lordonuthin
May 9, 10:06 PM
Now my Mac Pro is only getting normal wu's not bigadv units. It was interesting watching the MP and i7980x running side by side, I'll try to get a screenshot later when I get home, they were very close in time per frame at about 3 minutes... hope they get some more bigadv units out for us to run :rolleyes:
maclaptop
Apr 17, 07:39 AM
Nice one arsehole. Ruining my industry. I hope you don't get paid for the next few shifts you do at work and then maybe you'll realise how selfish and greedy you're being.
True, that's a huge problem with kids, they have been repeatedly worshiped by their parents, thus and air of entitlement is all they know.
True, that's a huge problem with kids, they have been repeatedly worshiped by their parents, thus and air of entitlement is all they know.
Glideslope
Apr 25, 03:59 PM
Is it just me, or does the back of the iPhone look like the iPod touch (like recent rumours claimed)?
By the way, it would be moronic for Apple to use 4s instead of 5. They used 3Gs simply because you can't have an iPhone 3G and then a successor named iPhone 3.
Just you. :apple:
By the way, it would be moronic for Apple to use 4s instead of 5. They used 3Gs simply because you can't have an iPhone 3G and then a successor named iPhone 3.
Just you. :apple:
dicklacara
Jul 21, 01:25 PM
But Apple admitted that it DOES drop more calls than 3GS.
They spun it as "less than 1 per 100", but assuming all 3,000,000 iPhone 4 users make about 5 calls per day, that's over ONE MILLION dropped calls per week MORE than iPhone 3GS.
It's a problem.
It's been reproduced by CNET, Consumer Reports, NYT, and many others.
The debate here is not whether there's a problem, but why Apple is obfuscating, rather than fixing it, pretending that bridging the gap of their electrically exposed antenna is equivalent to attenuating an antenna by completely covering it with one's meaty hand.
(seems like moving this gap to the bottom edge of the phone where it's far less likely to be touched, would be an easy fix).
Couple of things:
1) What isn't factored into your calculations is that because of its more-sensitive antenna, the iP4 was able to make calls, in marginal signal areas, where the 3GS showed no signal and was not able to attempt or receive a call... dropping any of these "never-before-possible" calls would reflect poorly on the iP4, and be included in the "< 1 call per hundred" more dropped calls by the iP4.
2) <1 per 100 more dropped calls by the iP4 than the 3GS. "< 1" can mean anything from, say, .0000000001 to .9999999999. Without knowing the real delta fraction it is difficult to base calculations on it.
3) The 3GS came into being with a plethora of available cases-- the iP4 with 1 case, that was in so short supply as to be non-available. Apple stated that 80% of the 3GSs left their store with a case. So, many 3Gs had 2 layers of antenna shielding, the 3GS plastic housing and an external case. The bulk of iP4s had neither-- 0 levels of antenna shielding.
All of this has been widely reported (or obvious) to those who care to objectively examine the facts. So it is a bit disingenuous to make your assertions, without qualification.
.
They spun it as "less than 1 per 100", but assuming all 3,000,000 iPhone 4 users make about 5 calls per day, that's over ONE MILLION dropped calls per week MORE than iPhone 3GS.
It's a problem.
It's been reproduced by CNET, Consumer Reports, NYT, and many others.
The debate here is not whether there's a problem, but why Apple is obfuscating, rather than fixing it, pretending that bridging the gap of their electrically exposed antenna is equivalent to attenuating an antenna by completely covering it with one's meaty hand.
(seems like moving this gap to the bottom edge of the phone where it's far less likely to be touched, would be an easy fix).
Couple of things:
1) What isn't factored into your calculations is that because of its more-sensitive antenna, the iP4 was able to make calls, in marginal signal areas, where the 3GS showed no signal and was not able to attempt or receive a call... dropping any of these "never-before-possible" calls would reflect poorly on the iP4, and be included in the "< 1 call per hundred" more dropped calls by the iP4.
2) <1 per 100 more dropped calls by the iP4 than the 3GS. "< 1" can mean anything from, say, .0000000001 to .9999999999. Without knowing the real delta fraction it is difficult to base calculations on it.
3) The 3GS came into being with a plethora of available cases-- the iP4 with 1 case, that was in so short supply as to be non-available. Apple stated that 80% of the 3GSs left their store with a case. So, many 3Gs had 2 layers of antenna shielding, the 3GS plastic housing and an external case. The bulk of iP4s had neither-- 0 levels of antenna shielding.
All of this has been widely reported (or obvious) to those who care to objectively examine the facts. So it is a bit disingenuous to make your assertions, without qualification.
.
iBug2
Apr 30, 06:48 PM
Is there? They're already controlling what can and cannot be sold on the iOS platform (and it is an entire platform now with full-fledged computers in the form of the iPad). They've proven themselves beyond contempt by insisting that in-app subscriptions be the same or lower on the App store than direct, despite the fact that they demand 1/3 of all the selling price. They've added an 'App' store for OSX proper and have the same 30% "grab" for everything on there. They're advertising and bragging about bringing iOS features back to OSX. I'm just doing simple math here. You can make 1+1 = 1 if you say it's a bigger one, but in my world, 2 is still the more likely answer.
And you are the ones using the words "foolish". I think it's quite possibly a business-savvy solution to ensuring profits stay high into the future. What you or I may want in OSX is irrelevant to both Apple and Steve Jobs. Steve has essentially said that consumers don't know what's best for them and that it takes a visionary to move forward. We know Steve's 'vision' is smaller/thinner/more mobile at almost any cost. So I'm not saying it will happen like that, but that it's looking more likely every day. Only time will tell for sure. But I know if it does happen, I'll no longer have an interest in OSX. I don't want Apple deciding for me what I can or cannot buy or watching developers get 1/3 their gross taken from them (same % as a typical injury lawyer BTW. You don't get paid until they get paid FIRST and your bills 2nd and you last; in this case it would be taxes instead of bills). You can think it's good/fair/right. I don't agree and I don't want Apple telling me I have to use Safari because they don't want Firefox or Chrome competing with them.
I don't know about that. There will always be a market for faster/more powerful (i.e. most people may drive a Ford Focus or Chevy Impala or Toyota Corrola and hybrids may capture larger and larger market penetration in the future, but that doesn't mean there isn't a market for the WRX, Mustang, Corvette, etc. even if it shrinks over time) and so even if Apple AND Microsoft bail out of traditional computing, that just means someone else will likely take over. They can't make Linux go away, for example. And if people didn't BUY it, the lines would stop. Newton didn't exactly go over so well the first time around....
Remember what Steve said. PC's as we use today will be like trucks. Yes they will be around but nobody, not you nor me are going to use them.
And no. Are you currently using a 64 core workstation? I bet not. But they are available. So no, we don't need the fastest even today. In 15 years, an iPad will be more powerful than our 12 core Mac Pro's. And nobody will pick anything up. All computer industry will go post pc devices, because it makes much more sense. They are much easier to use, we hate them now because we can use actual PC's, but most of the population can't. Not just old people, most of the young people have tons of issues with regular PC's as well.
And don't worry, we won't be too down about it when it finally happens, since it'll happen very slowly.
Like I said, that's not even the weird part. We won't even have CPU's in our computers, just inputs. :)
And you are the ones using the words "foolish". I think it's quite possibly a business-savvy solution to ensuring profits stay high into the future. What you or I may want in OSX is irrelevant to both Apple and Steve Jobs. Steve has essentially said that consumers don't know what's best for them and that it takes a visionary to move forward. We know Steve's 'vision' is smaller/thinner/more mobile at almost any cost. So I'm not saying it will happen like that, but that it's looking more likely every day. Only time will tell for sure. But I know if it does happen, I'll no longer have an interest in OSX. I don't want Apple deciding for me what I can or cannot buy or watching developers get 1/3 their gross taken from them (same % as a typical injury lawyer BTW. You don't get paid until they get paid FIRST and your bills 2nd and you last; in this case it would be taxes instead of bills). You can think it's good/fair/right. I don't agree and I don't want Apple telling me I have to use Safari because they don't want Firefox or Chrome competing with them.
I don't know about that. There will always be a market for faster/more powerful (i.e. most people may drive a Ford Focus or Chevy Impala or Toyota Corrola and hybrids may capture larger and larger market penetration in the future, but that doesn't mean there isn't a market for the WRX, Mustang, Corvette, etc. even if it shrinks over time) and so even if Apple AND Microsoft bail out of traditional computing, that just means someone else will likely take over. They can't make Linux go away, for example. And if people didn't BUY it, the lines would stop. Newton didn't exactly go over so well the first time around....
Remember what Steve said. PC's as we use today will be like trucks. Yes they will be around but nobody, not you nor me are going to use them.
And no. Are you currently using a 64 core workstation? I bet not. But they are available. So no, we don't need the fastest even today. In 15 years, an iPad will be more powerful than our 12 core Mac Pro's. And nobody will pick anything up. All computer industry will go post pc devices, because it makes much more sense. They are much easier to use, we hate them now because we can use actual PC's, but most of the population can't. Not just old people, most of the young people have tons of issues with regular PC's as well.
And don't worry, we won't be too down about it when it finally happens, since it'll happen very slowly.
Like I said, that's not even the weird part. We won't even have CPU's in our computers, just inputs. :)
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?
Erwin-Br
May 3, 05:47 PM
So maybe, just maybe you fandroids out there, Apple had the foresight to design an ecosystem that just works and do it the right way.
Sorry to shatter your illusion, but my friend doesn't have Personal Hotspot on his iPhone because his Telco removed the feature. So how is this different and better from Android, huh? At least on Android you can still easily circumvent it without hacking or jail braking.
Sorry to shatter your illusion, but my friend doesn't have Personal Hotspot on his iPhone because his Telco removed the feature. So how is this different and better from Android, huh? At least on Android you can still easily circumvent it without hacking or jail braking.
quadrakid
Sep 12, 01:07 AM
it looks slick but really uncomfortable in the hand
Northgrove
Apr 29, 01:41 PM
Yes! Now analyze this build and post an article about it for me, minions! :D
Popeye206
Mar 29, 08:03 AM
1. You intentionally ignored the point that referred to Apple's Terms of Service. For example, applications like VMWare Fusion, Parallels Desktop or even SuperDuper! could never be distributed through the Mac AppStore because they belong in a category that Apple does not ALLOW in their AppStore. As a matter of fact, even their own Xcode violates their TOS. But they wouldn't be Apple if the same rules also applied to themselves...
2. There won't be a Microsoft AppStore for Windows INTEGRATED INTO WINDOWS. EVER. Why? Because they can't for LEGAL reasons. Anti-trust lawsuits, anyone? Microsoft would only get away with that if they implemented a "choose your AppStore" program that would let the people choose which online store they want to use - just like they had to do it for the web browsers. I think that Apple should also be forced to do the same. After all, there is at least one other "AppStore" for the Mac out there that is even OLDER than Apple's own AppStore, and Apple misuses their power to drive those guys out of business. People stopped using Netscape when Internet Explorer came pre-installed on the operating system. Now people will not even try to look for another online store when the AppStore and iTunes are pre-installed on their computers. The same thing. The same rules should apply to Apple as they obviously apply to Microsoft.
Winni.... you're obviously playing lawyer and have no idea what you're talking about. Microsoft could do what Apple is doing. There is nothing illegal or anti trust about distributing software. They just have to play by the same rules as everyone else. If Apple was to give away the distribution, that would be more in line with anti-trust because then they would be using their power to give something that others pay for. As long as Microsoft would keep their rules within the boundaries of the industry practice, they would be fine to do the same.
Things change and companies with the better idea's thrive while others go away. Music stores are dying. Video stores are dying. Book stores are dying and software distribution stores are dying. But not because of just Apple.... because with the digital age many companies are by-passing channel completely and going direct. What Apple does would be no different than Ford or Mercedes distributing 3rd party accessories through their dealerships to their customers.
Also.... your rights on software depends on what's in the license when you buy it. If it's non-transerable, it's non-transferable. That's why you can get away with buying some of this software for $5. But it's not your legal right to resell. That depends on the license you agree to.
Whoa! The jury is still out as to whether the Mac App Store is a success. While a few apps at the top have trumpeted their success, I dare say there is a far greater mass of apps that are doing less business than before the Mac App Store opened.
In my own market segment the Mac App Store has reduced the cash flow for everyone due largely, among other factors, to the increased and sustained visibility of the freebies. It is crazy for Apple to court developers and then throw up a list of freebies alongside my own paid offering. Thanks so much -- for nothing! Where are the free alternatives to Garage Band, Keynote, or Numbers? You can be sure they are not on the same page in the Mac App Store...
As far as I am concerned as a developer, the Mac App Store is a waste of time unless we can all go write $1.99 apps that get downloaded by a million people (good luck!). Anything that requires significant development time is a loss. Plus, anything that costs real money can't be tried first from the Mac App Store. Developers still have to maintain websites, demos, and bandwidth but then pay Apple 30% for the sale in an environment that depresses prices. Success? By what measure and for whom?
I hear your point, but disagree. Putting your software in the App store will not guarantee success or failure. People buy what's worth it to them. They will pay for what meets their needs. Also, they have to know you exist too. Yes, the App Store can give you exposure, but you still have to market and sell your solution for people to find you or want you. Plus, the AppStore is one outlet and your other outlets should never be abandoned.
However... you're point on price is one to be considered. If you want to get impulse buys, you have to be impulsed priced. And as you point out... that is hard to compete in too.... back to my first point.
Please don't take me wrong... I'm not saying you're wrong... just pointing out that the AppStore does not guarantee anything if you don't have good sales and marketing behind it. Also, you have to have software people want.
2. There won't be a Microsoft AppStore for Windows INTEGRATED INTO WINDOWS. EVER. Why? Because they can't for LEGAL reasons. Anti-trust lawsuits, anyone? Microsoft would only get away with that if they implemented a "choose your AppStore" program that would let the people choose which online store they want to use - just like they had to do it for the web browsers. I think that Apple should also be forced to do the same. After all, there is at least one other "AppStore" for the Mac out there that is even OLDER than Apple's own AppStore, and Apple misuses their power to drive those guys out of business. People stopped using Netscape when Internet Explorer came pre-installed on the operating system. Now people will not even try to look for another online store when the AppStore and iTunes are pre-installed on their computers. The same thing. The same rules should apply to Apple as they obviously apply to Microsoft.
Winni.... you're obviously playing lawyer and have no idea what you're talking about. Microsoft could do what Apple is doing. There is nothing illegal or anti trust about distributing software. They just have to play by the same rules as everyone else. If Apple was to give away the distribution, that would be more in line with anti-trust because then they would be using their power to give something that others pay for. As long as Microsoft would keep their rules within the boundaries of the industry practice, they would be fine to do the same.
Things change and companies with the better idea's thrive while others go away. Music stores are dying. Video stores are dying. Book stores are dying and software distribution stores are dying. But not because of just Apple.... because with the digital age many companies are by-passing channel completely and going direct. What Apple does would be no different than Ford or Mercedes distributing 3rd party accessories through their dealerships to their customers.
Also.... your rights on software depends on what's in the license when you buy it. If it's non-transerable, it's non-transferable. That's why you can get away with buying some of this software for $5. But it's not your legal right to resell. That depends on the license you agree to.
Whoa! The jury is still out as to whether the Mac App Store is a success. While a few apps at the top have trumpeted their success, I dare say there is a far greater mass of apps that are doing less business than before the Mac App Store opened.
In my own market segment the Mac App Store has reduced the cash flow for everyone due largely, among other factors, to the increased and sustained visibility of the freebies. It is crazy for Apple to court developers and then throw up a list of freebies alongside my own paid offering. Thanks so much -- for nothing! Where are the free alternatives to Garage Band, Keynote, or Numbers? You can be sure they are not on the same page in the Mac App Store...
As far as I am concerned as a developer, the Mac App Store is a waste of time unless we can all go write $1.99 apps that get downloaded by a million people (good luck!). Anything that requires significant development time is a loss. Plus, anything that costs real money can't be tried first from the Mac App Store. Developers still have to maintain websites, demos, and bandwidth but then pay Apple 30% for the sale in an environment that depresses prices. Success? By what measure and for whom?
I hear your point, but disagree. Putting your software in the App store will not guarantee success or failure. People buy what's worth it to them. They will pay for what meets their needs. Also, they have to know you exist too. Yes, the App Store can give you exposure, but you still have to market and sell your solution for people to find you or want you. Plus, the AppStore is one outlet and your other outlets should never be abandoned.
However... you're point on price is one to be considered. If you want to get impulse buys, you have to be impulsed priced. And as you point out... that is hard to compete in too.... back to my first point.
Please don't take me wrong... I'm not saying you're wrong... just pointing out that the AppStore does not guarantee anything if you don't have good sales and marketing behind it. Also, you have to have software people want.
acslater017
Apr 15, 06:01 PM
Dear Google:
Apple *already* revolutionized the music industry.
Try copying something of theirs that's a little less established.
(and then just leave it in beta like you do with everything else.)
Cheers.
In fairness to Google, no one said that they were out to destroy iTunes or anything like that. They've got a growing mobile business, and it makes sense that they want to make some cohesive media store.
Likewise, Apple is trying to grow its online/cloud services (Google's strength)! Funny, they are kind of moving towards each other in that sense...
Apple *already* revolutionized the music industry.
Try copying something of theirs that's a little less established.
(and then just leave it in beta like you do with everything else.)
Cheers.
In fairness to Google, no one said that they were out to destroy iTunes or anything like that. They've got a growing mobile business, and it makes sense that they want to make some cohesive media store.
Likewise, Apple is trying to grow its online/cloud services (Google's strength)! Funny, they are kind of moving towards each other in that sense...
albusseverus
Jan 10, 05:41 PM
just goes to show, if your name is Think Secret and you have no corporate backing, Apple will hound you out of existence...
if you publish an unchecked story about the iPhone being delayed, causing a run on Apple's stock price...
or stuff up a trade show...
it's all just good fun... ??
it's hard to know the best way to treat this... ban them and give them MORE publicity? or boycott their site...
Kevin, can we have a negative Digg option... I want UnDigg
if you publish an unchecked story about the iPhone being delayed, causing a run on Apple's stock price...
or stuff up a trade show...
it's all just good fun... ??
it's hard to know the best way to treat this... ban them and give them MORE publicity? or boycott their site...
Kevin, can we have a negative Digg option... I want UnDigg
cantthinkofone
Apr 3, 08:35 PM
Can't the police get a warrant for the IP address? I think if they have a warrant above their heads they might "find" a IP address. All the information they get from a xbox or 360 that gets on XBL they HAVE to know the IP.
avalys
Jan 9, 01:33 PM
Well, Apple stock is up 7%, so it must've been good, whatever it was.
Come on guys, post the stream!
Come on guys, post the stream!
Illuminated
Apr 6, 12:48 PM
You'd pair food with a trash can? :confused:
Maybe for you...
http://thedecorologist.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/toilet-coffee-mug-via-harrietcarter.jpg
Um, a brand new trash can. Plus you would have to burn inside of the trashcan first...pretty much build a fire inside it using coals and wood.
Maybe for you...
http://thedecorologist.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/toilet-coffee-mug-via-harrietcarter.jpg
Um, a brand new trash can. Plus you would have to burn inside of the trashcan first...pretty much build a fire inside it using coals and wood.
Eric S.
Mar 30, 10:43 AM
So the next will be:
OS Xi
... little i being key.
Yes, it's already here; it's called iOS.
OS Xi
... little i being key.
Yes, it's already here; it's called iOS.
Poolo
Apr 25, 10:34 PM
Oh sweet. Looks really good, can always do with a bigger screen!!
puuukeey
Jan 9, 01:51 PM
I've been know to be cruel:D
longsilver
Sep 12, 08:19 AM
Wow those analysts really are going out on a limb with those predictions.
Hmm a consumer electronics company will introduce comsumer electronics over time.. crazy crazy.. who would have thunk it
:rolleyes:
But it sounds so much better (and well paid) in corporatespeak:
...and going forward we'll see CE outrolls Q4/06 through Q1/07 with OEM rampings... yaddayaddayadda :)
Hmm a consumer electronics company will introduce comsumer electronics over time.. crazy crazy.. who would have thunk it
:rolleyes:
But it sounds so much better (and well paid) in corporatespeak:
...and going forward we'll see CE outrolls Q4/06 through Q1/07 with OEM rampings... yaddayaddayadda :)
pudrums
Apr 8, 06:09 PM
16 Blocks
http://pic.leech.it/i/7d0f6/a6317ca0125698104.jpg
http://pic.leech.it/i/7d0f6/a6317ca0125698104.jpg
sikuss
Apr 8, 07:17 PM
16 Blocks
http://pic.leech.it/i/7d0f6/a6317ca0125698104.jpg
I love this movie
http://pic.leech.it/i/7d0f6/a6317ca0125698104.jpg
I love this movie
TheSideshow
Apr 21, 09:14 PM
Hopefully it's totally new from the ground up, ditch all the Win32/legacy crap that's hindered MSFT for years.
That would be idiotic by Microsoft.
That would be idiotic by Microsoft.
Patrick J
Apr 29, 04:26 PM
I wish they would keep the slider buttons. I really really liked them :/
Don't you think they were really unintuitive? It works on a touch screen. Not on a OSX device.
Don't you think they were really unintuitive? It works on a touch screen. Not on a OSX device.
Rodimus Prime
Apr 15, 05:33 PM
One thing I can not see in the pictures is a microUSB slot. It makes it seem unlikely that apple is going to try to follow that everyone else agreed apron. It is nice to be able to in a pinch use some one else charger. Oh and please do not use the adapter crap argument apple could include because that complete defeats the point of using the standard.
"Filipino escort girls in dubai,Pakistani escort girls in dubai,turkish call girl in dubai
ReplyDeleteturkish Models In Dubai,turkish girls in dubai,Russian escorts dubai,Cheap Russian Girls Dubai,Russian escort girls in dubai,Turkish escort girls in dubai,Indian escort dubai,Indian escort in dubai,Dubai indian escorts,Pakistani escort dubai,Pakistani escort in dubai,Escort service in dubai,Dubai escort Service,Dubai escorts,Escort in dubai,escort girls in dubai,escort girl in dubai,vip escort in dubai,escort for vip people,vip escort dubai
vip escorts in dubai,indian call girls in dubai,vip escorts,nepali escorts,russian escorts,indian escorts in dudai,abu-dhabi escorts,european escorts,pakistani escorts,www.luckydxb.com