jav6454
Mar 24, 03:04 PM
10 years already? Time to touch land. It's been great 10 years at sea.
MikeDTyke
Jan 9, 04:00 PM
I'm really tee'd off now.
Have avoided all websites except this forum thread for the last 3 hours and haven't gone near my email neither, then some b'stard comes in and drops a fat giveaway URL without even obfuscating it and telling us its a spoiler.
I even managed to look at google finance to check the aapl share price without seeing any giveaway news articles.
I'm not going to look at any specs and hope there's another small surprise or two in the keynote.
Git's each and everyone who's posted the leak or commented on it thinking well someone else has already let the cat out of the bag.
:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:
Have avoided all websites except this forum thread for the last 3 hours and haven't gone near my email neither, then some b'stard comes in and drops a fat giveaway URL without even obfuscating it and telling us its a spoiler.
I even managed to look at google finance to check the aapl share price without seeing any giveaway news articles.
I'm not going to look at any specs and hope there's another small surprise or two in the keynote.
Git's each and everyone who's posted the leak or commented on it thinking well someone else has already let the cat out of the bag.
:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:
Prof.
Apr 5, 04:19 PM
Note from Apple, inc.:
iAd Gallery will come preinstalled in every future iPhone, iPod, and iPad. For existing customers, iAd Gallery will be added to iOS 5. It will be impossible to delete. If you do delete it, your warranty will be void.
Thank you for your cooperation.
:apple:
iAd Gallery will come preinstalled in every future iPhone, iPod, and iPad. For existing customers, iAd Gallery will be added to iOS 5. It will be impossible to delete. If you do delete it, your warranty will be void.
Thank you for your cooperation.
:apple:
Reach9
Mar 18, 05:17 PM
I'm all for people loving their apple products. I love my iPhone too. But unlike some of these apple fans, I don't consider my iPhone to be the holy grail of smartphones.
Completely agree. The iPhone 4 is nice, but not perfect. Hardware wise, and Software wise it needs a lot of work. I guess that's too much to swallow for some people.
Completely agree. The iPhone 4 is nice, but not perfect. Hardware wise, and Software wise it needs a lot of work. I guess that's too much to swallow for some people.
more...
wlh99
Apr 26, 05:44 PM
I'm aware of that ulbador, and my point is that like any other language.. you get better with time & practice. Nobody FORCES you or dejo to read my threads, or answer them. If you see lack of objective-C fundamentals, just go to another thread (for Pros), is that simple. Some people like to help, others laugh, others ignore you or get frustrated because they can't read ... who cares man, if you don't like the thread just go to another one but never try to discourage a person who's starting to learn, that I'm against.
(about the code) Thanks for pointing that out, I needed a variable, after that I created a timer appropriately and used the variable as a reference to trigger my cancel methods (invalidate).
Have you read the documentation for NSTimer?
+ (NSTimer *)scheduledTimerWithTimeInterval:(NSTimeInterval)seconds invocation:(NSInvocation *)invocation repeats:(BOOL)repeats
The above line has your answer.
(about the code) Thanks for pointing that out, I needed a variable, after that I created a timer appropriately and used the variable as a reference to trigger my cancel methods (invalidate).
Have you read the documentation for NSTimer?
+ (NSTimer *)scheduledTimerWithTimeInterval:(NSTimeInterval)seconds invocation:(NSInvocation *)invocation repeats:(BOOL)repeats
The above line has your answer.
jp102235
Dec 13, 05:07 PM
If this rumor is true (I am leaning towards its truth) - what implications does it have for the ipad LTE ? Does the recent adoption of ipad in the verizon stores mean there will be a double whammy LTE introduction of ipad/iphone LTE editions - that could really wollup the competition - should be interesting.
jp
jp
more...
itguy06
Oct 28, 05:47 PM
How much plainer does it need to be, their whole intent is to enable people to steal the GUI and enjoy the Apple OS X experience for free.
How do you figure? There are people like me that hate Intel's products but love Apple's. So I really don't want to buy an Intel Mac. I would much rather build an AMD rig and buy OSX and install on that. I have bought all OS X releases since 10.2 and would proudly buy 10.5 and run on non-Apple hardware.
I'd imagine there are many like me that would rather not use Apple hardware but would gladly buy OS X to run on their computers.
Brad Pitt and Jennifer Aniston
more...
Pictures of Jennifer Aniston
Jennifer Aniston#39;s House is a
more...
jennifer aniston at home pic
Jennifer Aniston poolside
more...
Jennifer-Aniston-Hal-Levitt-
Jennifer Aniston Wants To Be A
more...
Jennifer Aniston Jennifer
Jennifer Aniston#39;s Home: No
more...
Jennifer Aniston Selling Her
jennifer-aniston-house000.
Topic: Jennifer Aniston
How do you figure? There are people like me that hate Intel's products but love Apple's. So I really don't want to buy an Intel Mac. I would much rather build an AMD rig and buy OSX and install on that. I have bought all OS X releases since 10.2 and would proudly buy 10.5 and run on non-Apple hardware.
I'd imagine there are many like me that would rather not use Apple hardware but would gladly buy OS X to run on their computers.
davepoint
Aug 8, 01:33 PM
By the way - the apple uk store lists the 23" as �779 - yet earlier in this thread people were saying that the prices had not yet dropped..I was under the impression that 779 was the reduced price..is it going down further or are the wrong?
more...
Joshuarocks
Apr 8, 08:27 PM
There is no beta of Windows 8 yet so it is hard to say. MS can add million new features to make it sound good on paper and then fail it like they did with Vista. In the end, the most important thing is stability. Windows 7 is great and I really hope W8 will take it even further.
I'd like to see Windows 8 use a Linux kernel underlying the GUI itself.. Microsoft could have some potential, but should not copy from Apple.
I'd like to see Windows 8 use a Linux kernel underlying the GUI itself.. Microsoft could have some potential, but should not copy from Apple.
leekohler
May 5, 04:30 PM
You're better than this Lee.
Just because it hasn't worked in Chicago doesn't mean it won't work period. Other countries ban guns just fine. It's about enforcement.
There are completely different cultural factors that play into this as well. You cannot blame guns for this, you have to blame people. There are underlying issues that cause this type of violence that we are not dealing with. Guns are not the problem, our culture is. Treat the disease, not the symptom, or your results will continue to be the same.
Just because it hasn't worked in Chicago doesn't mean it won't work period. Other countries ban guns just fine. It's about enforcement.
There are completely different cultural factors that play into this as well. You cannot blame guns for this, you have to blame people. There are underlying issues that cause this type of violence that we are not dealing with. Guns are not the problem, our culture is. Treat the disease, not the symptom, or your results will continue to be the same.
more...
tvguru
Sep 12, 08:31 AM
http://www.apple.com/de/quicktime/win.html
bottom left of page
Hey Chundles get him. :D
bottom left of page
Hey Chundles get him. :D
RichP
Aug 13, 12:13 PM
klaus,
so, based on your experience, we can still say the "new" 23s are junk? That really is upsetting.
I gave up on 23s a while ago, although I would really like the increased resolution. I agree with what you said, for the price we pay, we should get quality and consistency, (especially with a company that really pushes dual screen configurations) There is NOTHING more irritating than when the monitors dont "match"
so, based on your experience, we can still say the "new" 23s are junk? That really is upsetting.
I gave up on 23s a while ago, although I would really like the increased resolution. I agree with what you said, for the price we pay, we should get quality and consistency, (especially with a company that really pushes dual screen configurations) There is NOTHING more irritating than when the monitors dont "match"
more...
LagunaSol
Apr 29, 04:29 PM
btw- does anyone know why the current version is named Windows 7? Why 7?
Microsoft needed the good luck after Vista. :p
Microsoft needed the good luck after Vista. :p
SimonTheSoundMa
Sep 25, 04:03 PM
I suppose there could be a bit of news here for non-photographers.
As I understand it, Aperture uses OS X's built-in RAW image processing. If I remember rightly, the last Aperture update accompanied an OS X update. So it's possible 10.4.8 could be just around the corner (i.e. sometime this week?)
It still is pretty poor with compatibility when it comes to RAW. For example, it still can't read white balance from the meta data on RAW files off Canon cameras. Great!
Aperture's development also is going slow. Apple pulling out the software?
Perhaps all the developers are spending too much time on Leopard and Logic 8 at the moment.
As I understand it, Aperture uses OS X's built-in RAW image processing. If I remember rightly, the last Aperture update accompanied an OS X update. So it's possible 10.4.8 could be just around the corner (i.e. sometime this week?)
It still is pretty poor with compatibility when it comes to RAW. For example, it still can't read white balance from the meta data on RAW files off Canon cameras. Great!
Aperture's development also is going slow. Apple pulling out the software?
Perhaps all the developers are spending too much time on Leopard and Logic 8 at the moment.
more...
teme
Oct 4, 04:29 AM
hi,
The people I have spoken to who use PC's are not nerds or power users, however, they do have monitors that work perfectly fine and want to use them. Why would someone purchase a 20" iMac when they already have sitting on their desk a 12 month old 19" LCD? They may not all need expandability (or really understand what that means) but they are of the mind set that they must have the option. These people are simply not considering Apple computers because of the lack of an upgradeable computer that is under $1500 (the mini is not easily upgradeable unless you happen to be one of those nerds you are refering to). The gap between the mini and the Mac Pro is enormous in both power and price yet there is nothing in the middle price/power range. Simply dismissing this catagory of people will not convince them to buy an iMac. Further, saying the operating system will convince them to switch is a moot point if they never buy the computer in the first place.
My friends, family, and co-workers are all interested in this "OS X thing" but get turned off at the price of the Pro, the lack of power of the mini, and the all in one of the iMac. This is what I am seeing, and Apple is losing sales because of it.
s.
You said the exact reasons why I bought a new PC tower and not a Mac, although I wanted to get a Mac.
The people I have spoken to who use PC's are not nerds or power users, however, they do have monitors that work perfectly fine and want to use them. Why would someone purchase a 20" iMac when they already have sitting on their desk a 12 month old 19" LCD? They may not all need expandability (or really understand what that means) but they are of the mind set that they must have the option. These people are simply not considering Apple computers because of the lack of an upgradeable computer that is under $1500 (the mini is not easily upgradeable unless you happen to be one of those nerds you are refering to). The gap between the mini and the Mac Pro is enormous in both power and price yet there is nothing in the middle price/power range. Simply dismissing this catagory of people will not convince them to buy an iMac. Further, saying the operating system will convince them to switch is a moot point if they never buy the computer in the first place.
My friends, family, and co-workers are all interested in this "OS X thing" but get turned off at the price of the Pro, the lack of power of the mini, and the all in one of the iMac. This is what I am seeing, and Apple is losing sales because of it.
s.
You said the exact reasons why I bought a new PC tower and not a Mac, although I wanted to get a Mac.
snberk103
Apr 15, 12:29 PM
While this is true, we can't allow that technicality to wipe the slate clean. Our security as a whole is deficient, even if the TSA on its own might not be responsible for these two particular failures. Our tax dollars are still going to the our mutual safety so we should expect more.
As I said, I understood the point you were trying to make. But.... you can't take two non-TSA incidents and use those to make a case against the TSA specifically. All you can do is say that increased security, similar to what the TSA does, can be shown to not catch everything. I could just as easily argue that because the two incidents (shoe and underwear bombers) did not occur from TSA screenings then that is proof the TSA methods work. I could, but I won't because we don't really know that is true. Too small a sample to judge.
Well when a fanatic is willing to commit suicide because he believes that he'll be rewarded in heaven, 50/50 odds don't seem to be all that much of a deterrent.
Did you not read my post above? Or did you not understand it? Or did I not write clearly? I'll assume the 3rd. Past history is that bombs are not put on planes by lone wolf fanatics. They are placed there by a whole operation involving a number of people... perhaps a dozen, maybe? The person carrying the bomb may be a brainwashed fool (though, surprisingly - often educated) - but the support team likely aren't fools. The team includes dedicated individuals who have specialized training and experience that are needed to mount further operations. The bomb makers, the money people, the people who nurture the bomb carrier and ensure that they are fit (mentally) to go through with a suicide attack. These people, the support crew, are not going to like 50/50 odds. Nor, are the support teams command and control. The security forces have shown themselves to be quite good at eventually following the linkages back up the chain.
What's worse is that we've only achieved that with a lot of our personal dignity, time, and money. I don't think we can tolerate much more. We should be expecting more for the time, money, and humiliation we're putting ourselves (and our 6 year-old children) through.
You are right. There has been a cost to dignity, time and money. Most of life is. People are constantly balancing personal and societal security/safety against personal freedoms. In this case what you think is only part of the balance between society and security. You feel it's too far. I can't argue. I don't fly anymore unless I have to. But, I also think that what the TSA (and CATSA, & the European equivalents) are doing is working. I just don't have to like going through it.
....
Your statistics don't unequivocally prove the efficacy of the TSA though. They only show that the TSA employs a cost-benefit method to determine what measures to take.
Give the man/woman/boy a cigar! There is no way to prove it, other than setting controlled experiments in which make some airports security free, and others with varying levels of security. And in some cases you don't tell the travelling public which airports have what level (if any) of security - but you do tell the bad guys/gals.
In other words, in this world... all you've got is incomplete data to try and make a reasonable decisions based on a cost/benefit analysis.
Since you believe in the efficacy of the TSA so much, the burden is yours to make a clear and convincing case, not mine. I can provide alternative hypotheses, but I am in no way saying that these are provable at the current moment in time.
I did. I cited a sharp drop-off in hijackings at a particular moment in history. Within the limits of a Mac Rumours Forum, that is as far as I'm going to go. If you an alternative hypothesis, you have to at least back it up with something. My something trumps your alternative hypothesis - even if my something is merely a pair of deuces - until you provide something to back up your AH.
I'm only saying that they are rational objections to your theory.
Objections with nothing to support them.
My hypothesis is essentially the same as Lisa's: the protection is coming from our circumstances rather than our deliberative efforts.
Good. Support your hypothesis. Otherwise it's got the exactly the same weight as my hypothesis that in fact Lisa's rock was making the bears scarce.
Terrorism is a complex thing. My bet is that as we waged wars in multiple nations, it became more advantageous for fanatics to strike where our military forces were.
US has been waging wars in multiple nations since.... well, lets not go there.... for a long time. What changed on 9/11? Besides enhanced security at the airports, that is.
Without having to gain entry into the country, get past airport security (no matter what odds were), or hijack a plane, terrorists were able to kill over 4,000 Americans in Iraq and nearly 1,500 in Afghanistan. That's almost twice as many as were killed on 9/11.
Over 10 years, not 10 minutes. It is the single act of terrorism on 9/11 that is engraved on people's (not just American) memories and consciousnesses - not the background and now seemingly routine deaths in the military ranks (I'm speaking about the general population, not about the families and fellow soldiers of those who have been killed.)
Terrorism against military targets is 1) not technically terrorism, and b) not very newsworthy to the public. That's why terrorists target civilians. Deadliest single overseas attack on the US military since the 2nd WW - where and when? Hint... it killed 241 American serviceman. Even if you know that incident, do you think it resonates with the general public in anyway? How about the Oklahoma City bombing? Bet you most people would think more people were killed there than in .... (shall I tell you? Beirut.) That's because civilians were targeted in OK, and the military in Beirut.
If I were the leader of a group intent on killing Americans and Westerners in general, I certainly would go down that route rather than hijack planes.
You'd not make the news very often, nor change much public opinion in the US, then.
It's pretty clear that it was not the rock.
But can you prove it? :)
Ecosystems are constantly finding new equilibriums; killing off an herbivore's primary predator should cause a decline in vegetation.
I'm glad you got that reference. The Salmon works like this. For millennia the bears and eagles have been scooping the salmon out of the streams. Bears, especially, don't actually eat much of the fish. They take a bite or two of the juiciest bits (from a bear's POV) and toss the carcass over their shoulder to scoop another Salmon. All those carcasses put fish fertilizer into the creek and river banks. A lot of fertilizer. So, the you get really big trees there.
That is not surprising, nor is it difficult to prove (you can track all three populations simultaneously). There is also a causal mechanism at work that can explain the effect without the need for new assumptions (Occam's Razor).
The efficacy of the TSA and our security measures, on the other hand, are quite complex and are affected by numerous causes.
But I think your reasoning is flawed. Human behaviour is much less complex than tracking how the ecosystem interacts with itself. One species vs numerous species; A species we can communicate with vs multiples that we can't; A long history of trying to understand human behaviour vs Not so much.
Changes in travel patterns, other nations' actions, and an enemey's changing strategy all play a big role. You can't ignore all of these and pronounce our security gimmicks (and really, that's what patting down a 6 year-old is) to be so masterfully effective.
It's also why they couldn't pay me enough me to run that operation. Too many "known unknowns".
We can't deduce anything from that footage of the 6 year old without knowing more. What if the explosives sniffing machine was going nuts anytime the girl went near it. If you were on that plane, wouldn't you want to know why that machine thought the girl has explosives on her? We don't know that there was a explosives sniffing device, and we don't know that there wasn't. All we know is from that footage that doesn't give us any context.
If I was a privacy or rights group, I would immediately launch an inquiry though. There is a enough information to be concerned, just not enough to form any conclusions what-so-ever. Except the screener appeared to be very professional.
As I said, I understood the point you were trying to make. But.... you can't take two non-TSA incidents and use those to make a case against the TSA specifically. All you can do is say that increased security, similar to what the TSA does, can be shown to not catch everything. I could just as easily argue that because the two incidents (shoe and underwear bombers) did not occur from TSA screenings then that is proof the TSA methods work. I could, but I won't because we don't really know that is true. Too small a sample to judge.
Well when a fanatic is willing to commit suicide because he believes that he'll be rewarded in heaven, 50/50 odds don't seem to be all that much of a deterrent.
Did you not read my post above? Or did you not understand it? Or did I not write clearly? I'll assume the 3rd. Past history is that bombs are not put on planes by lone wolf fanatics. They are placed there by a whole operation involving a number of people... perhaps a dozen, maybe? The person carrying the bomb may be a brainwashed fool (though, surprisingly - often educated) - but the support team likely aren't fools. The team includes dedicated individuals who have specialized training and experience that are needed to mount further operations. The bomb makers, the money people, the people who nurture the bomb carrier and ensure that they are fit (mentally) to go through with a suicide attack. These people, the support crew, are not going to like 50/50 odds. Nor, are the support teams command and control. The security forces have shown themselves to be quite good at eventually following the linkages back up the chain.
What's worse is that we've only achieved that with a lot of our personal dignity, time, and money. I don't think we can tolerate much more. We should be expecting more for the time, money, and humiliation we're putting ourselves (and our 6 year-old children) through.
You are right. There has been a cost to dignity, time and money. Most of life is. People are constantly balancing personal and societal security/safety against personal freedoms. In this case what you think is only part of the balance between society and security. You feel it's too far. I can't argue. I don't fly anymore unless I have to. But, I also think that what the TSA (and CATSA, & the European equivalents) are doing is working. I just don't have to like going through it.
....
Your statistics don't unequivocally prove the efficacy of the TSA though. They only show that the TSA employs a cost-benefit method to determine what measures to take.
Give the man/woman/boy a cigar! There is no way to prove it, other than setting controlled experiments in which make some airports security free, and others with varying levels of security. And in some cases you don't tell the travelling public which airports have what level (if any) of security - but you do tell the bad guys/gals.
In other words, in this world... all you've got is incomplete data to try and make a reasonable decisions based on a cost/benefit analysis.
Since you believe in the efficacy of the TSA so much, the burden is yours to make a clear and convincing case, not mine. I can provide alternative hypotheses, but I am in no way saying that these are provable at the current moment in time.
I did. I cited a sharp drop-off in hijackings at a particular moment in history. Within the limits of a Mac Rumours Forum, that is as far as I'm going to go. If you an alternative hypothesis, you have to at least back it up with something. My something trumps your alternative hypothesis - even if my something is merely a pair of deuces - until you provide something to back up your AH.
I'm only saying that they are rational objections to your theory.
Objections with nothing to support them.
My hypothesis is essentially the same as Lisa's: the protection is coming from our circumstances rather than our deliberative efforts.
Good. Support your hypothesis. Otherwise it's got the exactly the same weight as my hypothesis that in fact Lisa's rock was making the bears scarce.
Terrorism is a complex thing. My bet is that as we waged wars in multiple nations, it became more advantageous for fanatics to strike where our military forces were.
US has been waging wars in multiple nations since.... well, lets not go there.... for a long time. What changed on 9/11? Besides enhanced security at the airports, that is.
Without having to gain entry into the country, get past airport security (no matter what odds were), or hijack a plane, terrorists were able to kill over 4,000 Americans in Iraq and nearly 1,500 in Afghanistan. That's almost twice as many as were killed on 9/11.
Over 10 years, not 10 minutes. It is the single act of terrorism on 9/11 that is engraved on people's (not just American) memories and consciousnesses - not the background and now seemingly routine deaths in the military ranks (I'm speaking about the general population, not about the families and fellow soldiers of those who have been killed.)
Terrorism against military targets is 1) not technically terrorism, and b) not very newsworthy to the public. That's why terrorists target civilians. Deadliest single overseas attack on the US military since the 2nd WW - where and when? Hint... it killed 241 American serviceman. Even if you know that incident, do you think it resonates with the general public in anyway? How about the Oklahoma City bombing? Bet you most people would think more people were killed there than in .... (shall I tell you? Beirut.) That's because civilians were targeted in OK, and the military in Beirut.
If I were the leader of a group intent on killing Americans and Westerners in general, I certainly would go down that route rather than hijack planes.
You'd not make the news very often, nor change much public opinion in the US, then.
It's pretty clear that it was not the rock.
But can you prove it? :)
Ecosystems are constantly finding new equilibriums; killing off an herbivore's primary predator should cause a decline in vegetation.
I'm glad you got that reference. The Salmon works like this. For millennia the bears and eagles have been scooping the salmon out of the streams. Bears, especially, don't actually eat much of the fish. They take a bite or two of the juiciest bits (from a bear's POV) and toss the carcass over their shoulder to scoop another Salmon. All those carcasses put fish fertilizer into the creek and river banks. A lot of fertilizer. So, the you get really big trees there.
That is not surprising, nor is it difficult to prove (you can track all three populations simultaneously). There is also a causal mechanism at work that can explain the effect without the need for new assumptions (Occam's Razor).
The efficacy of the TSA and our security measures, on the other hand, are quite complex and are affected by numerous causes.
But I think your reasoning is flawed. Human behaviour is much less complex than tracking how the ecosystem interacts with itself. One species vs numerous species; A species we can communicate with vs multiples that we can't; A long history of trying to understand human behaviour vs Not so much.
Changes in travel patterns, other nations' actions, and an enemey's changing strategy all play a big role. You can't ignore all of these and pronounce our security gimmicks (and really, that's what patting down a 6 year-old is) to be so masterfully effective.
It's also why they couldn't pay me enough me to run that operation. Too many "known unknowns".
We can't deduce anything from that footage of the 6 year old without knowing more. What if the explosives sniffing machine was going nuts anytime the girl went near it. If you were on that plane, wouldn't you want to know why that machine thought the girl has explosives on her? We don't know that there was a explosives sniffing device, and we don't know that there wasn't. All we know is from that footage that doesn't give us any context.
If I was a privacy or rights group, I would immediately launch an inquiry though. There is a enough information to be concerned, just not enough to form any conclusions what-so-ever. Except the screener appeared to be very professional.
more...
citizenzen
May 5, 12:25 PM
Oh wait, you may not even have the chance to ask, because now you're dead. He shot you because he felt like it, and there was nothing you could do to stop him.
Thanks for making my point.
The proliferation of guns in America makes it easier for people to end my life with a simple pull of the trigger.
Fewer guns would mean that fewer people would have that capability.
Thanks for making my point.
The proliferation of guns in America makes it easier for people to end my life with a simple pull of the trigger.
Fewer guns would mean that fewer people would have that capability.
airforce1
May 2, 10:51 AM
- iPod bug fixes
Hopefully fixes the bug when album artwork doesn't show on the lock screen. It's not a critical bug, just kinda annoying.
At least apple admitted for the first time ever that they have a bug, i guess they mean BUG as in eavesdropping!
Hopefully fixes the bug when album artwork doesn't show on the lock screen. It's not a critical bug, just kinda annoying.
At least apple admitted for the first time ever that they have a bug, i guess they mean BUG as in eavesdropping!
LightSpeed1
Apr 11, 03:47 PM
I am still in the middle of setting everything up and the monitor for example is not even out of the box yet...just been really busy. Hopefully in about 1 month's time I can share. Sorry :(I look forward to seeing it.:o
fluidedge
Jan 14, 11:45 AM
what the hell can you do with a 32 GB flash drive?
The OS alone must take up 15GB leaving you with 15GB. 15GB. On a Macbook PRO. People actually do constructive work on these things. 15GB is about 10 photoshop files to some people. No music. No 'movies' nothing else can fit on 15GB. 15GB is about 1/5 the size of my itunes library.
What is the fliping point of a 32GB flash drive in an Apple? I see absolutly no use in putting anything less than a 128GB flash drive in a professional class laptop. And thats not going to happen for a good 3 or 4 years yet.
32GB flash drives would be perfect for the next gen Asus EEE PC though - just to store a bit of music and some documents and few apps.
The OS alone must take up 15GB leaving you with 15GB. 15GB. On a Macbook PRO. People actually do constructive work on these things. 15GB is about 10 photoshop files to some people. No music. No 'movies' nothing else can fit on 15GB. 15GB is about 1/5 the size of my itunes library.
What is the fliping point of a 32GB flash drive in an Apple? I see absolutly no use in putting anything less than a 128GB flash drive in a professional class laptop. And thats not going to happen for a good 3 or 4 years yet.
32GB flash drives would be perfect for the next gen Asus EEE PC though - just to store a bit of music and some documents and few apps.
Dunepilot
Oct 19, 10:46 AM
Does anyone know their marketshare in terms of computers in use?
It's not an exact science, but these days you can make a safe assumption that most computers are connected to the internet, so info such as the browser usage on a site like Google can give some indication of number of machines in use
It's not an exact science, but these days you can make a safe assumption that most computers are connected to the internet, so info such as the browser usage on a site like Google can give some indication of number of machines in use
vendettabass
Nov 16, 04:23 PM
uk store down too.. my moneys on maintenence
Compile 'em all
Jul 22, 08:21 AM
I'm sorry, but these video stunts are just bogus and have no credibility. Clearly on 3 of them the person holding the phone is applying a lot of vice-like pressure and squeezing the phones as hard as possible. You can see the arm shaking from applying so much force and the thumb turns red. Do they think people are that stupid? That is far removed from realistic usage of the phones, whereas the problem with the iPhone 4 is just touching it in a certain spot.
Apple is making it worse because instead of just being honest and forthcoming, they are now lying and trying to distract from the real issue. People will be understanding and wouldn't care if Apple would just be contrite, educate people about facts and make an attempt to rectify the situation. They did that by giving away the bumpers and sharing the data about dropped calls which helps their case that it is still a great phone, but everything else they have done damages their brand. Their attempt to mislead people from the facts is not helping.
What real issues?
Apple are selling iPhones as fast as they can make them.
Aside from a tiny minority on the internet, the avg. joe is out there enjoying and using their new iPhone. If it was a big issue as the media portrayed it, Apple wouldn't be selling a single unit.
You people are funny.
Apple is making it worse because instead of just being honest and forthcoming, they are now lying and trying to distract from the real issue. People will be understanding and wouldn't care if Apple would just be contrite, educate people about facts and make an attempt to rectify the situation. They did that by giving away the bumpers and sharing the data about dropped calls which helps their case that it is still a great phone, but everything else they have done damages their brand. Their attempt to mislead people from the facts is not helping.
What real issues?
Apple are selling iPhones as fast as they can make them.
Aside from a tiny minority on the internet, the avg. joe is out there enjoying and using their new iPhone. If it was a big issue as the media portrayed it, Apple wouldn't be selling a single unit.
You people are funny.
Mad Mac Maniac
Apr 21, 01:48 PM
yeah. I think a bit more "use" needs to be decided about these things. plus conformity to the look of MR.
They worked a bit funky too.
They worked a bit funky too.
No comments:
Post a Comment