WestonHarvey1
Jul 21, 09:30 AM
Oh my god...
did Apple seriously just make pointing fingers apart of their campaign?
I thought they were above that!
I understand that it's unfair that the other companies do that and all, but Apple really doesn't need to stoop to their level, do they?
They're not stooping. They are defending their product by demonstrating that the issue is not unique to their phone. I think most people instinctively knew this before the iPhone - telling someone that holding a phone a certain way might reduce the signal would have resulted in a shoulder shrug. Of course it will, it's a radio.
The N1 can't maintain a 3G signal when touched, period. Yet it didn't cause this kind of outcry because it wasn't from Apple.
did Apple seriously just make pointing fingers apart of their campaign?
I thought they were above that!
I understand that it's unfair that the other companies do that and all, but Apple really doesn't need to stoop to their level, do they?
They're not stooping. They are defending their product by demonstrating that the issue is not unique to their phone. I think most people instinctively knew this before the iPhone - telling someone that holding a phone a certain way might reduce the signal would have resulted in a shoulder shrug. Of course it will, it's a radio.
The N1 can't maintain a 3G signal when touched, period. Yet it didn't cause this kind of outcry because it wasn't from Apple.
dalvin200
Sep 12, 07:33 AM
I'm still waiting for my TV Shows in the UK :(
If Corrie makes it into the store, then i'm leaving!! lol..
If Corrie makes it into the store, then i'm leaving!! lol..
sparkleytone
Oct 28, 03:51 PM
Its not that big of a deal. Every "OSx86" release we have seen so far share the same fundamental problem: they are "one-off" builds.
This means they are not upgradeable via Software Update and the build can be easily obsoleted by a subsequent Apple release. This combined with the fact that Joe User wouldn't touch this with a 10ft pole means that it can't really harm Apple very much. In fact, until it is truly hacked, OSx86 builds will probably contribute more to Apple sales than hurt them.
This means they are not upgradeable via Software Update and the build can be easily obsoleted by a subsequent Apple release. This combined with the fact that Joe User wouldn't touch this with a 10ft pole means that it can't really harm Apple very much. In fact, until it is truly hacked, OSx86 builds will probably contribute more to Apple sales than hurt them.
Glideslope
Apr 25, 01:11 PM
What??
Define ftw? :apple:
Define ftw? :apple:
samcraig
May 2, 02:34 PM
Common sense to a programmer is not all ways the same same a common sense to a user. :confused:
The code is working as intented, but the design is flawed. A switch that prevents applications from calling a service is functionally the same as disabling the service; except in this case. In this case they intentional left the service running, without considering the consequences of the cache continuing to update.
The common sense I referred to is that an on/off switch doesn't need to be explained to a user. Off = Off. On = On.
The code is NOT working as intended. Apple even said so. Turning it off wasn't supposed to continue the recording of locations.
That's like the old joke that a broken clock is still right twice a day.
Look - they're fixing it. They know it was an issue (now for certain). That's really what matters here.
The code is working as intented, but the design is flawed. A switch that prevents applications from calling a service is functionally the same as disabling the service; except in this case. In this case they intentional left the service running, without considering the consequences of the cache continuing to update.
The common sense I referred to is that an on/off switch doesn't need to be explained to a user. Off = Off. On = On.
The code is NOT working as intended. Apple even said so. Turning it off wasn't supposed to continue the recording of locations.
That's like the old joke that a broken clock is still right twice a day.
Look - they're fixing it. They know it was an issue (now for certain). That's really what matters here.
iphone3gs16gb
Apr 26, 09:09 AM
If you have nothing to add to the discussion, don't post. Your act is wearing thin.
I did have something to add, my opinion, which I am more than entitled to state just as much as you do.
This guy had arms and legs. He could've at least tried to defend himself, but he chose not too, which I dont understand why...
If I were attacked, my first instinct would be to fight back or run.
I did have something to add, my opinion, which I am more than entitled to state just as much as you do.
This guy had arms and legs. He could've at least tried to defend himself, but he chose not too, which I dont understand why...
If I were attacked, my first instinct would be to fight back or run.
LouF
Nov 24, 11:45 AM
Went to the Eastview Mall store near Rochester, NY.
No double discounts at store.
Went back home and recieved both discounts online no Problem.
This was for local government employees.
LouF
No double discounts at store.
Went back home and recieved both discounts online no Problem.
This was for local government employees.
LouF
Reissman
Jan 8, 10:59 PM
Do you think they will have a price reduction of anything with the introduction of new products?
airforce1
May 2, 11:19 AM
Well that's just wrong... they aren't completely removing location tracking in anything. Just fixing "bugs" that stored to much information in a file on your phone.
FAIL
your correct, based on Steve Jobbs response to this which was pure BS we can never trust that the files do NOT get sent out, so with this and their sweat shops in china i think enough activists, governments around the world and companies will shut apple down, so its not just Congress coming to ask Apple why it was still there after a year ago when they where sued for using it to COLLECT POLITICAL VIEWS:
Lets see why :
Wikileeks, Wall street, Oil Giants, allot of these people used macs and iphones, I think Congress is doing the right thing indicting Apple for violations of privacy on US and foreign citizens becuase if they do nothing other nations will pull the plug forever, Israel already is planning a blockade on the devices
FAIL
your correct, based on Steve Jobbs response to this which was pure BS we can never trust that the files do NOT get sent out, so with this and their sweat shops in china i think enough activists, governments around the world and companies will shut apple down, so its not just Congress coming to ask Apple why it was still there after a year ago when they where sued for using it to COLLECT POLITICAL VIEWS:
Lets see why :
Wikileeks, Wall street, Oil Giants, allot of these people used macs and iphones, I think Congress is doing the right thing indicting Apple for violations of privacy on US and foreign citizens becuase if they do nothing other nations will pull the plug forever, Israel already is planning a blockade on the devices
krestfallen
Oct 17, 10:01 AM
1. VHS had longer tapes, Betamax's tapes were smaller, so had difficulty coming out with larger capacity tapes. Faced with one system that's standard tapes could record 1 hour and one that could do 3 hours, most people chose the latter (VHS).
2. Sony's tight grip on the Betamax format kept prices high and innovation low. VHS decks were cheaper and made by more manufacturers, and hence consumers had more choice.
3. The porn industry chose VHS.
so it's kind of a mixture here.
1. more capacity -> blu-ray
2. lower price -> hd-dvd
3. porn industry choses the cheapest format -> hd-dvd
the big thing will be the players. blu-ray players had a bad start (frames were dropped, image quality wasn't that good, delays).
it looks like blu-ray will have a hard fight.
2. Sony's tight grip on the Betamax format kept prices high and innovation low. VHS decks were cheaper and made by more manufacturers, and hence consumers had more choice.
3. The porn industry chose VHS.
so it's kind of a mixture here.
1. more capacity -> blu-ray
2. lower price -> hd-dvd
3. porn industry choses the cheapest format -> hd-dvd
the big thing will be the players. blu-ray players had a bad start (frames were dropped, image quality wasn't that good, delays).
it looks like blu-ray will have a hard fight.
quagmire
Aug 3, 07:39 PM
It is going to sell for that much above MSRP, according to some dealers.
So expect to fork out 50-60k for a Volt the first 6-18 months.
GM needs to smack those dealers in the head. This is part of the reason why I am for manufactures opening corporate dealerships.
So expect to fork out 50-60k for a Volt the first 6-18 months.
GM needs to smack those dealers in the head. This is part of the reason why I am for manufactures opening corporate dealerships.
bselack
Sep 25, 11:53 AM
Look at the new requirements page...
http://www.apple.com/aperture/specs/
Apple must have tweaked it VERY much. Will make it available to more people based on the new hardware and expanded video support.
Even the NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Ultra and Intel Mac Mini.
http://www.apple.com/aperture/specs/
Apple must have tweaked it VERY much. Will make it available to more people based on the new hardware and expanded video support.
Even the NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Ultra and Intel Mac Mini.
iMacZealot
Jan 5, 03:17 PM
Feel it people. A million geeks, all achieving orgasm at the same time. It's such a thing of beauty. :)
EWW!!
It's in my head forever!!!
EWW!!
It's in my head forever!!!
Music-Man
Jan 9, 03:33 PM
Arrrrrhhhhh!
Mum just rang me to see if I'd seen the new Apple *****!
She TOLD ME!
But at least I haven't seen it yet.
Come on. Where is this video? 5 more mins.
Mum just rang me to see if I'd seen the new Apple *****!
She TOLD ME!
But at least I haven't seen it yet.
Come on. Where is this video? 5 more mins.
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.
Right hip/upper thigh
tattoos on hip thigh. the hip and thigh so the; the hip and thigh so the. FarmerBob. Nov 22, 04:52 AM
tattoos on hip thigh.
WAIST SIZE (low waist) (hip)
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.
Surf Monkey
Mar 17, 02:02 AM
It's very hard to take anyone seriously who believes in fairy tales like karma.
Metaphor.
Metaphor.
Stridder44
Mar 24, 03:07 PM
OS X? Never heard of it. It'll probably fail and fall into product obscurity hell like the iPod did.
wlh99
Apr 26, 07:41 PM
...
wlh99, I'll step back when ever I want to, this is a public Forum and people are here to discuss and learn new stuff.
Any way.. if you guys can't help me, just go to another thread.
I'm more than happy to help, which is why I asked what you meant by "ON" and "OFF" and what exactly you want to do. Because I don't know. Timers are not "ON" or "OFF" so I need to know what you mean.
I was referring to the "if" statement, not the comment. How and where do you declare myTimer and newTimer? Where are they assigned a value? Post that code. My assumption was (possibly incorrect) that they were assigned as the return value from when you created the timers.
In which case, they are pointers. If you declared them as a primitive type and assigned them a value not related to the timer objects, then they are not pointers. If that is the case, I am even more confused as to what you want the program to do.
Post your code, and let us know what you are trying to accomplish.
wlh99, I'll step back when ever I want to, this is a public Forum and people are here to discuss and learn new stuff.
Any way.. if you guys can't help me, just go to another thread.
I'm more than happy to help, which is why I asked what you meant by "ON" and "OFF" and what exactly you want to do. Because I don't know. Timers are not "ON" or "OFF" so I need to know what you mean.
I was referring to the "if" statement, not the comment. How and where do you declare myTimer and newTimer? Where are they assigned a value? Post that code. My assumption was (possibly incorrect) that they were assigned as the return value from when you created the timers.
In which case, they are pointers. If you declared them as a primitive type and assigned them a value not related to the timer objects, then they are not pointers. If that is the case, I am even more confused as to what you want the program to do.
Post your code, and let us know what you are trying to accomplish.
IOIIOOO
Apr 5, 03:11 PM
Now the dismal iAd clickthrough rates we see do to so few ads available can be made even lower. Thanks Apple!
kuwisdelu
Apr 8, 05:41 PM
I'd say 10.6 had a ton of new features; they just weren't in the UI.
Branskins
Apr 29, 09:51 PM
Well they said that touch screens for desktops/laptops like to be horizontal in front of you, so they already said the trackpad is like their touch screen.
So I don't like the arguments about how the slider isn't good for non-touch screens: the trackpad IS the Mac's "touchscreen"
So I don't like the arguments about how the slider isn't good for non-touch screens: the trackpad IS the Mac's "touchscreen"
Prom1
Mar 24, 09:42 PM
I was there at the beginning - in & out 3 times.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ko4V3G4NqII
OS X you've been the Apple of my eye since the beginning!
:apple:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ko4V3G4NqII
OS X you've been the Apple of my eye since the beginning!
:apple:
jimbo110
Sep 12, 08:36 AM
It's showtime in the danish store as well. It looks like a international update. That's positive sign.
Luph67
Apr 8, 05:00 PM
Possible Office Ribbon interface for Windows Explorer (http://www.neowin.net/news/microsoft-testing-ribbon-ui-in-windows-8)
The ribbon is awful though. :(
The ribbon is awful though. :(
No comments:
Post a Comment