bassfingers
Apr 23, 01:11 PM
Well, ours is not much better. We just never get anything for it. At least the French do.
Oh wait. Sorry- corporations and big oil have gotten quite a bit of money out of it.
awwws are you jealous?
Oh wait. Sorry- corporations and big oil have gotten quite a bit of money out of it.
awwws are you jealous?
ShnikeJSB
Aug 8, 01:35 PM
...and this could lead to some nasty screen burn.)
I was under the impression LCD's can't GET "Burn-In"... And that they MIGHT get "Image Persistance", which isn't permanent.
I was under the impression LCD's can't GET "Burn-In"... And that they MIGHT get "Image Persistance", which isn't permanent.
Stella
Jul 21, 10:09 AM
Apple is doing what they need to do to defend themselves against the smear job put out by the haters in the media and tech sites aligned against them.
LOL. Grow up. You sound paranoid: Everyone is out to get Apple.
The Antenna issue is real. It was bought about because enough people were having issues not due to some kind of grand conspiracy.
LOL. Grow up. You sound paranoid: Everyone is out to get Apple.
The Antenna issue is real. It was bought about because enough people were having issues not due to some kind of grand conspiracy.
Surf Monkey
Mar 17, 01:06 AM
As for the Karma, I found a iPhone 4 at Macy's 2-days before shopping with my girlfriend, and I didn't think twice about not turning it in. I made this woman's day when she got it back. So I figured hey, maybe that was a little something I got for doing something honest a few days before
We all find creative ways to justify our actions.
We all find creative ways to justify our actions.
more...
RawBert
Mar 24, 03:33 PM
I remember the first time I saw OS X at CompUSA in Burbank. I fell in love and that's when I became a MacHead.
OS X Birthday Party tonight at my place! Drugs, girls and booze... :)
*Adults only*
OS X Birthday Party tonight at my place! Drugs, girls and booze... :)
*Adults only*
aristobrat
Oct 6, 06:32 PM
I think the biggest problem is when Apple had the chance to change the game by not doing subizided cost they instead give in and just make it worse by forcing a much larger than average subsudize on there phone ($400 vs $250).
Unlock phones puts the network and the phone separete.
I'm not sure why you think Apple's original iPhone sales model was changing the game.
The customer paid the full price of the iPhone, the iPhone was still locked to a specific carrier, and the carrier agreed to pay Apple monthly for every iPhone customer they had.
On top of that, AT&T created a special, cheaper data plan to lure customers in, as the full-priced phone was very off-putting to some.
Sounds like the original iPhone ended up costing AT&T more than the subsidy on the iPhone 3G/3GS did.
And why did Apple change its original sales model? Because they weren't selling nearly as fast as Apple had hoped.
I agree with you that being able to buy any phone and have it work on any network would be awesome. Logistically, I just don't ever see it happening.
Unlock phones puts the network and the phone separete.
I'm not sure why you think Apple's original iPhone sales model was changing the game.
The customer paid the full price of the iPhone, the iPhone was still locked to a specific carrier, and the carrier agreed to pay Apple monthly for every iPhone customer they had.
On top of that, AT&T created a special, cheaper data plan to lure customers in, as the full-priced phone was very off-putting to some.
Sounds like the original iPhone ended up costing AT&T more than the subsidy on the iPhone 3G/3GS did.
And why did Apple change its original sales model? Because they weren't selling nearly as fast as Apple had hoped.
I agree with you that being able to buy any phone and have it work on any network would be awesome. Logistically, I just don't ever see it happening.
more...
7o7munoz7o7
Dec 13, 04:59 PM
On your first point: It is also the company that came out with the iphone 4 and its antenna problems.
Your second point: Don't you think Verizon would take the oppurtunity to give apple what they really want over the Android phones: The first 4g phone on Verizon network. That would be a huge advantage. Just because the network isnt fully up yet doesn't mean Verizon couldn't have given apple the tech to make a 4g iphone. Verizon see android phone sales dropping and know that an iphone would boost sales by a huge amount.
Your third point: It would only be one chip, read the article for reference. How do you know how much battery it uses? It may be only a small amount more than 3g. Att's 3g sucked when the 3g iphone came out. It still sucks. Don't underestimate apple and verizon. You may be surprised!
Edit: By no means am a I acknowledging the merit or lack there of of this article
What iPhone 4 Antenna Problem?
Your second point: Don't you think Verizon would take the oppurtunity to give apple what they really want over the Android phones: The first 4g phone on Verizon network. That would be a huge advantage. Just because the network isnt fully up yet doesn't mean Verizon couldn't have given apple the tech to make a 4g iphone. Verizon see android phone sales dropping and know that an iphone would boost sales by a huge amount.
Your third point: It would only be one chip, read the article for reference. How do you know how much battery it uses? It may be only a small amount more than 3g. Att's 3g sucked when the 3g iphone came out. It still sucks. Don't underestimate apple and verizon. You may be surprised!
Edit: By no means am a I acknowledging the merit or lack there of of this article
What iPhone 4 Antenna Problem?
flopticalcube
Nov 25, 07:02 PM
Mighty Mouse has shipped. Woohoo! Told me it would be 2 weeks!
I noticed that given my two order numbers are about 20000 apart and the orders are 4 hours apart, they were doing 5000 sales an hour from apple.ca yesterday?
Anyone know if that is alot?
I noticed that given my two order numbers are about 20000 apart and the orders are 4 hours apart, they were doing 5000 sales an hour from apple.ca yesterday?
Anyone know if that is alot?
more...
cayley
Apr 4, 06:54 PM
but B&E is B&E no matter how you look at it and is illegal.
Yea... but with all that dog **** everywhere, I bet the cops won't want to stay very long gathering evidence :)
Yea... but with all that dog **** everywhere, I bet the cops won't want to stay very long gathering evidence :)
The Mad Kiwi
Sep 25, 06:45 PM
The thing I truely love about Apple, is they look after their customers with regular updates to their software with useful features added. I can't think of another company that will add so many new features without charging users for it.
And with some luck it might be faster as well, something that Apple are great at delivering as well, better and faster.
And with some luck it might be faster as well, something that Apple are great at delivering as well, better and faster.
more...
MacDonaldsd
Jan 9, 04:53 PM
http://events.apple.com.edgesuite.net/j47d52oo/event/ has less spoiler - first post!
Don't no how you got that, but thank you !!!!!!!!!
Don't no how you got that, but thank you !!!!!!!!!
MacTraveller
Oct 4, 08:15 AM
If I were CES management, I'd ban them for life. Can't imagine Apple will let them anywhere near Moscone.
It's not up to Apple. It's up to IDG. They manage the expo, they administer the expo on behalf of Apple.
It's not up to Apple. It's up to IDG. They manage the expo, they administer the expo on behalf of Apple.
more...
zimtheinvader
Jan 15, 01:54 PM
Who is Apple kidding, the ultra-portable market is for *cheap* ultra-portables or for Tablets. If I didn't buy a 7" touch-screen UMPC for $1000, why on earth would I buy a non-touchscreen, ethernetless, 13" envelope-sized "sub-notebook". The price is Pro-line, the lack of screen options, lack of graphics, lack of FW800, lack of ethernet, speaks otherwise. Even a touchscreen would have saved this thing, right now its just an incredibly expensive, thinner, backlit Macbook. I mean, I get it is thin, but are they serious? My MBP is thin enough....
Amazing Iceman
May 4, 08:48 AM
You're totally wrong. I develop software that is used by hospitals. In fact, I'm writing an iPad app now. Our customers (hospitals) are buying iPads left and right. One hospital just bought 1800 iPads for example. In the HIS world (Hospital Information Systems) there are tons of articles illustrating how iPads are being adopted. A recent article talked about how iOS is trouncing everything else with a 90% share among health professionals.
Doctors are always on the go, specially in a hospital. Having the iPad allows them freedom to move around and have all the information pertaining to their patients available at any time, without having to carry or wait for patient's files, etc.
The iPad will always be a toy, but not just a toy. It is a very adaptable device that is useful on many fields. It's an amazing tool in the medical, engineering, management, artistic, etc fields.
Doctors are always on the go, specially in a hospital. Having the iPad allows them freedom to move around and have all the information pertaining to their patients available at any time, without having to carry or wait for patient's files, etc.
The iPad will always be a toy, but not just a toy. It is a very adaptable device that is useful on many fields. It's an amazing tool in the medical, engineering, management, artistic, etc fields.
more...
CalBoy
Apr 15, 04:21 PM
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 actually we know the TSA methods don't work because both of the incidents were from European airports that mirror what the TSA does. Added to the number of weapons that make it through TSA checkpoints, it's easy to see that the TSA does in fact not work to the extent that it is expected to.
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.
I understood your rather simplistic attempt at game theory just fine. The problem remains that one side is not a rational actor. The command portion of terrorists have virtually nothing to lose with a botched attempt, and neither does the fanatic patsy. A 50/50 ratio isn't good enough for our security because the downside for both command and patsy are much smaller than the upside (from their perspective). The chances of failure need to be much higher in order to effectively deter terrorists.
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.
Sacrificing these things is appropriate when there is a tangible gain. There hasn't been much of a tangible gain with TSA, and this is coming from the head of Israeli Security. We're paying a lot and getting almost nothing in return. Every year there's a new "standard" put out there to make it seem like TSA is doing something, but time and again security experts have lambasted TSA and its efforts as a dog and pony show.
Your own opinion of flying should be an example of how ridiculous things have gotten. If people now become disgruntled and irritated every time they fly, for perhaps marginal gains in security, then our methods have failed.
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.
It is difficult to prove, but you can make an educated guess about what the cause is. Other than the correlational evidence, there is no other good data to suggest that TSA has actually been effective. In no field is correlation enough to establish anything but correlation.
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.
No, that's not how it works. If you want to assert your idea as correct, the burden is on you to show that it is correct. I am going to try to poke holes in your reasoning, and it's up to you to show that my criticisms are invalid on the bases of logic and evidence.
So far you've only cited correlation, which is not sufficient evidence for causation. You ignored my criticism based on military intervention, changing travel patterns, etc, and only want to trumpet your belief that correlation is enough. It's not. If you don't want to do more on Mac Rumors, then don't post anymore on this topic concerning this line of discussion.
.jpg "selena gomez without makeup")
selena gomez without makeup
more...
selena gomez without makeup. Rtamp;Dzine. Mar 26, 12:04 AM. Are you serious? That#39;s a horrible thing to say. They should deprive themselves of sex because your
selena gomez no makeup who
selena gomez without makeup
Well actually we know the TSA methods don't work because both of the incidents were from European airports that mirror what the TSA does. Added to the number of weapons that make it through TSA checkpoints, it's easy to see that the TSA does in fact not work to the extent that it is expected to.
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.
I understood your rather simplistic attempt at game theory just fine. The problem remains that one side is not a rational actor. The command portion of terrorists have virtually nothing to lose with a botched attempt, and neither does the fanatic patsy. A 50/50 ratio isn't good enough for our security because the downside for both command and patsy are much smaller than the upside (from their perspective). The chances of failure need to be much higher in order to effectively deter terrorists.
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.
Sacrificing these things is appropriate when there is a tangible gain. There hasn't been much of a tangible gain with TSA, and this is coming from the head of Israeli Security. We're paying a lot and getting almost nothing in return. Every year there's a new "standard" put out there to make it seem like TSA is doing something, but time and again security experts have lambasted TSA and its efforts as a dog and pony show.
Your own opinion of flying should be an example of how ridiculous things have gotten. If people now become disgruntled and irritated every time they fly, for perhaps marginal gains in security, then our methods have failed.
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.
It is difficult to prove, but you can make an educated guess about what the cause is. Other than the correlational evidence, there is no other good data to suggest that TSA has actually been effective. In no field is correlation enough to establish anything but correlation.
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.
No, that's not how it works. If you want to assert your idea as correct, the burden is on you to show that it is correct. I am going to try to poke holes in your reasoning, and it's up to you to show that my criticisms are invalid on the bases of logic and evidence.
So far you've only cited correlation, which is not sufficient evidence for causation. You ignored my criticism based on military intervention, changing travel patterns, etc, and only want to trumpet your belief that correlation is enough. It's not. If you don't want to do more on Mac Rumors, then don't post anymore on this topic concerning this line of discussion.
flopticalcube
Apr 21, 11:44 AM
Don't think this is necessary in such a highly polarized forum but whatever, I shall ignore them.
more...
door4
Sep 12, 08:30 AM
Is this new?
http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE/WebObjects/AppleStore.woa/wo/2.RSLID?mco=34809CF6&nplm=TH578LL%2FA
http://store.apple.com/Catalog/US/Images/th578lla_alt.jpg
It's recent.. The sys displays the Ipod menu on the TV for "media center" style browsing
http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE/WebObjects/AppleStore.woa/wo/2.RSLID?mco=34809CF6&nplm=TH578LL%2FA
http://store.apple.com/Catalog/US/Images/th578lla_alt.jpg
It's recent.. The sys displays the Ipod menu on the TV for "media center" style browsing
Popeye206
Apr 5, 04:44 PM
Seems silly... would be useful if you got coupons or something special out of the Ads.
Silly App.
Silly App.
Ygn
Nov 8, 02:03 PM
I'm worried about getting banned for getting it (a few hours) early.
I was on multiplayer earlier, you'd be surprised at how many thousands of people are already on it, via pre-orders I assume and different timezones judging by the different accents people had.
I was on multiplayer earlier, you'd be surprised at how many thousands of people are already on it, via pre-orders I assume and different timezones judging by the different accents people had.
Willis
Apr 15, 07:54 PM
Not a bad design... images are shoddy but, I wouldn't mind my next iPhone to be like that
xAnthony
Mar 19, 11:38 AM
Even though I own two iPhone 4's I never experienced being a meat sandwich so that survey is mostly bullshiznit.
Just because you aren't getting laid doesn't mean it's 'bullshiznit'. Sometimes you have to blame the player, not the game.
Just because you aren't getting laid doesn't mean it's 'bullshiznit'. Sometimes you have to blame the player, not the game.
Stella
Jul 21, 09:21 AM
Why are Apple on a witch hunt?
Apple should concentrate on fixing their problem instead of finger pointing and deflecting the issue onto other companies. We already know the problem isn't as severe on other devices as the iPhone 4.
Apple should concentrate on fixing their problem instead of finger pointing and deflecting the issue onto other companies. We already know the problem isn't as severe on other devices as the iPhone 4.
Ger Teunis
Apr 29, 03:15 PM
nevermind
TuckBodi
Oct 6, 11:41 AM
The iPhone to Verizon won't happen, especially with the announcement today that Verizon is teaming up with Google and their Android phone. I at first thought the commercial was just a leverage ploy on Verizons part, working on Apple and their negotiations. Now I think it's just the first shot over the bow.
Time to look at unlocking and bailing to T-Mo again and get out of this crap-shoot called AT$T.
http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20091006-709550.html
Time to look at unlocking and bailing to T-Mo again and get out of this crap-shoot called AT$T.
http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20091006-709550.html
No comments:
Post a Comment