EspressoLove
Apr 23, 01:14 AM
Yes it is a deal breaker. I actually spend quite a bit of time in bed after lights out surfing and reading, keeping up with stuff (I am doing it at this moment) with the brightness at the lowest level +1 to not disturb my wife, and its definitely not enough to see the keyboard.
...
If it is absolutely deal breaker for you then you might look at Glowing fluorescent keyboard stickers (http://www.amazon.com/Glowing-fluorescent-English-keyboard-stickers/dp/B004CEN1VU) ...
I'd think it's not nearly as good as Apple's backlight (and you can't ramp it up, or turn it off :eek:)
For me it would be nice to have KB backlight, but not a big deal
...
If it is absolutely deal breaker for you then you might look at Glowing fluorescent keyboard stickers (http://www.amazon.com/Glowing-fluorescent-English-keyboard-stickers/dp/B004CEN1VU) ...
I'd think it's not nearly as good as Apple's backlight (and you can't ramp it up, or turn it off :eek:)
For me it would be nice to have KB backlight, but not a big deal
ArchaicRevival
Mar 23, 06:42 PM
Im in agreement with this.
Remove them from the App Store.
It might be illegal etc.. but we must draw the line somewhere.
Nope it's not illegal. The law enforcement is required to announce them, plus many radio show hosts announce them as well.
but I definitely agree with other posts, that if a guy is too drunk to drive, he's probably to drunk to use his phone and look for DUI checkpoints anyway. It's probably for people that are not super drunk, but are maybe 0.09% instead of 0.08%. ;)
Overzealous democrats and republicans on both side need to suck it.:mad:
Remove them from the App Store.
It might be illegal etc.. but we must draw the line somewhere.
Nope it's not illegal. The law enforcement is required to announce them, plus many radio show hosts announce them as well.
but I definitely agree with other posts, that if a guy is too drunk to drive, he's probably to drunk to use his phone and look for DUI checkpoints anyway. It's probably for people that are not super drunk, but are maybe 0.09% instead of 0.08%. ;)
Overzealous democrats and republicans on both side need to suck it.:mad:
res1233
Apr 30, 01:50 PM
One step closer to the MacBook Air update.
I swear, this guy never seems happy about anything. I seem to recall him saying this for other product releases... $10 says he'll say it again once the MBA is released.
I swear, this guy never seems happy about anything. I seem to recall him saying this for other product releases... $10 says he'll say it again once the MBA is released.
devman
Sep 26, 10:22 PM
I ended up doing the reverse. I bought a SLVR in China and brought it back to the USA. It's so nice not to have to be on any ****ing "contract". (Sorry, I just really hate the state of the cellphone market in the USA.)
I just want WiFi VoIP phones to come along and wipe out the whole market...I think that will have to wait for WiMax rollouts nationwide, though.
I'm not on a contract. I use their pay-as-you-go offering.
I just want WiFi VoIP phones to come along and wipe out the whole market...I think that will have to wait for WiMax rollouts nationwide, though.
I'm not on a contract. I use their pay-as-you-go offering.
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.
munkery
Mar 23, 04:20 PM
http://www.macforensicslab.com/ProductsAndServices/index.php?main_page=document_general_info&products_id=174
Much of the information in the PDF (http://www.macforensicslab.com/Malware_on_Mac_OS_X.pdf) associated with this article (http://www.macforensicslab.com/ProductsAndServices/index.php?main_page=document_general_info&products_id=174) is incorrect. For example:
Page 26
It refers to the bundle architecture as insecure. The argument presented would be true if security sensitive apps were not owned by system. Given that they are owned by system, malware cannot modify the bundle of an app owned by system without authentication when the app is run with user privileges in an admin or standard account.
For example, show package contents of iTunes, Safari, or Mail and try to create a folder in the bundle. In relation to the example in the article, try renaming iTunes. The argument in the article relies on actions that can not be completed in an OS X admin account; these type of changes are even more restricted in a standard account.
Apps not owned by system are vulnerable but without privilege escalation can not install rootkits or keyloggers. Even apps owned by system run with user privileges and require privilege escalation to install dangerous payloads.
Mac OS X does not prompt for authentication if you install apps in the proper location for that user account type. When installed in the proper location, apps are sandboxed from the system level of Mac OS X by the Unix DAC model used within Mac OS X.
Windows is less secure because most apps (Chrome only exception I can recall) install their associated files in levels of the system that require authentication regardless of user account type (unless Admin in Windows XP because running as superuser - no authentication required to install with elevated privileges - very dangerous). It is easier to trick Windows users to install a trojan with elevated privileges given that almost all apps ask for authentication to install and the user can not distinguish the intent of that authentication.
Page 30
The claim that the Application folder is unprotected is false. Security sensitive apps within the Application folder are owned by system.
Also, security sensitive system binaries are still stored in /bin and /sbin in Mac OS X.
Page 31
The ability to read the contacts stored in Address Book could be used by a worm to propagate. But, malware that uses this to spread is not likely to appear in the wild if the malware is not profitable. It is unlikely that malware will be profitable without being able to hook (this is a specific function) into apps owned by system.
Page 33
Starts off talking about trojans, trojans are easily avoided with user knowledge in Mac OS X because most apps do not require authentication to install if installed in the appropriate location where the Unix DAC model protects the system.
Viruses using the model shown in the article will not be successful without privilege escalation. This is the reason why Mac OS X malware is not successful in the wild.
By default, very few server side services are exposed in Mac OS X and those that are exposed are sandboxed. Vectors for worm propagation are limited to client side. Client side worms require authentication to install and spread if do not include privilege escalation via exploitation because of the Unix DAC model used in Mac OS X. Trojans used to trick users to authenticate are less likely to be successful in Mac OS X as stated above.
Much of the information in the PDF (http://www.macforensicslab.com/Malware_on_Mac_OS_X.pdf) associated with this article (http://www.macforensicslab.com/ProductsAndServices/index.php?main_page=document_general_info&products_id=174) is incorrect. For example:
Page 26
It refers to the bundle architecture as insecure. The argument presented would be true if security sensitive apps were not owned by system. Given that they are owned by system, malware cannot modify the bundle of an app owned by system without authentication when the app is run with user privileges in an admin or standard account.
For example, show package contents of iTunes, Safari, or Mail and try to create a folder in the bundle. In relation to the example in the article, try renaming iTunes. The argument in the article relies on actions that can not be completed in an OS X admin account; these type of changes are even more restricted in a standard account.
Apps not owned by system are vulnerable but without privilege escalation can not install rootkits or keyloggers. Even apps owned by system run with user privileges and require privilege escalation to install dangerous payloads.
Mac OS X does not prompt for authentication if you install apps in the proper location for that user account type. When installed in the proper location, apps are sandboxed from the system level of Mac OS X by the Unix DAC model used within Mac OS X.
Windows is less secure because most apps (Chrome only exception I can recall) install their associated files in levels of the system that require authentication regardless of user account type (unless Admin in Windows XP because running as superuser - no authentication required to install with elevated privileges - very dangerous). It is easier to trick Windows users to install a trojan with elevated privileges given that almost all apps ask for authentication to install and the user can not distinguish the intent of that authentication.
Page 30
The claim that the Application folder is unprotected is false. Security sensitive apps within the Application folder are owned by system.
Also, security sensitive system binaries are still stored in /bin and /sbin in Mac OS X.
Page 31
The ability to read the contacts stored in Address Book could be used by a worm to propagate. But, malware that uses this to spread is not likely to appear in the wild if the malware is not profitable. It is unlikely that malware will be profitable without being able to hook (this is a specific function) into apps owned by system.
Page 33
Starts off talking about trojans, trojans are easily avoided with user knowledge in Mac OS X because most apps do not require authentication to install if installed in the appropriate location where the Unix DAC model protects the system.
Viruses using the model shown in the article will not be successful without privilege escalation. This is the reason why Mac OS X malware is not successful in the wild.
By default, very few server side services are exposed in Mac OS X and those that are exposed are sandboxed. Vectors for worm propagation are limited to client side. Client side worms require authentication to install and spread if do not include privilege escalation via exploitation because of the Unix DAC model used in Mac OS X. Trojans used to trick users to authenticate are less likely to be successful in Mac OS X as stated above.
MacinDoc
Sep 14, 03:55 PM
Why is everyone saying that Aperture 2.0 announcement is too little???
Photokina is all about *photo*. Aperture is about digital *photo* workflow. Its workflow features were pretty groundbreaking a year ago. Yes, it was buggy before first update. Yes, it was slow, and still is too some extent. But the features they showed -- autostacking, the loupe, the library -- are *fantastic*. They had a year to improve -- why not hold a big event to show it off!
No one would say that Adobe hosting an event to show new version of Photoshop would be to little, right? Same goes for Apple.
I'm desperately waiting for the update. If AP update (2.0, 1.5 -- whatever) improves speed on new Mac Pros, my order for a MP + AP goes right in. And $3.5K go to pay for it.
I, for one, can't remember the last time Apple had a press event to introduce just one item (although the iPod case introduced along with the iPod HiFi was a bit of a joke, but then again, Apple promoted that event as the introduction of a few minor fun things). Steve knows that the faithful hunger for "One More Thing"; it's our well-known addiction, and a large part of what keeps Apple in business.
Photokina is all about *photo*. Aperture is about digital *photo* workflow. Its workflow features were pretty groundbreaking a year ago. Yes, it was buggy before first update. Yes, it was slow, and still is too some extent. But the features they showed -- autostacking, the loupe, the library -- are *fantastic*. They had a year to improve -- why not hold a big event to show it off!
No one would say that Adobe hosting an event to show new version of Photoshop would be to little, right? Same goes for Apple.
I'm desperately waiting for the update. If AP update (2.0, 1.5 -- whatever) improves speed on new Mac Pros, my order for a MP + AP goes right in. And $3.5K go to pay for it.
I, for one, can't remember the last time Apple had a press event to introduce just one item (although the iPod case introduced along with the iPod HiFi was a bit of a joke, but then again, Apple promoted that event as the introduction of a few minor fun things). Steve knows that the faithful hunger for "One More Thing"; it's our well-known addiction, and a large part of what keeps Apple in business.
ArchaicRevival
Apr 30, 01:59 PM
Curious that everyone is clamoring for a thunderbolt-enabled machine, but there isn't a single thunderbolt drive available on the market.
I guess some people just need to feel like they have new stuff even if it's totally pointless.
Everybody said that to Nikola Tesla when he introduced the AC... It's new, and we have to redesign everything now, and Edison is gonna lose all his investments oh my god! We can't do that!
A century later...
I guess some people just need to feel like they have new stuff even if it's totally pointless.
Everybody said that to Nikola Tesla when he introduced the AC... It's new, and we have to redesign everything now, and Edison is gonna lose all his investments oh my god! We can't do that!
A century later...
termite
Oct 12, 03:23 PM
Normally Oprah tapes a ton of shows over the course of a few weeks, and they are edited and aired over the course of a couple months. So the idea of "tape today, show tomorrow" seems unlikely to me -- for one, they would have to be assuming Absolutely Nothing Goes Wrong during editing.
It could happen, but it seems too quick to me. Alternately, maybe they taped it earlier.
It could happen, but it seems too quick to me. Alternately, maybe they taped it earlier.
GregA
Sep 15, 08:33 PM
I believe this is because of the pricing. Europe is much cheaper when it comes to price-per-minute.
Also in the US and Canada, you pay to receive a phone call. Not so in Europe, or Australia... if you only answer calls it costs you nothing.
Many people here buy a cheap phone on a cheap plan and say "It's for others to contact me, and for emergencies". Of course in reality someone pays to call them, and when they make their occassional call it costs a lot... still, the concept removes the barrier to people buying a phone.
The main thing I've noticed travelling is there's far more young people with cell phones here than in the US. btw... Australia has more active cellphones than people now.
Also in the US and Canada, you pay to receive a phone call. Not so in Europe, or Australia... if you only answer calls it costs you nothing.
Many people here buy a cheap phone on a cheap plan and say "It's for others to contact me, and for emergencies". Of course in reality someone pays to call them, and when they make their occassional call it costs a lot... still, the concept removes the barrier to people buying a phone.
The main thing I've noticed travelling is there's far more young people with cell phones here than in the US. btw... Australia has more active cellphones than people now.
iCrizzo
Mar 23, 05:44 PM
I downloaded all of these apps yesterday just in case!! I don't drink, but yes I am a smoker, not while I am driving.. but I have yet to find a good delivery service so some days I must ride dirty!! :cool: :apple:
P-Worm
Sep 13, 08:58 PM
No way, it might actually happen...
P-Worm
P-Worm
chameleon
Mar 29, 12:35 PM
I'm not even sure anyone at Apple really cares about these numbers because we're talking about dozens of handsets using those OS's vs a single phone on iOS.
No, the reason Apple doesn't care is this:
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/11/02/02/apples_iphone_extends_lead_in_mobile_profits.html
Their "one phone" makes more profit that all the variations of Android, Windows Phone and BlackBerries combined.
No, the reason Apple doesn't care is this:
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/11/02/02/apples_iphone_extends_lead_in_mobile_profits.html
Their "one phone" makes more profit that all the variations of Android, Windows Phone and BlackBerries combined.
Icaras
Apr 19, 08:27 AM
word. it's called competition. omg the second car manufacturer designed a car with an engine and 4 wheels, he must be copying. lol
I know that car analogy may not be entirely the same as whats going on here, but what would you do if you were in that situation? What would you do if it was your company that was the first one to manufacture a car with that structure?
You would just let that slide while the second car company starts making money off your template?
I know that car analogy may not be entirely the same as whats going on here, but what would you do if you were in that situation? What would you do if it was your company that was the first one to manufacture a car with that structure?
You would just let that slide while the second car company starts making money off your template?
herecomestreble
Apr 25, 03:27 PM
Great, i hope the first thing to go is the razor sharp edge on the wrist palm edge, for long fingered fellas this thing has been a nightmare.
aristobrat
Apr 23, 09:33 AM
I used to have a laptop as a single computer at my home. It resembled a Christmas tree pretty much - it had an USB optical mouse, a printer, external speakers, a Yamaha keyboard, card reader and power cord plugged in. I was always plugging and unplugging cables whenever I wanted to move it to another place. Thank goodness I did not come to the idea to attach an external monitor to it.
USB keyboard + mouse? Was this from the 90s??? Bluetooth keyboards/mice and WiFi printers are how most people do it nowadays. Apples monitors even have a laptop power cord, speakers and a USB hub built in, so it's 3 cables max to attach. If it takes more than 5 literal seconds to connect/disconnect when you move, you're doing it wrong. And with their patents for doing eveything over one cable, looks like the futures only going to get easier.
USB keyboard + mouse? Was this from the 90s??? Bluetooth keyboards/mice and WiFi printers are how most people do it nowadays. Apples monitors even have a laptop power cord, speakers and a USB hub built in, so it's 3 cables max to attach. If it takes more than 5 literal seconds to connect/disconnect when you move, you're doing it wrong. And with their patents for doing eveything over one cable, looks like the futures only going to get easier.
toddybody
Mar 22, 02:19 PM
Brian Tong could announce a 30inch 300dpi + 6 Core SB i7 + 24GB RAM + 500GB SSD + crossfired 6970 iMac for 500.00...and he'd still be totally worthless (unintelligent + NOT funny + unattractive + annoying as hell + probably hides cameras in the CNET women's bathrooms).
...Now Brian Cooley on the other hand, THAT DUDE ROCKS!
...Now Brian Cooley on the other hand, THAT DUDE ROCKS!
mromero
Sep 14, 05:02 PM
1.Aperture 2.0
2.MacBook Pro w/ Intel Merom
2.MacBook Pro w/ Intel Merom
Multimedia
Sep 12, 05:32 AM
I, for one, would be happy to spread the Word to the ignorant masses if Apple came out with a cute little white tower to match everyone's cute little white iPod. :P The Mini's nice, and the new iMac is nice too, but I think this thing could help Apple a lot in the desktop segment. I'd say something like that's bound to come out at some point, but when is the big question.
Also, it's probably been mentioned earlier in the thread, but does anyone know how long after Kentsfield Clovertown is supposed to come out? I heard "early 2007" a while ago, but with Kentsfield coming out so early, I would think Clovertown won't take that long.In two weeks at the Intel Developer's Conference in San Francisco, I think Intel will tell us exactly. But from what I've read recently, looks like Clovertown will be shipping no later than November. So looks like worst case scenario will force Steve to have to introduce 8 core Mac Pros in four months at the MacWorld Expo San Francisco SteveNote January 9, 2007. I don't see how he could wait any longer than that.
Sure they will cost more than any previous Mac ever has, $4k is my guess, but to imagine there isn't a market for such a goliath is myopic in the extreme.
Also, it's probably been mentioned earlier in the thread, but does anyone know how long after Kentsfield Clovertown is supposed to come out? I heard "early 2007" a while ago, but with Kentsfield coming out so early, I would think Clovertown won't take that long.In two weeks at the Intel Developer's Conference in San Francisco, I think Intel will tell us exactly. But from what I've read recently, looks like Clovertown will be shipping no later than November. So looks like worst case scenario will force Steve to have to introduce 8 core Mac Pros in four months at the MacWorld Expo San Francisco SteveNote January 9, 2007. I don't see how he could wait any longer than that.
Sure they will cost more than any previous Mac ever has, $4k is my guess, but to imagine there isn't a market for such a goliath is myopic in the extreme.
aiqw9182
Apr 16, 01:53 AM
No different? What planet on you living on because it's not Earth.... The link quoted tested a slow 2.5" drive and still showed a 3.5x speed improvement. USB3 can only go as fast as the drive it's connected to. You're going to find that out with TB as well. You can't make gold out of dirt.
These people on here suggesting Intel should can USB3 are not real computer users. They're non-computer types that don't know WTF they're talking about. Period. There is NO reason to NOT use USB3 on new computers. Their cost is next to nothing. They're 100% backwards compatible with USB2.0,1.1 and 1.0 and you'll need those ports regardless whether your computer has TB or not. Not having USB3 simply means less flexibility. Even if you hate it, your friend comes over with his 7200RPM USB3 drive and connects it to your Mac using USB 2.0 and instead of going 110MB/sec as it would under USB3, it goes 30-35MB/sec under USB 2.0. He then asks you why your Mac SUCKS SO HARD and your reply will be that he should have paid $400 for that drive with a TB connector instead of $150 with a USB3 connector (even though TB will not go faster because that's the limit of the drive itself). Your friend will then suggest you give him some money since you're stinking loaded to WASTE $250 more on the TB drive when USB3 would have done just as well. But then you remind him that Apple don't support no stinking USB3 and he then tells you that his PC just 'PWNED' your 'Crapple'. :eek:
Apple isn't doing themselves ANY favors to ignore mainstream tech. They want TB? Fine, but don't leave out USB3 to spite yourself. Oh wait. They already did that with Blu-Ray.... :rolleyes:
Or you could just buy a multi-port Thunderbolt adapter(that supports USB 3) for less than $10 when they are released making your half-baked scenario completely worthless.
Lol
Oh and why would someone pay extra money for a drive that can reach at the LOWEST twice the performance of USB 3? Gee, I wonder. I'd love to know where you got the sales figures from also.
These people on here suggesting Intel should can USB3 are not real computer users. They're non-computer types that don't know WTF they're talking about. Period. There is NO reason to NOT use USB3 on new computers. Their cost is next to nothing. They're 100% backwards compatible with USB2.0,1.1 and 1.0 and you'll need those ports regardless whether your computer has TB or not. Not having USB3 simply means less flexibility. Even if you hate it, your friend comes over with his 7200RPM USB3 drive and connects it to your Mac using USB 2.0 and instead of going 110MB/sec as it would under USB3, it goes 30-35MB/sec under USB 2.0. He then asks you why your Mac SUCKS SO HARD and your reply will be that he should have paid $400 for that drive with a TB connector instead of $150 with a USB3 connector (even though TB will not go faster because that's the limit of the drive itself). Your friend will then suggest you give him some money since you're stinking loaded to WASTE $250 more on the TB drive when USB3 would have done just as well. But then you remind him that Apple don't support no stinking USB3 and he then tells you that his PC just 'PWNED' your 'Crapple'. :eek:
Apple isn't doing themselves ANY favors to ignore mainstream tech. They want TB? Fine, but don't leave out USB3 to spite yourself. Oh wait. They already did that with Blu-Ray.... :rolleyes:
Or you could just buy a multi-port Thunderbolt adapter(that supports USB 3) for less than $10 when they are released making your half-baked scenario completely worthless.
Lol
Oh and why would someone pay extra money for a drive that can reach at the LOWEST twice the performance of USB 3? Gee, I wonder. I'd love to know where you got the sales figures from also.
jonhaxor
Mar 30, 12:15 PM
Does the general public think of a particular store when someone says Burger Store? I'm pretty sure people do not say "hey lets go to the Burger Store." The term Burger Store has no mindshare from what I know with the general public. No one uses it as a brand name.
you mean macdonalds?
you mean macdonalds?
Hodapp
Sep 26, 04:10 PM
Why Cingular?
They do not alow you to unlock their phones - even after their contract has expired. They think there is usa and nothing else. If you travel - you are screwed - roam on our network (or go to hell)! They are useless for anyone who travels beyond canada or hawaii(ok - thats only 15% of americans)
I have had Five different Cingular phones since Cellular One became Cingular and they switched their network to GSM. I've been given the unlock code for every one of my devices from little more than a phone call to customer service.
A little kindness goes a long way when dealing with a customer support agent who has spent all day dealing with the retards who are posting in this thread about how hard Cingular has "screwed them over" in the past. I think people just like playing the victim role when it comes to telco conglomerates because it's chic to be in the circle-jerk complainers crew on the blogosphere.
They do not alow you to unlock their phones - even after their contract has expired. They think there is usa and nothing else. If you travel - you are screwed - roam on our network (or go to hell)! They are useless for anyone who travels beyond canada or hawaii(ok - thats only 15% of americans)
I have had Five different Cingular phones since Cellular One became Cingular and they switched their network to GSM. I've been given the unlock code for every one of my devices from little more than a phone call to customer service.
A little kindness goes a long way when dealing with a customer support agent who has spent all day dealing with the retards who are posting in this thread about how hard Cingular has "screwed them over" in the past. I think people just like playing the victim role when it comes to telco conglomerates because it's chic to be in the circle-jerk complainers crew on the blogosphere.
crabstick
Sep 12, 02:43 PM
Yep, i've already downloaded the update and it's all good. Just been playing Tetris.
Hastings101
Apr 19, 11:47 AM
What's the point of these lawsuits, nothing ever comes from them lol. Publicity?
0 comments:
Post a Comment