Steve121178
Apr 20, 10:39 AM
Apple goes to all sorts of lengths to protect media files with FairPlay, yet they don't care about stuff like this. Shows where their focus is; protecting their own stuff and not giving a flying f--- about the user. :mad:
Apple has never cared about the user, this is not news. Apple only care about one thing: money
As for being tracked, I couldn't care less. In the UK, there are so many CCTV cameras, you can't do anything without it being recorded. No point getting upset about it...
Apple has never cared about the user, this is not news. Apple only care about one thing: money
As for being tracked, I couldn't care less. In the UK, there are so many CCTV cameras, you can't do anything without it being recorded. No point getting upset about it...
Mattsasa
Apr 30, 06:47 PM
Glad, hoping for a redesign, but probably unlikely, also would be great to see the yellow tint issue resolved..
Yea I don't think I redesign is likely, Apple likes the current one still, and it is pretty nice IMO
Yea I don't think I redesign is likely, Apple likes the current one still, and it is pretty nice IMO
Rodimus Prime
Apr 25, 01:27 AM
I really don't think it is necessary to call me or any member of my family "pathetic." There's nothing wrong with manipulating the system to your advantage, if you do it for a valid purpose (such as teaching a crappy driver a lesson).
-Don
no I am going to say it is pathetic and proves that the system is clearly broken.
Ethically your mom and your family is in the wrong and clearly your mom is not teaching you good ethics.
-Don
no I am going to say it is pathetic and proves that the system is clearly broken.
Ethically your mom and your family is in the wrong and clearly your mom is not teaching you good ethics.
mainstreetmark
Apr 20, 10:00 AM
i'm tired of companies taking our privacy so lightly. makes a consumer feel like a dumb piece of meat. i hope someone files a lawsuit over this. any sneaky tactics like this should be outright banned by the government. maybe once we get some politicians of a younger generation in there who are more aware of these issues they will actually do something to protect the consumer from greedy and arrogant corporations. i hope but i'm not sure i will ever see this dream realized the way government currently lets companies run rampant.
It *is* private now. This information isn't broadcast anywhere but your own personal computer in the form of an encrypted backup file. The information won't go anywhere but with you and your property.
However, if your iphone gets stolen, the GPS log is likely the least private thing you need to worry about. The thief will have access to your entire contact list, browsing history, etc..
It *is* private now. This information isn't broadcast anywhere but your own personal computer in the form of an encrypted backup file. The information won't go anywhere but with you and your property.
However, if your iphone gets stolen, the GPS log is likely the least private thing you need to worry about. The thief will have access to your entire contact list, browsing history, etc..
ChazUK
Mar 29, 12:19 PM
In iOS, you have to flick and flick, especially if you have many apps.
There's always that little thing called "Spotlight". Home button, flick left, start typing.
Hardly an impossibility. ;)
There's always that little thing called "Spotlight". Home button, flick left, start typing.
Hardly an impossibility. ;)
bdkennedy1
Mar 30, 11:59 AM
Microsoft is turning desperate a lot slower than I thought they would.
Mundy
Sep 10, 04:54 PM
Whats wrong with having two dual core processors on one chip? I can understand that the FSB might become a bottleneck but thats not only a issue related to the number of cores/processors is it?
The problem is that a double-dual-core solution (like Intel's Kentsfield and Clovertown) still requires that two cores communicate with the other two cores over the FSB. A single, shared FSB is one of the reasons that Intel's first generation of dual-core CPUs could not compete with AMD's 64-bit X2 line.
Intel has its reasons for the way it's doing its first generation of quad-core CPUs, but performance is not one of them. Right now, the primary concern is silicon yields, and the double-dual-core method allows Intel to throw away a bad core without tossing the entire quad-core silicon wafer. A true quad-core CPU would not allow this�i.e. Intel couldn't "cut out" the bad silicon�and therefore the potential for monetary loss is greater.
The truth is that Kentsfield and Clovertown are trial runs. They are stopgap measures in the same way that Yonah was a stopgap on the way to Merom. Once Intel goes to true quad-core CPUs and a 45 nm process, it might be time to worry about the Mac Pro being obsolete. Until then, anything Intel releases will be incremental.
Just my 2 cents.
The problem is that a double-dual-core solution (like Intel's Kentsfield and Clovertown) still requires that two cores communicate with the other two cores over the FSB. A single, shared FSB is one of the reasons that Intel's first generation of dual-core CPUs could not compete with AMD's 64-bit X2 line.
Intel has its reasons for the way it's doing its first generation of quad-core CPUs, but performance is not one of them. Right now, the primary concern is silicon yields, and the double-dual-core method allows Intel to throw away a bad core without tossing the entire quad-core silicon wafer. A true quad-core CPU would not allow this�i.e. Intel couldn't "cut out" the bad silicon�and therefore the potential for monetary loss is greater.
The truth is that Kentsfield and Clovertown are trial runs. They are stopgap measures in the same way that Yonah was a stopgap on the way to Merom. Once Intel goes to true quad-core CPUs and a 45 nm process, it might be time to worry about the Mac Pro being obsolete. Until then, anything Intel releases will be incremental.
Just my 2 cents.
savar
Sep 14, 09:11 AM
Is there any chance that they'll release the MBPs here?
Haha, they're probably going to release 16:9 touchscreen iPods and be like:
"You really thought all we were doing to the iPod was adding 20GB? YOU GOT PUNK'D!!"
Haha, they're probably going to release 16:9 touchscreen iPods and be like:
"You really thought all we were doing to the iPod was adding 20GB? YOU GOT PUNK'D!!"
vitaboy
Aug 24, 03:49 AM
There seems to be a lot of misunderstanding about just exactly what the settlement means. But I would like to remind people not to take things at face value - Apple is smarter than that.
I suspect that it was Apple who proposed the settlement to Creative. More than that, I suspect it was Apple who dictated the actual terms. Creative had no choice but to accept, which was just as well because at first appearance, they look like the winner.
However, I believe Apple is playing corporate jujitsu here. The settlement is a strategic move that greatly benefits Apple in the long term even as Apple is willing to suffer an apparent loss of face.
Why?
Because the settlement gives Creative much needed ammunition (in both cash and legal standing) to go after every one of the iPod's competitors. You can be sure Creative is getting ready to send out letters to Sandisk, which has raced past them in the music player space this year. You can be sure Creative will be sending letters to iRiver.
And most certainly, you can be certain that Creative will be sending letters to Microsoft with regards to Zune.
Really, Apple was not playing from a weak position. There's no other way to say it, but that's a simplistic and naive interpretation. Patent battles are very, very expensive, lasting years and thousands of man-months of time. Creative not only had to fight Apple over its original patents, but simultaneously defends itself against Apple's countersuit (which were filed in a different state, just to make life more difficult for Creative's legal team).
Without any effort at all, Apple could drag the case through the courts for 5+ years and force Creative to cough up tens of millions of dollars in legal expenses. Creative simply does not have that kind of money, after blowing through $100 million in cash to write of unsold inventory last year. The company's cash position is very weak and the company was undoubtedly sweating blood trying to determine if it would have enough cash to see things through the end - an end which was far from guaranteed. Even if Creative won its original patent suit, they would have lost the countersuit for the same reasons.
The prospect of blowing $50 million over 5 years to pay lawyers for a net gain of nothing was weighing heavily on their minds, I'm sure.
I think what really motivated the settlement is the sudden appearance of Zune. That basically gave Apple the ace it needed to give it a four-of-a-kind. Why? Because while Creative might have been able to tough it out before Zune, the existence of Zune would basically kill the company before the case could wind through the court system.
I mean, we saw Creative's share of the music player market dive from 8% to just 4% in about a year. Sandisk, which was a virtually unknown brand in the music player space, went from nothing to 8% in a short time.
Even if Zune is far from being an "iPod killer", with Microsoft's marketing machine backing it up, I think any reasonable person could see that it is quite likely that Creative's marketshare would be dropping to nothing a year from now.
So Apple basically gave Creative an offer it couldn't refuse.
Settle with us now and forget this silly patent threat of yours. We'll give you $100 million to license your patents, if only because you got them first. And now that we're all family, why don't you go after some of our competitors. You'll probably be able to get just as much, if not more, which is a lot better than what you were getting trying to fight us with that Zen thing.
And if you want to let your pride get in the way, I don't think we need to remind you that Zune is just a few months away from demolishing what little is left of your company. A year from now, it will be iPod, Sandisk, Zune....everyone will have forgotten about Creative because frankly, you don't have any loyal customers like we do.
In fact, we'll be nice and help you gain some loyal customers, too. By making great iPod accessories, you'll be truly a welcome part of the family and more importantly, you'll have products that people actually buy. How about that!
Just remember, the $100 million is a kind of loan, of sorts. When you talk to that Microsoft fella, remember to share some of the payments you extract with us. We're all family, right?
Given that the writing was on the wall, I figure Creative realized that if you can't beat 'em, it was far, far better to join Apple.
I suspect that it was Apple who proposed the settlement to Creative. More than that, I suspect it was Apple who dictated the actual terms. Creative had no choice but to accept, which was just as well because at first appearance, they look like the winner.
However, I believe Apple is playing corporate jujitsu here. The settlement is a strategic move that greatly benefits Apple in the long term even as Apple is willing to suffer an apparent loss of face.
Why?
Because the settlement gives Creative much needed ammunition (in both cash and legal standing) to go after every one of the iPod's competitors. You can be sure Creative is getting ready to send out letters to Sandisk, which has raced past them in the music player space this year. You can be sure Creative will be sending letters to iRiver.
And most certainly, you can be certain that Creative will be sending letters to Microsoft with regards to Zune.
Really, Apple was not playing from a weak position. There's no other way to say it, but that's a simplistic and naive interpretation. Patent battles are very, very expensive, lasting years and thousands of man-months of time. Creative not only had to fight Apple over its original patents, but simultaneously defends itself against Apple's countersuit (which were filed in a different state, just to make life more difficult for Creative's legal team).
Without any effort at all, Apple could drag the case through the courts for 5+ years and force Creative to cough up tens of millions of dollars in legal expenses. Creative simply does not have that kind of money, after blowing through $100 million in cash to write of unsold inventory last year. The company's cash position is very weak and the company was undoubtedly sweating blood trying to determine if it would have enough cash to see things through the end - an end which was far from guaranteed. Even if Creative won its original patent suit, they would have lost the countersuit for the same reasons.
The prospect of blowing $50 million over 5 years to pay lawyers for a net gain of nothing was weighing heavily on their minds, I'm sure.
I think what really motivated the settlement is the sudden appearance of Zune. That basically gave Apple the ace it needed to give it a four-of-a-kind. Why? Because while Creative might have been able to tough it out before Zune, the existence of Zune would basically kill the company before the case could wind through the court system.
I mean, we saw Creative's share of the music player market dive from 8% to just 4% in about a year. Sandisk, which was a virtually unknown brand in the music player space, went from nothing to 8% in a short time.
Even if Zune is far from being an "iPod killer", with Microsoft's marketing machine backing it up, I think any reasonable person could see that it is quite likely that Creative's marketshare would be dropping to nothing a year from now.
So Apple basically gave Creative an offer it couldn't refuse.
Settle with us now and forget this silly patent threat of yours. We'll give you $100 million to license your patents, if only because you got them first. And now that we're all family, why don't you go after some of our competitors. You'll probably be able to get just as much, if not more, which is a lot better than what you were getting trying to fight us with that Zen thing.
And if you want to let your pride get in the way, I don't think we need to remind you that Zune is just a few months away from demolishing what little is left of your company. A year from now, it will be iPod, Sandisk, Zune....everyone will have forgotten about Creative because frankly, you don't have any loyal customers like we do.
In fact, we'll be nice and help you gain some loyal customers, too. By making great iPod accessories, you'll be truly a welcome part of the family and more importantly, you'll have products that people actually buy. How about that!
Just remember, the $100 million is a kind of loan, of sorts. When you talk to that Microsoft fella, remember to share some of the payments you extract with us. We're all family, right?
Given that the writing was on the wall, I figure Creative realized that if you can't beat 'em, it was far, far better to join Apple.
Micjose
Apr 25, 01:44 PM
YESSS! Exactly what i wanted to hear. I'm waiting till the new redesign comes out to buy my First MacBook Pro.. :D
Meandmunch
Apr 25, 07:08 PM
Other than shaving a few millimeters of the case, a few grams of weight what amount of change isn't incremental at this point?
n-abounds
Sep 8, 02:44 PM
Right. You won't get the full 64 bit native benfits of Leopard without either a G5 or a Core 2 Duo processor.
It'll still run on a G4 just fine.
Yea thanks, I really have no idea what 64-bit and 32-bit is about...all I know is that Core Duo didn't support it...
Now I'm buying a new mac soon- thinking of going with 17inch iMac. Will a 128MB video card be enough for Vista to run perfectly? I want as many features as possible...
It'll still run on a G4 just fine.
Yea thanks, I really have no idea what 64-bit and 32-bit is about...all I know is that Core Duo didn't support it...
Now I'm buying a new mac soon- thinking of going with 17inch iMac. Will a 128MB video card be enough for Vista to run perfectly? I want as many features as possible...
regandarcy
May 3, 10:32 AM
The 21.5" has thunderbolt too....does that mean you can use it as an external display as well? :-)
liketom
Oct 12, 12:19 PM
if true thats good , but should be more like 10%
Porchland
Aug 31, 01:10 PM
Apple Insider was saying the movie price would be $14.99 -I would not pay that much to watch a movie on a small screen... no way, unless I had a hour long commute to work on a train... can't believe there are that many people like that out there!
This may be on the rosy side, but I assume that $14.99 for new titles and $9.99 for catalog titles means higher resolution. Otherwise, a movie is 7x the cost of a TV episode with no added value, which just doesn't sound like something Apple would do.
The higher resolution would allow you to (somehow) play the episode directly to your TV and burn a copy on DVD. The biggest problem is size. It would take as long to download a 2-hour movie in HD (or even SD) as it would to watch it.
I hope Apple gets this movie thing right.
This may be on the rosy side, but I assume that $14.99 for new titles and $9.99 for catalog titles means higher resolution. Otherwise, a movie is 7x the cost of a TV episode with no added value, which just doesn't sound like something Apple would do.
The higher resolution would allow you to (somehow) play the episode directly to your TV and burn a copy on DVD. The biggest problem is size. It would take as long to download a 2-hour movie in HD (or even SD) as it would to watch it.
I hope Apple gets this movie thing right.
ten-oak-druid
May 4, 09:57 AM
So I read that if a monitor, such as an imac in target display mode, is part of a thunderbolt chain of devices, it must be the last in the chain and is not hot-swappable. Correct me if I'm wring but that is what I remember reading about it here on MR I believe.
This reminds me of the days of scsi. So if I want to use a thunderbolt monitor, I need to turn the computer off and back on at the start and end of the session in order to connect and later disconnect the monitor.
Are devices connected to a hub in the chain ending with the monitor still hor swappable?
I'm looking forward to thunderbolt drives. The monitor thing doesn't look too appealing for portable macs at least. For a mac mini or tower it isn't as much of a problem.
This reminds me of the days of scsi. So if I want to use a thunderbolt monitor, I need to turn the computer off and back on at the start and end of the session in order to connect and later disconnect the monitor.
Are devices connected to a hub in the chain ending with the monitor still hor swappable?
I'm looking forward to thunderbolt drives. The monitor thing doesn't look too appealing for portable macs at least. For a mac mini or tower it isn't as much of a problem.
Yamcha
Mar 30, 11:53 AM
I'll say it again "App Store" is a generic term, I think everyone should be able to use it.. I hope Apple doesn't win this one.. If someone used "Mac App Store", completely understandable..
Warbrain
Apr 20, 10:04 AM
With respect to all the "view with alarm" postings that will follow, this really doesn't mean anything. I leave my home at the same time every morning. The transponder in my car records my passage and debits my account with the state highway department. Traffic cameras record my license plate at several points during my journey. Once out of the car, my smiling phiz can be seen on any number of CCTVs en route to my office, whose door I open with a card that automatically records my entry. The IP address of this posting will reveal that I am sitting in my living room as I write. Even without the GPS turned on, my phone regularly initiates a conversation with the local cell tower. I can be found with almost pinpoint accuracy.
So I'm not exactly going to panic to learn that my computer and phone keep a record of my latitude and longitude that they don't share with anyone else.
The government already knows where I live, where I work, where I bank, and all kinds of other interesting information. It's how they collect their taxes and send me my mail.
If there were the slightest indication that liberals, atheists, and other enemies of the state were being tracked by their GPSes and rounded up, I'd be the first to the barricades. But there isn't. Our privacy is not based on "nobody knows", it's based on "nobody cares."
You're dead on. Use a GPS device in your car? Can be tracked. Onstar? Tracked. Red light cameras, CCTV at buildings, etc? Yep, tracked.
So I'm not exactly going to panic to learn that my computer and phone keep a record of my latitude and longitude that they don't share with anyone else.
The government already knows where I live, where I work, where I bank, and all kinds of other interesting information. It's how they collect their taxes and send me my mail.
If there were the slightest indication that liberals, atheists, and other enemies of the state were being tracked by their GPSes and rounded up, I'd be the first to the barricades. But there isn't. Our privacy is not based on "nobody knows", it's based on "nobody cares."
You're dead on. Use a GPS device in your car? Can be tracked. Onstar? Tracked. Red light cameras, CCTV at buildings, etc? Yep, tracked.
Eidorian
Aug 28, 01:06 PM
O.K....
Alright...
Gotcha, Merom. Thanks guys. :)I wonder if some people read the guide I made at all. :confused:
Alright...
Gotcha, Merom. Thanks guys. :)I wonder if some people read the guide I made at all. :confused:
GFLPraxis
Aug 28, 12:30 PM
Please give us an Intel iMac tomorrow...:D
School starts on the 20th, I want that iMac!
School starts on the 20th, I want that iMac!
inkswamp
Mar 29, 03:11 PM
Here were their illuminating predictions in Jan 2010. :rolleyes:
http://www.idc.com/getdoc.jsp?containerId=prUS22176610
Key findings from a new IDC market outlook include the following:
http://www.idc.com/getdoc.jsp?containerId=prUS22176610
Key findings from a new IDC market outlook include the following:
iPost
Sep 29, 07:49 AM
I am really looking forward to this. I have Cingular and they are actually one of the better services where I live. And, when you are talking about quality of service from carriers, it really depends on where you live.
I currently have a Blackberry. Maybe it's just me, but I find the user interface of the Blackberry very clunky. It always feel like a struggle whenever I try to do anything with it. As this is an area where Apple usually shines, I'm looking forward to a phone that will feel effortless when using its functionality. If Apple gets this right, I'll be first in line to buy the new iPhone.
I currently have a Blackberry. Maybe it's just me, but I find the user interface of the Blackberry very clunky. It always feel like a struggle whenever I try to do anything with it. As this is an area where Apple usually shines, I'm looking forward to a phone that will feel effortless when using its functionality. If Apple gets this right, I'll be first in line to buy the new iPhone.
larryw
Apr 4, 12:30 PM
Interesting how a security guard is allowed to have a gun. Interesting to see what happens to him.
"Allowed to have a gun" :rolleyes:. Read the Second Amendment.
"Allowed to have a gun" :rolleyes:. Read the Second Amendment.
Bomino
Apr 25, 02:45 AM
Because I actually care about my grandparents. They have done something genuine for me, they have cared for me, they have loved me, etc.
this love you have for your grand parents is called conditional love. AKA the love of a spoiled brat. AKA fake love.
EDIT: you know, if your parents thought of you this way, there would be absolutely no incentive to even want to feed you.
this love you have for your grand parents is called conditional love. AKA the love of a spoiled brat. AKA fake love.
EDIT: you know, if your parents thought of you this way, there would be absolutely no incentive to even want to feed you.