Jason Beck
Jan 11, 05:21 PM
Windows user here for at least a decade. This is obviously propaganda to promote some sort of upcoming suite of software for OSX to prevent "viruses" lol. Yawn. I am right now on my Windows box as I don't have a Mac at the moment but I have owned several. The only way your Mac can be infected with anything is through stupidity.
Sony Ericsson – Xperia™ Neo
sony ericsson xperia neo
Sony Ericsson XPERIA Neo
Sony Ericsson Xperia neo
Sony Ericsson Xperia Neo Specs
Approved Sony Ericsson Xperia
JGowan
Mar 22, 02:18 PM
The new 27-inch model will be my father's first computer (he'll turn 78 this June 1st) � I would've bought him one long ago, but he stills works for Union Pacific Railroad (conductor) and is never home. He says however, that he's ready and wants an iMac.
This is going to be a great BDay for him!
This is going to be a great BDay for him!
MovieCutter
Sep 5, 04:33 PM
I'm going to venture a guess and say we'll see something named the iPod Showtime or Showtime as a product name.
10layers
Sep 4, 07:49 PM
This is exactly what we have been predicting in the article Apple movie downloads soon, what about the TV?. (http://10layers.com/2006/09/apple-movie-downloads-soon-what-about-the-tv/)
Apple has been driving iPod sales with music sales. We think that they will be driving some new device sales with movie sales. In addition, we do not think that movie downloads will go mainstream until it is convenient to view them on the best device: your home entertainment system. This is what Apple has been redying before launching movie downloads. Apple want the picture to be complete.
Apple has been driving iPod sales with music sales. We think that they will be driving some new device sales with movie sales. In addition, we do not think that movie downloads will go mainstream until it is convenient to view them on the best device: your home entertainment system. This is what Apple has been redying before launching movie downloads. Apple want the picture to be complete.
DeeEss
Mar 30, 01:03 PM
What a cunning linguist he or she would be.
:)
:)
HitchHykr
Apr 20, 12:50 PM
Unless you decide to work for Google (which from your comment, I presume your aren't), or if you get famous, then I'd say that the chance that anyone at Google would decide to look at any data they collected about you is abysmal. This goes for any information Apple collects too. Obviously, there's a risqu� for security breaches, but the chance that your info then would be accessed or used is also rather small.
Not that it's not a problem.
This is different. The information is made accessible to people around you. So, while an iPhone owner is away from the house, someone else, who will be a lot more interested in him or her, can access the log in their backup.
If your behavior is risqu� then the risk of a security breach is very important. :)
Not that it's not a problem.
This is different. The information is made accessible to people around you. So, while an iPhone owner is away from the house, someone else, who will be a lot more interested in him or her, can access the log in their backup.
If your behavior is risqu� then the risk of a security breach is very important. :)
SeaFox
Apr 22, 10:45 PM
LOL at some of the responses here. Something to think about:
sony-ericsson-xperia-neo
Sony Ericsson Xperia Neo: Sony
Sony Ericsson Xperia Neo
Sony Ericsson Recently added
The Sony Xperia Neo was
sony ericsson xperia neo
Sony Ericsson Xperia Neo
sony ericsson xperia neo pro.
sony ericsson xperia neo. sony
Sony Ericsson XPERIA Neo front
Sony Ericsson Xperia Neo
Red sony ericsson xperia neo
joeboy_45101
Aug 23, 07:07 PM
Well, I guess we can be relieved that this lawsuit didn't become something worse.
As much as I think this is a BS patent and lawsuit at least Apple can continue to sell iPods. Just imagine if Apple lost the lawsuit and Creative denied them use of the patented technology.
BS as it all is, I'm just relieved that its over. :o
As much as I think this is a BS patent and lawsuit at least Apple can continue to sell iPods. Just imagine if Apple lost the lawsuit and Creative denied them use of the patented technology.
BS as it all is, I'm just relieved that its over. :o
longofest
Jul 14, 09:48 AM
wait, now conroe is "widely expected" in the powermacs? I thought woodcrest was... I still think it will be:
mac pro - woodcrest
xserve - woodcrest
imac - conroe
macbook pro - merom
macbook - merom (but months later)
mini - merom (but months later)
We shall know soon! :)
I'm working with Arn on that one... Woodcrest is pretty much slated towards the PowerMacs. We may have to update the story...
mac pro - woodcrest
xserve - woodcrest
imac - conroe
macbook pro - merom
macbook - merom (but months later)
mini - merom (but months later)
We shall know soon! :)
I'm working with Arn on that one... Woodcrest is pretty much slated towards the PowerMacs. We may have to update the story...
Multimedia
Sep 12, 06:32 PM
What does this mean for the long-rumored widescreen ipod? Are they saving the new samsung 120gig drives for that? Will they wait until the hype dies down then hit it hard with the new 6g ipod like last year? Personally I like the updates, better battery, brighter screen, gapless playback(!), more storage. I just don't want to buy this and then have an uber ipod out in a month's time...Keep Your Powder Dry. It's coming. When we don't know. But no doubt on the way.
FoxMcCloud
Mar 30, 01:46 PM
Stupid, just stupid. You can't possibly trademark App Store.
Putting two generic words together to form a generic term generically shouldn't be legally trademarked.
How often have you seen a music store named Music Store, or a food store named Food Store.
The part you should be able to trademark would be with your company name in front I.e Pheonix Music Store. Therefore no one else can call their music store Pheonix Music Store.
A store that sells apps cannot be trademarked as such, unless it featured a brand prefix like Apple App Store, Microsoft App Store, Amazon AppStore etc.
Example, if Amazon trademarked Amazon AppStore then this would prevent RIM from opening an AppStore in the Amazon forest called Amazon AppStore.
See?
Likewise, Tasty Food Store, there could be only one. But Food Store itself, no.
Putting two generic words together to form a generic term generically shouldn't be legally trademarked.
How often have you seen a music store named Music Store, or a food store named Food Store.
The part you should be able to trademark would be with your company name in front I.e Pheonix Music Store. Therefore no one else can call their music store Pheonix Music Store.
A store that sells apps cannot be trademarked as such, unless it featured a brand prefix like Apple App Store, Microsoft App Store, Amazon AppStore etc.
Example, if Amazon trademarked Amazon AppStore then this would prevent RIM from opening an AppStore in the Amazon forest called Amazon AppStore.
See?
Likewise, Tasty Food Store, there could be only one. But Food Store itself, no.
DavPeanut
Aug 28, 01:23 PM
Yeah, Apple would NEVER do THAT. :rolleyes:
These are products that are now competing directly with the products or the PC industry. I have been using macs since I was about 4, but now that Apple is using Intel Processors, all they really have going for them are their ability to run OS X and their design, which are huge for most of Apple's current market. The ability to run Windows though has helped recently to increase Apple's sales, but it means that apples are now directly competing with Dell, HP and the like. It used to be that apple boasted about their benchmarks versus PCs, but with the Mac Pro, they have been boasting about their price. The innards of a high-end Dell workstation are almost identical to those of the Mac Pro, and likewise, the MacBook and MacBook Pros are very similar to the offerings of the rest of the computer industry. If apple wants to be able to market their products based solely on their products special features they won't sell. It has been the comparible performance along with the things that make Apples Apples that have caused MacBooks to become backordered.
These are products that are now competing directly with the products or the PC industry. I have been using macs since I was about 4, but now that Apple is using Intel Processors, all they really have going for them are their ability to run OS X and their design, which are huge for most of Apple's current market. The ability to run Windows though has helped recently to increase Apple's sales, but it means that apples are now directly competing with Dell, HP and the like. It used to be that apple boasted about their benchmarks versus PCs, but with the Mac Pro, they have been boasting about their price. The innards of a high-end Dell workstation are almost identical to those of the Mac Pro, and likewise, the MacBook and MacBook Pros are very similar to the offerings of the rest of the computer industry. If apple wants to be able to market their products based solely on their products special features they won't sell. It has been the comparible performance along with the things that make Apples Apples that have caused MacBooks to become backordered.
tsugaru
Mar 22, 03:08 PM
Now I can rid myself of my 27" i7 2009 iMac.
Things that I would see/would like to see on the new iMacs:
- Thunderbolt (2 ports would be nice)
- Target DisplayPort Mode with HDMI + HDMI audio in, without needing to fully power up the entire computer (and a toggle that doesn't require an Apple keyboard)
- USB3 (I know Intel isn't natively putting USB3 on their chipsets until Ivy Bridge, but Apple could do the right thing and add this)
- get rid of the internal speakers as an option for more cooling
- at least a Radeon 6850 or GeForce GTX 560 Ti (preferably the nVidia card for CUDA/HW accelerated stuff) with at least 1 (2 please) GB of GDDR5 (I'm still boggled why they even offered a 256MB 6490 on the MacBook Pro)
- easily accessible 2.5" port for an SSD (doubt it)
- i7-2600 at the high end (Apple won't sell the K version, unless they go nuts and allow overclocking)
- a side mounted USB port or 2 would be nice, hell, more USB ports period (6-8) would be nice
- a second Firewire 800 (or 1600 if Apple is feeling frisky) port
- matte screen option (this, like the 2.5" bay, has a snowballs' chance in hell)
- Blu-Ray (see my note on the matte screen)
Wonder if Apple will allow for the full 32GB support that the Sandy Bridge processors can fully take, and the DDR3-1600 speeds, since they are limiting both on the MacBook Pros at the moment.
Things that I would see/would like to see on the new iMacs:
- Thunderbolt (2 ports would be nice)
- Target DisplayPort Mode with HDMI + HDMI audio in, without needing to fully power up the entire computer (and a toggle that doesn't require an Apple keyboard)
- USB3 (I know Intel isn't natively putting USB3 on their chipsets until Ivy Bridge, but Apple could do the right thing and add this)
- get rid of the internal speakers as an option for more cooling
- at least a Radeon 6850 or GeForce GTX 560 Ti (preferably the nVidia card for CUDA/HW accelerated stuff) with at least 1 (2 please) GB of GDDR5 (I'm still boggled why they even offered a 256MB 6490 on the MacBook Pro)
- easily accessible 2.5" port for an SSD (doubt it)
- i7-2600 at the high end (Apple won't sell the K version, unless they go nuts and allow overclocking)
- a side mounted USB port or 2 would be nice, hell, more USB ports period (6-8) would be nice
- a second Firewire 800 (or 1600 if Apple is feeling frisky) port
- matte screen option (this, like the 2.5" bay, has a snowballs' chance in hell)
- Blu-Ray (see my note on the matte screen)
Wonder if Apple will allow for the full 32GB support that the Sandy Bridge processors can fully take, and the DDR3-1600 speeds, since they are limiting both on the MacBook Pros at the moment.
Nym
Apr 20, 12:11 PM
Depends on the cipher really. Not all ciphers can be decrypted with even the latest of the latest hardware, especially if you lack the private key. And a court order can force you all you want to give up that private key, but they can't force you to remember it or not lose it. ;)
"I don't remember" or "I lost the private key to my encrypted backup, but here's the AES-256 encrypted file guys, have a go at it" are perfectly good answers.
As for this topic, SLA/ToS whatever. Not everything written in a TOS is legal or binding. If they wrote you had to murder your 1st born child, would you ? Would a court find it legally binding ? Of course not. Invasions of privacy aside, is there even a reason to store the location information like that, timestamped and polled every second ?
Why can't the device poll my location when asked for it only ? Why does it need to do it periodically ? Why is there no cleaning up after a certain time has elapsed ?
All serious questions. Even if I don't have anything to hide my privacy is still important to me. If I want you to know about my mundane life with no frills, I'll tell you about it.
Agree. I never understood the "Read the ToS" excuse because there's no way you are legally binded to everything that it says (your example was clear enough).
I have no problem with the logs the phone creates (I have already downloaded the PhoneTracker app and I can confirm that it does work) but I would like to know when, how and why it�s running. Just because someone has "nothing to hide" doesn't mean that they want to "show you everything".
Apple, since it clearly advocates a "user-driven" culture, needs to explain why this is happening.
if you are not doing anything wrong, what is there to worry about?
I kinda remember someone in the industry saying something like this...
"I don't remember" or "I lost the private key to my encrypted backup, but here's the AES-256 encrypted file guys, have a go at it" are perfectly good answers.
As for this topic, SLA/ToS whatever. Not everything written in a TOS is legal or binding. If they wrote you had to murder your 1st born child, would you ? Would a court find it legally binding ? Of course not. Invasions of privacy aside, is there even a reason to store the location information like that, timestamped and polled every second ?
Why can't the device poll my location when asked for it only ? Why does it need to do it periodically ? Why is there no cleaning up after a certain time has elapsed ?
All serious questions. Even if I don't have anything to hide my privacy is still important to me. If I want you to know about my mundane life with no frills, I'll tell you about it.
Agree. I never understood the "Read the ToS" excuse because there's no way you are legally binded to everything that it says (your example was clear enough).
I have no problem with the logs the phone creates (I have already downloaded the PhoneTracker app and I can confirm that it does work) but I would like to know when, how and why it�s running. Just because someone has "nothing to hide" doesn't mean that they want to "show you everything".
Apple, since it clearly advocates a "user-driven" culture, needs to explain why this is happening.
if you are not doing anything wrong, what is there to worry about?
I kinda remember someone in the industry saying something like this...
Silentwave
Sep 16, 01:45 PM
I don't like the sound of "off the shelf" parts. That sounds like Apple is going to rebrand an existing phone or place the guts of another company's phone in their casing.
I'm don't want a piece-of-@#$% Motorola handset inside a nice brushed steel Apple form. Which is who I imagine they would partner with.
If you're listening Apple, I'm interested in the iPhone. I buy my phones outright and I'm not interested in changing carriers (currently on T-Mobile). So you better sell it yourself and hardware unlocked.
I'll agree about the motorola thing! I've had my share of Moto handsets over the years and I've hated every single one. My primary complaint? underpowered and unresponsive. LAG! I would like it if they would just stick a Core Solo ULV in there and we'll be good! ;)
I'd love it to be unlocked too. But they'll probably make it GSM so i'll need to switch networks. Unless they're REALLY nice and make it GSM/CDMA like my Samsung A790 (about to be on my third of those- they have a knack for survival unless you hurl them onto concrete 5 feet below you as hard as you can throw them). I'd pay tons of money for that.
I'm don't want a piece-of-@#$% Motorola handset inside a nice brushed steel Apple form. Which is who I imagine they would partner with.
If you're listening Apple, I'm interested in the iPhone. I buy my phones outright and I'm not interested in changing carriers (currently on T-Mobile). So you better sell it yourself and hardware unlocked.
I'll agree about the motorola thing! I've had my share of Moto handsets over the years and I've hated every single one. My primary complaint? underpowered and unresponsive. LAG! I would like it if they would just stick a Core Solo ULV in there and we'll be good! ;)
I'd love it to be unlocked too. But they'll probably make it GSM so i'll need to switch networks. Unless they're REALLY nice and make it GSM/CDMA like my Samsung A790 (about to be on my third of those- they have a knack for survival unless you hurl them onto concrete 5 feet below you as hard as you can throw them). I'd pay tons of money for that.
dmula
Mar 30, 12:52 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_0 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/532.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Mobile/8A293 Safari/6531.22.7)
'app store' means simply 'store at which apps are offered for sale,'
So what about Apple store?
'app store' means simply 'store at which apps are offered for sale,'
So what about Apple store?
Bluefusion
Apr 4, 11:43 AM
Rent-a-cops have guns? And shoot people IN THE HEAD? I'm amazed.
That said, this is pretty ******. Sure, the guy was a criminal lowlife, and he certainly deserved punishment, but I don't think he deserved to get killed. Oh well.
That said, this is pretty ******. Sure, the guy was a criminal lowlife, and he certainly deserved punishment, but I don't think he deserved to get killed. Oh well.
auxplage
Sep 26, 07:20 AM
I may have to break down and buy my first cell phone. I feel so out of place being 18 and in college without a cell phone. Well, at least when I do get the "iPhone" I can be "cool" for three months? :o :rolleyes: :)
rxse7en
Jul 14, 11:14 AM
I am glad you have enough knowledge to tell me why it is silly, instead of making a silly comment yourself.
What's up with the personal insults? If you want to pay top dollar for incremental increases that's your choice. Most of us "professionals" would prefer the fastest systems available, because as we all know, time is money!
What's up with the personal insults? If you want to pay top dollar for incremental increases that's your choice. Most of us "professionals" would prefer the fastest systems available, because as we all know, time is money!
bommai
Aug 23, 05:47 PM
This is not the first time Apple has licensed someone else's technology. When the online Apple Store opened, they were the first to license Amazon's One-Click technology. May be Apple just wanted this headache over. May be Apple also figured if they settle now, may be Creative could use this precedence to sue Microsoft and other competitors over their UI and make them pay for licenses too.
samiwas
Apr 20, 02:47 PM
The free market would suck if it were run in the way your brain imagines it. But imagine if you ran a company, and your chief goal is to make a profit. Having happy employees who are payed fairly and receive vacation days, benefits, etc, is definitely a better business model than working your employees like slaves.
OK, so why don't more businesses do that, instead of doing everything they can to "cut costs" to "generate higher profits"? Obviously, a business needs to make a profit. But instead of just making a profit, it seems that nowadays a business is not considered successful unless that business generates massive profits, or highly increased profits over the previous year. And if a business doesn't make as much as they thought they might (even though they've pulled in billions in profit), they are considered failed and their stock tumbles.
Honestly, I don't believe the "free market" that you or any Republican/Tea Partier/Libertarian believes in would work either, except for funneling even more dough to the top (which I actually think might be the way you want to see it, and thus believe would be successful). If you really believe that without some sort of regulation, all businesses would be spending MORE on their employees, you are hopeless.
Benefits shouldn't be government regulated. However, the slave labor that you describe should most certainly not be allowed, duh. Try cutting back on the straw man argument some.
My example may have been a little over the top, but let's not pretend for one second that plenty of employers out there would think nothing of asking their employees to come in on weekends or stay late nights with no extra compensation.
Benefits should have some sort of MINIMAL regulation. The US has pretty much the fewest benefits of any developed nation, and this is considered a good thing....because it benefits the business and not the worker.
It's humorous that when people imagine a free market, they ignore that in a free market, employers would be fighting for good employees as much as employees are fighting for the employers.
Wait...what?? Employers are currently not trying to get good employees? What does this even mean?
It's sad that the government is the largest charity, because it's just so darn inefficient. I have an idea. Private charity.
Somehow, I can't imagine a private charity large enough to take care of all of America's bottom class or replace existing "entitlement programs". The largest charity in the US is the United Way with $3.8billion in income. As for current government program expenses, even Tenant-based Rental Assistance is at $18.2billion, and that's just a single line item in a portion of one part of programs. I just cannot see how private charity could have the kind of reach that the government does. And I'm guessing that the people who do run the government programs make a little less than the $715,000 salary of the head of the United Way.
For all the bleeding heart liberals I've spoken with over the years, who want crazy amounts taxed in order to support social uplift programs, I never see any of them giving away 50+% of their income to charity. It's a lot easier to ask the government to give other peoples money to charity.
I can tell you right now that my family gives >50% of its total income.
However, if you think that taxes = charity, what incentive do you have to give? (to the organizations that are 90+% efficient rather than whatever the crap the government is)
So, AFTER paying 30% in federal and state income taxes, whatever percentage in sales and property tax, you are still able give away an additional 50% or more to charity? So you are able to live on like 3% of your earnings? I would LOVE to be in that position! It's very admirable, but hardly reachable for the average person. I try to give whenever I can, but I can admit that's it's usually around $2k a year.
Anyway, the topic is about the influx of low-wage, no-benefit jobs with no worker protections during times of high profitability and skyrocketing leadership pay. Some people actually see this as good. Some see it as bad. If you see this as a good thing, then we're at an impasse.
OK, so why don't more businesses do that, instead of doing everything they can to "cut costs" to "generate higher profits"? Obviously, a business needs to make a profit. But instead of just making a profit, it seems that nowadays a business is not considered successful unless that business generates massive profits, or highly increased profits over the previous year. And if a business doesn't make as much as they thought they might (even though they've pulled in billions in profit), they are considered failed and their stock tumbles.
Honestly, I don't believe the "free market" that you or any Republican/Tea Partier/Libertarian believes in would work either, except for funneling even more dough to the top (which I actually think might be the way you want to see it, and thus believe would be successful). If you really believe that without some sort of regulation, all businesses would be spending MORE on their employees, you are hopeless.
Benefits shouldn't be government regulated. However, the slave labor that you describe should most certainly not be allowed, duh. Try cutting back on the straw man argument some.
My example may have been a little over the top, but let's not pretend for one second that plenty of employers out there would think nothing of asking their employees to come in on weekends or stay late nights with no extra compensation.
Benefits should have some sort of MINIMAL regulation. The US has pretty much the fewest benefits of any developed nation, and this is considered a good thing....because it benefits the business and not the worker.
It's humorous that when people imagine a free market, they ignore that in a free market, employers would be fighting for good employees as much as employees are fighting for the employers.
Wait...what?? Employers are currently not trying to get good employees? What does this even mean?
It's sad that the government is the largest charity, because it's just so darn inefficient. I have an idea. Private charity.
Somehow, I can't imagine a private charity large enough to take care of all of America's bottom class or replace existing "entitlement programs". The largest charity in the US is the United Way with $3.8billion in income. As for current government program expenses, even Tenant-based Rental Assistance is at $18.2billion, and that's just a single line item in a portion of one part of programs. I just cannot see how private charity could have the kind of reach that the government does. And I'm guessing that the people who do run the government programs make a little less than the $715,000 salary of the head of the United Way.
For all the bleeding heart liberals I've spoken with over the years, who want crazy amounts taxed in order to support social uplift programs, I never see any of them giving away 50+% of their income to charity. It's a lot easier to ask the government to give other peoples money to charity.
I can tell you right now that my family gives >50% of its total income.
However, if you think that taxes = charity, what incentive do you have to give? (to the organizations that are 90+% efficient rather than whatever the crap the government is)
So, AFTER paying 30% in federal and state income taxes, whatever percentage in sales and property tax, you are still able give away an additional 50% or more to charity? So you are able to live on like 3% of your earnings? I would LOVE to be in that position! It's very admirable, but hardly reachable for the average person. I try to give whenever I can, but I can admit that's it's usually around $2k a year.
Anyway, the topic is about the influx of low-wage, no-benefit jobs with no worker protections during times of high profitability and skyrocketing leadership pay. Some people actually see this as good. Some see it as bad. If you see this as a good thing, then we're at an impasse.
CplBadboy
Apr 30, 01:09 PM
Yeeeeeeeeessssssssss!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Hooray! Cash is waiting for a fully loaded iMac baby!:D
TangoCharlie
Jul 14, 09:34 AM
Woohoo! 3GHz here we come. As was mentioned before, though, a mid-sized tower priced at the iMac level (but upgradable) would be the final logical step in the Apple product line. That would leave Woodcrest to the high end MacPro with its quad configuration.
The fasted Core 2 Extreme at launch will be 2.93 (ok, that's pretty close to 3GHz).... however, if we're going QUAD, then we're looking at Xeon 5100 series
and the 5050, 5060 and 5080 will be 3GHz and above!
What about a a Mac Pro with dual 3.73 GHz Xeon 5080's?? :D
We might need an enclosure the size of the G5 for those!! :eek:
I agree, there's space int he Apple line-up for a single cpu (Conroe) system which is aimed to business and people who want the upgradeability of a "box" but don't want to splash out on dual Xeons!!
The fasted Core 2 Extreme at launch will be 2.93 (ok, that's pretty close to 3GHz).... however, if we're going QUAD, then we're looking at Xeon 5100 series
and the 5050, 5060 and 5080 will be 3GHz and above!
What about a a Mac Pro with dual 3.73 GHz Xeon 5080's?? :D
We might need an enclosure the size of the G5 for those!! :eek:
I agree, there's space int he Apple line-up for a single cpu (Conroe) system which is aimed to business and people who want the upgradeability of a "box" but don't want to splash out on dual Xeons!!
milo
Mar 30, 12:28 PM
Like if instead of "iPod", they called it "MP3 Player" and then suing Creative or Archos when they release a device advertised as an MP3 Player or called "Creative MP3 Player" for instance.
I see your point, but in that example there were already products in the market using the term "mp3 player". In the case of App Store, was that term previously in use? And by the way, "Mighty Mouse" wasn't a trademark violation, they listed that it was used with permission from day one.
I see your point, but in that example there were already products in the market using the term "mp3 player". In the case of App Store, was that term previously in use? And by the way, "Mighty Mouse" wasn't a trademark violation, they listed that it was used with permission from day one.