does this mean you're buying lunch for all of us? :)
FWIW, I regret not buying some AAPL a long, long time ago...didn't do it because my employer makes it a major hassle to own individual stocks because they apply stricter financial reporting requirements (if I were to set up an automatic monthly purchase, I'd have to report it every month, run it up through management for signatures *every* month, etc, etc. Very painful).
-hh
$1,810,330 - $94,070.00 = $1,716,260.00 stock worth.
I have not sold one share. Now who is laughing. Thank you iPod.
Does this mean you're buying lunch for all of us? :)
FWIW, I regret not buying some AAPL a long, long time ago...didn't do it because my employer makes it a major hassle to own individual stocks because they apply stricter financial reporting requirements (if I were to set up an automatic monthly purchase, I'd have to report it every month, run it up through management for signatures *every* month, etc, etc. Very painful).
-hh
darkwing
Mar 21, 08:14 AM
This really sucks. :( I just bought a new house and am going to almost immediately get it wired up for an alarm, though I probably don't need to. It's out in the middle of nowhere. :P Anyhow, if you want to set up a donation paypal account I bet a lot of us can chip in $5 each or something to help. :)
zac4mac
Aug 2, 01:33 PM
Lyra - mellow out, we(the USA) have enough people out there P.O.d at us as it is. Like Mel Gibson just said, "It's about existing in harmony in a world that seems to have gone mad."
I'm not fond of DRM, but I see it as a necessary evil for the time being. I buy from iTMSm not for music quality, but for convenience. If I really need quality, I buy the CD and rip. Someday I'm going to archive all my Vinyl - somewhere around 600+ albums, from the 60s-80s; a daunting task I keep procrastinating.
iTMS is not a closed system - music plays, as said on iPods, PCs, Macs, and not mentioned, several Motorola phones. Not as many options as "Plays for Sure", but not as isolated as portayed.
I hope for the folks in France and Scandinavia that they don't force Apple to abandon them. I don't see Apple caving on this issue.
Z
I'm not fond of DRM, but I see it as a necessary evil for the time being. I buy from iTMSm not for music quality, but for convenience. If I really need quality, I buy the CD and rip. Someday I'm going to archive all my Vinyl - somewhere around 600+ albums, from the 60s-80s; a daunting task I keep procrastinating.
iTMS is not a closed system - music plays, as said on iPods, PCs, Macs, and not mentioned, several Motorola phones. Not as many options as "Plays for Sure", but not as isolated as portayed.
I hope for the folks in France and Scandinavia that they don't force Apple to abandon them. I don't see Apple caving on this issue.
Z
keysersoze
Nov 16, 03:55 PM
AMD does not have the ability to produce enough chips. Period. They have sold their soul to Dell, and Dell will suck them bone dry.
Not gunna happen.
Not gunna happen.
twoodcc
Oct 19, 09:55 AM
Always a good sign!
yes it is! great news for Apple. I'm excited :D
yes it is! great news for Apple. I'm excited :D
NT1440
Mar 3, 08:09 PM
Wow. This is the boldest the GOP has been in a while. Not even trying to hide the fact that they're just trying to do away with union rights and the right to organize.:mad:
Fines for strikes? Is there a link to the actual text of this bill anywhere?
Fines for strikes? Is there a link to the actual text of this bill anywhere?
theBB
Jan 14, 08:48 PM
Now, Gizmodo just posted another editorial. They are not just refusing to apologize, they are actually proud. Supposedly this is a an act of civil disobedience, a sign of their independence. Not only are they being immature jerks, but exhibit this self righteous attitude. It is just a prank, (actually it is not even a creative one) so it is not that big of a deal, but their new editorial makes them seem even more immature. I wonder if somebody is going to play pranks on them to show some independence of his own.
fyrefly
Apr 29, 03:03 PM
That was actually fixed in the build before this one.
Ah, okay. Guess I just didn't notice it till this build. :)
Ah, okay. Guess I just didn't notice it till this build. :)
MacAddict1978
Apr 16, 04:03 PM
why do music companies make it so difficult to distribute their music? weird.
It's because they wan't to make it more enticing for people to steal music instead of making it easier for them to buy it. They can sue 80 year old ladies for a $million for 1 Incubus song... (no, seriously, they did.) That's a much better haul than 99 cents right? :D
Sounds like the Record companies are being their typical stupid selves. Only reason Apple is really able to get away with it is because they are Apple. It is not the closed system part but because they are Apple. I bet if the record company could they would say F you to Apple and pull out. I also would not be surpised if they regreat now making a deal with them when iTunes first launched.
This stinks over all. It is not closed or open argument. This is a record company being record companies.
iTunes made legally downloading relevant. We'd still not have a model like this if Apple hadn't done it (no one thought apple would grow to such a behmoth back at the time iTunes Store was born). We'd having something, but I doubt we'd have the flexibility of individual tracks at that price if individual tracks at all. Really, even though there is still piracy, iTunes probably saved the music industry more than it killed it IMO. And if the record labels don't like people cherry picking the 2 good songs of an ablbum, start putting out artists that have albums without filler (like that kesha creature)
It's because they wan't to make it more enticing for people to steal music instead of making it easier for them to buy it. They can sue 80 year old ladies for a $million for 1 Incubus song... (no, seriously, they did.) That's a much better haul than 99 cents right? :D
Sounds like the Record companies are being their typical stupid selves. Only reason Apple is really able to get away with it is because they are Apple. It is not the closed system part but because they are Apple. I bet if the record company could they would say F you to Apple and pull out. I also would not be surpised if they regreat now making a deal with them when iTunes first launched.
This stinks over all. It is not closed or open argument. This is a record company being record companies.
iTunes made legally downloading relevant. We'd still not have a model like this if Apple hadn't done it (no one thought apple would grow to such a behmoth back at the time iTunes Store was born). We'd having something, but I doubt we'd have the flexibility of individual tracks at that price if individual tracks at all. Really, even though there is still piracy, iTunes probably saved the music industry more than it killed it IMO. And if the record labels don't like people cherry picking the 2 good songs of an ablbum, start putting out artists that have albums without filler (like that kesha creature)
No comments:
Post a Comment