Dr.Gargoyle
Sep 14, 08:17 AM
Cross the 8GB black iPod nano with a decent phone, add bluetooth earphones, and maybe even put in GPS, and we have a winner.
Exactly! Just how hard can that be??? All the technology has been available for years. I just dont get what is holding back Apple.
Exactly! Just how hard can that be??? All the technology has been available for years. I just dont get what is holding back Apple.
seabass069
Aug 24, 04:12 AM
I think this was all part of Apple's plan to start using Creative Labs' Audigy Technology in their computers. Apple has never really had a strong audio core. Now, with all the litigation overwith, I think the teams are going to come together. It might even be possible that Apple buys out Creative.
stol
Apr 11, 07:26 AM
This is great news, I've been waiting for something like that for ages.
For all those people that fail to see how it could be useful, consider the following scenarios:
I got my Mac connected to some great speakers.
Now, a friend comes by for a visit, brings along his laptop and we want to hear some music from his iTunes --> messy cables, my friend standing with his laptop by the amplifier because that cable is short (�)
Another friend comes over. We want to listen to music from his/her iPod/iPhone/iPad --> messy cables.
My beloved speakers are self-amplified and connected directly to my mac or say, an external sound card --> even more complicated!
Same friends, different room - let's say a living room with a HTPC --> More cables.
All this could be accomplished with a few airport express units across the house which is somehow a luxury option money-wise and somehow redundant since I already have a wireless router and at least one computer up and running. Also, it would probably create more of a mess with the aforementioned setup (I would need a multiple input amplifier for my living room or an extra mixer for self-amplified speakers). Don't get me wrong, I think AX is a great device and I'll probably get one someday, but it sounds absurd that one device cannot stream audio to a computer.
And for those suggesting third-party software, this sounds great if I were the only using them. I cannot imagine telling my friends "hey, buy this $40 software so we can stream music to each other's computer". I'm not sure I could even convince them to install free software to mess with their audio setup. iOS users are ruled out of course.
For those suggesting iTunes home sharing: this is for personal use. I don't want to share my id/pass with anyone, and no one wants to share it with me.
For all those people that fail to see how it could be useful, consider the following scenarios:
I got my Mac connected to some great speakers.
Now, a friend comes by for a visit, brings along his laptop and we want to hear some music from his iTunes --> messy cables, my friend standing with his laptop by the amplifier because that cable is short (�)
Another friend comes over. We want to listen to music from his/her iPod/iPhone/iPad --> messy cables.
My beloved speakers are self-amplified and connected directly to my mac or say, an external sound card --> even more complicated!
Same friends, different room - let's say a living room with a HTPC --> More cables.
All this could be accomplished with a few airport express units across the house which is somehow a luxury option money-wise and somehow redundant since I already have a wireless router and at least one computer up and running. Also, it would probably create more of a mess with the aforementioned setup (I would need a multiple input amplifier for my living room or an extra mixer for self-amplified speakers). Don't get me wrong, I think AX is a great device and I'll probably get one someday, but it sounds absurd that one device cannot stream audio to a computer.
And for those suggesting third-party software, this sounds great if I were the only using them. I cannot imagine telling my friends "hey, buy this $40 software so we can stream music to each other's computer". I'm not sure I could even convince them to install free software to mess with their audio setup. iOS users are ruled out of course.
For those suggesting iTunes home sharing: this is for personal use. I don't want to share my id/pass with anyone, and no one wants to share it with me.
aegisdesign
Sep 10, 04:55 PM
I remember back in the 2nd half of the 90's, HP came out with the dual Pentium II processor configuration, which only ran on NT. At the time I was administering a new Sparc network and we had a Sun 690MP with 4 ultra-Sparc processors. I thought is was cool that MS PC's had moved to multiple processors.
However, I was disappointed to learn that the 2nd processor could be only be used for little more than a coprocessor. So, I did some reading about the relationship of the Bus design, processor architecture and the OS. It made me appreciate Sparc a lot more.
That's bollocks.
Both processors on Windows NT going back as far as NT3.1 at least will run at full speed, share tasks between them if threaded or just run one task on each.
There was even a hack to have the Explorer (the equivalent of Finder) run multithreaded that sped things up on multi-cpu machines. I've almost always tried to have multi-CPU desktop machines even if that meant a little slower for each CPU. Back in 97-98 my favourite machine was a dual Celeron 366 overclocked to 550Mhz each. Each CPU was about $80. It creamed boxes costing much more but was also really smooth to use since there was also a spare CPU quite often to keep things ticking along whilst CPU1 was tied up.
However, I was disappointed to learn that the 2nd processor could be only be used for little more than a coprocessor. So, I did some reading about the relationship of the Bus design, processor architecture and the OS. It made me appreciate Sparc a lot more.
That's bollocks.
Both processors on Windows NT going back as far as NT3.1 at least will run at full speed, share tasks between them if threaded or just run one task on each.
There was even a hack to have the Explorer (the equivalent of Finder) run multithreaded that sped things up on multi-cpu machines. I've almost always tried to have multi-CPU desktop machines even if that meant a little slower for each CPU. Back in 97-98 my favourite machine was a dual Celeron 366 overclocked to 550Mhz each. Each CPU was about $80. It creamed boxes costing much more but was also really smooth to use since there was also a spare CPU quite often to keep things ticking along whilst CPU1 was tied up.
CapturedDarknes
Nov 13, 10:31 PM
Most of the complaints, including this one, are about when Apple rejects an app for something that is NOT in the developer's guide.
Actually, "this complaint" is about something that is in the developer's guide. The use of Apple icons. There have been lots of apps that have been rejected over it because of the use of icons to similar to other iPhone system icons, or Apple OS icons.
Actually, "this complaint" is about something that is in the developer's guide. The use of Apple icons. There have been lots of apps that have been rejected over it because of the use of icons to similar to other iPhone system icons, or Apple OS icons.
jrv3034
Oct 12, 01:08 PM
Unfortunately, your solution just doesn't work very well for actually solving the problem. A program just to educate Africans about how AIDS is spread would be an enormous cost alone. But I'm sure you're just looking to get flamed. Well, it won't be long now, just wait for it.
That post isn't even worth the time to flame...
That post isn't even worth the time to flame...
benthewraith
Oct 27, 08:25 AM
It's about time Apple got rid of some of the rubbish materials in their machines, it's not that the campaigners are trying to brusie Apple but encourage them to be better than their competitors. I mean, Apple already has many advantages over Windows, so surely 'Green' can be one of them.
....it's a computer, what are you going to make it out of? oak leaves and wood?
Seriously. I mean I support the environment, but I know reactionary sensationalism when I see it. As someone said, Greenpeace has lost most of it's respect, even with the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency).
....it's a computer, what are you going to make it out of? oak leaves and wood?
Seriously. I mean I support the environment, but I know reactionary sensationalism when I see it. As someone said, Greenpeace has lost most of it's respect, even with the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency).
Micjose
Mar 22, 01:16 PM
Finally some Mac rumors.. :D
milo
Sep 12, 02:32 PM
Yeah, I wanted to see the phone that was rumored (phone, iPod, remote control, etc.).
A phone was NEVER rumored for today from any reliable source. It was just delusional apple fanboys hoping for it.
I hate when a smarta$$ lays in with this post. We'll whine if we want to. YEAH!
That was exactly his point. Thanks for proving it.
A phone was NEVER rumored for today from any reliable source. It was just delusional apple fanboys hoping for it.
I hate when a smarta$$ lays in with this post. We'll whine if we want to. YEAH!
That was exactly his point. Thanks for proving it.
heehee
Apr 25, 09:06 AM
I'm just wondering if anyone can help me reassure my mother that she'll get out of a parking ticket that we got tonight.
We were going out to dinner, and we parked in a handicap spot in downtown ann arbor (we were parallell parking). The sign wasn't clearly visible, so we didn't put up my grandmother's handicap sign in the windshield (she was with us). When we came back from dinner, my Mom found a nice $100 parking ticket on the windshield (her first in 24 years) because there was no handicap sign. So here's my question, she should get out of it if she goes down to the police station with my grandma and my grandma's handicap sign, right? She convinced that that won't work, but I think it will. Any opinions?
Thanks,
Don
Good luck with reporting my plates. I've done that to drunk drivers before, the 911 operator has told me "We're sorry sir, we cannot divert officers based on heresy." Also, see above: My uncle is the traffic court judge in the jurisdiction where I did this, good luck getting a ticket to stand.
EDIT: @mrsirs2009 - No I actually just felt like going fast.
-Don
Listen you're not going to beat me with legal antics. My mother is a senior partner at the largest law firm in Michigan. I've grown up in legal libraries and in courtrooms watching her. You're lie detector statement is total BS. Lie detectors are not admissible in a court of law; also a court can not compel someone to take a polygraph. My previous history would be easily disputed. There were no witnesses present (besides my mother) when I was highbeaming her and laying on my horn. There were however cars present when she brakechecked me. There was one car present when I brakechecked her, but not when I cut her off. The simple fact is that I plan these things out in order to reduce my legal exposure, and increase the other person's legal exposure, in case there were to be an accident/law suit.
Go ahead and call me twisted for giving people what they deserve. It amazes me how such little things tick people off.
-Don
I thought your mom is a senior partner at the largest law firm in Michigan and your uncle is the traffic court judge ? :D
We were going out to dinner, and we parked in a handicap spot in downtown ann arbor (we were parallell parking). The sign wasn't clearly visible, so we didn't put up my grandmother's handicap sign in the windshield (she was with us). When we came back from dinner, my Mom found a nice $100 parking ticket on the windshield (her first in 24 years) because there was no handicap sign. So here's my question, she should get out of it if she goes down to the police station with my grandma and my grandma's handicap sign, right? She convinced that that won't work, but I think it will. Any opinions?
Thanks,
Don
Good luck with reporting my plates. I've done that to drunk drivers before, the 911 operator has told me "We're sorry sir, we cannot divert officers based on heresy." Also, see above: My uncle is the traffic court judge in the jurisdiction where I did this, good luck getting a ticket to stand.
EDIT: @mrsirs2009 - No I actually just felt like going fast.
-Don
Listen you're not going to beat me with legal antics. My mother is a senior partner at the largest law firm in Michigan. I've grown up in legal libraries and in courtrooms watching her. You're lie detector statement is total BS. Lie detectors are not admissible in a court of law; also a court can not compel someone to take a polygraph. My previous history would be easily disputed. There were no witnesses present (besides my mother) when I was highbeaming her and laying on my horn. There were however cars present when she brakechecked me. There was one car present when I brakechecked her, but not when I cut her off. The simple fact is that I plan these things out in order to reduce my legal exposure, and increase the other person's legal exposure, in case there were to be an accident/law suit.
Go ahead and call me twisted for giving people what they deserve. It amazes me how such little things tick people off.
-Don
I thought your mom is a senior partner at the largest law firm in Michigan and your uncle is the traffic court judge ? :D
timmillwood
Oct 12, 06:06 PM
so its real but nothing on apple site yet.
i guess they will put it on tomorrow and the MBP too!
i guess they will put it on tomorrow and the MBP too!
DZMacNutZ
Mar 18, 10:44 AM
The biggest reason that we have been Virus and attack free in general is because we have been such an exclusive club for so long. We have never been mainstream. We were always elitist and as such not a very lucrative target for hackers and virus creators.
Now that the Apple Club is becoming more and more mainstream and more of a middle class status symbol (and less of an upper class one), and therefore with a wider and larger user base, we will be more of a target for hackers.
I mean really when 92% of the world runs on Windows, and mere 5% runs on OSX, who would you target? But as that percentage begins to increase, and the typical Mac user has more money that the typical Windows user, the value associated with target us is becoming more and more lucrative.
Anyway, just my 2.
Now that the Apple Club is becoming more and more mainstream and more of a middle class status symbol (and less of an upper class one), and therefore with a wider and larger user base, we will be more of a target for hackers.
I mean really when 92% of the world runs on Windows, and mere 5% runs on OSX, who would you target? But as that percentage begins to increase, and the typical Mac user has more money that the typical Windows user, the value associated with target us is becoming more and more lucrative.
Anyway, just my 2.
OllyW
Mar 29, 11:30 AM
Don't believe it!
Some people said the same thing back in 2009 when analysts said that Android would overtake the iPhone by 2012 (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=662706). :D
Some people said the same thing back in 2009 when analysts said that Android would overtake the iPhone by 2012 (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=662706). :D
MBPro825
Apr 10, 01:20 PM
Obviously McAfee has a vested interest is spewing "fear FUD" such as this. :rolleyes:
Interesting isn't it how McAfee could benefit from these "New security threats"
Interesting isn't it how McAfee could benefit from these "New security threats"
irmongoose
Sep 13, 09:06 PM
A '?' now?
irmongoose
irmongoose
z4n3
Apr 20, 01:06 PM
Is your backup encrypted???
yep! and takes the Pwnage Tool vitamin :D
yep! and takes the Pwnage Tool vitamin :D
r1ch4rd
Apr 25, 06:25 AM
We don`t allow children to drive in the UK.
Think there`s a reason for that...
My brother is 17 and learning to drive. It scares me what he will be like on the road! Good job he lives a long way away :D
Think there`s a reason for that...
My brother is 17 and learning to drive. It scares me what he will be like on the road! Good job he lives a long way away :D
cmaier
Nov 13, 11:51 PM
Which law firm please. We'd all like to know for future reference, who to not trust our cases with. While most law has to do with the letter of the law, jury trials often are won or lost based on what the jury believes to be the intent or spirit of the law.
The british common law legal system was never intended to be like this. The lawyers have destroyed and twisted it beyond all recognition. It was originally supposed to be based on judeo-christian morals and ethics. There is not supposed to be a grey area. You are either deliberately infringing on the rights of others or you are not. The original intent was to have a court case as the last resort where parties would first try to solve the problem by talking to each other, then go to arbitration and then court as a last resort.
Wow. That's quite a diatribe. Historically inaccurate, too. English common law descends from the Roman system of laws that predates christianity (and which was not based on judaism) and from Saxon law, which also has nothing to do with judeo-christian ethics.
And juries are given instructions to follow the letter of the law as explained to them by the judge. Further, in the U.S. system, only matters at law, not equity, are subject to jury trial, and, in many cases, only if the defendant demands a jury trial.
You say:
"You are either deliberately infringing on the rights of others or you are not."
Ok. So when your third grader copies a few quotes from a book for his book report, he is infringing the copyright statute. But, of course, you complain that it's not the letter of the law that matters - it's the spirit. That's why judges came up with the fair use defense (later codified into the statute).
But what if the third grader copies 10 quotes? Still okay? A chapter? How about now? Where's the dividing line? What if instead of a third grader, it's another author who copies a few of the best quotes and competes with the first author? How about then? Gets more complicated, huh?
And that's why the fair use defense has evolved into a complicated legal test involving multiple factors. Among the factors:
the purpose and character of your use
the nature of the copyrighted work
the amount and substantiality of the portion taken, and
the effect of the use upon the potential market.
Let's look at these.
1) the purpose and character of your use
This is often called the transformative test. Am I creating something new and different and worthwhile to society, involving my own creativity? Many people say that the use in this case was pretty creative and useful, but let's assume no. So this factor weighs against fair use.
2) the nature of the copyrighted work
Published works, such as these icons, are entitled to less protection than unpublished. Also, factual or representative works, such as icons, are entitled to less protection than creative works like novels. So this factor weighs for fair use.
3) the amount and substantiality of the portion taken, and
A handful of icons out of an entire operating system? Seems small to me. Weighs for fair use.
4) the effect of the use upon the potential market.
By using these icons, is the "infringer" somehow preventing Apple from selling this sort of software, or preventing Apple from selling these icons? No. Again, weighs for fair use.
You simultaneously argue that things are black and white (you either infringe or you don't) and then you argue that the spirit of the law matters, not the letter. You argue for a bright line test, then for shades of gray.
Well, the answer is a little of both, but men and women far smarter than you have come up with the best tests they can to figure out how to deal with these fuzzy situations.
You can go to church and pray instead of going to court, if you'd like, but for those of us that believe in the legal system, we take solace in the fact that things really aren't black and white, and yet there is a framework in place that let's us try and figure these things out.
The british common law legal system was never intended to be like this. The lawyers have destroyed and twisted it beyond all recognition. It was originally supposed to be based on judeo-christian morals and ethics. There is not supposed to be a grey area. You are either deliberately infringing on the rights of others or you are not. The original intent was to have a court case as the last resort where parties would first try to solve the problem by talking to each other, then go to arbitration and then court as a last resort.
Wow. That's quite a diatribe. Historically inaccurate, too. English common law descends from the Roman system of laws that predates christianity (and which was not based on judaism) and from Saxon law, which also has nothing to do with judeo-christian ethics.
And juries are given instructions to follow the letter of the law as explained to them by the judge. Further, in the U.S. system, only matters at law, not equity, are subject to jury trial, and, in many cases, only if the defendant demands a jury trial.
You say:
"You are either deliberately infringing on the rights of others or you are not."
Ok. So when your third grader copies a few quotes from a book for his book report, he is infringing the copyright statute. But, of course, you complain that it's not the letter of the law that matters - it's the spirit. That's why judges came up with the fair use defense (later codified into the statute).
But what if the third grader copies 10 quotes? Still okay? A chapter? How about now? Where's the dividing line? What if instead of a third grader, it's another author who copies a few of the best quotes and competes with the first author? How about then? Gets more complicated, huh?
And that's why the fair use defense has evolved into a complicated legal test involving multiple factors. Among the factors:
the purpose and character of your use
the nature of the copyrighted work
the amount and substantiality of the portion taken, and
the effect of the use upon the potential market.
Let's look at these.
1) the purpose and character of your use
This is often called the transformative test. Am I creating something new and different and worthwhile to society, involving my own creativity? Many people say that the use in this case was pretty creative and useful, but let's assume no. So this factor weighs against fair use.
2) the nature of the copyrighted work
Published works, such as these icons, are entitled to less protection than unpublished. Also, factual or representative works, such as icons, are entitled to less protection than creative works like novels. So this factor weighs for fair use.
3) the amount and substantiality of the portion taken, and
A handful of icons out of an entire operating system? Seems small to me. Weighs for fair use.
4) the effect of the use upon the potential market.
By using these icons, is the "infringer" somehow preventing Apple from selling this sort of software, or preventing Apple from selling these icons? No. Again, weighs for fair use.
You simultaneously argue that things are black and white (you either infringe or you don't) and then you argue that the spirit of the law matters, not the letter. You argue for a bright line test, then for shades of gray.
Well, the answer is a little of both, but men and women far smarter than you have come up with the best tests they can to figure out how to deal with these fuzzy situations.
You can go to church and pray instead of going to court, if you'd like, but for those of us that believe in the legal system, we take solace in the fact that things really aren't black and white, and yet there is a framework in place that let's us try and figure these things out.
PlaceofDis
Nov 13, 04:07 PM
Because they are NO LONGER USING THE API! They give the rights to use the API to call and display the image. It doesn't give them the right to take that image and use it for something else outside of the context it was meant to be used.
they are using the OS X API in the context it was meant to be used in. as far as i can tell these images aren't loaded into the iPhone application itself and are rather transmitted over-the-air as the application is being used, thus they are being called by the OS while the application is being run and are merely being displayed through the iPhone application, its like saying you can't see any apple trademark icons through a VPN client.
they are using the OS X API in the context it was meant to be used in. as far as i can tell these images aren't loaded into the iPhone application itself and are rather transmitted over-the-air as the application is being used, thus they are being called by the OS while the application is being run and are merely being displayed through the iPhone application, its like saying you can't see any apple trademark icons through a VPN client.
hobo.hopkins
Apr 20, 10:48 AM
so the program can not find the file. Does that mean my iPhone isnt tracking me?
I was just about to post the same thing; the application says that it couldn't find the consolidated.db file. I even tried syncing my iPhone once more and it still didn't help. An interesting note though - I own a Verizon iPhone. I wonder if that has anything to do with it.
I was just about to post the same thing; the application says that it couldn't find the consolidated.db file. I even tried syncing my iPhone once more and it still didn't help. An interesting note though - I own a Verizon iPhone. I wonder if that has anything to do with it.
Forensic111
Apr 4, 12:44 PM
The author wrote this was a hold-up, but he did not mention "Who" was held up. All he said was a security guard caught the suspects smashing the windows of the store. This is not a hold-up, it's a burglary. No store employee was involved. Also the author did not say say the suspect/s fired at the security guard. If they did, then the security had the right to defend himself, if it was just a burglary and the suspect/s did not fire on the guard, then he had no right to use deadly force. The author also stated it was a "Head-Shot", apparently the author has never had a gun pointed at him, nor been in a fire fight. The fact that the suspect was shot in the head is a tough shot to make at a moving target. The author just wrote it that way to attract attention to his story. He should find out the facts and use the proper terms and don't elaborate. If the guard was a retired or off duty police office, he would have aimed for the X-10 ring...not the head.
cube
Mar 30, 01:02 PM
Scotch tape is a brand name of sticky tape.
Yes, like "Xerox", "Band-Aid", and so on.
Yes, like "Xerox", "Band-Aid", and so on.
FFTT
Sep 10, 05:28 AM
What ever Apple decides to do, the result will have to be better than any Vista
Powered AMD set-up.
The thing is that Apple has not only set a standard for performance, but also
for QUIET that no other workstation in it's class has ever achieved.
They won't be able to maintain that ground if they cut too many corners.
Some of these quad core designs will be a success and some with probably fail
to meet Apple's standards.
Powered AMD set-up.
The thing is that Apple has not only set a standard for performance, but also
for QUIET that no other workstation in it's class has ever achieved.
They won't be able to maintain that ground if they cut too many corners.
Some of these quad core designs will be a success and some with probably fail
to meet Apple's standards.
gri
Apr 25, 02:46 PM
Well they arent going to get worse are they!!
They could, e.g. by leaving out features we got used to and like (see back lit keyboard in current MBA)
They could, e.g. by leaving out features we got used to and like (see back lit keyboard in current MBA)