obeygiant
Apr 16, 06:58 PM
Well have fun Lee!
Meanwhile here's a clip about the honey badger (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4r7wHMg5Yjg).
Meanwhile here's a clip about the honey badger (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4r7wHMg5Yjg).
flopticalcube
Apr 16, 04:47 PM
People being gay and then teaching children gay history are 2 different things. I'm afraid that one is an affront that should not be tolerated by any good parent. I'd advise those parents to just pull their kids out of the public school system, which they should have never put their kid into in the first place.
Narrow-mindedness is an affront.
Narrow-mindedness is an affront.
hobo.hopkins
Mar 28, 04:46 PM
This not so subtle shift is a terrifying glimpse into the future of our beloved OSX.
That is so crazy it's ridiculous. There is no evidence to support your statement. Mac OS X is not headed towards the "walled garden" universe that everyone seems to freak out over. Apple's just giving people who don't know anything about computers an easy way to purchase and find applications.
I do agree, however, that by not including applications outside of the Mac App Store Apple is diminishing the value of the award. I believe it is within their right to do so, although I don't like it.
That is so crazy it's ridiculous. There is no evidence to support your statement. Mac OS X is not headed towards the "walled garden" universe that everyone seems to freak out over. Apple's just giving people who don't know anything about computers an easy way to purchase and find applications.
I do agree, however, that by not including applications outside of the Mac App Store Apple is diminishing the value of the award. I believe it is within their right to do so, although I don't like it.
OdduWon
Oct 16, 03:01 AM
I suppose this tuesday (10/17) is more likely than last tuesday was... As we approach the holidays, each week brings more promise. But I'm not getting my hopes up...
yes, and the 5th anniversary of ipod is this week as well :eek: . shuffles a ship'n soon, and ipod cinema :eek: may added to mark the date. or maybe it will be april all over again :p
yes, and the 5th anniversary of ipod is this week as well :eek: . shuffles a ship'n soon, and ipod cinema :eek: may added to mark the date. or maybe it will be april all over again :p
more...
R.Perez
Mar 15, 10:01 PM
Which makes all the difference. Night and day. As far as anyone is concerned, making tech usable and desirable to that degree is pretty innovative.
You really need to step out of your fanboi bubble, it seems a little silly to be honest.
You really need to step out of your fanboi bubble, it seems a little silly to be honest.
Eolian
Mar 24, 06:24 PM
One of my favorite old Zepplin tunes :) I think I've kept all my install CDs from 10.1 on; wow, time has been marchin' along :D
Good on ya Apple :apple:
Good on ya Apple :apple:
more...
LightSpeed1
Apr 11, 01:25 AM
Similar tastes...I have the 23" and M10's as well. But where did you find black Swans?...unless it's painted after the fact
Lockware Systems (http://www.lockwaresystems.com/swanm10b-179.html)
Have you posted your setup before?
Mac Setup: Past & Present (Part 14) (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1098165)
If you have a picture of your setup and don't mind sharing it, I would love to see the two together.
Lockware Systems (http://www.lockwaresystems.com/swanm10b-179.html)
Have you posted your setup before?
Mac Setup: Past & Present (Part 14) (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1098165)
If you have a picture of your setup and don't mind sharing it, I would love to see the two together.
GadgetAddict
Apr 29, 01:55 PM
What stage will this be stable enough to use as your main OS? :apple:
When it is publicly released.
When it is publicly released.
more...
mrw00tastic
Apr 25, 12:43 PM
If that is a guy holding that phone he needs to cut those nails...Damn hippy!
8CoreWhore
May 2, 02:38 PM
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
--
I agree.
It's sad to see so many down vote your statement - a statement that is an advocate for people and democracy.
Too many people here are more patriotic to corporations than they are to themselves. Sad, sad, sad.
iSteve caves to the likes of Al Franken. Yep. Too Funny.
Maybe Al can get Apple to put a real GPU back in the MBP13? I'm off to email him. Wish me luck!
Apple responded to the people, not Al.
I suppose you care more about the corporations desire to build massive databases, to commoditize every detail about us.
Are we merely targets for advertising, or are we human?
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
--
I agree.
It's sad to see so many down vote your statement - a statement that is an advocate for people and democracy.
Too many people here are more patriotic to corporations than they are to themselves. Sad, sad, sad.
iSteve caves to the likes of Al Franken. Yep. Too Funny.
Maybe Al can get Apple to put a real GPU back in the MBP13? I'm off to email him. Wish me luck!
Apple responded to the people, not Al.
I suppose you care more about the corporations desire to build massive databases, to commoditize every detail about us.
Are we merely targets for advertising, or are we human?
more...
maclaptop
Apr 15, 10:25 PM
It's not only new territory, it's outside their core competency. Like Cisco selling cameras or Google selling phones.
Its this closed minded view that separates risk taking leaders from regular employees.
To prove this, all one has to do is look at Apple's success in portions of the tech sector that they previously had not occupied.
Never say never :)
Its this closed minded view that separates risk taking leaders from regular employees.
To prove this, all one has to do is look at Apple's success in portions of the tech sector that they previously had not occupied.
Never say never :)
wnurse
Aug 7, 08:26 PM
Makes them a little more attractive to the penny concious buyer.
More importantly, cutting price of the current design signals the arrival of a new design in the not-too-distant-future.
20' for $699?. I bought the dell version a year and a half ago for $600. Wow, yeah, sure puts the scare into Dell.. Dell is practically giving away their 20 inches now. No thanks, I'll take my 699, add a few more dollars and get a Dell 23 inch.
One good thing, Apple 30 inch is now cheaper than Dell's!!!.. If I had the money for a 30 inch (man, oh man) this would definetly be a deal for me. Oh well.
Anyone want to donate a $1 towards my "Get a 30 inch apple display" Foundation?. You'll get a tax writeoff!!.. All i need is 2000 people donating $1 each.
More importantly, cutting price of the current design signals the arrival of a new design in the not-too-distant-future.
20' for $699?. I bought the dell version a year and a half ago for $600. Wow, yeah, sure puts the scare into Dell.. Dell is practically giving away their 20 inches now. No thanks, I'll take my 699, add a few more dollars and get a Dell 23 inch.
One good thing, Apple 30 inch is now cheaper than Dell's!!!.. If I had the money for a 30 inch (man, oh man) this would definetly be a deal for me. Oh well.
Anyone want to donate a $1 towards my "Get a 30 inch apple display" Foundation?. You'll get a tax writeoff!!.. All i need is 2000 people donating $1 each.
more...
Hovey
Jul 21, 03:12 PM
Apple should simply focus on resolving their own issues. It's not their job to be the "tattle tell" police pointing out problems or potential problems with their competitors. The press and/or markets will uncover issues with Apple competitors.
They weren't doing it for that purpose. It was to show people that it's a common problem with physics no matter who makes the phone. People were thinking that only Apple's iPhone has the problem and they were simply saying, no, it's not because it's apple product, it's because it's a cell phone.
They weren't doing it for that purpose. It was to show people that it's a common problem with physics no matter who makes the phone. People were thinking that only Apple's iPhone has the problem and they were simply saying, no, it's not because it's apple product, it's because it's a cell phone.
PinkyMacGodess
Oct 6, 09:23 PM
Well if Verizon hadn't been so crazy to try to corn hole Apple over the features of the iPhone and cause Apple to walk from the discussions, it would be a nearly bankrupt AT&T with their nose pressed against the glass saying that the iPhone sucks...
Sure, I have issues with AT&T's service. Sure there are times when I use AT&T's name in vain. I swore more when I found out that my Verizon phone with bluetooth would have more features on someone elses cell phone network and that the 'brain drain' at Verizon ordered certain features removed from the phone on their network! Yeah, Verizon has ZERO room to talk. They coulda had the iPhone... Hah!
Sure, I have issues with AT&T's service. Sure there are times when I use AT&T's name in vain. I swore more when I found out that my Verizon phone with bluetooth would have more features on someone elses cell phone network and that the 'brain drain' at Verizon ordered certain features removed from the phone on their network! Yeah, Verizon has ZERO room to talk. They coulda had the iPhone... Hah!
more...
z4n3
Mar 25, 05:13 AM
To complement my earlier screen shots from 2001 and I just found my original upgrade CD! from 10.0 to 10.1 love the way it states "Requires Mac OS X" quite a funny comparison when you look at in just 10 years OS X has gone from a 650Mb CD to a 8Gb Apple USB Drive :eek:
Georgie
Jan 5, 03:00 PM
Why did Apple do away with live feeds of the event? That seems like a good idea. What are they trying to avoid?
more...
MagnusVonMagnum
May 3, 06:13 AM
??? Actually, those first versions of Windows were the only ones with names based on the version number.
Although, I can't make out what either of you are saying.
Egad. No sense of humor around here at all. I'm not 'saying' anything, just making a jab at the wording of a previous poster's wording (i.e. Windows7 took 7 years to get right, which is silly sounding when OSX has been at that 'version' for 10+ years. Now do some of you get it? Ragging on Windows7 (based on 'vista' which is only 5 years old by release date, although obviously started earlier internally (i.e. the 7 year old date makes no sense to begin with) and it's really based on NT which is 18 years old) when OSX is older (released for 10+ years and based on NeXT Step (NOT OS9) which is MUCH older (1985) than Windows period and that's based on Unix which is literally ancient in the tech world (1969). So no matter how you look at it, a comment that makes fun of Windows7' age versus OSX is ironic/funny/silly. That's the joke I saw. How silly of me to think people would 'get it'. :rolleyes:
Although, I can't make out what either of you are saying.
Egad. No sense of humor around here at all. I'm not 'saying' anything, just making a jab at the wording of a previous poster's wording (i.e. Windows7 took 7 years to get right, which is silly sounding when OSX has been at that 'version' for 10+ years. Now do some of you get it? Ragging on Windows7 (based on 'vista' which is only 5 years old by release date, although obviously started earlier internally (i.e. the 7 year old date makes no sense to begin with) and it's really based on NT which is 18 years old) when OSX is older (released for 10+ years and based on NeXT Step (NOT OS9) which is MUCH older (1985) than Windows period and that's based on Unix which is literally ancient in the tech world (1969). So no matter how you look at it, a comment that makes fun of Windows7' age versus OSX is ironic/funny/silly. That's the joke I saw. How silly of me to think people would 'get it'. :rolleyes:
CalBoy
Apr 14, 10:50 PM
I understand the point you are trying to make (re: enhanced security measures] but technically those two incidents had nothing to do with the TSA since they both flew from non-USA airports - that is, the TSA didn't screen them at all.
While this is true, we can't allow that technicality to wipe the slate clean. Our security as a whole is deficient, even if the TSA on its own might not be responsible for these two particular failures. Our tax dollars are still going to the our mutual safety so we should expect more.
I guess that depends on how you define "not much trouble". We can't know the actual number, since we will never know many actually get through. But they are catching over half the weapons that their own agents try to smuggle through on test/training runs. So that counts as being "some trouble". How much "trouble" is enough? Read my post above about how much risk a "bad person" organization is willing to take on 50/50 odds. My late father made his career "gaming" situations, so I have a bit of a passing knowledge of it. I am certain that the TSA has "gamed" the odds, and the TSA believe that they have reached a reasonable balance between costing the public time, money, and indignities - and - ensuring a reasonable level of safety for the flying public. They may be wrong.... but I would bet money that, to the best of their ability, they believe they have reached a balance.
Well when a fanatic is willing to commit suicide because he believes that he'll be rewarded in heaven, 50/50 odds don't seem to be all that much of a deterrent. What's worse is that we've only achieved that with a lot of our personal dignity, time, and money. I don't think we can tolerate much more. We should be expecting more for the time, money, and humiliation we're putting ourselves (and our 6 year-old children) through.
If this is the TSA's best effort and what it believes is the best balance, I want a new TSA.
OK, then why are hijackings down? I have my working hypothesis. I cited some evidence to support it. If you don't agree, then it is up to you to state an alternative one that is supported by more than unsupported statements.
I am not saying the TSA (or in my case CATSA) is perfect or haven't mucked things up sometimes. I'm just saying that I believe that they have been mostly responsible for a dramatic drop in airline hijackings. I cited some statistics. Now it's your turn.....
Your statistics don't unequivocally prove the efficacy of the TSA though. They only show that the TSA employs a cost-benefit method to determine what measures to take.
Since you believe in the efficacy of the TSA so much, the burden is yours to make a clear and convincing case, not mine. I can provide alternative hypotheses, but I am in no way saying that these are provable at the current moment in time. I'm only saying that they are rational objections to your theory.
My hypothesis is essentially the same as Lisa's: the protection is coming from our circumstances rather than our deliberative efforts.
Terrorism is a complex thing. My bet is that as we waged wars in multiple nations, it became more advantageous for fanatics to strike where our military forces were. Without having to gain entry into the country, get past airport security (no matter what odds were), or hijack a plane, terrorists were able to kill over 4,000 Americans in Iraq and nearly 1,500 in Afghanistan. That's almost twice as many as were killed on 9/11.
If I were the leader of a group intent on killing Americans and Westerners in general, I certainly would go down that route rather than hijack planes.
ps there is no proof that it wasn't Lisa's rock. There are some very weird causal relationships in the world. Like shooting wolves causes the Aspen to die off in Wyoming. Or .... overfishing the Salmon in the Pacific changes the mix of trees along the rivers of the BC coast.....
It's pretty clear that it was not the rock. Ecosystems are constantly finding new equilibriums; killing off an herbivore's primary predator should cause a decline in vegetation. That is not surprising, nor is it difficult to prove (you can track all three populations simultaneously). There is also a causal mechanism at work that can explain the effect without the need for new assumptions (Occam's Razor).
The efficacy of the TSA and our security measures, on the other hand, are quite complex and are affected by numerous causes. Changes in travel patterns, other nations' actions, and an enemey's changing strategy all play a big role. You can't ignore all of these and pronounce our security gimmicks (and really, that's what patting down a 6 year-old is) to be so masterfully effective.
While this is true, we can't allow that technicality to wipe the slate clean. Our security as a whole is deficient, even if the TSA on its own might not be responsible for these two particular failures. Our tax dollars are still going to the our mutual safety so we should expect more.
I guess that depends on how you define "not much trouble". We can't know the actual number, since we will never know many actually get through. But they are catching over half the weapons that their own agents try to smuggle through on test/training runs. So that counts as being "some trouble". How much "trouble" is enough? Read my post above about how much risk a "bad person" organization is willing to take on 50/50 odds. My late father made his career "gaming" situations, so I have a bit of a passing knowledge of it. I am certain that the TSA has "gamed" the odds, and the TSA believe that they have reached a reasonable balance between costing the public time, money, and indignities - and - ensuring a reasonable level of safety for the flying public. They may be wrong.... but I would bet money that, to the best of their ability, they believe they have reached a balance.
Well when a fanatic is willing to commit suicide because he believes that he'll be rewarded in heaven, 50/50 odds don't seem to be all that much of a deterrent. What's worse is that we've only achieved that with a lot of our personal dignity, time, and money. I don't think we can tolerate much more. We should be expecting more for the time, money, and humiliation we're putting ourselves (and our 6 year-old children) through.
If this is the TSA's best effort and what it believes is the best balance, I want a new TSA.
OK, then why are hijackings down? I have my working hypothesis. I cited some evidence to support it. If you don't agree, then it is up to you to state an alternative one that is supported by more than unsupported statements.
I am not saying the TSA (or in my case CATSA) is perfect or haven't mucked things up sometimes. I'm just saying that I believe that they have been mostly responsible for a dramatic drop in airline hijackings. I cited some statistics. Now it's your turn.....
Your statistics don't unequivocally prove the efficacy of the TSA though. They only show that the TSA employs a cost-benefit method to determine what measures to take.
Since you believe in the efficacy of the TSA so much, the burden is yours to make a clear and convincing case, not mine. I can provide alternative hypotheses, but I am in no way saying that these are provable at the current moment in time. I'm only saying that they are rational objections to your theory.
My hypothesis is essentially the same as Lisa's: the protection is coming from our circumstances rather than our deliberative efforts.
Terrorism is a complex thing. My bet is that as we waged wars in multiple nations, it became more advantageous for fanatics to strike where our military forces were. Without having to gain entry into the country, get past airport security (no matter what odds were), or hijack a plane, terrorists were able to kill over 4,000 Americans in Iraq and nearly 1,500 in Afghanistan. That's almost twice as many as were killed on 9/11.
If I were the leader of a group intent on killing Americans and Westerners in general, I certainly would go down that route rather than hijack planes.
ps there is no proof that it wasn't Lisa's rock. There are some very weird causal relationships in the world. Like shooting wolves causes the Aspen to die off in Wyoming. Or .... overfishing the Salmon in the Pacific changes the mix of trees along the rivers of the BC coast.....
It's pretty clear that it was not the rock. Ecosystems are constantly finding new equilibriums; killing off an herbivore's primary predator should cause a decline in vegetation. That is not surprising, nor is it difficult to prove (you can track all three populations simultaneously). There is also a causal mechanism at work that can explain the effect without the need for new assumptions (Occam's Razor).
The efficacy of the TSA and our security measures, on the other hand, are quite complex and are affected by numerous causes. Changes in travel patterns, other nations' actions, and an enemey's changing strategy all play a big role. You can't ignore all of these and pronounce our security gimmicks (and really, that's what patting down a 6 year-old is) to be so masterfully effective.
Nekbeth
Apr 25, 04:00 PM
Thanks for your advice dejo, but I'm not stepping away because of lack of fundamentals. Interaction with other developers is an additional learning source (the main is all kind of documentation), of course I need to learn more about fundamentals of objective C just like you did when you had 3 months programming, but that ain't stopping me from asking help in forums. Some people help you, some don't, you just have to deal with that.
btw, thanks for pointing my error, your right.. those are declaration for cancelTime: and cancelIt: , I got confuse with the parameter :D
btw, thanks for pointing my error, your right.. those are declaration for cancelTime: and cancelIt: , I got confuse with the parameter :D
Chundles
Sep 12, 07:57 AM
hate to ask a stupid, perhaps already answered a gagillion times, question but
is there a live feed of today's proceedings?
No, we will be able to watch it from Apple's website later in the day. Macrumorslive will be providing live text updates.
is there a live feed of today's proceedings?
No, we will be able to watch it from Apple's website later in the day. Macrumorslive will be providing live text updates.
Leoff
Oct 29, 05:50 AM
Apple is a hardware company.
Apple is a hardware company.
If they didn't sell Macintoshes and iPods they would be out of business.
If they didn't sell Macintoshes and iPods they would be out of business.
The software is what makes the hardware valuable.
The software is what makes the hardware valuable.
The software is easy to use and works well.
The software is easy to use and works well.
If the software worked on any hardware, it would not be so easy to use.
If the software worked on any hardware, it would not be so easy to use.
It would also not work so well.
It would also not work so well.
What's funny is, you could easily swap "Software" for "Hardware" in your little mantra and it still rings just as true.
"Apple is a Software Company"
"If they didn't sell the Mac OS they would be out of business"
"The Hardware is what makes the Software valuable"
"The Hardware is easy to use and works well"
"If they Hardware worked with any software, it would not be so easy to use"
"It would also not work so well"
Apple is not a hardware company, it is a computer company. There is quite a difference. Apple has a symbiotic relationship between it's hardware and software. One without the other, the company would be dead.
Apple is a hardware company.
If they didn't sell Macintoshes and iPods they would be out of business.
If they didn't sell Macintoshes and iPods they would be out of business.
The software is what makes the hardware valuable.
The software is what makes the hardware valuable.
The software is easy to use and works well.
The software is easy to use and works well.
If the software worked on any hardware, it would not be so easy to use.
If the software worked on any hardware, it would not be so easy to use.
It would also not work so well.
It would also not work so well.
What's funny is, you could easily swap "Software" for "Hardware" in your little mantra and it still rings just as true.
"Apple is a Software Company"
"If they didn't sell the Mac OS they would be out of business"
"The Hardware is what makes the Software valuable"
"The Hardware is easy to use and works well"
"If they Hardware worked with any software, it would not be so easy to use"
"It would also not work so well"
Apple is not a hardware company, it is a computer company. There is quite a difference. Apple has a symbiotic relationship between it's hardware and software. One without the other, the company would be dead.
white pilgrim
Nov 24, 11:07 AM
Let the sale go global! :p
I thought the Airport Express looks more excusable to own now. :D
I thought the Airport Express looks more excusable to own now. :D
NAG
Jan 11, 10:42 PM
Before they posted the video they basically had a big post explaining why CES sucks and should go away. So I can believe it completely.
croooow
Apr 6, 08:10 AM
I remember a girl/woman submitting such an app to Apple.
It was rejected on the grounds:
'Not required => redundant'.
I see something changing now. :rolleyes:
That is the very first thing I thought of. I remember that rejection and how ridiculous it was for 2 reasons.
1: She was trying to promote Apple's iAds! How does it hurt Apple?
2: Has Apple seen all the apps that could easily be called "not required" or "redundant"?
It was rejected on the grounds:
'Not required => redundant'.
I see something changing now. :rolleyes:
That is the very first thing I thought of. I remember that rejection and how ridiculous it was for 2 reasons.
1: She was trying to promote Apple's iAds! How does it hurt Apple?
2: Has Apple seen all the apps that could easily be called "not required" or "redundant"?