Roy Hobbs
Oct 27, 09:34 AM
Steve Jobs is a hippie.
In my opinion you can't have true hippie values and be a CEO of a major cooperation.
In my opinion you can't have true hippie values and be a CEO of a major cooperation.
pixpixpix
Apr 20, 01:59 PM
Looks like this has been widely known (http://www.forensicfocus.com/search-results?cx=partner-pub-1997641209324587%3Av26jsjw0irb&cof=FORID%3A9&ie=UTF-8&q=consolidated.db+&sa=Search) for a long time. There's an interesting ongoing discussion and analysis on the Forensic Focus website (http://www.forensicfocus.com/index.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&printertopic=1&t=6758&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=20). For example, this:
As an example of the information recorded under controlled conditions, I joined a single access point on a freshly restored iPad. I had location services turned off and airplane mode switched on. I never moved from my office chair, the phone was also connected to a cell tower using 3G on O2. By just joining the wireless access point my ipad was populated with 379 access point locations and 122 cell tower locations.
From my office I can see at a push 4 wifi access points and some of the cell towers were 22KM away. There is no way I would connect to some of the cell towers or access points recorded from where I am located.
As an example of the information recorded under controlled conditions, I joined a single access point on a freshly restored iPad. I had location services turned off and airplane mode switched on. I never moved from my office chair, the phone was also connected to a cell tower using 3G on O2. By just joining the wireless access point my ipad was populated with 379 access point locations and 122 cell tower locations.
From my office I can see at a push 4 wifi access points and some of the cell towers were 22KM away. There is no way I would connect to some of the cell towers or access points recorded from where I am located.
PetMac
Sep 5, 12:15 PM
I want an iTunes Movie Store, but to me it would be a lot better if you had the choice between a $9.99 download and a $2 or $3 rental that expired after a couple days. I honestly don't buy very many movies at all, because I rarely watch a movie twice. I do like to rent them though, and anything that made that more convenient would be great.
I couldn't agree more. Steve was right when he said people don't want to rent their music, they want to own it. The opposite is true about movies. Besides who has that kind of HDD space? I almost never buy movies but we do use Netflix. How about a model just like that. A monthly fee based on how many active movies you can have a one time. You can watch them as long as you like but when you download another you have to give one up.
I couldn't agree more. Steve was right when he said people don't want to rent their music, they want to own it. The opposite is true about movies. Besides who has that kind of HDD space? I almost never buy movies but we do use Netflix. How about a model just like that. A monthly fee based on how many active movies you can have a one time. You can watch them as long as you like but when you download another you have to give one up.
poppe
Sep 5, 12:32 PM
So no mermom MBP's on September 12 then?
rdowns
Apr 29, 01:37 PM
There is just so much wrong with 100% of your post. I can't even begin, nor will I spend time, contradicting every sentence.
In short, there is no war between Apple and Microsoft...nor has been for decades. Also, you think Apple is not a monopoly? Apple makes the hardware, the OS, the apps, and Appstore, and APPROVES what apps consumers can purchase. No...that's not a monopoly. No, sir.
That is wrong. Apple has no more of a monopoly on the iPhone as Samsung has one for the Galaxy. For Apple to have a monopoly, there would be few to no companies making smart phones. There are dozens of smart phone companies, 5 or so mobile OSs, many App Stores and all exert some control (that they decided on) over your device. So, no, that's not a monopoly.
In short, there is no war between Apple and Microsoft...nor has been for decades. Also, you think Apple is not a monopoly? Apple makes the hardware, the OS, the apps, and Appstore, and APPROVES what apps consumers can purchase. No...that's not a monopoly. No, sir.
That is wrong. Apple has no more of a monopoly on the iPhone as Samsung has one for the Galaxy. For Apple to have a monopoly, there would be few to no companies making smart phones. There are dozens of smart phone companies, 5 or so mobile OSs, many App Stores and all exert some control (that they decided on) over your device. So, no, that's not a monopoly.
DavidLeblond
Aug 28, 02:00 PM
If you walked into the Apple Store today and bought a 2GHz MacBook, it'd be the most current.
Until tomorrow.
Well, allegedly. ... More like in my dreams.
Until tomorrow.
Well, allegedly. ... More like in my dreams.
Joshuarocks
Apr 19, 10:58 PM
See the roll eyes after his post, I think he was being sarcastic.
No, I truly hate that place.. and all it stands for.
No, I truly hate that place.. and all it stands for.
Michael73
Apr 25, 04:05 PM
The unibody was already a giant leap forward. How much better can Apple get?
I'm more interested in the specifications, and hardware (electronics) not so much the casing.
+1. Why I upgraded from my early 2009 15" MBP to my new 2011 15" MBP. Form was already awesome but I wanted a machine that was on par speed-wise with my 2008 MP.
Thinner, no optical...perhaps SSD only?
SSD on a per GB basis is still way too expensive. For those of us doing media work big hard drives are still needed. Now, a good solution are the current line-up of Seagate Momentus XT hybrid drives.
Oh boo hoo. No new case since 2008?
We Mac-Pro user are so very sad for you.
Amen! Although, I'm less interested in a show horse and more interested in a workhorse. For me it comes down to speed of encoding, rendering, working with large files, multi-tasking, opening/closing tons of applications and overall efficiency.
I'm more interested in the specifications, and hardware (electronics) not so much the casing.
+1. Why I upgraded from my early 2009 15" MBP to my new 2011 15" MBP. Form was already awesome but I wanted a machine that was on par speed-wise with my 2008 MP.
Thinner, no optical...perhaps SSD only?
SSD on a per GB basis is still way too expensive. For those of us doing media work big hard drives are still needed. Now, a good solution are the current line-up of Seagate Momentus XT hybrid drives.
Oh boo hoo. No new case since 2008?
We Mac-Pro user are so very sad for you.
Amen! Although, I'm less interested in a show horse and more interested in a workhorse. For me it comes down to speed of encoding, rendering, working with large files, multi-tasking, opening/closing tons of applications and overall efficiency.
Benjy91
Mar 22, 01:34 PM
Like Squirrels you must store these "Mac" rumor articles, for the cold, iOS rumor months to follow. ;)
Peace
Sep 5, 11:40 AM
No one else has yet mentioned that the Airport Extreme is currently reflecting a 1-3 week shipping period (http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE/WebObjects/AppleStore.woa/wo/1.RSLID?mco=B842E400&nplm=M8799LL%2FA), while the Airport Express (http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE/WebObjects/AppleStore.woa/wo/1.RSLID?mco=7D88DA55&nplm=M9470LL%2FA) still says it will ship within 24 hours on the Apple Store Online. It would seem that it is the Extreme and not the Express to be getting the update.
The reason for the 1-3 week delay in the Extreme Base Station is due to the new European regulations on certain chemicals going into effect.
The reason for the 1-3 week delay in the Extreme Base Station is due to the new European regulations on certain chemicals going into effect.
freeny
Aug 23, 09:23 PM
100million to make a nagging itch go away? not bad and well worth it IMO.
If only the middle East were so diplomatic....
If only the middle East were so diplomatic....
bigbossbmb
Aug 28, 05:52 PM
So with all this dumping going on, Apple better have at least equal hardware. They were first out with the core 2 duo xeon and with yonah.
I don't know about woodcrest...but they were definitely not the first with yonah.
I don't know about woodcrest...but they were definitely not the first with yonah.
samiwas
Apr 20, 02:47 PM
The free market would suck if it were run in the way your brain imagines it. But imagine if you ran a company, and your chief goal is to make a profit. Having happy employees who are payed fairly and receive vacation days, benefits, etc, is definitely a better business model than working your employees like slaves.
OK, so why don't more businesses do that, instead of doing everything they can to "cut costs" to "generate higher profits"? Obviously, a business needs to make a profit. But instead of just making a profit, it seems that nowadays a business is not considered successful unless that business generates massive profits, or highly increased profits over the previous year. And if a business doesn't make as much as they thought they might (even though they've pulled in billions in profit), they are considered failed and their stock tumbles.
Honestly, I don't believe the "free market" that you or any Republican/Tea Partier/Libertarian believes in would work either, except for funneling even more dough to the top (which I actually think might be the way you want to see it, and thus believe would be successful). If you really believe that without some sort of regulation, all businesses would be spending MORE on their employees, you are hopeless.
Benefits shouldn't be government regulated. However, the slave labor that you describe should most certainly not be allowed, duh. Try cutting back on the straw man argument some.
My example may have been a little over the top, but let's not pretend for one second that plenty of employers out there would think nothing of asking their employees to come in on weekends or stay late nights with no extra compensation.
Benefits should have some sort of MINIMAL regulation. The US has pretty much the fewest benefits of any developed nation, and this is considered a good thing....because it benefits the business and not the worker.
It's humorous that when people imagine a free market, they ignore that in a free market, employers would be fighting for good employees as much as employees are fighting for the employers.
Wait...what?? Employers are currently not trying to get good employees? What does this even mean?
It's sad that the government is the largest charity, because it's just so darn inefficient. I have an idea. Private charity.
Somehow, I can't imagine a private charity large enough to take care of all of America's bottom class or replace existing "entitlement programs". The largest charity in the US is the United Way with $3.8billion in income. As for current government program expenses, even Tenant-based Rental Assistance is at $18.2billion, and that's just a single line item in a portion of one part of programs. I just cannot see how private charity could have the kind of reach that the government does. And I'm guessing that the people who do run the government programs make a little less than the $715,000 salary of the head of the United Way.
For all the bleeding heart liberals I've spoken with over the years, who want crazy amounts taxed in order to support social uplift programs, I never see any of them giving away 50+% of their income to charity. It's a lot easier to ask the government to give other peoples money to charity.
I can tell you right now that my family gives >50% of its total income.
However, if you think that taxes = charity, what incentive do you have to give? (to the organizations that are 90+% efficient rather than whatever the crap the government is)
So, AFTER paying 30% in federal and state income taxes, whatever percentage in sales and property tax, you are still able give away an additional 50% or more to charity? So you are able to live on like 3% of your earnings? I would LOVE to be in that position! It's very admirable, but hardly reachable for the average person. I try to give whenever I can, but I can admit that's it's usually around $2k a year.
Anyway, the topic is about the influx of low-wage, no-benefit jobs with no worker protections during times of high profitability and skyrocketing leadership pay. Some people actually see this as good. Some see it as bad. If you see this as a good thing, then we're at an impasse.
OK, so why don't more businesses do that, instead of doing everything they can to "cut costs" to "generate higher profits"? Obviously, a business needs to make a profit. But instead of just making a profit, it seems that nowadays a business is not considered successful unless that business generates massive profits, or highly increased profits over the previous year. And if a business doesn't make as much as they thought they might (even though they've pulled in billions in profit), they are considered failed and their stock tumbles.
Honestly, I don't believe the "free market" that you or any Republican/Tea Partier/Libertarian believes in would work either, except for funneling even more dough to the top (which I actually think might be the way you want to see it, and thus believe would be successful). If you really believe that without some sort of regulation, all businesses would be spending MORE on their employees, you are hopeless.
Benefits shouldn't be government regulated. However, the slave labor that you describe should most certainly not be allowed, duh. Try cutting back on the straw man argument some.
My example may have been a little over the top, but let's not pretend for one second that plenty of employers out there would think nothing of asking their employees to come in on weekends or stay late nights with no extra compensation.
Benefits should have some sort of MINIMAL regulation. The US has pretty much the fewest benefits of any developed nation, and this is considered a good thing....because it benefits the business and not the worker.
It's humorous that when people imagine a free market, they ignore that in a free market, employers would be fighting for good employees as much as employees are fighting for the employers.
Wait...what?? Employers are currently not trying to get good employees? What does this even mean?
It's sad that the government is the largest charity, because it's just so darn inefficient. I have an idea. Private charity.
Somehow, I can't imagine a private charity large enough to take care of all of America's bottom class or replace existing "entitlement programs". The largest charity in the US is the United Way with $3.8billion in income. As for current government program expenses, even Tenant-based Rental Assistance is at $18.2billion, and that's just a single line item in a portion of one part of programs. I just cannot see how private charity could have the kind of reach that the government does. And I'm guessing that the people who do run the government programs make a little less than the $715,000 salary of the head of the United Way.
For all the bleeding heart liberals I've spoken with over the years, who want crazy amounts taxed in order to support social uplift programs, I never see any of them giving away 50+% of their income to charity. It's a lot easier to ask the government to give other peoples money to charity.
I can tell you right now that my family gives >50% of its total income.
However, if you think that taxes = charity, what incentive do you have to give? (to the organizations that are 90+% efficient rather than whatever the crap the government is)
So, AFTER paying 30% in federal and state income taxes, whatever percentage in sales and property tax, you are still able give away an additional 50% or more to charity? So you are able to live on like 3% of your earnings? I would LOVE to be in that position! It's very admirable, but hardly reachable for the average person. I try to give whenever I can, but I can admit that's it's usually around $2k a year.
Anyway, the topic is about the influx of low-wage, no-benefit jobs with no worker protections during times of high profitability and skyrocketing leadership pay. Some people actually see this as good. Some see it as bad. If you see this as a good thing, then we're at an impasse.
danielbriggs
Aug 31, 05:12 PM
The Palm OS as we currently know it (the one you will find on Palm OS-powered Treos, the Palm TX, etc.) is basically dead. PalmSource is doing no further development to it, and PalmSource was acquired by Access, which is creating the Access Linux Platform as a successor to the Palm OS (it will include Palm emulation to run Palm apps, etc.).
It's not to say that it's compeltely worthless to have a Palm-based system. Plenty of people still do have Palm OS Treos and other Palm OS PDA's, and there's still plenty of people using it and developing software for it. I personally have a Treo 650 and it's still working great for me.
Hopefully Palm will license the Access Linux Platform and use that so that the "Palm OS" stays alive, but so far Palm hasn't committed to it. It's entirely possible that Palm could end up just making Windows Mobile devices.
If you want a platform that definitely has support behind it, you're basically stuck with a PocketPC. There's also Symbian and some other stuff, but PocketPC is definitely sort of repeating the "success" of Windows in the PDA world.
-Zadillo
Does this mean an Archos PMA-400 iPod style thingy. That was cool when it came out a year or so ago. 40GB PDA not bad!
Dan :-)
It's not to say that it's compeltely worthless to have a Palm-based system. Plenty of people still do have Palm OS Treos and other Palm OS PDA's, and there's still plenty of people using it and developing software for it. I personally have a Treo 650 and it's still working great for me.
Hopefully Palm will license the Access Linux Platform and use that so that the "Palm OS" stays alive, but so far Palm hasn't committed to it. It's entirely possible that Palm could end up just making Windows Mobile devices.
If you want a platform that definitely has support behind it, you're basically stuck with a PocketPC. There's also Symbian and some other stuff, but PocketPC is definitely sort of repeating the "success" of Windows in the PDA world.
-Zadillo
Does this mean an Archos PMA-400 iPod style thingy. That was cool when it came out a year or so ago. 40GB PDA not bad!
Dan :-)
cube
Apr 23, 01:47 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
Aren't intel in the process on implementing Open CL?
The Skinny. Rachel (Elizabeth
SkinnyGirlmobile.jpg
ray ban sunglasses yellow.
your perfectly flat skinny
Aren't intel in the process on implementing Open CL?
MacRumors
Oct 27, 07:43 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
Environmental activist group Greenpeace was ejected from London's Mac Expo yesterday, after various other exhibitors complained about the group's activities at the show.
The group had purchased a small both with contract terms to only hand out leaflets within their assigned area and to not take photographs at other stands. The Register got in touch with MacExpo marketing director Matt Denton (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/10/26/greepeace_ejected_from_mac_expo/print.html) who said "It was a valid stand with a valid message... they breached their contract."
Greenpeace does not deny having passed out fliers beyond their booth (http://weblog.greenpeace.org/makingwaves/archives/2006/10/we_love_our_macs_but_mac_expo.html), but insists that the reaction was "over the top" in a statement to MacRumors. Greenpeace is vowing to return to the expo tomorrow to continue their 'Green my Apple (http://www.greenmyapple.org)' campaign.
Greenpeace recently rated Apple the 4th worst tech company in their guide to greener electronics (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/08/20060829114739.shtml).
Environmental activist group Greenpeace was ejected from London's Mac Expo yesterday, after various other exhibitors complained about the group's activities at the show.
The group had purchased a small both with contract terms to only hand out leaflets within their assigned area and to not take photographs at other stands. The Register got in touch with MacExpo marketing director Matt Denton (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/10/26/greepeace_ejected_from_mac_expo/print.html) who said "It was a valid stand with a valid message... they breached their contract."
Greenpeace does not deny having passed out fliers beyond their booth (http://weblog.greenpeace.org/makingwaves/archives/2006/10/we_love_our_macs_but_mac_expo.html), but insists that the reaction was "over the top" in a statement to MacRumors. Greenpeace is vowing to return to the expo tomorrow to continue their 'Green my Apple (http://www.greenmyapple.org)' campaign.
Greenpeace recently rated Apple the 4th worst tech company in their guide to greener electronics (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/08/20060829114739.shtml).
logandzwon
Mar 30, 01:45 PM
That's like saying it's OK to name a restaurant "Burger Place" because it's technically a "Fast Food Place".
ya or "Burger King" because technically they were just the king of making burgers?
ya or "Burger King" because technically they were just the king of making burgers?
Peace
Aug 31, 04:44 PM
Well if they do the announcement late on Monday 12 in Cupertino that will be Tuesday in Paris (time zone difference is +9) so will comply with the tradition LOL :rolleyes: :p :D
Sept. 12th is a Tuesday in Cupertino.
Sept. 12th is a Tuesday in Cupertino.
blahblah100
Mar 30, 01:25 PM
In the Windows world, it would be a Program Store. Look at any Windows computer and there's nothing called an application or an app. MS claims to have, like 95% of the desktop market. How would the gazillion Windows users out there even know what an "app" was? They've had zero exposure to it, it's a totally foreign term. Wait a minute, it's an Apple term that is coming into common usage and now MS might have to change their language to get rid of the goofy term "program", conceding defeat, so its usage must be stopped or curtailed. That's what this is really about.
As others have pointed out (repeatedly), Windows does actually refer to what you call 'Programs' as applications. For example, right click on a 'program' shortcut. On the short-cut, what does it say for the "target type?"
Since you seem to have trouble reading so-far, I'll give you a hint: it says "Application."
It's been this way since <at least> Windows XP.
Edit: Actually, I just looked at some really old KB articles from Microsoft, MS-Dos 'programs' were also referred to as "applications."
As others have pointed out (repeatedly), Windows does actually refer to what you call 'Programs' as applications. For example, right click on a 'program' shortcut. On the short-cut, what does it say for the "target type?"
Since you seem to have trouble reading so-far, I'll give you a hint: it says "Application."
It's been this way since <at least> Windows XP.
Edit: Actually, I just looked at some really old KB articles from Microsoft, MS-Dos 'programs' were also referred to as "applications."
gnasher729
Mar 30, 01:08 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_0 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/532.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Mobile/8A293 Safari/6531.22.7)
'app store' means simply 'store at which apps are offered for sale,'
Go back five years. I tell you "Someone told me that I should use iMovie to edit the movies that I made with my video camera. Where can I buy it"? You say: "You should go to an app store". I say "What on earth is an app store?"
No, that wouldn't have happened. You would have said "You should go to a computer store". "You might try a games store, they might have it". You would never have said "You should go to an app store".
'app store' means simply 'store at which apps are offered for sale,'
Go back five years. I tell you "Someone told me that I should use iMovie to edit the movies that I made with my video camera. Where can I buy it"? You say: "You should go to an app store". I say "What on earth is an app store?"
No, that wouldn't have happened. You would have said "You should go to a computer store". "You might try a games store, they might have it". You would never have said "You should go to an app store".
bdj21ya
Oct 12, 01:14 PM
Granted, this is a good thing.
But does anyone else find it ironic that the iPods in question are being made by people who according to media reports could use this type of financial subsidization as well?
It's not really the same. They are poor and struggling to improve their lives, but their entire people is not being wiped out by a disease that they don't have the resources to understand, much less combat.
But does anyone else find it ironic that the iPods in question are being made by people who according to media reports could use this type of financial subsidization as well?
It's not really the same. They are poor and struggling to improve their lives, but their entire people is not being wiped out by a disease that they don't have the resources to understand, much less combat.
Vegasman
Mar 30, 01:38 PM
But MS never consistently used the term App to describe any part of their business. Sure it pops up occasionally here and there, almost at random, but that's about it. Historically they've always used 'Programs'. So to use your example, why couldn't they say: "We have this thing called Marketplace. What is it? Well, it's a place where you can buy programs.....". Why are they not happy with that? It will line up so much better with their software genealogy.
I suspect the truth of the matter is they now want to start using 'App' for everything (instead of Programs), because Apple has popularized the term. Its on everybody's tongue now. And MS wants in on it. They want their stuff to be associated with the buzz that Apple created. That's borderline parasitic to me.
Because apps and applications have been used interchangeably for over a decade. Why only allow Apple to use it?
I suspect the truth of the matter is they now want to start using 'App' for everything (instead of Programs), because Apple has popularized the term. Its on everybody's tongue now. And MS wants in on it. They want their stuff to be associated with the buzz that Apple created. That's borderline parasitic to me.
Because apps and applications have been used interchangeably for over a decade. Why only allow Apple to use it?
hayesk
May 3, 06:58 PM
My iMacs have 2 Firewire ports (a 27" and a 24") which I use for TM and a SD clone external. The new iMacs only have one FW port - with 4 USB connections. Seems like a slower way to have to back up, and I see no externals out there that run Thunderbolt.
Am I missing something? :confused:
I'm missing why you would waste money on FW or TB for backups. Why do you need top performance for simply backups. Save yourself some money and get a cheap USB drive for backups. I just bought a 3TB USB driver at Best Buy for $170 CDN - it's just as safe as a firewire drive, and I don't need the speed - it's not like I'm capturing video or running software off of it.
Am I missing something? :confused:
I'm missing why you would waste money on FW or TB for backups. Why do you need top performance for simply backups. Save yourself some money and get a cheap USB drive for backups. I just bought a 3TB USB driver at Best Buy for $170 CDN - it's just as safe as a firewire drive, and I don't need the speed - it's not like I'm capturing video or running software off of it.
scrapple
Apr 28, 03:28 PM
yawn..
they both made billions... who cares.
they both made billions... who cares.
