FX120
Apr 9, 12:55 PM
Sounds like MS either is paying Adobe a small fee or they are done being scared. It is not like Acrobat reader is anything more than just a PDF reader. Something the OS as sorely needed built in.
I think that all changed when adobe was forced to publish the specifications for the PDF format a few years back.
My guess is that it has more to do with antitrust regulation, primarily in Europe. I'm surprised that they can even include a calculator as part of Windows and still sell it in the EU.
I think that all changed when adobe was forced to publish the specifications for the PDF format a few years back.
My guess is that it has more to do with antitrust regulation, primarily in Europe. I'm surprised that they can even include a calculator as part of Windows and still sell it in the EU.
Calidude
Apr 16, 05:13 PM
This is no value to me, if you consider your position to be narrow-mind, and not an abomination, sorry...., affront.
Make more sense. This sentence of yours makes none.
Make more sense. This sentence of yours makes none.
gorgeousninja
Apr 16, 07:19 AM
iPhone did nothing new. It just took some popular features and combined them. It was more of a game changer due to it being made by apple.
People talk about a so-called 'reality distortion field' about Steve Jobs and yet everyday we get people blatantly ignoring truth because it doesn't fit with their own personal world view.
Yes, there were Palms, and Blackberries, Nokia's, Sony-Ericssons, and Panasonics etc before the iPhone but when we all saw the iPhone everyone instantly knew that was the future; touch-screen, icon based, intuitive, with an emphasis on both design and usability.
You might not like the fact that Apple revolutionized the phone market but history says otherwise.
People talk about a so-called 'reality distortion field' about Steve Jobs and yet everyday we get people blatantly ignoring truth because it doesn't fit with their own personal world view.
Yes, there were Palms, and Blackberries, Nokia's, Sony-Ericssons, and Panasonics etc before the iPhone but when we all saw the iPhone everyone instantly knew that was the future; touch-screen, icon based, intuitive, with an emphasis on both design and usability.
You might not like the fact that Apple revolutionized the phone market but history says otherwise.
twoodcc
May 10, 09:39 PM
It will be easier once you get moved.
yeah it should be. i'll be there to fix any problems then
But it's so fun cursing at the thing because you did something wrong and have to reboot into the firmware yet again. Ahhh, but once you get it right it feels good that you only took 3 days this time, the last time took a week or more :p each time gets a little less painful, usually anyway. :rolleyes:
haha, yeah it can be fun....when it works. not so fun when things aren't working. but i'll get it
But you loose the bigadv unit every time almost no?
i wouldn't say that. it seems this is the only area where i've been kinda lucky. i haven't lost as many bigadv units as some, but i have lost a few
That is true, unfortunately with my new i7980x I haven't gotten any bigadv units yet, I may need to reinstall folding to see if that works, which means losing a normal unit... And most of the problems were before I had folding going anyway.
yeah i'm sorry to hear no bigadv units for that monster. yeah reinstalling fah might help. let us know how it goes
yeah it should be. i'll be there to fix any problems then
But it's so fun cursing at the thing because you did something wrong and have to reboot into the firmware yet again. Ahhh, but once you get it right it feels good that you only took 3 days this time, the last time took a week or more :p each time gets a little less painful, usually anyway. :rolleyes:
haha, yeah it can be fun....when it works. not so fun when things aren't working. but i'll get it
But you loose the bigadv unit every time almost no?
i wouldn't say that. it seems this is the only area where i've been kinda lucky. i haven't lost as many bigadv units as some, but i have lost a few
That is true, unfortunately with my new i7980x I haven't gotten any bigadv units yet, I may need to reinstall folding to see if that works, which means losing a normal unit... And most of the problems were before I had folding going anyway.
yeah i'm sorry to hear no bigadv units for that monster. yeah reinstalling fah might help. let us know how it goes
more...
Lord Blackadder
Aug 10, 01:10 PM
There's nothing really sinister about it. It's just harder to measure and to this point, there's been no point in trying to measure it in comparison to cars.
I understand that they have to be measured differently, but doesn't it make sense that they be compared apples-to-apples (if possible) to the vehicles they are intended to replace?
Most people do ignore it to a large extent, because they say "heck, if it costs me $1 to go 40 miles on electric vs. $2.85 to go 40 miles on gasoline, then that *must* be more efficient in some way". And they are probably right. Economics do tend to line up with efficiency (or government policy).
That is true, but as you pointed out later "green", "efficient", "alternative[to oil imports]" are not all the same thing. Perhaps they are more green but less efficient, or less efficient but more green. Just being more efficient in terms of bang for buck is not necessarily also good from an environmental or alternative energy standpoint. But you are right that the end cost per mile is going to weigh heavily when it comes to consumer acceptance of new types of autos.
I think it's great that European car manufacturers have invested heavily in finding ways to make more fuel efficient cars. And they have their governments to thank for that by making sure that diesel is given a tax advantage vs. gasoline. About 15 years ago, Europe recognized the potential for efficiency in diesels to ultimately outweigh the environmental downside. It was a short-term risk that paid off and now that they have shifted the balance, Europe is tightening their diesel emissions standards to match the US. Once that happens, I'm sure there will a huge market for TDIs in the US and we'll have a nice competitive landscape for driving-up fuel efficiency with diesels vs. gasoline hybrids vs. extended range electrics.
I would argue that Europe's switch to diesels did not involve quite the environmental tradeoff you imply - in the 70s we in the US were driving cars with huge gasoline engines, and to this day diesel regulation for trucks in this country is pretty minimal. Our emissions were probably world-leading then - partially due to the fact that we had the most cars on the roads by far. The problem lies (in my heavily biased opinion) in ignorance. People see smoke coming off diesel exhausts and assume they are dirtier than gasoline engines. But particulate pollution is not necessarily worse, just different. People are not educated about the differerence between gasoline engine pollution and diesel engine pollution. Not to mention the fact that diesel engines don't puff black smoke like they did in the 70s. I'm not arguing that diesels are necessarily cleaner, but they are arguably no worse than gasoline engines and are certainly more efficient.
Whether or not it's "greener" depends upon your definition of green. If you're worried about smog and air quality, then you might make different decisions than if you are worried about carbon dioxide and global warming. Those decisions may also be driven by where you live and where the electricity comes from.
A lot of people in the US (and I assume around the world) are also concerned about energy independence. For those people, using coal to power an electric car is more attractive than using foreign diesel. Any cleaner? Probably not, but probably not much dirtier and certainly cheaper. Our government realizes that we can always make power plants cleaner in the future through regulation, just as Europe realized they could make diesels cleaner in the future through regulation. Steven Chu is no dummy.
It's a fair point. Given the choice, I would prioritize moving to domestic fuel sources in the short term over a massive "go green" (over all alse) campaign.
Which is why we will need new metrics that actually make sense for comparing gasoline to pure electric, perhaps localized to account for the source of power in your area. For example, when I lived in Chicago, the electric was 90% nuclear. It's doesn't get any cleaner than that from an air quality / greenhouse gas standpoint. However, if you're on the east coast, it's probably closer to 60% coal.
I agree completely. The transition needs to be made as transparent as possible. People need to know the source, efficiency and cleanliness of their power source so that they can make informed choices.
I think you're smart enough to know that it's more efficient, but you're not willing to cede that for the sake of your argument, but I encourage you to embrace the idea that we should have extended range electrics *and* clean diesels *and* gasoline hybrids. There's more than one way to skin a cat.
I'm not trying to sound stubborn, I simply have not come accross the numbers anywhere. I don't get paid to do this research, ya know. I do it while hiding from the boss. ;)
I've seen that propaganda FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) before. It doesn't stand up to scrutiny. Let's consider that the power grid can handle every household running an air conditioner on a hot summer day. That's approximately 2000-3500 watts per household per hour during daytime peak load (on top of everything else on the grid.) Now let's consider that a Volt (or equivalent) has a 16kw battery that charges in 8 hours. That's 200 watts per hour, starting in the evening, or the equivalent of (4) 50 watt light bulbs. This is not exactly grid-overwhelming load.
I'm no math whiz (or electrician), but wouldn't 200 watts/hr * 8 hours = 1.6kw, rather than 16kw? I thought you'd need 2kw/hr * 8hrs to charge a 16kw battery.
It's not that I don't think people have looked into this stuff, it's just that I myself have no information on just how much energy the Volt uses and how much the grid can provide. In the short term, plugin hybrids are few in number and I don't see it being an issue. But it's something we need to work out in the medium/long term.
Or, some would argue that the biggest thing that Americans have trouble with are a few people telling them what the majority should or shouldn't do - which is, as it seems, the definition of "Communism", but I wouldn't go so far as to say that. :)
Communism means nothing in this country, because we've been so brainwashed by Cold War/right-wing rhetoric that, like "freedom", the term has been stolen for propaganda purposes until the original meanings have become lost in a massive sea of BS. I was using it for it's hyperbole value. :D
Most people do indeed realize that they can get better mileage with a smaller car and could "get by" with a much smaller vehicle. They choose not to and that is their prerogative. If the majority wants to vote for representatives who will make laws that increase fuel mileage standards, which in turn require automakers to sell more small cars - or find ways to make them more efficient - that is also their prerogative. (And, in case you haven't noticed, in the last major US election, voters did indeed vote for a party that is increasing CAFE standards.)
Well, that's the nature of democracy. But it's not so much a question of the fact that people realize a smaller car is more efficient, but a question of whether people really care about efficiency. I have recently lived in Nevada and Alaska, two states whose residents are addicted to burning fuel. Seemingly everyone has a pickup, RV and four-wheelers. Burning fuel is not just part of the daily transportation routine - it's a lifestyle.
CAFE standardsAnd if it's important to you, you should do your part and ride a bike to work or buy a TDI, or lobby your congressman for reduced emissions requirements, or stand up on a soap box and preach about the advantages of advanced clean diesel technology. All good stuff.
I walk to work. I used to commute 34 miles a day (total), and while I never minded it, I felt pretty liberated being able to ditch the car for my daily commute. Four years of walking and I don't want to go back. I love cars and motorsport, and I don't consider myself an environmentalist, but I got to the point where I realized that I was driving a lot more than necessary. That realization came when I moved out of a suburb (where you have to drive to get anywhere) and into first a small town and then a biggish city. In both cases it became possible to walk almost everywhere I needed to go. A tank of fuel lasted over a month (or longer) rather than a week from my highway-commuting days. And I lost weight as I hauled by fat backside around on foot. ;)
I won't be in the market for another car for a few years, and my current car (a Subaru) is not very fuel efficient - but then again it has literally not been driven more than half a dozen times in the last six months. When the time comes to replace it I'll be looking for something affordable (ruling out the Volt) but efficiency will be high on the priority list, followed by green-ness.
I wonder if all of you people who are proposing a diesel/diesel hybrid are Europeans, because in America, diesel is looked at as smelly and messy - it's what the trucks with black smoke use.
<snip>
As far as the Chevy Volt goes, I just don't like the name... but the price is right assuming they can get it into the high $20,000's rather quickly.
I'm an American, and yes I've seen the trucks with black smoke. We just need to discard that preconception. This isn't 1973 anymore. We also need to tighten up emissions regualtion on trucks.
The Volt is a practical car by all acoioutns, but it costs way too much. The battery is the primary contributing factor, I've heard that it costs somewhere between $8-15k by itself. Hopefully after GM has been producing such batteries for a few years the cost will drop substantially.
I understand that they have to be measured differently, but doesn't it make sense that they be compared apples-to-apples (if possible) to the vehicles they are intended to replace?
Most people do ignore it to a large extent, because they say "heck, if it costs me $1 to go 40 miles on electric vs. $2.85 to go 40 miles on gasoline, then that *must* be more efficient in some way". And they are probably right. Economics do tend to line up with efficiency (or government policy).
That is true, but as you pointed out later "green", "efficient", "alternative[to oil imports]" are not all the same thing. Perhaps they are more green but less efficient, or less efficient but more green. Just being more efficient in terms of bang for buck is not necessarily also good from an environmental or alternative energy standpoint. But you are right that the end cost per mile is going to weigh heavily when it comes to consumer acceptance of new types of autos.
I think it's great that European car manufacturers have invested heavily in finding ways to make more fuel efficient cars. And they have their governments to thank for that by making sure that diesel is given a tax advantage vs. gasoline. About 15 years ago, Europe recognized the potential for efficiency in diesels to ultimately outweigh the environmental downside. It was a short-term risk that paid off and now that they have shifted the balance, Europe is tightening their diesel emissions standards to match the US. Once that happens, I'm sure there will a huge market for TDIs in the US and we'll have a nice competitive landscape for driving-up fuel efficiency with diesels vs. gasoline hybrids vs. extended range electrics.
I would argue that Europe's switch to diesels did not involve quite the environmental tradeoff you imply - in the 70s we in the US were driving cars with huge gasoline engines, and to this day diesel regulation for trucks in this country is pretty minimal. Our emissions were probably world-leading then - partially due to the fact that we had the most cars on the roads by far. The problem lies (in my heavily biased opinion) in ignorance. People see smoke coming off diesel exhausts and assume they are dirtier than gasoline engines. But particulate pollution is not necessarily worse, just different. People are not educated about the differerence between gasoline engine pollution and diesel engine pollution. Not to mention the fact that diesel engines don't puff black smoke like they did in the 70s. I'm not arguing that diesels are necessarily cleaner, but they are arguably no worse than gasoline engines and are certainly more efficient.
Whether or not it's "greener" depends upon your definition of green. If you're worried about smog and air quality, then you might make different decisions than if you are worried about carbon dioxide and global warming. Those decisions may also be driven by where you live and where the electricity comes from.
A lot of people in the US (and I assume around the world) are also concerned about energy independence. For those people, using coal to power an electric car is more attractive than using foreign diesel. Any cleaner? Probably not, but probably not much dirtier and certainly cheaper. Our government realizes that we can always make power plants cleaner in the future through regulation, just as Europe realized they could make diesels cleaner in the future through regulation. Steven Chu is no dummy.
It's a fair point. Given the choice, I would prioritize moving to domestic fuel sources in the short term over a massive "go green" (over all alse) campaign.
Which is why we will need new metrics that actually make sense for comparing gasoline to pure electric, perhaps localized to account for the source of power in your area. For example, when I lived in Chicago, the electric was 90% nuclear. It's doesn't get any cleaner than that from an air quality / greenhouse gas standpoint. However, if you're on the east coast, it's probably closer to 60% coal.
I agree completely. The transition needs to be made as transparent as possible. People need to know the source, efficiency and cleanliness of their power source so that they can make informed choices.
I think you're smart enough to know that it's more efficient, but you're not willing to cede that for the sake of your argument, but I encourage you to embrace the idea that we should have extended range electrics *and* clean diesels *and* gasoline hybrids. There's more than one way to skin a cat.
I'm not trying to sound stubborn, I simply have not come accross the numbers anywhere. I don't get paid to do this research, ya know. I do it while hiding from the boss. ;)
I've seen that propaganda FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) before. It doesn't stand up to scrutiny. Let's consider that the power grid can handle every household running an air conditioner on a hot summer day. That's approximately 2000-3500 watts per household per hour during daytime peak load (on top of everything else on the grid.) Now let's consider that a Volt (or equivalent) has a 16kw battery that charges in 8 hours. That's 200 watts per hour, starting in the evening, or the equivalent of (4) 50 watt light bulbs. This is not exactly grid-overwhelming load.
I'm no math whiz (or electrician), but wouldn't 200 watts/hr * 8 hours = 1.6kw, rather than 16kw? I thought you'd need 2kw/hr * 8hrs to charge a 16kw battery.
It's not that I don't think people have looked into this stuff, it's just that I myself have no information on just how much energy the Volt uses and how much the grid can provide. In the short term, plugin hybrids are few in number and I don't see it being an issue. But it's something we need to work out in the medium/long term.
Or, some would argue that the biggest thing that Americans have trouble with are a few people telling them what the majority should or shouldn't do - which is, as it seems, the definition of "Communism", but I wouldn't go so far as to say that. :)
Communism means nothing in this country, because we've been so brainwashed by Cold War/right-wing rhetoric that, like "freedom", the term has been stolen for propaganda purposes until the original meanings have become lost in a massive sea of BS. I was using it for it's hyperbole value. :D
Most people do indeed realize that they can get better mileage with a smaller car and could "get by" with a much smaller vehicle. They choose not to and that is their prerogative. If the majority wants to vote for representatives who will make laws that increase fuel mileage standards, which in turn require automakers to sell more small cars - or find ways to make them more efficient - that is also their prerogative. (And, in case you haven't noticed, in the last major US election, voters did indeed vote for a party that is increasing CAFE standards.)
Well, that's the nature of democracy. But it's not so much a question of the fact that people realize a smaller car is more efficient, but a question of whether people really care about efficiency. I have recently lived in Nevada and Alaska, two states whose residents are addicted to burning fuel. Seemingly everyone has a pickup, RV and four-wheelers. Burning fuel is not just part of the daily transportation routine - it's a lifestyle.
CAFE standardsAnd if it's important to you, you should do your part and ride a bike to work or buy a TDI, or lobby your congressman for reduced emissions requirements, or stand up on a soap box and preach about the advantages of advanced clean diesel technology. All good stuff.
I walk to work. I used to commute 34 miles a day (total), and while I never minded it, I felt pretty liberated being able to ditch the car for my daily commute. Four years of walking and I don't want to go back. I love cars and motorsport, and I don't consider myself an environmentalist, but I got to the point where I realized that I was driving a lot more than necessary. That realization came when I moved out of a suburb (where you have to drive to get anywhere) and into first a small town and then a biggish city. In both cases it became possible to walk almost everywhere I needed to go. A tank of fuel lasted over a month (or longer) rather than a week from my highway-commuting days. And I lost weight as I hauled by fat backside around on foot. ;)
I won't be in the market for another car for a few years, and my current car (a Subaru) is not very fuel efficient - but then again it has literally not been driven more than half a dozen times in the last six months. When the time comes to replace it I'll be looking for something affordable (ruling out the Volt) but efficiency will be high on the priority list, followed by green-ness.
I wonder if all of you people who are proposing a diesel/diesel hybrid are Europeans, because in America, diesel is looked at as smelly and messy - it's what the trucks with black smoke use.
<snip>
As far as the Chevy Volt goes, I just don't like the name... but the price is right assuming they can get it into the high $20,000's rather quickly.
I'm an American, and yes I've seen the trucks with black smoke. We just need to discard that preconception. This isn't 1973 anymore. We also need to tighten up emissions regualtion on trucks.
The Volt is a practical car by all acoioutns, but it costs way too much. The battery is the primary contributing factor, I've heard that it costs somewhere between $8-15k by itself. Hopefully after GM has been producing such batteries for a few years the cost will drop substantially.
someguy
Jul 24, 09:51 AM
And there actually are people who don't know who made the iPod! :confused:
My mother, a month ago:
Her: A guy I was talking to has an iPod for sale, he only wants 100 bucks for it.
Me: What is it? A regular iPod or a nano, and what size?
Her: It's an Apple one, so it's got to be the better kind, whichever that is.
Me: That's iPod, but there are different iPods available.
Her: Well, whichever one Apple makes is the one he's selling.
Eventually, I was able to show her that iPod is made by Apple. There are no Sony iPods, Creative iPods, etc. iPod does not simply mean MP3 player. I guess that's one of the downfalls of Apple's success with the iPod is that the term eventually becomes synonymous with MP3 players in general.
My mother, a month ago:
Her: A guy I was talking to has an iPod for sale, he only wants 100 bucks for it.
Me: What is it? A regular iPod or a nano, and what size?
Her: It's an Apple one, so it's got to be the better kind, whichever that is.
Me: That's iPod, but there are different iPods available.
Her: Well, whichever one Apple makes is the one he's selling.
Eventually, I was able to show her that iPod is made by Apple. There are no Sony iPods, Creative iPods, etc. iPod does not simply mean MP3 player. I guess that's one of the downfalls of Apple's success with the iPod is that the term eventually becomes synonymous with MP3 players in general.
more...
roadbloc
Apr 23, 04:13 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) Mobile/8H7)
How would they acquire the data? How would they know this is a young person they actually want to follow? Couldn't they just follow them home from somewhere? Does the person need to lose their phone for a danger to occur? Does this paedophile need to have a phone with them?
The tracking that is occurring is by cell tower identification when someone is in range of one. Will the paedophile have access to a spy satellite to zero in on the exact location of an individual?
I'm still not buying it.
It is no secret that pedophiles have been known to hack children's computers to gain access to their webcam pictures, messenger conversations and ect. If that child has an iPhone and the said pedophile knows the file that contains the iPhone locations; what the pedo essentially has is the child's daily or weekly routine of where they are.
I buy it. Slim chance, but certainly possible and certainly doable.
How would they acquire the data? How would they know this is a young person they actually want to follow? Couldn't they just follow them home from somewhere? Does the person need to lose their phone for a danger to occur? Does this paedophile need to have a phone with them?
The tracking that is occurring is by cell tower identification when someone is in range of one. Will the paedophile have access to a spy satellite to zero in on the exact location of an individual?
I'm still not buying it.
It is no secret that pedophiles have been known to hack children's computers to gain access to their webcam pictures, messenger conversations and ect. If that child has an iPhone and the said pedophile knows the file that contains the iPhone locations; what the pedo essentially has is the child's daily or weekly routine of where they are.
I buy it. Slim chance, but certainly possible and certainly doable.
EricNau
Jan 12, 12:25 AM
they didn't release iwork and ilife probably b/c of Amazon putting it up on their website early
Actually, I believe it wasn't released at MacWorld for two reasons...
1) Time. They keynote ran about 2 hours as is (already above the average). Introducing two new software suites would easily add another 45 minutes (making the event much too long).
2) The focus was clearly the iPhone, and Jobs didn't want anything to steal its glory.
It makes much more sense to introduce the iPhone at MacWorld and have a separate event for Leopard, iLife, and iWork.
Actually, I believe it wasn't released at MacWorld for two reasons...
1) Time. They keynote ran about 2 hours as is (already above the average). Introducing two new software suites would easily add another 45 minutes (making the event much too long).
2) The focus was clearly the iPhone, and Jobs didn't want anything to steal its glory.
It makes much more sense to introduce the iPhone at MacWorld and have a separate event for Leopard, iLife, and iWork.
more...
MOFS
Mar 13, 12:18 PM
So you mean computing won't be "Input, Process, Output, Storage" but something else ?
You failed to see any of my points. Tablets are not some kind of "future change to computers!", tablets are very much computing devices utilizing the same concepts and ideas that have been the very core of the industry for the last 50 years.
Touch based computer ? It's still input and input is just that, input. It doesn't matter whether is touch, keyboards, mice, network, voice, biometrics. Input is input.
A lot of you people want to see a massive change where frankly there isn't any. A new type of device doesn't somehow make everything different. It can just be a "new type of device", something the computer industry of the last 50 years has seen plenty of.
Read my post again carefully, you'll see that I already addressed all your points. Don't just respond to me without even understanding what I'm talking about and at least trying to counteract my points if you're going to try to contradict me.
For me, I do see the iPad (and actually the App Store) as a change in computing. By removing the complex processes that we go through in a computer (eg instead of downloading an app, moving it into a folder, deleting the dmg its a simple case of downloading the app), the iPad is changing our computer experience by simplifying it to the extent that it's only the part we want to use rather than need to use. The iPad and the App Store process have the potential to kickstart and similarly drastic change in computing as moving from a line based OS to a GUI. In this case, "input is not input": a GUI opened up computers to more than just programmers, and the simplified OSs of the iPad (and, as we can see, creeping into Mac OS Lion) will only help people using these actually really quite complex devices. It will happen, as we can see it happening as Apple and Google look to move the "computer" into phones and televisions. Some people will want different devices (servers etc) but increasingly I think the computer is moving away from the idea of a desktop PC.
You failed to see any of my points. Tablets are not some kind of "future change to computers!", tablets are very much computing devices utilizing the same concepts and ideas that have been the very core of the industry for the last 50 years.
Touch based computer ? It's still input and input is just that, input. It doesn't matter whether is touch, keyboards, mice, network, voice, biometrics. Input is input.
A lot of you people want to see a massive change where frankly there isn't any. A new type of device doesn't somehow make everything different. It can just be a "new type of device", something the computer industry of the last 50 years has seen plenty of.
Read my post again carefully, you'll see that I already addressed all your points. Don't just respond to me without even understanding what I'm talking about and at least trying to counteract my points if you're going to try to contradict me.
For me, I do see the iPad (and actually the App Store) as a change in computing. By removing the complex processes that we go through in a computer (eg instead of downloading an app, moving it into a folder, deleting the dmg its a simple case of downloading the app), the iPad is changing our computer experience by simplifying it to the extent that it's only the part we want to use rather than need to use. The iPad and the App Store process have the potential to kickstart and similarly drastic change in computing as moving from a line based OS to a GUI. In this case, "input is not input": a GUI opened up computers to more than just programmers, and the simplified OSs of the iPad (and, as we can see, creeping into Mac OS Lion) will only help people using these actually really quite complex devices. It will happen, as we can see it happening as Apple and Google look to move the "computer" into phones and televisions. Some people will want different devices (servers etc) but increasingly I think the computer is moving away from the idea of a desktop PC.
Rodimus Prime
Apr 22, 06:57 PM
Whereas I agree with your post entirely, I get the feeling that you wouldn't be saying this if Apple were the only ones not to collect such data. You have bashed Google many times for the amount of data it collects, but as soon as Apple is to be seen to be doing it, it's all cool. A "non-issue.":rolleyes:
some how I think the only reason he is saying that is because Apple is the one doing it.
If it was anyone else LTD would be bashing it like no tomorrow.
My issue with it is the fact that it does not let you opt out. It would be one thing to freely give away that infomation. It is another not to be even given the option to opt out. On top of that the way Apple is doing it is even worse.
Google and Apple are in the wrong I feel. I just feel Apple is even more wrong than Google. Google at least only stores the last 50 cell towers and 200 wifi compared to Apple which keeps all of it locally.
some how I think the only reason he is saying that is because Apple is the one doing it.
If it was anyone else LTD would be bashing it like no tomorrow.
My issue with it is the fact that it does not let you opt out. It would be one thing to freely give away that infomation. It is another not to be even given the option to opt out. On top of that the way Apple is doing it is even worse.
Google and Apple are in the wrong I feel. I just feel Apple is even more wrong than Google. Google at least only stores the last 50 cell towers and 200 wifi compared to Apple which keeps all of it locally.
more...
QuarterSwede
Apr 25, 01:32 PM
iCon police.
Took me a minute to get that. Nice. ;)
Took me a minute to get that. Nice. ;)
dieselpower44
Jul 21, 09:46 AM
I love the way that every time Apple show an image or video of one of their employees "holding" another phone to demonstrate this signal attenuation, they always appear to be literally crushing the phone in their hand. Whereas, with the i4, you just sit it comfortably in the pocket of your palm.
Apple has become the new Microsoft. They have lost that connection they had with their customers where they would strive to please. Now they just sit back like the rest and go "well you bought it, it's your problem."
Apple has become the new Microsoft. They have lost that connection they had with their customers where they would strive to please. Now they just sit back like the rest and go "well you bought it, it's your problem."
more...
T-Will
Apr 5, 04:53 PM
Awesome. Do they have an app?
Why yes they do. And it's FREE!!!
http://www.hsn.com/hsn-everywhere-iphone-app_at-3570_xa.aspx
Why yes they do. And it's FREE!!!
http://www.hsn.com/hsn-everywhere-iphone-app_at-3570_xa.aspx
ThaDoggg
Apr 10, 07:29 PM
Not the OP but here ya go! (http://lockwaresystems.com/swanm10b-179.html)
Awesome..wasn't aware of these guys.
Awesome..wasn't aware of these guys.
more...
tristangage
Apr 22, 02:50 PM
To me, the whole idea is completely redundant.
Yeah, we can tell.
Yeah, we can tell.
617arg
Sep 28, 01:41 PM
this is one of the worst titles for a story I have read. It also sounds like whoever wrote the story has no knowledge of anything that's been happening in architecture for about a century.
Clean, modern design? Must be influenced by the iPhone! :rolleyes:
Clean, modern design? Must be influenced by the iPhone! :rolleyes:
more...
3N16MA
Apr 5, 04:27 PM
Celebration of advertising? Seriously?
fhiphonedev
Apr 5, 10:49 PM
Really love the functionality. Way to go!
.gif "funny quotes about oys and")
Davowade
Apr 7, 01:15 AM
:eek: NICE!!! Man, I am green with jealous rage. Makes my 40D, kit lens, and 50 1.8 seem so, so pathetic.
Thanks. Sadly this all belongs to work, but it should team pretty well with my personal 550D.
Thanks. Sadly this all belongs to work, but it should team pretty well with my personal 550D.
franmatt80
Apr 26, 11:08 AM
Apart from in this thread, I've hardly seen the system in use. Perhaps I'm just not visiting the right boards? Does it seem to be popular?
NiteWaves77
Jan 13, 04:23 AM
I'll log on just to laugh myself silly when I read the threads created by n00bs saying "Why didn't Apple release so-and-so" and "I hate apple, im leaving them foreverz!!!11111!"
It's sad, really (And slightly disturbing)
I would love nothing more than for almost everyone in these forums to "leave Apple" and never darken these hallways again. Unless they're cute. Then they should shut-up and sit on my lap. (That goes for the GUYS, too.)
I have another prediction to add to my list: with great fanfare and circumstance, they commemorate Woz's contributions to Apple and the industry by dipping him in gold and bolting him to the lawn of the main Apple campus. We'll no longer have to hear about how wonderful he is, how he single handedly invented the personal computer industry, cured cancer, and makes a hell of a deviled ham sandwich.
There's something in the air, indeed: the scent of the unbathed bloggers at the MacWorld keynote, wondering why the traditional press doesn't respect them while they're dressed as college students after a beer bong party in the basement of the Physics building. Sheezus.
Gosh, this is better than Christmas. :D
It's sad, really (And slightly disturbing)
I would love nothing more than for almost everyone in these forums to "leave Apple" and never darken these hallways again. Unless they're cute. Then they should shut-up and sit on my lap. (That goes for the GUYS, too.)
I have another prediction to add to my list: with great fanfare and circumstance, they commemorate Woz's contributions to Apple and the industry by dipping him in gold and bolting him to the lawn of the main Apple campus. We'll no longer have to hear about how wonderful he is, how he single handedly invented the personal computer industry, cured cancer, and makes a hell of a deviled ham sandwich.
There's something in the air, indeed: the scent of the unbathed bloggers at the MacWorld keynote, wondering why the traditional press doesn't respect them while they're dressed as college students after a beer bong party in the basement of the Physics building. Sheezus.
Gosh, this is better than Christmas. :D
balamw
Apr 26, 08:53 PM
is that last code enough info balamw?
Still too much left out. "After that I implement a Cancel method pointing to sender (button)" should tell you you are leaving potentially important stuff out.
You can point out an error and give solution or you can tell that person to quit what he's doing because he has no idea. It's a lot easier to say, go read Apples documentation than to point out an error and explain it yourself.
No one is telling you to quit. They're telling you to go back and make sure you understand objects. (Clearly you don't). This is something you will have to understand for yourself.
As it stands you are confusing yourself.
I don't think I've been involved in any of your threads. What resources are you using to learn Objective-C?
B
Still too much left out. "After that I implement a Cancel method pointing to sender (button)" should tell you you are leaving potentially important stuff out.
You can point out an error and give solution or you can tell that person to quit what he's doing because he has no idea. It's a lot easier to say, go read Apples documentation than to point out an error and explain it yourself.
No one is telling you to quit. They're telling you to go back and make sure you understand objects. (Clearly you don't). This is something you will have to understand for yourself.
As it stands you are confusing yourself.
I don't think I've been involved in any of your threads. What resources are you using to learn Objective-C?
B
Flowbee
Jan 12, 03:52 PM
Equating destruction of physical property to turning off tv sets is a stretch.
Obviously.:rolleyes: I was responding to the idea that is was somehow ironic (and funny) that such a low-tech device could disrupt such a high-tech show. There are many other low-tech ways to cause problems for exhibitors. You can't have an open, accessible show floor and protect against everyone's idea of a "prank." Exhibitors have to be able to trust that attendees, especially press credentialed attendees, won't make them look foolish in order to drive traffic to their blogs.
Anyway, I hope you took notice of the real point of my comment:
If pranks like these become more common, companies and trade shows will start to put severe restrictions on who's allowed to attend their events.
That's nothing to laugh about.
Obviously.:rolleyes: I was responding to the idea that is was somehow ironic (and funny) that such a low-tech device could disrupt such a high-tech show. There are many other low-tech ways to cause problems for exhibitors. You can't have an open, accessible show floor and protect against everyone's idea of a "prank." Exhibitors have to be able to trust that attendees, especially press credentialed attendees, won't make them look foolish in order to drive traffic to their blogs.
Anyway, I hope you took notice of the real point of my comment:
If pranks like these become more common, companies and trade shows will start to put severe restrictions on who's allowed to attend their events.
That's nothing to laugh about.
mscriv
Apr 27, 04:13 PM
Hmmm... how can I use this new system to my advantage in the MRville WW game? ;)