SkyStudios
May 2, 12:48 PM
I am glad they are addressing it as well; however...Apple's response to this issue has been somewhat confusing (and begs the question as to why they needed that much data and why it was not encrypted properly). Ill be first to say that it most likely is and was just a dumb move on Apple's behalf...
Remy Ma-Nicki Minaj. This old
Nicki Minaj music video
New Nicki Minaj Pictures
PghLondon
Apr 29, 02:34 PM
And people kept telling me that OSX and iOS weren't going to merge in any meaningful manner for years ahead, if ever. Yeah right. I'd bet the one after this has them nearly fully merged and I mean towards iOS for the most part. OSX will be dumbed down to the lowest common brain cell and you won't be able to get free/open software anymore. It'll have to come through the App Store or not at all. Wait and see. That is the point I'll be moving on.
That's impressive. You've shown you don't understand business, software engineering, or computer engineering, all in one paragraph.
Nice!
That's impressive. You've shown you don't understand business, software engineering, or computer engineering, all in one paragraph.
Nice!
MusicallySilent
Jan 11, 03:43 PM
As much as I doubt it would happen I would really like
Large Mac Mini/Midtower Mac pro
1 socket with quad
2 pci E
4 Ram slots
2-4 HDD spaces
1 Superdrive
Starting at 999 or maybe slightly less with a dual core.
Large Mac Mini/Midtower Mac pro
1 socket with quad
2 pci E
4 Ram slots
2-4 HDD spaces
1 Superdrive
Starting at 999 or maybe slightly less with a dual core.
sailortena
Jan 9, 07:59 AM
Realistically, this is want I want:
Congratulations Nicki Minaj!
mariah nicki doll 475x356 New
Nicki Minaj amp; Keyshia Cole
i believe it is for nicki
Nicki Pic Of Nicki Minaj
lil-kim-and-nicki-minaj
Nicki Minaj greeted fans and
MINAJ RULES RAP: 25-year-old
Happy Birthday Nicki Minaj
Nicki Minaj via Vibe,
nicki minaj Nicki Minaj Admits
What a sexy old man…
Hephaestus
Mar 17, 07:35 PM
I get it a lot too but I just say "nah, this phone sucks it's the worst phone in the world" and they usually shut up.
They shut up because they have an insecurity about their phone and the iPhone 4 is the better phone. Shooting down a better phone makes their phone seem even worse. It's like a double headshot.
I hate to say it again but haters gon hate! It happens with ANYTHING. If you buy a BMW, Audi owners will waltz in saying "SEE MY CAR HAS THIS STANDARD IT'S WAY BETTER THAN BMW!!!!". If you buy a Rolex you get Omega and TAG Heuer owners going "MY WATCH IS SO MUCH BETTER THAN ROLEX BECAUSE IT'S CHEAPER AND IT HAS MORE THINGS IN IT!!!".
It's a thing you have to live with if you buy the most popular, top-of-the-line luxury things. If you can afford it, why not buy it?
the whole thing makes my brain hurt because it's so stupid and I don't care if the guy next to me had an Evo or an iPhone 4. :rolleyes:
That was exactly my point. I don't see why people care so much about what phone someone else has. It's only the Android folks that engage in this, I have yet to see an iPhone owner behave so pathetically.
They shut up because they have an insecurity about their phone and the iPhone 4 is the better phone. Shooting down a better phone makes their phone seem even worse. It's like a double headshot.
I hate to say it again but haters gon hate! It happens with ANYTHING. If you buy a BMW, Audi owners will waltz in saying "SEE MY CAR HAS THIS STANDARD IT'S WAY BETTER THAN BMW!!!!". If you buy a Rolex you get Omega and TAG Heuer owners going "MY WATCH IS SO MUCH BETTER THAN ROLEX BECAUSE IT'S CHEAPER AND IT HAS MORE THINGS IN IT!!!".
It's a thing you have to live with if you buy the most popular, top-of-the-line luxury things. If you can afford it, why not buy it?
the whole thing makes my brain hurt because it's so stupid and I don't care if the guy next to me had an Evo or an iPhone 4. :rolleyes:
That was exactly my point. I don't see why people care so much about what phone someone else has. It's only the Android folks that engage in this, I have yet to see an iPhone owner behave so pathetically.
twoodcc
Jul 17, 03:34 PM
That is a very poor speed, at least I'm getting close to 10 mb/s but paying for 30 I think... $76 a month. These monopolies we have in the US are a drag, they can do whatever they want and the gov does nothing about it. Mine is adequate for all the folding at least.
yeah what i'm getting is terrible. but it's been getting a little better today. but i can't upload bigadv results with these speeds
yeah what i'm getting is terrible. but it's been getting a little better today. but i can't upload bigadv results with these speeds
pudrums
Apr 11, 05:20 PM
21 Gramm
http://www.cineasten.de/bilder/filme/21-gramm/l.jpg
http://www.cineasten.de/bilder/filme/21-gramm/l.jpg
Arran
Mar 17, 07:03 AM
OP: Just curious. Roughly what bill denominations did you hand over? Was it mostly big bills? Or a mess of ones, fives, tens, twenties and coins?
Did you count it along with him? There's no chance a relative secretly slipped an extra $300 in your iPad fund - just to be nice to you. It's been known to happen.
Did you count it along with him? There's no chance a relative secretly slipped an extra $300 in your iPad fund - just to be nice to you. It's been known to happen.
iAlan
Oct 10, 10:29 PM
yes, I hope it's true...<snip>
As for ThinkSecret, who cares what they say...they go back and forth because they just have no clue and if this indeed happen or not they will say they were right. What a joke.
Right now the most reliable site is Appleinsider.
Actually right now the most reliable site is Apple -- once they announce and update their webpage :D :D :D
As for ThinkSecret, who cares what they say...they go back and forth because they just have no clue and if this indeed happen or not they will say they were right. What a joke.
Right now the most reliable site is Appleinsider.
Actually right now the most reliable site is Apple -- once they announce and update their webpage :D :D :D
balamw
Apr 26, 09:12 PM
wlh99 , you just described exactly what I want to do.
And what was in the tutorial I linked and the code that KnightWRX posted ...
B
And what was in the tutorial I linked and the code that KnightWRX posted ...
B
jz1492
Dec 13, 03:37 PM
There are two powerful reasons for Verizon to push for an LTE/CDMA iPhone at this time:
1) Fear of the iPhone data hogs. What better way to avoid saturation in large cities than to channel iPhone users to their highest-BW unused spectrum.
2) Voice + Data. After so much pressure from AT&T and Apple's marketing in this regard, there is no way the new Verizon's iPhone could be introduced successfully without top notch V+D functionality. CDMA is a no go, even with the latest upgrade.
On the other hand, this could be a false rumor slipped by the competition to hurt Christmas time sales of the iPhone 4.
1) Fear of the iPhone data hogs. What better way to avoid saturation in large cities than to channel iPhone users to their highest-BW unused spectrum.
2) Voice + Data. After so much pressure from AT&T and Apple's marketing in this regard, there is no way the new Verizon's iPhone could be introduced successfully without top notch V+D functionality. CDMA is a no go, even with the latest upgrade.
On the other hand, this could be a false rumor slipped by the competition to hurt Christmas time sales of the iPhone 4.
SevenInchScrew
Mar 13, 04:26 PM
Can you say just one company that seems to capture the needs/desires as Apple has?
I don'y see lines for the latest Droid phone or pad...
Like it or not of late; Apple knows how do things right...
I think you missed the entire point of his post.
I don'y see lines for the latest Droid phone or pad...
Like it or not of late; Apple knows how do things right...
I think you missed the entire point of his post.
Young Spade
May 4, 03:01 AM
Meh, overall I dont' agree with them taking out applications that allow for tethering. Yes it is against the "rules" but I also don't agree that I should be charged to spend the data I'm already paying for a different way than they intend for me to use it.
I have the Nexus 1 and luckily ATT has no direct control over the phone as it's sold through Google and I'm allowed to use the built in tethering application at no charge to me. I don't wirelessly tether often but it does come in handy when I'm in class and there's no wifi or when I'm out or riding in the car.
I have the Nexus 1 and luckily ATT has no direct control over the phone as it's sold through Google and I'm allowed to use the built in tethering application at no charge to me. I don't wirelessly tether often but it does come in handy when I'm in class and there's no wifi or when I'm out or riding in the car.
arkmannj
Apr 29, 02:17 PM
Now that OS X Server is bundled with the Client version, does this mean we should see a price drop on the Mac Mini server edition?
Or maybe just better hardware specs to compensate for the cost difference?
Or maybe there won't be a server version, you just have one Mac Mini, pick your options, and when you receive it, then you enable the server features you want...
Or maybe just better hardware specs to compensate for the cost difference?
Or maybe there won't be a server version, you just have one Mac Mini, pick your options, and when you receive it, then you enable the server features you want...
jeanlain
Apr 29, 04:03 PM
Too bad, I was looking forward to the scroll bars similar to iOS
Where do people get the idea that scrollbars have changed? :confused:
They're just like they were before the update.
Where do people get the idea that scrollbars have changed? :confused:
They're just like they were before the update.
CalBoy
Apr 15, 04:21 PM
As I said, I understood the point you were trying to make. But.... you can't take two non-TSA incidents and use those to make a case against the TSA specifically. All you can do is say that increased security, similar to what the TSA does, can be shown to not catch everything. I could just as easily argue that because the two incidents (shoe and underwear bombers) did not occur from TSA screenings then that is proof the TSA methods work. I could, but I won't because we don't really know that is true. Too small a sample to judge.
Well actually we know the TSA methods don't work because both of the incidents were from European airports that mirror what the TSA does. Added to the number of weapons that make it through TSA checkpoints, it's easy to see that the TSA does in fact not work to the extent that it is expected to.
Did you not read my post above? Or did you not understand it? Or did I not write clearly? I'll assume the 3rd. Past history is that bombs are not put on planes by lone wolf fanatics. They are placed there by a whole operation involving a number of people... perhaps a dozen, maybe? The person carrying the bomb may be a brainwashed fool (though, surprisingly - often educated) - but the support team likely aren't fools. The team includes dedicated individuals who have specialized training and experience that are needed to mount further operations. The bomb makers, the money people, the people who nurture the bomb carrier and ensure that they are fit (mentally) to go through with a suicide attack. These people, the support crew, are not going to like 50/50 odds.
I understood your rather simplistic attempt at game theory just fine. The problem remains that one side is not a rational actor. The command portion of terrorists have virtually nothing to lose with a botched attempt, and neither does the fanatic patsy. A 50/50 ratio isn't good enough for our security because the downside for both command and patsy are much smaller than the upside (from their perspective). The chances of failure need to be much higher in order to effectively deter terrorists.
You are right. There has been a cost to dignity, time and money. Most of life is. People are constantly balancing personal and societal security/safety against personal freedoms. In this case what you think is only part of the balance between society and security. You feel it's too far. I can't argue. I don't fly anymore unless I have to. But, I also think that what the TSA (and CATSA, & the European equivalents) are doing is working. I just don't have to like going through it.
Sacrificing these things is appropriate when there is a tangible gain. There hasn't been much of a tangible gain with TSA, and this is coming from the head of Israeli Security. We're paying a lot and getting almost nothing in return. Every year there's a new "standard" put out there to make it seem like TSA is doing something, but time and again security experts have lambasted TSA and its efforts as a dog and pony show.
Your own opinion of flying should be an example of how ridiculous things have gotten. If people now become disgruntled and irritated every time they fly, for perhaps marginal gains in security, then our methods have failed.
Give the man/woman/boy a cigar! There is no way to prove it, other than setting controlled experiments in which make some airports security free, and others with varying levels of security. And in some cases you don't tell the travelling public which airports have what level (if any) of security - but you do tell the bad guys/gals.
It is difficult to prove, but you can make an educated guess about what the cause is. Other than the correlational evidence, there is no other good data to suggest that TSA has actually been effective. In no field is correlation enough to establish anything but correlation.
I cited a sharp drop-off in hijackings at a particular moment in history. Within the limits of a Mac Rumours Forum, that is as far as I'm going to go. If you an alternative hypothesis, you have to at least back it up with something. My something trumps your alternative hypothesis - even if my something is merely a pair of deuces - until you provide something to back up your AH.
No, that's not how it works. If you want to assert your idea as correct, the burden is on you to show that it is correct. I am going to try to poke holes in your reasoning, and it's up to you to show that my criticisms are invalid on the bases of logic and evidence.
So far you've only cited correlation, which is not sufficient evidence for causation. You ignored my criticism based on military intervention, changing travel patterns, etc, and only want to trumpet your belief that correlation is enough. It's not. If you don't want to do more on Mac Rumors, then don't post anymore on this topic concerning this line of discussion.
Pic Of Nicki Minaj Rocking A
Maybe it#39;s the 15-year old in
nicki minaj old and new. and
Well actually we know the TSA methods don't work because both of the incidents were from European airports that mirror what the TSA does. Added to the number of weapons that make it through TSA checkpoints, it's easy to see that the TSA does in fact not work to the extent that it is expected to.
Did you not read my post above? Or did you not understand it? Or did I not write clearly? I'll assume the 3rd. Past history is that bombs are not put on planes by lone wolf fanatics. They are placed there by a whole operation involving a number of people... perhaps a dozen, maybe? The person carrying the bomb may be a brainwashed fool (though, surprisingly - often educated) - but the support team likely aren't fools. The team includes dedicated individuals who have specialized training and experience that are needed to mount further operations. The bomb makers, the money people, the people who nurture the bomb carrier and ensure that they are fit (mentally) to go through with a suicide attack. These people, the support crew, are not going to like 50/50 odds.
I understood your rather simplistic attempt at game theory just fine. The problem remains that one side is not a rational actor. The command portion of terrorists have virtually nothing to lose with a botched attempt, and neither does the fanatic patsy. A 50/50 ratio isn't good enough for our security because the downside for both command and patsy are much smaller than the upside (from their perspective). The chances of failure need to be much higher in order to effectively deter terrorists.
You are right. There has been a cost to dignity, time and money. Most of life is. People are constantly balancing personal and societal security/safety against personal freedoms. In this case what you think is only part of the balance between society and security. You feel it's too far. I can't argue. I don't fly anymore unless I have to. But, I also think that what the TSA (and CATSA, & the European equivalents) are doing is working. I just don't have to like going through it.
Sacrificing these things is appropriate when there is a tangible gain. There hasn't been much of a tangible gain with TSA, and this is coming from the head of Israeli Security. We're paying a lot and getting almost nothing in return. Every year there's a new "standard" put out there to make it seem like TSA is doing something, but time and again security experts have lambasted TSA and its efforts as a dog and pony show.
Your own opinion of flying should be an example of how ridiculous things have gotten. If people now become disgruntled and irritated every time they fly, for perhaps marginal gains in security, then our methods have failed.
Give the man/woman/boy a cigar! There is no way to prove it, other than setting controlled experiments in which make some airports security free, and others with varying levels of security. And in some cases you don't tell the travelling public which airports have what level (if any) of security - but you do tell the bad guys/gals.
It is difficult to prove, but you can make an educated guess about what the cause is. Other than the correlational evidence, there is no other good data to suggest that TSA has actually been effective. In no field is correlation enough to establish anything but correlation.
I cited a sharp drop-off in hijackings at a particular moment in history. Within the limits of a Mac Rumours Forum, that is as far as I'm going to go. If you an alternative hypothesis, you have to at least back it up with something. My something trumps your alternative hypothesis - even if my something is merely a pair of deuces - until you provide something to back up your AH.
No, that's not how it works. If you want to assert your idea as correct, the burden is on you to show that it is correct. I am going to try to poke holes in your reasoning, and it's up to you to show that my criticisms are invalid on the bases of logic and evidence.
So far you've only cited correlation, which is not sufficient evidence for causation. You ignored my criticism based on military intervention, changing travel patterns, etc, and only want to trumpet your belief that correlation is enough. It's not. If you don't want to do more on Mac Rumors, then don't post anymore on this topic concerning this line of discussion.
bousozoku
Jan 13, 05:28 PM
but the point is that Apple's lineup isn't going to stay the way it is forever. Within a couple of weeks or months, Apple will announce the widescreen iPod. Now that they have shown what you can do with a touchscreen, I reckon we should expect OS X and a dully-touchable display on the iPod.
Just wait a little while; the 6th Gen iPod will be released :)
The possibilities seem endless. Maybe, they could do a smart remote control. I've seen those priced at more than $1000 on the high end.
Just wait a little while; the 6th Gen iPod will be released :)
The possibilities seem endless. Maybe, they could do a smart remote control. I've seen those priced at more than $1000 on the high end.
iMikeT
Oct 17, 07:24 PM
What ever the outcome is in the end, the hardware of one of these formats will be nothing more than a paper weight.
zwida
Oct 2, 07:34 PM
Well, that has to be the funniest thing I ever heard.
Heh. I literally laughed out loud when I saw that line.
Heh. I literally laughed out loud when I saw that line.
drsmithy
Oct 5, 02:25 AM
Squarely wrong. Even "The Inquirer" has talked about the vastly superior multitasking AND SMP features of OS X Leopard, as compared to what Vista seems to offer. Damn, even today any version of Windows crawls far behind OS X in that (XP Home didn't even have SMP support in the first place).
The Inquirer is wrong (and it certainly wouldn't be the first time). Not only is Windows's SMP capability ahead of OS X's right now, it's improved even more in Vista. All those improvements in 10.4 regarding SMP ? NT was getting them 7 - 8 years ago.
Oh, and XP Home most certainly *does* support SMP (and seeing as it uses the same kernel as other versions of Windows, it makes better use of multiple CPUs than OS X does).
Windows NT was designed from day one for multiprocessor machines and has been running on them since 1993. It's at least as good as its contemporaries.
The Inquirer is wrong (and it certainly wouldn't be the first time). Not only is Windows's SMP capability ahead of OS X's right now, it's improved even more in Vista. All those improvements in 10.4 regarding SMP ? NT was getting them 7 - 8 years ago.
Oh, and XP Home most certainly *does* support SMP (and seeing as it uses the same kernel as other versions of Windows, it makes better use of multiple CPUs than OS X does).
Windows NT was designed from day one for multiprocessor machines and has been running on them since 1993. It's at least as good as its contemporaries.
SandynJosh
Mar 28, 04:54 PM
What exactly is a 'hater'? Someone that disagrees with the company line? Someone with a dissenting opinion?
How about someone that has a negative opinion on whatever Apple does. You don't have to look far in any thread. They're the ones that are usually whining about something and often are threatening to switch brands over imagined minor rumors.
How about someone that has a negative opinion on whatever Apple does. You don't have to look far in any thread. They're the ones that are usually whining about something and often are threatening to switch brands over imagined minor rumors.
JohnnyQuest
Mar 17, 01:15 AM
Haaaaaaa just shared a launch day story, and the majority of you would have hauled ass with iPad in hand for the price I paid. Haters lmfao
I must say, terrific use of grammar. Flawless.
You are so delusional. Not everyone lacks morals. What you did is WRONG, and you're trying to justify your actions. The poor guy you STOLE from is most likely going to lose his job. Bravo, you're a huge ass.
I must say, terrific use of grammar. Flawless.
You are so delusional. Not everyone lacks morals. What you did is WRONG, and you're trying to justify your actions. The poor guy you STOLE from is most likely going to lose his job. Bravo, you're a huge ass.
puuukeey
Jan 9, 01:48 PM
It refreshes the supposed page every minute!
NICE!!!
NICE!!!
vizkiz
Apr 15, 04:14 PM
I call yours fake. They forgot to put in the switch.
This (black plastic)http://assets.gearlive.com/blogimages/gallery/iphone-unboxing/13-iphone-mute-volume_medium.jpg
is different than this (hole)http://media.boygeniusreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/30951.jpg
First off, it's supposedly a picture of the next-gen phone, it's not going to have the same rocker as the current or previous model. My 3G doesn't have the same switch as the first-gen iPhone.
Second, it's supposedly photos of the CASE, not the whole phone.
And, as someone pointed out in the MacRumors thread with these pictures, there's no space for the camera flash, which the next-gen phone supposedly will have, as there are things pointing to it in the OS 4.0 Beta. They're most likely fakes. Not the best ones, but certainly not terrible either.
This (black plastic)http://assets.gearlive.com/blogimages/gallery/iphone-unboxing/13-iphone-mute-volume_medium.jpg
is different than this (hole)http://media.boygeniusreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/30951.jpg
First off, it's supposedly a picture of the next-gen phone, it's not going to have the same rocker as the current or previous model. My 3G doesn't have the same switch as the first-gen iPhone.
Second, it's supposedly photos of the CASE, not the whole phone.
And, as someone pointed out in the MacRumors thread with these pictures, there's no space for the camera flash, which the next-gen phone supposedly will have, as there are things pointing to it in the OS 4.0 Beta. They're most likely fakes. Not the best ones, but certainly not terrible either.