Branskins
Apr 29, 05:04 PM
To stay ahead of the 6 in 10.6. When the XBOX 2 was released, the rumor was that it was called the 360, as to put it on equal naming as the Playstation 3. Microsoft did not want to be '2' and them '3', so they added a number that started with 3.
And at the time the Wii was known as the Revolution, which is 360 degrees. So they tackled the PS3 with the 3, and the "Revolution" with 360. Kind of funny.
Anyways, I really hope they bring back the sliders. They are/were one of my favorite parts of Lion! It was funny to press a button while holding shift to see it move very slllllooooowwwwllly!
And at the time the Wii was known as the Revolution, which is 360 degrees. So they tackled the PS3 with the 3, and the "Revolution" with 360. Kind of funny.
Anyways, I really hope they bring back the sliders. They are/were one of my favorite parts of Lion! It was funny to press a button while holding shift to see it move very slllllooooowwwwllly!
Defender2010
Sep 29, 08:10 AM
Do u think if Steve decides to sell his house he can just hit a restore button to clean it up for the new owners? Then, when he moves on to the next one he can just restore from backup and nothing from before is lost!
Silly joke I know, but I had to post it!
Silly joke I know, but I had to post it!
iJohnHenry
Apr 16, 07:20 PM
I love that video. Cracks me up every time I see it.
First time viewer.
So, Honey Badgers are gay, or what??
First time viewer.
So, Honey Badgers are gay, or what??
Banyan Bruce
Apr 29, 04:03 PM
What is this hideous faux leather iCal format ????? It's just like the truly awful wooden background that somehow crawled in to the iPad. Please think again on this. It will look abysmal on a large iMac or MBP screen. It looks like a child's toy. :o
more...
dmr727
Jan 15, 01:17 PM
I liked it. I was happy with the update to the AppleTV - I think I'll finally get off the fence and buy one. The Capsule seems interesting. The MBA is outside of what I want to spend, but it's pretty awesome nonetheless.
It would have been nice to see updated specs on the Mini and other notebooks, but hey, you can't have everything! :)
It would have been nice to see updated specs on the Mini and other notebooks, but hey, you can't have everything! :)
voicegy
Jan 12, 01:14 PM
Statement from the CEA (http://www.news.com/8301-10784_3-9849168-7.html?tag=nefd.only):
It's not quite as funny when there are consequences.
Indeed. Excellent - this is just the action I would have expected and I'm glad to see it happen.:)
It's not quite as funny when there are consequences.
Indeed. Excellent - this is just the action I would have expected and I'm glad to see it happen.:)
more...
aafuss1
Nov 16, 07:35 PM
Yes Dad. :D
Ladies and Gentlemen of Macrumours, this is from Digitimes, they still owe me a G5 iBook from 2005.
Digitimes = wrong, always wrong.
I agree DigiTimes is very inaccurate with Apple rumors, but probably not the same for other companies-eg. Sony or Samsung.
Ladies and Gentlemen of Macrumours, this is from Digitimes, they still owe me a G5 iBook from 2005.
Digitimes = wrong, always wrong.
I agree DigiTimes is very inaccurate with Apple rumors, but probably not the same for other companies-eg. Sony or Samsung.
MagnusVonMagnum
Apr 29, 10:34 PM
There's a huge difference between merging in concepts of the UI, user-friendly software distribution, media access and what you describe.
It is very unlikely that Apple's engineering and marketing would destroy what they've worked to build for so long, IMHO. How are you so certain that they'll be bringing all the bad stuff along with the good stuff? Seriously - do you really think that Apple's talent are as utterly foolish that you make them out to be?
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.
No, it'll happen whether we like it or not. Because the industry is going to the iPad like dumbed down devices for every day use, and in 10-15 years those devices will be fast enough for all of us to do almost everything on 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....
It is very unlikely that Apple's engineering and marketing would destroy what they've worked to build for so long, IMHO. How are you so certain that they'll be bringing all the bad stuff along with the good stuff? Seriously - do you really think that Apple's talent are as utterly foolish that you make them out to be?
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.
No, it'll happen whether we like it or not. Because the industry is going to the iPad like dumbed down devices for every day use, and in 10-15 years those devices will be fast enough for all of us to do almost everything on 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....
more...
Hastings101
May 3, 09:51 PM
If you ask Hastings101, he might call it cheesy.
DoFoT9
Jul 30, 08:51 PM
yes i have macs, but i don't fold with any of them. my mac pro is too old to fold with. but i am eying those new mac pros though
too bad osx cant utilise GPUs and whatnot. :( otherwise id let my 4850 have a crack - better then the CPU thats for sure!
too bad osx cant utilise GPUs and whatnot. :( otherwise id let my 4850 have a crack - better then the CPU thats for sure!
more...
LimeiBook86
Apr 29, 01:13 PM
The power of Mac OS X. The magic of iPad.
Oh god...
Yeah that doesn't sit too well with me either. But as long as there are a good set of nice new features without much of the iPad-ness mucking it up I'll be pleased. I hope to see more of Lion soon, the more features the better! :D
Oh god...
Yeah that doesn't sit too well with me either. But as long as there are a good set of nice new features without much of the iPad-ness mucking it up I'll be pleased. I hope to see more of Lion soon, the more features the better! :D
mkrishnan
Sep 8, 08:17 AM
How is he a 'no-talent ass clown'.
That term should be reserved for one person and one person only:
http://www.hollywoodimages.net/Michael_Bolton.jpg
Why should I change? He's the one who sucks.
http://www.thecobrasnose.com/images3/OSM&Ssm.jpg
:D
That term should be reserved for one person and one person only:
http://www.hollywoodimages.net/Michael_Bolton.jpg
Why should I change? He's the one who sucks.
http://www.thecobrasnose.com/images3/OSM&Ssm.jpg
:D
more...
Glideslope
Apr 25, 01:35 PM
I agree, you're good!
Good looking for sure. :cool:
Good looking for sure. :cool:
kalisphoenix
Oct 17, 09:17 AM
*yawns loudly* Didn't we know this months and months ago?
more...
puuukeey
Jan 9, 01:51 PM
I've been know to be cruel:D
SkyStudios
May 2, 12:41 PM
My only question is:
If there was a study that was conducted some time back [more than 2 months back] and got Apple to investigate the issue seriously, why did Apple wait for another study OR another media non-sense to acknowledge the bugs and report to the consumers?
Why did Apple not rectify the problem before? Did Apple already knew about these features or are they simply getting with this crap by calling them "bugs"?
To be honest, this is probably the first time I'm feeling that Apple was trying to play with the consumers privacy and trust. I think Apple just fooled us.
-deth a lawsuite was filed a year ago, apple refused to address the problem becuase it was not out in the public as it is now with Congress connecting trails to wall street and who knows why apple collected political views.
According to authorities, Apple uses trolls, some techs even to bury issues posted on forums so they can buy time if many people either give up or simply seem less in number, so if the ratio of complaints are kept low no one notices bugs,
Im not surprised that the FEDS are upset about this, if they had iphones people can track them and all sorts of info is out public or in the wrong hands, makes the wikileeks kids look like angels
If there was a study that was conducted some time back [more than 2 months back] and got Apple to investigate the issue seriously, why did Apple wait for another study OR another media non-sense to acknowledge the bugs and report to the consumers?
Why did Apple not rectify the problem before? Did Apple already knew about these features or are they simply getting with this crap by calling them "bugs"?
To be honest, this is probably the first time I'm feeling that Apple was trying to play with the consumers privacy and trust. I think Apple just fooled us.
-deth a lawsuite was filed a year ago, apple refused to address the problem becuase it was not out in the public as it is now with Congress connecting trails to wall street and who knows why apple collected political views.
According to authorities, Apple uses trolls, some techs even to bury issues posted on forums so they can buy time if many people either give up or simply seem less in number, so if the ratio of complaints are kept low no one notices bugs,
Im not surprised that the FEDS are upset about this, if they had iphones people can track them and all sorts of info is out public or in the wrong hands, makes the wikileeks kids look like angels
more...
err404
May 2, 09:41 AM
I'm glad that Apple listened to the user demand for this change, despite their feeling that this wasn't a big deal. They could have just as easily ignored the issue saying that it is functioning as intended.
dsnort
Aug 3, 09:08 PM
Highland
I'm going to try to do this without all that cumbersome quoting we've been doing.
1.Cool, we all need to laugh sometimes. And big company or individual, right is right, and wrong is wrong. It is no more ethical to trample the rights of the large than it is to run roughshod over the small. ( Because where do you draw the line between big and small, and who gets to decide?) And just in case you think I will always jump to Apples defense, I personally think they are dead wrong on the dead pixel issue. Anyone receiving a new product from a manufacturer has a right to expect it to be properly functional with no obvious defects.
2.What? We agree on something? ( I must have my open mind meter set too high!)
3.Disagree that iPod is a monopoly. MP3 players introduced in 1998, first download service, Napster P2P, in 1999. iPod into'd 2001. If I remember correctly currently 70% of market(?). Even the French legislature admitted that there was fierce competition in the online music business, and that the competition was effective.
4.I believe Apples letter to the CC of Norway clarified that changes to the agreement only affected FUTURE downloads, and had no effect on files downloaded prior to the change. There is no "Ex Post Facto" effect.
5. Ehhh, the balance of power can be a bit slippery. The maiin reason they have all the power, is because we give it to them! We vote with our dollars. Just like the main reason we have $3.00/gallon gas (US) is because we continue to go to the pump and pay $3.00 for a gallon of gas. If we would find ways to limit our usage, the price would come down. But everyone is convinced that they should be able to jump in an auto and hare off around town on the slightest pretext. The wife and I have reduced our gas bill about 40% a week just by taking the time to plan out our trips so as to accomplish as much as possible in one trip, instead of making 5 trips. (Meanwhile, my sister inlaw lives in her car, and is the loudest complainer about the price of gas you've ever heard)
Similiarly, we have this insane argument over the terms of some service we didn't even know about 10 years ago, but have convinced ourselves we can't live without!
6.As for the cd thing, I guess only time will which of us, if either of us, is right.
Well, the wifes abed, need to go before she gets sleepy;)
G'night, and look forward to hearing from you.
IF YOU DARE:D LOL
I'm going to try to do this without all that cumbersome quoting we've been doing.
1.Cool, we all need to laugh sometimes. And big company or individual, right is right, and wrong is wrong. It is no more ethical to trample the rights of the large than it is to run roughshod over the small. ( Because where do you draw the line between big and small, and who gets to decide?) And just in case you think I will always jump to Apples defense, I personally think they are dead wrong on the dead pixel issue. Anyone receiving a new product from a manufacturer has a right to expect it to be properly functional with no obvious defects.
2.What? We agree on something? ( I must have my open mind meter set too high!)
3.Disagree that iPod is a monopoly. MP3 players introduced in 1998, first download service, Napster P2P, in 1999. iPod into'd 2001. If I remember correctly currently 70% of market(?). Even the French legislature admitted that there was fierce competition in the online music business, and that the competition was effective.
4.I believe Apples letter to the CC of Norway clarified that changes to the agreement only affected FUTURE downloads, and had no effect on files downloaded prior to the change. There is no "Ex Post Facto" effect.
5. Ehhh, the balance of power can be a bit slippery. The maiin reason they have all the power, is because we give it to them! We vote with our dollars. Just like the main reason we have $3.00/gallon gas (US) is because we continue to go to the pump and pay $3.00 for a gallon of gas. If we would find ways to limit our usage, the price would come down. But everyone is convinced that they should be able to jump in an auto and hare off around town on the slightest pretext. The wife and I have reduced our gas bill about 40% a week just by taking the time to plan out our trips so as to accomplish as much as possible in one trip, instead of making 5 trips. (Meanwhile, my sister inlaw lives in her car, and is the loudest complainer about the price of gas you've ever heard)
Similiarly, we have this insane argument over the terms of some service we didn't even know about 10 years ago, but have convinced ourselves we can't live without!
6.As for the cd thing, I guess only time will which of us, if either of us, is right.
Well, the wifes abed, need to go before she gets sleepy;)
G'night, and look forward to hearing from you.
IF YOU DARE:D LOL
JeffDM
Oct 3, 11:11 AM
When will this hacking nerd do something REALLY positive and productive to the world?
Last time I heard, his occupation was to break into companies' IPR without any legal permission to do so...not commendable, to say the least.
It's currently the only way to get non-Disney movies onto an iPod and many other similar devices. It's also a way for users to get the videos they've paid for onto media devices that don't have a DVD drive. For the movie industry to say that they have to buy the movie again is completely ludicrous on their part.
His work allowed people to use the media and devices they paid for in the way that they want to use it. I would call that productive.
I know you probably don't agree with it but frankly, I think the movie industry is being too greedy here.
The DMCA changed that, and until it's tested in court anything where encryption is used or even potentially used is not "safe" to reverse engineer in the US.
DVDJon is in the EU, which I don't think has such a law yet. The DMCA only applies to the US. Counterpart laws are in the works.
There might be some trouble if he decides to come to the US. Adobe had some Russian guy arrested when he came to the US for making a program that applied ROT13 to Adobe's "encrypted" files to make them useable.
He's just another guy trying to make a quick buck...
I think that's a bit of an ignorant comment. It's taken him long enough to get around to doing so, so I don't think "quick" applies. He's been breaking encryption systems for maybe ten years now, I'm not sure if he's made any money on it so far.
My knowledge on these areas is pretty slim but would Apple be able to license FairPlay content only or would that open up the risk of other companies creating MP3 players that could read FairPlay content and, hence, compete with the iPod? ...or is that some sore of seperate licensure?
I doubt that licencing the format would have to mean that it allows competing players. The licensing contracts can be very specific such that it allows only encryptors, not decryptors, and be limited to certain circumstances.
Last time I heard, his occupation was to break into companies' IPR without any legal permission to do so...not commendable, to say the least.
It's currently the only way to get non-Disney movies onto an iPod and many other similar devices. It's also a way for users to get the videos they've paid for onto media devices that don't have a DVD drive. For the movie industry to say that they have to buy the movie again is completely ludicrous on their part.
His work allowed people to use the media and devices they paid for in the way that they want to use it. I would call that productive.
I know you probably don't agree with it but frankly, I think the movie industry is being too greedy here.
The DMCA changed that, and until it's tested in court anything where encryption is used or even potentially used is not "safe" to reverse engineer in the US.
DVDJon is in the EU, which I don't think has such a law yet. The DMCA only applies to the US. Counterpart laws are in the works.
There might be some trouble if he decides to come to the US. Adobe had some Russian guy arrested when he came to the US for making a program that applied ROT13 to Adobe's "encrypted" files to make them useable.
He's just another guy trying to make a quick buck...
I think that's a bit of an ignorant comment. It's taken him long enough to get around to doing so, so I don't think "quick" applies. He's been breaking encryption systems for maybe ten years now, I'm not sure if he's made any money on it so far.
My knowledge on these areas is pretty slim but would Apple be able to license FairPlay content only or would that open up the risk of other companies creating MP3 players that could read FairPlay content and, hence, compete with the iPod? ...or is that some sore of seperate licensure?
I doubt that licencing the format would have to mean that it allows competing players. The licensing contracts can be very specific such that it allows only encryptors, not decryptors, and be limited to certain circumstances.
PeterQVenkman
Oct 7, 03:49 PM
I dare say that different technology's i.e. GSM vs CDMA could also be the problem in your area.
When I had Verizon, the worse and only problem was with a Razor the tech was an idiot........... Other than that very very stable network, cannot say that for AT&T
My only problem was with a Razer, also. That phone was unstable as hell. Right now I have an el cheapo phone that is darn near bullet proof and small. Makes great calls.
And it does absolutely nothing else well. ;)
When I had Verizon, the worse and only problem was with a Razor the tech was an idiot........... Other than that very very stable network, cannot say that for AT&T
My only problem was with a Razer, also. That phone was unstable as hell. Right now I have an el cheapo phone that is darn near bullet proof and small. Makes great calls.
And it does absolutely nothing else well. ;)
AhmedFaisal
Apr 13, 07:40 AM
Yeah, because you have access to all of the intellegence reports. :rolleyes: You try again...
The official 9/11 commission report speaks for itself.
As for the TSA not making air travel any safer you literally have nothing to go on other than making a blind assumption. It is simply another security layer and that in itself will deter some from giving it a try. That being said, if someone wants to kill people bad enough they will and people like you will constantly blame it on others. :rolleyes:
Linky (http://www.usatoday.com/travel/columnist/mcgee/2008-02-27-state-of-airline-security_N.htm)
So much about that. Even when you read biased **** like the recent RAND Corp report the findings are astounding. What baffles me even more is their conclusion that international airtravel is the threat and domestic security should be reduced again. Nevermind that the 9/11 flights were all domestic flights and the 9/11 gang would have most likely been caught had they tried this stunt on an international flight with the pre 9/11 security measures of international travel. There is so much misinformation and ******** being propagated in this arena my trust in the competence of anyone involved in this business is absolute zero.
The official 9/11 commission report speaks for itself.
As for the TSA not making air travel any safer you literally have nothing to go on other than making a blind assumption. It is simply another security layer and that in itself will deter some from giving it a try. That being said, if someone wants to kill people bad enough they will and people like you will constantly blame it on others. :rolleyes:
Linky (http://www.usatoday.com/travel/columnist/mcgee/2008-02-27-state-of-airline-security_N.htm)
So much about that. Even when you read biased **** like the recent RAND Corp report the findings are astounding. What baffles me even more is their conclusion that international airtravel is the threat and domestic security should be reduced again. Nevermind that the 9/11 flights were all domestic flights and the 9/11 gang would have most likely been caught had they tried this stunt on an international flight with the pre 9/11 security measures of international travel. There is so much misinformation and ******** being propagated in this arena my trust in the competence of anyone involved in this business is absolute zero.
jackc
Jan 15, 05:09 PM
Randy Newman sucks.
clevin
Jan 12, 07:15 PM
Actually, I find your post to be spot off. I find your portrayal of Mac owners to be shallow, self-serving, stereotyping and weak. I did notice you used the term 'some' in an attempt to mitigate your attack.
The fact is, of the 50-100 Mac users I know, I only know one other person who reads these boards. The majority are just owner/users who love their machines. If I were to pick a group of smug zealots around here, it would be the the Apple bashers.
I expected the trolls to come flying out of the woodwork after Tuesday. You are living up to all my expectations.
i believe what u said, out of 50-100 mac users, only 2~4% read here. which does mean that majority of mac users are just as normal as pc users.
but its too subjective to say zealots u saw here are apple bashers, its MR. statistically, u sure see more apple zealots here. Its just very simple fact.
No, Texas is evil. These are just businessmen.
i strongly disagree.
The fact is, of the 50-100 Mac users I know, I only know one other person who reads these boards. The majority are just owner/users who love their machines. If I were to pick a group of smug zealots around here, it would be the the Apple bashers.
I expected the trolls to come flying out of the woodwork after Tuesday. You are living up to all my expectations.
i believe what u said, out of 50-100 mac users, only 2~4% read here. which does mean that majority of mac users are just as normal as pc users.
but its too subjective to say zealots u saw here are apple bashers, its MR. statistically, u sure see more apple zealots here. Its just very simple fact.
No, Texas is evil. These are just businessmen.
i strongly disagree.
IJ Reilly
Oct 19, 11:50 AM
So you only payed $1600 for them, and now they're worth $125,000. You legend!! Good luck..
No, my cost basis is closer to $6,400.00. I paid an average of $16/share, before the two splits. Lest we forget, there were a lot of dark times between then and now. When it dropped 50% overnight on that terrible day in September 2000, I thought I was going to be physically ill. It took nerve to hang on through these moments, or complete idiocy. Your choice. Either way, it worked out.
No, my cost basis is closer to $6,400.00. I paid an average of $16/share, before the two splits. Lest we forget, there were a lot of dark times between then and now. When it dropped 50% overnight on that terrible day in September 2000, I thought I was going to be physically ill. It took nerve to hang on through these moments, or complete idiocy. Your choice. Either way, it worked out.
0 comments:
Post a Comment