ZilogZ80
Apr 14, 04:56 AM
Would only make sense when combining Mac App Store and iOS App Store someway while keeping the syncing of the iOS devices in iTunes.
Or just do away with iTunes entirely and choose which available (i.e. purchased) apps you want to install directly in App Store on the device. Let any backups be cloud or Time Machine based.
Or just do away with iTunes entirely and choose which available (i.e. purchased) apps you want to install directly in App Store on the device. Let any backups be cloud or Time Machine based.
jhu
Oct 23, 08:23 PM
how is this any different than apple's end user-license agreement for mac os x? here is section 2A (http://images.apple.com/legal/sla/macosx104.pdf):
This License allows you to install and use one copy of the Apple Software on a single Apple-labeled computer at a time. This License does not allow the Apple Software to exist on more than one computer at a time, and you may not make the Apple Software available over a network where it could be used by multiple computer at the same time.
the language implies that virtualization on the same machine using the same software is forbidden. on the other hand, windows xp's end-user licence agreement (http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/home/eula.mspx) also has similar language disallowing multiple copies of the same software to be run on the same computer:
1.1 Installation and use. You may install, use, access, display and run one copy of the Software on a single computer, such as a workstation, terminal or other device ("Workstation Computer"). The Software may not be used by more than one processor at any one time on any single Workstation Computer.
microsoft's vista license just makes the virtualization part explicit. so i don't know what the hubub is over vista's license since the mac os x and windows xp licenses say the same thing, but not explicitly.
This License allows you to install and use one copy of the Apple Software on a single Apple-labeled computer at a time. This License does not allow the Apple Software to exist on more than one computer at a time, and you may not make the Apple Software available over a network where it could be used by multiple computer at the same time.
the language implies that virtualization on the same machine using the same software is forbidden. on the other hand, windows xp's end-user licence agreement (http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/home/eula.mspx) also has similar language disallowing multiple copies of the same software to be run on the same computer:
1.1 Installation and use. You may install, use, access, display and run one copy of the Software on a single computer, such as a workstation, terminal or other device ("Workstation Computer"). The Software may not be used by more than one processor at any one time on any single Workstation Computer.
microsoft's vista license just makes the virtualization part explicit. so i don't know what the hubub is over vista's license since the mac os x and windows xp licenses say the same thing, but not explicitly.
pmz
May 4, 07:34 AM
Bunch of lying crap. My upgrade date hasn't "moved" as this lying reader claims happened to him, it is still 6/19/2011. Every year my upgrade date coincides very closely with the release of the new iPhone. AT&T isn't going to just push my date back (a date I earn by paying a lot every month) because there is no new iPhone in June. So this guy is confusing two separate issues in order to get his BS story out. Maybe the rep said that, maybe he didn't, but he has absolutely no info from Apple, because Apple would never ever ever ever make such a statement to AT&T.
Jason Beck
Apr 9, 02:07 AM
http://fc04.deviantart.net/fs71/f/2011/098/e/e/mercedez_heat_iv_apr_2011_by_jasonbeck-d3djojk.jpg
Mercedez on my bathroom counter.
Mercedez on my bathroom counter.
more...
MacNut
Feb 25, 11:27 AM
As it is looking, looks like the show might be done period. Which just sucks. One of my favorite shows too! :mad:They show will be on as long as the ratings are up. Maybe Sheen gets killed off when he crashes his car next season and then their long lost brother enters.
-groovatious-
Apr 22, 04:17 PM
How the heck are you supposed to hold that up to your ear for any length of time?
No thanks.
No thanks.
more...
hansiedejong
Jan 27, 10:34 AM
Why? I'd love to buy some Beats headphones. Like the style of it.
LoganT
Apr 26, 01:01 PM
Depending on how useful the service is, one hundred dollars a year would probably be worth it.
more...
GeekOFComedy
Oct 26, 09:54 PM
5 days in the big Apple in April.
htcbug
Apr 20, 10:57 AM
Lol ok buddy. Hope your not waiting for there to be a backlit keyboard in the air because I doubt there will be. Apple took it out of the MBA for a reason not for the heck of it
lol, hope not so. Here are some other reasons: a 2 kg mbp 13 is a little bit too heavy for me as i need to travel around with a notebook to process my photos. 2 years ago i sold my t61 and replaced it with a x61 because t61 is too heavy and the cdrom is really useless to me. so when i got that the 2011 new mbp is equipped with a superdrive, i was really disappointed.
lol, hope not so. Here are some other reasons: a 2 kg mbp 13 is a little bit too heavy for me as i need to travel around with a notebook to process my photos. 2 years ago i sold my t61 and replaced it with a x61 because t61 is too heavy and the cdrom is really useless to me. so when i got that the 2011 new mbp is equipped with a superdrive, i was really disappointed.
more...
rdlink
Apr 22, 05:17 AM
1) I own both.
They are rectangular and have icons on home screens.
There's only so much one can do with smart phone styling.
It's not like Apples on the verge of going out of business.
Much ado over nothing.
Like a teenage bully, Apples beyond stupid.
2) You actually believe clueless sales people?
The fact that "there's only so much you can do with smart phone styling" does not give one company the inalienable right to copy another's patents, or blur the line between their product and the one which they're trying to copy.
The size of Apple's bank account has nothing to do with this. Disney has sued much smaller companies in the past, and won. Because the courts recognize the need to protect valuable intellectual property, even when sofa lawyers don't.
Whether I believe clueless sales people or not is irrelevant. Clueless consumers often do. How else can you explain Android's rise? (zing! :o).
They are rectangular and have icons on home screens.
There's only so much one can do with smart phone styling.
It's not like Apples on the verge of going out of business.
Much ado over nothing.
Like a teenage bully, Apples beyond stupid.
2) You actually believe clueless sales people?
The fact that "there's only so much you can do with smart phone styling" does not give one company the inalienable right to copy another's patents, or blur the line between their product and the one which they're trying to copy.
The size of Apple's bank account has nothing to do with this. Disney has sued much smaller companies in the past, and won. Because the courts recognize the need to protect valuable intellectual property, even when sofa lawyers don't.
Whether I believe clueless sales people or not is irrelevant. Clueless consumers often do. How else can you explain Android's rise? (zing! :o).
PowerGamerX
Apr 22, 08:13 PM
Ugly. 4" screen is too big. Keep it at 3" or so.
Luckily, it won't look that ugly, even if it does have a 3.7" screen. I still wont buy it. I'm always a gen behind on iphones because well I just can't afford the new ones.
Luckily, it won't look that ugly, even if it does have a 3.7" screen. I still wont buy it. I'm always a gen behind on iphones because well I just can't afford the new ones.
more...
jazz1
Mar 31, 02:25 PM
Where is my paisley calendar?
wizard
Apr 15, 11:01 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
Learn from Google? What has Google developed that's anything close to an OS? And no, Chrome OS doesn't count...it's a giant web browser, with Cloud Apps...
TROLL
By that same vein, what has Apple ever developed that's anything close to a OS ? And no, Mac OS X, a bunch of components bought/taken from the open source community doesn't count... it's just a Unix distribution with a GUI layer on top. :rolleyes:
It's easy to discount anything going with that mentality. The fact is, Chrome OS is as much an undertaking as OS X was. It's more than just a "Web browser" since web browsers cannot be booted and don't provide graphical sub-systems, input management and process scheduling obviously.
(yes, I do realise Mac OS Classic existed).
And to answer your question directly : Android. ;)
Android what a laugh! The OS is Linux which they effectively forked. The SDK is built on a Java work alike, a work a like that has a questionable amount of others people's code in it. On top of that they purchased the company that started out developing the concept of Android.
It is reasonable to question if Android is even an ethical product. I don't think it is thus I steer people away from it. I don't want to discount the intelligence of the people working at Google, but I don't think the management there has any respect for the property of others. Android is just one factor here, google has problems with copyright and the concept of personal property.
Learn from Google? What has Google developed that's anything close to an OS? And no, Chrome OS doesn't count...it's a giant web browser, with Cloud Apps...
TROLL
By that same vein, what has Apple ever developed that's anything close to a OS ? And no, Mac OS X, a bunch of components bought/taken from the open source community doesn't count... it's just a Unix distribution with a GUI layer on top. :rolleyes:
It's easy to discount anything going with that mentality. The fact is, Chrome OS is as much an undertaking as OS X was. It's more than just a "Web browser" since web browsers cannot be booted and don't provide graphical sub-systems, input management and process scheduling obviously.
(yes, I do realise Mac OS Classic existed).
And to answer your question directly : Android. ;)
Android what a laugh! The OS is Linux which they effectively forked. The SDK is built on a Java work alike, a work a like that has a questionable amount of others people's code in it. On top of that they purchased the company that started out developing the concept of Android.
It is reasonable to question if Android is even an ethical product. I don't think it is thus I steer people away from it. I don't want to discount the intelligence of the people working at Google, but I don't think the management there has any respect for the property of others. Android is just one factor here, google has problems with copyright and the concept of personal property.
more...
CarlosMotoza
Apr 12, 02:09 PM
I have been under the impression that the iphone would be released sometime at the end of the year, with verzion having had gotten the iphone 4 in febuary, i couldn't see it coming out any time soon
twoodcc
Oct 27, 06:58 PM
I'll get right on it! and try to oc it some, once I figure out how :o
I should finish my first bigadv wu sometime around 10 cst tonight.
sounds good! you'll really stack up on points then! what kind of motherboard do you have with the 920?
also, how are your amd machines doing?
I should finish my first bigadv wu sometime around 10 cst tonight.
sounds good! you'll really stack up on points then! what kind of motherboard do you have with the 920?
also, how are your amd machines doing?
more...
Compile 'em all
Nov 11, 07:52 AM
just goes to show people still want to be able to see flash on their iphones reguardless of how bloated
I assume this means everyone want to be able to use iFart on their iPhones too?
Just because an app climbed up the charts doesn't mean they absolutely need the app. This is not how charting in the App Store works or means. I am pretty sure millions of iPhone users will be just fine without Angry Birds.
I assume this means everyone want to be able to use iFart on their iPhones too?
Just because an app climbed up the charts doesn't mean they absolutely need the app. This is not how charting in the App Store works or means. I am pretty sure millions of iPhone users will be just fine without Angry Birds.
hulugu
Dec 4, 03:43 PM
Yeah, when the poll was loading I expected 80-90% to be concerned about security, turns out only 40% are. So many ignorant "blissful" people that excuse Apple and think "It's Apple, of course it's safe". Obviously it's not. Ten serious exploits in about as many days of looking (they spent 30 days total, about an equal amount on linux and mac, and the rest on other OS's, so 10 should be right) and that is just scratching the surface. I was shocked that Apple actually had so many vulnerabilities, and for those that didn't find it scary that someone can install a program with kernel access simply by having you download their dmg file (not even opening it), well they're just being silly and need to realize that this is and some extremely bad things can happen if we are to go by that analysts words (saying OS X is not hot on security and that it is easy to find new hacks). :p
Not at all. I voted no, and I did so because I've spent enough time reading through vulnerability assesments to know that <i>all</i> software has problems, therefore I tend not to light my hair on fire and run around screaming the sky is falling the minute someone finds a flaw or a vector of flaws like the MOKB. Instead, I pay attention to the results, take steps to mitigate any possible problems, and then wait for the Security Update from Apple. The sooner the update happens, like the quick fix for the iAdware flaw, the happier I am.
Furthermore, one of the MOKB flaws is just a bug and is not actually a security vulnerability. The dmg vulnerability, wherein a malformed disk image can crash OS X and during this inject uknown code, has been debunked according to this guy (http://alastairs-place.net/2006/11/dmg-vulnerability/).
So, no I'm not concerned. I'm watchful, but I'm going to withhold the running and screaming and the Apple-better-*******-fix-this! rant until something serious happens.
Not at all. I voted no, and I did so because I've spent enough time reading through vulnerability assesments to know that <i>all</i> software has problems, therefore I tend not to light my hair on fire and run around screaming the sky is falling the minute someone finds a flaw or a vector of flaws like the MOKB. Instead, I pay attention to the results, take steps to mitigate any possible problems, and then wait for the Security Update from Apple. The sooner the update happens, like the quick fix for the iAdware flaw, the happier I am.
Furthermore, one of the MOKB flaws is just a bug and is not actually a security vulnerability. The dmg vulnerability, wherein a malformed disk image can crash OS X and during this inject uknown code, has been debunked according to this guy (http://alastairs-place.net/2006/11/dmg-vulnerability/).
So, no I'm not concerned. I'm watchful, but I'm going to withhold the running and screaming and the Apple-better-*******-fix-this! rant until something serious happens.
-aggie-
Apr 29, 03:53 PM
Me too. Given the theme i was already picturing myself as the marquee artist of the production ;)
anyway, the situation right now is:
eldiablo: 4 (dontpanic, chrmjenkins, aggie, ucfgrad)
chrmjenkins: 1 (jav)
not voted yet: Lbro, eldiablo
not much room to maneouvre for eldiablo, except in deciding who to infect (if he hasn't done it already).
so tomorrow should be 4 vs 1 (or 5 vs 1 if the hunter is successful). with everyone with equal chances of being wolfized.
it's like starting a new game, a tricky one with two shots at finding the wolf
I wasn�t the one who held up the night, since I gave my scan request to intell early, so I�m guessing one of the hunters is either not playing or not participating enough. Anyway, I�d appreciate the hunter protecting me from whoever gets infected.
Feel free to recommend who you want scanned.
anyway, the situation right now is:
eldiablo: 4 (dontpanic, chrmjenkins, aggie, ucfgrad)
chrmjenkins: 1 (jav)
not voted yet: Lbro, eldiablo
not much room to maneouvre for eldiablo, except in deciding who to infect (if he hasn't done it already).
so tomorrow should be 4 vs 1 (or 5 vs 1 if the hunter is successful). with everyone with equal chances of being wolfized.
it's like starting a new game, a tricky one with two shots at finding the wolf
I wasn�t the one who held up the night, since I gave my scan request to intell early, so I�m guessing one of the hunters is either not playing or not participating enough. Anyway, I�d appreciate the hunter protecting me from whoever gets infected.
Feel free to recommend who you want scanned.
Snowy_River
Jul 26, 06:08 PM
Just touching it is not tactile feedback. That would be like saying a piece of paper provides feedback if you touch it. Feedback means a signal is sent back to the user to acknowledge the the pressing of the control. The 3G iPod buttons gave an audio click - that is aural feedback. They also showed things on the screen - that is visual feedback. But they didn't spring, or have a physical barrier that you push through, so there was no tactile feedback (i.e. nothing that can be physically felt) to let you know that you pressed the button.
tactile |?taktl; ?tak?t?l|
adjective
� of or connected with the sense of touch
� perceptible by touch or apparently so; tangible
� designed to be perceived by touch
Tactile means that you touch it! If you touch something you get a tactile feedback from it, unless your finger is numb. Thus, if you're waving you hand over control, you get no tactile feedback. Whereas, even if the control doesn't push in, the simple act of touching a control does give tactile feedback. (Perhaps less tactile feedback than a control that does push in, but it still gives tactile feedback.)
When you press a button on a dead iPod, it does nothing, and it feels exactly the same as pressing a button on a working iPod - no tactile feedback.
Irrelevant. If you push a key on the keyboard of a dead computer it behaves the same as pressing the key on the keyboard of a working computer. So, by your logic, these keys that press down give no tactile feedback.
Who said it was revolutionary? And it could consitute a none-touch interface. It depends on if the patent is describing the control or the entire iPod. If there is a cover, you are not touching the control (the screen underneath), but the cover over it - hence none-touch.
My point was not to say that your suggestion was not possible, just that it was a small step above what already exists, as opposed to a revolutionary leap forward based on the description in the patent. Of course, for anyone who knows a little bit about patent writing and patent law, what's written in the patent is probably the broadest possible applications that Apple can think of to include in their patent.
A better (i.e. more scratch-proof) cover would be better. Who cares about fingerprints? You can clean those off. I don't want to hover my finger over something to control it - I'd always have to be careful not to touch the screen (unless it was durable). Not very good when on a bus, train etc., where the vehicle is shaking.
And if a better material were easily available, don't you think they'd be using it? :rolleyes:
tactile |?taktl; ?tak?t?l|
adjective
� of or connected with the sense of touch
� perceptible by touch or apparently so; tangible
� designed to be perceived by touch
Tactile means that you touch it! If you touch something you get a tactile feedback from it, unless your finger is numb. Thus, if you're waving you hand over control, you get no tactile feedback. Whereas, even if the control doesn't push in, the simple act of touching a control does give tactile feedback. (Perhaps less tactile feedback than a control that does push in, but it still gives tactile feedback.)
When you press a button on a dead iPod, it does nothing, and it feels exactly the same as pressing a button on a working iPod - no tactile feedback.
Irrelevant. If you push a key on the keyboard of a dead computer it behaves the same as pressing the key on the keyboard of a working computer. So, by your logic, these keys that press down give no tactile feedback.
Who said it was revolutionary? And it could consitute a none-touch interface. It depends on if the patent is describing the control or the entire iPod. If there is a cover, you are not touching the control (the screen underneath), but the cover over it - hence none-touch.
My point was not to say that your suggestion was not possible, just that it was a small step above what already exists, as opposed to a revolutionary leap forward based on the description in the patent. Of course, for anyone who knows a little bit about patent writing and patent law, what's written in the patent is probably the broadest possible applications that Apple can think of to include in their patent.
A better (i.e. more scratch-proof) cover would be better. Who cares about fingerprints? You can clean those off. I don't want to hover my finger over something to control it - I'd always have to be careful not to touch the screen (unless it was durable). Not very good when on a bus, train etc., where the vehicle is shaking.
And if a better material were easily available, don't you think they'd be using it? :rolleyes:
Mac Marc
Apr 25, 12:37 PM
How do you explain the MacBook Pros with the antiglare screens?
Never going to have a matte screen lol
Never going to have a matte screen lol
AlphaBob
Jan 30, 04:57 PM
...some people look at their paper money (cash, stock & bonds) and start to worry that all of it could go bankrupt...so they look for a little insurance in Gold, just incase the worse happens then they still have something of real value.
I understand the theory of what you say, that gold has intrinsic value. However, the theory has never been tested in a true crisis. Trust me, if everything went bankrupt (stocks, bonds, t-bills, banks, etc.), then gold will be of little value as well. The ONLY thing of true value under those circumstances will be food and those things that can be used to barter for food (gold would have some value in that case, but so would a box of ammunition) The fact that someone paid $1000 or $2000 an ounce for gold before a crisis will mean nothing. It will be worth only as much as someone is capable of paying, and that will be very little.
The last run-up in the price of gold in the 80s was met with a rapid drop less than two years later to the $350 range, which is where gold sat for almost twenty years. While I have no idea how much more it will increase in value over the short term, the problem is that when the fall comes it will be quite rapid.
The biggest difference I see between gold and stocks is that one is based on negative gloom/doom thinking, and the other is based on positive/growth thinking. I have little to no interest in investing in gloom/doom, and history is the reason why. Periods of negative thinking tend to be short-lived.
I understand the theory of what you say, that gold has intrinsic value. However, the theory has never been tested in a true crisis. Trust me, if everything went bankrupt (stocks, bonds, t-bills, banks, etc.), then gold will be of little value as well. The ONLY thing of true value under those circumstances will be food and those things that can be used to barter for food (gold would have some value in that case, but so would a box of ammunition) The fact that someone paid $1000 or $2000 an ounce for gold before a crisis will mean nothing. It will be worth only as much as someone is capable of paying, and that will be very little.
The last run-up in the price of gold in the 80s was met with a rapid drop less than two years later to the $350 range, which is where gold sat for almost twenty years. While I have no idea how much more it will increase in value over the short term, the problem is that when the fall comes it will be quite rapid.
The biggest difference I see between gold and stocks is that one is based on negative gloom/doom thinking, and the other is based on positive/growth thinking. I have little to no interest in investing in gloom/doom, and history is the reason why. Periods of negative thinking tend to be short-lived.
realitymonkey
Apr 15, 03:22 PM
Well they have fixed the chrome not closing when you quit it fault. (And also preventing the shutdown)
zephyrusrain
Apr 28, 06:40 PM
Here are your measurements - http://www.tipb.com/2011/04/28/white-iphone-4-roughly-02mm-thicker-black-iphone/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheIphoneBlog+%28TiPb%3A+iPhone%2C+iPad%2C+iPod%29
Oh good.
0.2mm thicker. Interesting.
Oh good.
0.2mm thicker. Interesting.
