SkyStudios
May 2, 12:44 PM
Well I'm sure Steve Jobs could trot out the explanations given here and point out it is nothing right?
Email him the argument that this is nothing and blown all out of proportion. He might have a news conference.
I hate this because it feels like I am ridiculing Steve Jobs like the trolls that come on here. I am not. The world simply isn't black and white. And that is more the case with corporations than individuals.
you want users to wste time emailing him when its a public concern world wide and he already answered with BS
http://blogs.forbes.com/kashmirhill/2011/04/25/where-steve-jobs-stood-on-location-privacy-in-2010/
portion of this story
Since Apple is mum at the moment, it’s worth looking back on Apple’s views in the summer of 2010 when the company first started storing this file on people’s phones. The video is above. Here’s a transcript of Jobs’ response: Jobs points out that Apple doesn’t allow apps to get users’ location data without their express permission. Then he says:
Demi Lovato Tweets Support for
demi lovato 2011 rehab. demi
selena gomez and demi lovato
more...
demi lovato fat 2011.
Track demilovato photo shoot
more...
Jan , photo shoot society
demi lovato in rehab images
more...
demi lovato 2011 hairstyle.
Email him the argument that this is nothing and blown all out of proportion. He might have a news conference.
I hate this because it feels like I am ridiculing Steve Jobs like the trolls that come on here. I am not. The world simply isn't black and white. And that is more the case with corporations than individuals.
you want users to wste time emailing him when its a public concern world wide and he already answered with BS
http://blogs.forbes.com/kashmirhill/2011/04/25/where-steve-jobs-stood-on-location-privacy-in-2010/
portion of this story
Since Apple is mum at the moment, it’s worth looking back on Apple’s views in the summer of 2010 when the company first started storing this file on people’s phones. The video is above. Here’s a transcript of Jobs’ response: Jobs points out that Apple doesn’t allow apps to get users’ location data without their express permission. Then he says:
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?
SandynJosh
Apr 16, 11:24 PM
Apple does censor things they do not want certain content on the appstore. Show a nip and you get axed I highly disagree with that enable a type of parental control don't chose for me
Want to see a nip? Just turn on iPhone Safari and you can jump on the internet and see the whole tit. Apple has a right to offer a store that is kid friendly, and in the end may make them more money than if they let hookers walk the aisles.
iTunes is a safe place. It's free of smut and malware. Everyone can go there and have a good time, like Disneyland.
Want to see a nip? Just turn on iPhone Safari and you can jump on the internet and see the whole tit. Apple has a right to offer a store that is kid friendly, and in the end may make them more money than if they let hookers walk the aisles.
iTunes is a safe place. It's free of smut and malware. Everyone can go there and have a good time, like Disneyland.
xparaparafreakx
Mar 24, 01:21 AM
A bunch of ********* kids I'm guessing. "Oh, lets steal the $400 Xbox instead of the $1500 TV or the laptop." What is this world coming to??
Back when I was about 8, we were jacked. However it was our house and the house next to us. We lost all of our console GAMES, the system still there. The other house lost their console SYSTEM, the games still there. Its nice to know that the world has not changed 10 years later.
Back when I was about 8, we were jacked. However it was our house and the house next to us. We lost all of our console GAMES, the system still there. The other house lost their console SYSTEM, the games still there. Its nice to know that the world has not changed 10 years later.
more...
callme
May 2, 09:57 AM
I find it hilarious that Steve Jobs claimed Apple was not tracking users, but now all of a sudden we find Location tracking being completely removed from this version of iOS, that is honestly something that annoyes me..
I find it hilarious that you don't understand what is being done here!
I find it hilarious that you don't understand what is being done here!
Mitthrawnuruodo
Aug 1, 10:41 AM
How can a Norwegian law affect Denmark like this?:confused:Gjennom EØS (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Economic_Area)-avtalen... :(
more...
snberk103
Apr 15, 12:29 PM
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.
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 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.
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. Nor, are the support teams command and control. The security forces have shown themselves to be quite good at eventually following the linkages back up the chain.
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.
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.
....
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.
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.
In other words, in this world... all you've got is incomplete data to try and make a reasonable decisions based on a cost/benefit analysis.
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 did. 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.
I'm only saying that they are rational objections to your theory.
Objections with nothing to support them.
My hypothesis is essentially the same as Lisa's: the protection is coming from our circumstances rather than our deliberative efforts.
Good. Support your hypothesis. Otherwise it's got the exactly the same weight as my hypothesis that in fact Lisa's rock was making the bears scarce.
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.
US has been waging wars in multiple nations since.... well, lets not go there.... for a long time. What changed on 9/11? Besides enhanced security at the airports, that is.
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.
Over 10 years, not 10 minutes. It is the single act of terrorism on 9/11 that is engraved on people's (not just American) memories and consciousnesses - not the background and now seemingly routine deaths in the military ranks (I'm speaking about the general population, not about the families and fellow soldiers of those who have been killed.)
Terrorism against military targets is 1) not technically terrorism, and b) not very newsworthy to the public. That's why terrorists target civilians. Deadliest single overseas attack on the US military since the 2nd WW - where and when? Hint... it killed 241 American serviceman. Even if you know that incident, do you think it resonates with the general public in anyway? How about the Oklahoma City bombing? Bet you most people would think more people were killed there than in .... (shall I tell you? Beirut.) That's because civilians were targeted in OK, and the military in Beirut.
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.
You'd not make the news very often, nor change much public opinion in the US, then.
It's pretty clear that it was not the rock.
But can you prove it? :)
Ecosystems are constantly finding new equilibriums; killing off an herbivore's primary predator should cause a decline in vegetation.
I'm glad you got that reference. The Salmon works like this. For millennia the bears and eagles have been scooping the salmon out of the streams. Bears, especially, don't actually eat much of the fish. They take a bite or two of the juiciest bits (from a bear's POV) and toss the carcass over their shoulder to scoop another Salmon. All those carcasses put fish fertilizer into the creek and river banks. A lot of fertilizer. So, the you get really big trees there.
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.
But I think your reasoning is flawed. Human behaviour is much less complex than tracking how the ecosystem interacts with itself. One species vs numerous species; A species we can communicate with vs multiples that we can't; A long history of trying to understand human behaviour vs Not so much.
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.
It's also why they couldn't pay me enough me to run that operation. Too many "known unknowns".
We can't deduce anything from that footage of the 6 year old without knowing more. What if the explosives sniffing machine was going nuts anytime the girl went near it. If you were on that plane, wouldn't you want to know why that machine thought the girl has explosives on her? We don't know that there was a explosives sniffing device, and we don't know that there wasn't. All we know is from that footage that doesn't give us any context.
If I was a privacy or rights group, I would immediately launch an inquiry though. There is a enough information to be concerned, just not enough to form any conclusions what-so-ever. Except the screener appeared to be very professional.
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 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.
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. Nor, are the support teams command and control. The security forces have shown themselves to be quite good at eventually following the linkages back up the chain.
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.
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.
....
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.
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.
In other words, in this world... all you've got is incomplete data to try and make a reasonable decisions based on a cost/benefit analysis.
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 did. 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.
I'm only saying that they are rational objections to your theory.
Objections with nothing to support them.
My hypothesis is essentially the same as Lisa's: the protection is coming from our circumstances rather than our deliberative efforts.
Good. Support your hypothesis. Otherwise it's got the exactly the same weight as my hypothesis that in fact Lisa's rock was making the bears scarce.
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.
US has been waging wars in multiple nations since.... well, lets not go there.... for a long time. What changed on 9/11? Besides enhanced security at the airports, that is.
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.
Over 10 years, not 10 minutes. It is the single act of terrorism on 9/11 that is engraved on people's (not just American) memories and consciousnesses - not the background and now seemingly routine deaths in the military ranks (I'm speaking about the general population, not about the families and fellow soldiers of those who have been killed.)
Terrorism against military targets is 1) not technically terrorism, and b) not very newsworthy to the public. That's why terrorists target civilians. Deadliest single overseas attack on the US military since the 2nd WW - where and when? Hint... it killed 241 American serviceman. Even if you know that incident, do you think it resonates with the general public in anyway? How about the Oklahoma City bombing? Bet you most people would think more people were killed there than in .... (shall I tell you? Beirut.) That's because civilians were targeted in OK, and the military in Beirut.
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.
You'd not make the news very often, nor change much public opinion in the US, then.
It's pretty clear that it was not the rock.
But can you prove it? :)
Ecosystems are constantly finding new equilibriums; killing off an herbivore's primary predator should cause a decline in vegetation.
I'm glad you got that reference. The Salmon works like this. For millennia the bears and eagles have been scooping the salmon out of the streams. Bears, especially, don't actually eat much of the fish. They take a bite or two of the juiciest bits (from a bear's POV) and toss the carcass over their shoulder to scoop another Salmon. All those carcasses put fish fertilizer into the creek and river banks. A lot of fertilizer. So, the you get really big trees there.
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.
But I think your reasoning is flawed. Human behaviour is much less complex than tracking how the ecosystem interacts with itself. One species vs numerous species; A species we can communicate with vs multiples that we can't; A long history of trying to understand human behaviour vs Not so much.
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.
It's also why they couldn't pay me enough me to run that operation. Too many "known unknowns".
We can't deduce anything from that footage of the 6 year old without knowing more. What if the explosives sniffing machine was going nuts anytime the girl went near it. If you were on that plane, wouldn't you want to know why that machine thought the girl has explosives on her? We don't know that there was a explosives sniffing device, and we don't know that there wasn't. All we know is from that footage that doesn't give us any context.
If I was a privacy or rights group, I would immediately launch an inquiry though. There is a enough information to be concerned, just not enough to form any conclusions what-so-ever. Except the screener appeared to be very professional.
marks47
Jan 11, 04:17 PM
I have a problem with tv-b-gone users in general.
That said, I was laughing at the video.
Some people have screamed "sue!"
You have to be able to PROVE damages.
As for causing the companies damages, remember these guys probably screwed up about 2 minutes worth of each presentation they messed with... We just happened to see it repeatedly, and non-stop. Don't forget those presentations are made every 5-10 minutes every day for 3-4 days... In the grand scheme of things, I have a hard time believing anyone was *really* damaged.
That said, I'm going to be manning our booth at Macworld next week. I'm disabling the IR receivers so nobody comes by with an Apple remote, trying to trigger front row on all our laptops!! :)
That said, I was laughing at the video.
Some people have screamed "sue!"
You have to be able to PROVE damages.
As for causing the companies damages, remember these guys probably screwed up about 2 minutes worth of each presentation they messed with... We just happened to see it repeatedly, and non-stop. Don't forget those presentations are made every 5-10 minutes every day for 3-4 days... In the grand scheme of things, I have a hard time believing anyone was *really* damaged.
That said, I'm going to be manning our booth at Macworld next week. I'm disabling the IR receivers so nobody comes by with an Apple remote, trying to trigger front row on all our laptops!! :)
more...
SkyStudios
May 2, 02:05 PM
Not again... The database in question is NOT used by Apple to actively track users. It's a local cache on your phone, sent to you from Apple. This database serves a legitimate purpose on your phone to improve the performance of location services.
The issue is that this DB can be used by others (not Apple) to gain in-site into your relative location over time. Technically I wouldn't even call this a 'bug' since it's working as designed. However it is a serious oversight on Apples part.
FTR - Apple does collect location data from your phone (assuming you opted-in). This tracking is done via entirely different process than is being discussed. active tracking means real time reporting, the data base is just to record it, they can say they erase the data base on your device but that does not mean they did not record it on their side, its like firefox says in their agreement, regardless of private browsing, the ISP can still record the traffic and know what websites and all you been looking at, search engines can even help them find words that match their desired character, whats strange to me is what this article says,
actress demi lovato miley
more...
demi lovato in rehab 2011.
Demi Lovato Photoshoot 2009
more...
demi lovato 2011 fat.
cyrus demi lovato Orient
more...
demi lovato in rehab why
Demi Lovato Outtakes From 2008
more...
New Demi Lovato Pic By Dirk
selena gomez and demi lovato
demi lovato photoshoot 2011#i
The issue is that this DB can be used by others (not Apple) to gain in-site into your relative location over time. Technically I wouldn't even call this a 'bug' since it's working as designed. However it is a serious oversight on Apples part.
FTR - Apple does collect location data from your phone (assuming you opted-in). This tracking is done via entirely different process than is being discussed. active tracking means real time reporting, the data base is just to record it, they can say they erase the data base on your device but that does not mean they did not record it on their side, its like firefox says in their agreement, regardless of private browsing, the ISP can still record the traffic and know what websites and all you been looking at, search engines can even help them find words that match their desired character, whats strange to me is what this article says,
Ygn
Nov 6, 04:55 PM
I've been using World at War for a bit recently mainly for the zombies so I'm looking forward to the new maps on Black Ops. I've never really been able to get into MW2, but the multiplayer of MW2 is really good so I hope Black ops follows, by trailers and videos I've watched it looks like it will.
more...
ten-oak-druid
Apr 8, 05:36 PM
Once I went to Best Buy to get a toslink cable with a mini plug end for my macbook. The employee in the department asked if I needed help. I responded that I need a toslink cable with a miniplug end rather than the regular. The employee in charge of the cable section had never heard of such a thing. I described it but the employee had this look that suggested I was confused. LOL
Local retail would be worth a little extra cost if employees were actually trained to be knowledgable in the products. That would require paying decent wages to knowledgable staff. Sadly the retail outlets like to charge more and pay minimum wage to people who are expected to know the location of items on shelves and that's it. Most of the employees in Best Buy that I've encountered could have been replaced with grocery store clerks and the service would be the same. I'm not insulting the workers. Just pointing out the expectations of the clerks in these places. And of course if you want employees to be interested in the product line more, they should be paid more.
Local retail would be worth a little extra cost if employees were actually trained to be knowledgable in the products. That would require paying decent wages to knowledgable staff. Sadly the retail outlets like to charge more and pay minimum wage to people who are expected to know the location of items on shelves and that's it. Most of the employees in Best Buy that I've encountered could have been replaced with grocery store clerks and the service would be the same. I'm not insulting the workers. Just pointing out the expectations of the clerks in these places. And of course if you want employees to be interested in the product line more, they should be paid more.
NickSl
Sep 12, 08:06 AM
Can't wait :D
The Australian store is claiming that the store is busy or to check my connection :confused:
The Australian Store now says "It's Showtime". Not really convinced they'll be anything to see for non-US customer's, hope I'm wrong.
The Australian store is claiming that the store is busy or to check my connection :confused:
The Australian Store now says "It's Showtime". Not really convinced they'll be anything to see for non-US customer's, hope I'm wrong.
more...
63dot
Mar 4, 12:37 PM
Yes, I absolutely really think so. The problem is that if (as I suspect) you only get your news from left-leaning organizations you're only getting half of the truth. Based on what I see, it's still the right that is more energized, it's still the right that is excited to vote in 2012, because deep down everyone realizes that these protesters are protesting for petty reasons. They don't care about the kids, the schools, the state, the budget, the economy... they just don't want THEIRS to be taken away. I've seen several polls which report exactly the opposite regarding public opinion on the unions... it's all in how you phrase the question.
IMHO, unless there's a MAJOR uptick in the economy and some MAJOR concessions made on the left regarding reducing the deficit, they don't stand a chance to win seats in 2012. Still a chance for the White House? Yes, but he probably won't be favored at that point if significant improvesments are seen in every day Americans' lives.
If I were the right wing, I would want to be energized.
The Senate and White House is in the dem's hands.
I think the GOP is energized but in the wrong areas. Dude, you have to capture the middle and the GOP does not appear to be doing that.
IMHO, unless there's a MAJOR uptick in the economy and some MAJOR concessions made on the left regarding reducing the deficit, they don't stand a chance to win seats in 2012. Still a chance for the White House? Yes, but he probably won't be favored at that point if significant improvesments are seen in every day Americans' lives.
If I were the right wing, I would want to be energized.
The Senate and White House is in the dem's hands.
I think the GOP is energized but in the wrong areas. Dude, you have to capture the middle and the GOP does not appear to be doing that.
lmalave
Oct 19, 12:58 PM
2. Slim MacBook? Don't you mean tiny MacBook? Apple could quite easily make the iPhone Smartphone and the MacBook Nano one and the same.
I don't think so - we're talking about radically different form-factors for a superslim MacBook vs. a PDA smartphone. A MacBook still has to have a decent screen and keyboard, and an iPhone Pro still needs to be pocket size.
Here's what I might expect:
1) MacBook nano: 10.6" widescreen, metallic finish in nano colors, and thinner and more rounded than the current MacBooks (though the slimness will be limited by the optical drive, unless they get rid of an internal optical drive which I don't think Apple will do)
2) iPhone Pro: probably a slider phone with a Treo/Blackberry style qwerty keyboard tucked away. Maybe Apple will innovate here and come up with something better than a slider though. The options I've seen for integrating a qwerty keyboard are:
- regular solid bar-type phone like Treo or Blackberry
- slider phone like LG Chocolate (haven't seen this for a smart phone though)
- sideways slider like Sidekick or T-Mobile MDA
- sideways clamshell like Nokia Communicator
Personally I think both the "slim" iPhone and the "PDA" iPhone will be slider phones. The reason being that I think Apple will design the phones to look almost exactly like the iPod when viewed from the front. So I think the "slim" phone will basically be be a slider iPod nano, and the "PDA" phone will basically be a slider video iPod. Probably they will only be offered in one color to start with, in order to simplify manufacturing and inventory control. Probably silver or black for the iPod nano phone, and black for the iPod PDA phone. Though both phones will have a metal case instead of plastic...
I don't think so - we're talking about radically different form-factors for a superslim MacBook vs. a PDA smartphone. A MacBook still has to have a decent screen and keyboard, and an iPhone Pro still needs to be pocket size.
Here's what I might expect:
1) MacBook nano: 10.6" widescreen, metallic finish in nano colors, and thinner and more rounded than the current MacBooks (though the slimness will be limited by the optical drive, unless they get rid of an internal optical drive which I don't think Apple will do)
2) iPhone Pro: probably a slider phone with a Treo/Blackberry style qwerty keyboard tucked away. Maybe Apple will innovate here and come up with something better than a slider though. The options I've seen for integrating a qwerty keyboard are:
- regular solid bar-type phone like Treo or Blackberry
- slider phone like LG Chocolate (haven't seen this for a smart phone though)
- sideways slider like Sidekick or T-Mobile MDA
- sideways clamshell like Nokia Communicator
Personally I think both the "slim" iPhone and the "PDA" iPhone will be slider phones. The reason being that I think Apple will design the phones to look almost exactly like the iPod when viewed from the front. So I think the "slim" phone will basically be be a slider iPod nano, and the "PDA" phone will basically be a slider video iPod. Probably they will only be offered in one color to start with, in order to simplify manufacturing and inventory control. Probably silver or black for the iPod nano phone, and black for the iPod PDA phone. Though both phones will have a metal case instead of plastic...
more...
COSWORTH
Mar 17, 09:22 AM
Karma, (in short,) is a concept explaining why some babies were born to great parents and others to bad parents. (It evolved into a concept of, be good in this life and you will be born into a good, or better life next time around.)
Hell all this time I was under the impression that it was a female dog, which is something real in this world. I hear a lot of people say Karma is a bitch. I should have known it was something made up and not something real.
Hell all this time I was under the impression that it was a female dog, which is something real in this world. I hear a lot of people say Karma is a bitch. I should have known it was something made up and not something real.
GadgetGav
May 2, 02:26 PM
Isn't it interesting how a seemingly intentional act (active user tracking) changes to a "bug" once it's existence is published in the news media? :D
How do you know it's "intentional" and not a "bug"..??
How do you know it's "intentional" and not a "bug"..??
more...
NiteWaves77
Jan 9, 06:56 PM
1. Steve Jobs will announce an "official" Apple Rumors blog, then sue himself for breach of contract.
2. The edditors of MacRumors.com will lurn to check theire posts for speling and grammor errors before poosting.
3. A retired Bill Gates will join the Apple board, bringing with him the much needed stale and unoriginal perspective on software Apple needs to finally break into the corporate sector.
4. Free ham with every purchase of an iPod Touch.
5. Someone will post something in this forum that isn't pure uneducated speculation, self-righteous nonsense, or pseudo-insider gobbledeegook.
2. The edditors of MacRumors.com will lurn to check theire posts for speling and grammor errors before poosting.
3. A retired Bill Gates will join the Apple board, bringing with him the much needed stale and unoriginal perspective on software Apple needs to finally break into the corporate sector.
4. Free ham with every purchase of an iPod Touch.
5. Someone will post something in this forum that isn't pure uneducated speculation, self-righteous nonsense, or pseudo-insider gobbledeegook.
LucasRoebuck
Jul 21, 11:46 AM
What he said.
Call me crazy, but my iPhone 4 works great. The minority consisting of me and the other 98.6% of iPhone 4 users probably just hasn't seen the problem yet, right?
I agree.
However, I disagree with your signature quote... at least you have taken it out of context.
"...those who live by mystery & charlatanerie, fearing you would render them useless by simplifying the Christian philosophy, the most sublime & benevolent, but most perverted system that ever shone on man, endeavored to crush your well earnt, & well deserved fame." - Thomas Jefferson to Joseph Priestley, Washington, 21 March 1801
If you are going to quote Jefferson, get it right.
Source: http://wiki.monticello.org/mediawiki/index.php/Christianity_is_the_most_perverted_system_that_ever_shone_on_man
Call me crazy, but my iPhone 4 works great. The minority consisting of me and the other 98.6% of iPhone 4 users probably just hasn't seen the problem yet, right?
I agree.
However, I disagree with your signature quote... at least you have taken it out of context.
"...those who live by mystery & charlatanerie, fearing you would render them useless by simplifying the Christian philosophy, the most sublime & benevolent, but most perverted system that ever shone on man, endeavored to crush your well earnt, & well deserved fame." - Thomas Jefferson to Joseph Priestley, Washington, 21 March 1801
If you are going to quote Jefferson, get it right.
Source: http://wiki.monticello.org/mediawiki/index.php/Christianity_is_the_most_perverted_system_that_ever_shone_on_man
ct2k7
Apr 22, 09:43 PM
Windows 8 is worse than anything else I've seen when it comes to keeping things secret. I'm seeing new screenshots nearly every day.
DewGuy1999
Apr 8, 09:03 PM
"Alice in Wonderland" DVD
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/618uZRUCKkL._SL500_AA300_.jpg
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/618uZRUCKkL._SL500_AA300_.jpg
LagunaSol
Apr 25, 12:19 PM
Would love a larger screen if they can maintain the same body size. I have no interest in something like the giant PDA-sized Android phones.
aeneas07
Oct 6, 11:46 AM
Getting back to the actual advertisement. What self-respecting advertising professional would use someone else's tagline like that.
I had a few friends watching the football game (where we saw the ad) and half of them thought it was an iphone commercial because they were only half paying attention and heard "there's a map for that".
Pretty shoddy work in my opinion.
I had a few friends watching the football game (where we saw the ad) and half of them thought it was an iphone commercial because they were only half paying attention and heard "there's a map for that".
Pretty shoddy work in my opinion.
keysersoze
Nov 16, 03:55 PM
AMD does not have the ability to produce enough chips. Period. They have sold their soul to Dell, and Dell will suck them bone dry.
Not gunna happen.
Not gunna happen.
Mitthrawnuruodo
Sep 12, 07:34 AM
Even the Norwegian iTunes store is down...
I didn't expect that, after the last couple of months controversies here... :confused:
I didn't expect that, after the last couple of months controversies here... :confused:
No comments:
Post a Comment