bearbo
Jan 12, 02:36 AM
I would love to see you come up with something revolutionary.
just because i can't come up with something revolutionary doesn't mean i can't say other things aren't.
The hardware, what do you want them to do? Come out with a floating phone? They do have to make something that is relatively affordable. They can't possibly make a platinum apple phone with surround sound speakers floating around it and tag it at $20,000. You would complain anyway.
hm. i think the point of revolutionary is so its function is not so obvious?
and just for the record, i don't want platium apple phone with surround sound speaker floating around it. ew.
again, i'm not saying iphone is crap, it's not the best thing in the world. gah
What else were you hoping for?
if he want to call it revolutionary, i was hoping for something revolutionary.
just because i can't come up with something revolutionary doesn't mean i can't say other things aren't.
The hardware, what do you want them to do? Come out with a floating phone? They do have to make something that is relatively affordable. They can't possibly make a platinum apple phone with surround sound speakers floating around it and tag it at $20,000. You would complain anyway.
hm. i think the point of revolutionary is so its function is not so obvious?
and just for the record, i don't want platium apple phone with surround sound speaker floating around it. ew.
again, i'm not saying iphone is crap, it's not the best thing in the world. gah
What else were you hoping for?
if he want to call it revolutionary, i was hoping for something revolutionary.
CharBroiled20s
Oct 11, 04:22 PM
I have lived in 4 different rural markets and regularly travel between them. Currently, in NC, Verizon is everywhere since they bought out a couple providers like Rural Cellular and I forget the other one.
When I left Verizon, they had full bar 3G coverage at my house. They had just upgraded about 3 months before I went with an iPhone. With AT&T, I need to drive almost 20 miles to even find 3G coverage.
With Verizon, I had a Palm Treo 700 and it was very rare to see even the analog signal at all.
If Apple would make the iPhone for Verizon, i'd switch back in a blink, even if I had to pay early termination, it's that bad. I typically lose between 20-40% of my calls. There is several dead zones too, that I can't even drive down without losing it.
I too came from Verizon where I hardly ever dropped a call. I can't remember it ever being a problem. Now I have my second iPhone (first was with tmobile) and I have to say that AT&T is the worst carrier I've ever used. I live in Chicago and not a day goes by where at least 1 call is dropped (usually more than 1).
I'd be right behind you in line at verizon to get one of their iPhones.
AT&T should be penalized for their garbage coverage by apple ripping the exclusivity deal away from them.
We in America would really benefit from legislation that bans anticompetitive exclusivity contracts. Similar laws to that which Europe enjoys would make everyone here a little happier.
Choice is never a bad thing.
When I left Verizon, they had full bar 3G coverage at my house. They had just upgraded about 3 months before I went with an iPhone. With AT&T, I need to drive almost 20 miles to even find 3G coverage.
With Verizon, I had a Palm Treo 700 and it was very rare to see even the analog signal at all.
If Apple would make the iPhone for Verizon, i'd switch back in a blink, even if I had to pay early termination, it's that bad. I typically lose between 20-40% of my calls. There is several dead zones too, that I can't even drive down without losing it.
I too came from Verizon where I hardly ever dropped a call. I can't remember it ever being a problem. Now I have my second iPhone (first was with tmobile) and I have to say that AT&T is the worst carrier I've ever used. I live in Chicago and not a day goes by where at least 1 call is dropped (usually more than 1).
I'd be right behind you in line at verizon to get one of their iPhones.
AT&T should be penalized for their garbage coverage by apple ripping the exclusivity deal away from them.
We in America would really benefit from legislation that bans anticompetitive exclusivity contracts. Similar laws to that which Europe enjoys would make everyone here a little happier.
Choice is never a bad thing.
Benjy91
Apr 7, 11:38 AM
According to Wikipedia, Windows 8 will be NT version 6.2, not 7.0 - just in case you were wondering.
Thats what I said.. I didnt say it would be NT 7.0
Thats what I said.. I didnt say it would be NT 7.0
Messy
Apr 26, 10:13 AM
I don't read into the results as you might have. This doesn't seem to show manipulation in any of the areas of this photo that are contested and news-worthy. I see an image that has been reproduced and resaved maybe a handful of times before it reached distribution here...
Anyone have any guesses at the extra icons depicted in that folder? The last may be the new facetime, but what of the two before that?
It suggests that the folders have been manipulated, additionally looking at the pixel width and height they are not uniform, suggesting stretching.
Theres also no real reason why it should be a grainy image, even if taken with a camera phone.
Anyone have any guesses at the extra icons depicted in that folder? The last may be the new facetime, but what of the two before that?
It suggests that the folders have been manipulated, additionally looking at the pixel width and height they are not uniform, suggesting stretching.
Theres also no real reason why it should be a grainy image, even if taken with a camera phone.
more...
jhu
Oct 29, 08:31 PM
hey, im all for apple not releasing this software to the public.
Why? it may mean less viruses or hacks.
security through obscurity doesn't really work as well as its proponents would like to think. take pgp for example. it's completely open. how many cracks have there been for it?
Why? it may mean less viruses or hacks.
security through obscurity doesn't really work as well as its proponents would like to think. take pgp for example. it's completely open. how many cracks have there been for it?
Scowlerjase
Jan 14, 07:15 PM
Gizmodo , as we say in the North of England , have well and truly p*ssed on their own chips.
more...
Jaymes
Mar 28, 02:13 PM
Welcome to 1984.
bikertwin
Sep 25, 03:47 PM
Yes, a very good point. And it makes me wonder if Adobe will ever charge for it. In fact, now they have rebranded it Adobe "Photoshop" Darkroom, it leads me to believe it will be included as part of Photoshop and not as a seperate product. This might also be why they haven't released it yet, since the next version of Photoshop isn't finished. This strategy would undercut Apple since most photography professionals undoubtedly already own Photoshop and will upgrade.
No, Adobe is claiming Lightroom will be released in late early a good 3 months before PS CS3.
I think with this rebranding, they're positioning Lightroom between PS Elements and PS CS, hence PS Lightroom.
No, Adobe is claiming Lightroom will be released in late early a good 3 months before PS CS3.
I think with this rebranding, they're positioning Lightroom between PS Elements and PS CS, hence PS Lightroom.
more...
macteo
Apr 29, 03:55 PM
Yeah, I preferred the iOS scrollbars, and the slider buttons.
Why Apple did it?
Why Apple did it?
QuarterSwede
Apr 25, 01:30 PM
The first picture is fake, that's beyond the question. Look at the iCal icon � it's much too wide. From this angle, it should be rather taller than wider. The other icons look out of shape too.
I don't see it. Holding my iPhone at nearly the same angle and about the same distance they look identical.
I don't see it. Holding my iPhone at nearly the same angle and about the same distance they look identical.
more...
ciTiger
May 2, 10:02 AM
I hope performance in gps accuracy isn t affected by it...
Illusion986
Apr 15, 03:14 PM
Real or Not....I like it
more...
OdduWon
Oct 11, 10:52 AM
yea! comming zoon
http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j248/jonathaniliff/microsoftzune.jpg
MAC: wait PC... pC are you ok.
PC: no, i had zune for lunch and .. ugggh,, oooh gawd, i think im going to blue screen
http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j248/jonathaniliff/Pc_blue.jpg
http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j248/jonathaniliff/microsoftzune.jpg
MAC: wait PC... pC are you ok.
PC: no, i had zune for lunch and .. ugggh,, oooh gawd, i think im going to blue screen
http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j248/jonathaniliff/Pc_blue.jpg
leekohler
Apr 25, 07:26 PM
I agree they are idiots and I already stated they should call the cops.
OP, I clicked on the article and the title is different from this thread. I do agree that the employees on duty at McDonald's be held responsible in the beating of a trans woman.
I know. Sloppy on my part, but I had to shorten the title. It would not fit.
OP, I clicked on the article and the title is different from this thread. I do agree that the employees on duty at McDonald's be held responsible in the beating of a trans woman.
I know. Sloppy on my part, but I had to shorten the title. It would not fit.
more...
AndroidfoLife
Apr 15, 09:35 PM
They were "called" smart phones. But the iphone defined the direction the iphones of the future would take.
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.
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.
Al Coholic
May 2, 11:02 AM
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!
Maybe Al can get Apple to put a real GPU back in the MBP13? I'm off to email him. Wish me luck!
more...
TuffLuffJimmy
Apr 26, 12:39 AM
I'll be a little bummed if this turns out to be the iPhone 5, especially with no resolution bump. I don't mean I'll be upset with slightly less ppi, but I would like to have a little more screen space instead of just a barely enlarged one.
I'll have to see what Apple has in store for iOS 5. If it's worth it I'll get another iPhone, if not maybe I'll check out the Pre 3.
As a developer, this will be pain in the ass!
Retina Displays have exactly the double number of pixels with the same resolution, having a second resolution is a giant step to gain one of the crappiest features of Android. I really doubt Apple would do that.
What if this isn't a bigger screen but a smaller device with the same screen on it? Hmm..
Before posting it's always a good idea to read the article and a little bit of the thread, not just the headline. Had you done any research, something I expect of developers, you would know that the general consensus is that it will be a larger screen with the same resolution. Also, Apple is giving you quite an amazing product and App Store to sling your wares instead of complaining you should maybe just put a little more effort into your applications and thank Apple for the opportunity they're giving you and others.
I'll have to see what Apple has in store for iOS 5. If it's worth it I'll get another iPhone, if not maybe I'll check out the Pre 3.
As a developer, this will be pain in the ass!
Retina Displays have exactly the double number of pixels with the same resolution, having a second resolution is a giant step to gain one of the crappiest features of Android. I really doubt Apple would do that.
What if this isn't a bigger screen but a smaller device with the same screen on it? Hmm..
Before posting it's always a good idea to read the article and a little bit of the thread, not just the headline. Had you done any research, something I expect of developers, you would know that the general consensus is that it will be a larger screen with the same resolution. Also, Apple is giving you quite an amazing product and App Store to sling your wares instead of complaining you should maybe just put a little more effort into your applications and thank Apple for the opportunity they're giving you and others.
kernkraft
Jul 30, 11:22 AM
I think the Volt is a success in terms of meeting its intended design parameters. However, I think the whole notion of the all-electric car and plug-in hybrids are flawed due to our current infrastructure.
As long as we burn fossil fuels to get the electricity, the electric car is just sweeping the fossil fuel/pollution problem under the rug by putting the "dirty" side of power consumption out of sight (back at the power plant). Also, there's no way our current power generation infrastructure could support even a fraction of the population switching to electric cars. California already has rolling blackouts - if people stopped burning gas and switched to electrics, the problem would get drastically worse.
I think electric cars are a dead end for the present...At least until our entire power grid makes large-scale switches to alternative energy, and there is no timeline for that currently. Also, there is currently no guarantee that practical fuel-cell systems will ever be truly affordable or mass-producable. The current offerings are all extremely expensive, proof-of-concept vehicles with short useful lives.
We'd be better off with diesels or diesel hybrids. People don't want to admit it, but those are currently our best options IMO.
I really wish I didn't sound so cynical, but that's the picture as I understand it.
Very valid points! My only point to add would be that BMW already makes diesel cars that use the company's EfficientDynamics technology to regenerate wasted energy. In the end, what might solve our energy crisis is the combination of alternative energy, frugality on the user end and trying to capture and re-use as much energy and energy-intensive (to make) products as possible. To me, there is no great difference between a hybrid and a BMW diesel that stops in stationary traffic. Of course, in city centres, using a purely electric drive helps to keep the air clean, which is something that diesel engines are not good at.
Well, they should research capacitors then, never wear out, and charge veeeeewy quick. Like EEstor (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EEStor)
Very good point. And not without a bit of irony as Rudolf Diesel patented his engine in the U.S. (608,845), and we don't use it - though that's because of the Oil companies, not the car companies.
I agree we should use the diesel. After the apocalypse, you could make your own fuel from zombie bodies!
Used vegetable oil or quality diesel would be a start...
True on the economies of scale bit - although the batteries are always going to be pricey.
I keep hammering the same point here, but the Volt would see a quite significant fuel economy boost by switching to a diesel engine to charge the batteries and run the motors. Sort it out, US car companies...it's not like we don't sell diesel here.
I heard it that the reason why BMW stopped selling diesel cars in the US was that the engines failed, due to the very poor quality. In Europe, you can get quality fuel, but in the US, diesel is still the fuel of trucks, primarily.
Just one statistics: in continental Europe (not in the UK), new diesel cars have been outselling petrol ones for almost a decade, despite the premium.
That's the great thing about a platform like the Volt, or anything like it: you can easily change whatever gives the electricity. Gas not working right? The American public finally getting their asses out of their collective heads about diesel? Just get one the right size, and hook it up to the generator. It works for trains. Small fusion reactors finally a possibility? Bingo!
If GM hadn't ****ed up when they tried bringing diesel cars to the market, it wouldn't be anywhere near as bad. We still have some old M-B diesels kicking around, and probably a good bunch of them run on SVO by now.
Subaru still sells FWD cars, just not in the US or Europe.
You may easily change the source of electricity (actually, you cannot, it mainly comes from coal and oil in the US, I think), but so far, there is no decent technology available to solve the problem of storing electricity. Batteries suck and the Volt still uses ancient batteries that you would find in all sorts of consumer products. That is a car, running on laptop batteries (or AA's, if you prefer).
Why did you burst my bubble of Subarus awesomeness? :(
Don't forget the dealership markup. Some of the automotive blogs have people complaining that the dealerships are adding a $10k markup to the already expensive vehicle.
You shouldn't have any impression about Subarus. They really have the traction of a train (AWD ones, of course - why would you buy anything else?!), but everything else is just midrange quality at best.
I've had a 1998 Impreza estate several years ago and it was OK. Recently, I've had a 2007 Legacy Outback from work. Nice glass on the top and good traction, but I have no intention of trading a BMW or Mercedes for it the next time. The interior is low quality and Subaru has no understanding of fuel efficiency, it seems. OK, it's a 2.5L engine, automatic and AWD, but still... 25 imperial mpg?!
As long as we burn fossil fuels to get the electricity, the electric car is just sweeping the fossil fuel/pollution problem under the rug by putting the "dirty" side of power consumption out of sight (back at the power plant). Also, there's no way our current power generation infrastructure could support even a fraction of the population switching to electric cars. California already has rolling blackouts - if people stopped burning gas and switched to electrics, the problem would get drastically worse.
I think electric cars are a dead end for the present...At least until our entire power grid makes large-scale switches to alternative energy, and there is no timeline for that currently. Also, there is currently no guarantee that practical fuel-cell systems will ever be truly affordable or mass-producable. The current offerings are all extremely expensive, proof-of-concept vehicles with short useful lives.
We'd be better off with diesels or diesel hybrids. People don't want to admit it, but those are currently our best options IMO.
I really wish I didn't sound so cynical, but that's the picture as I understand it.
Very valid points! My only point to add would be that BMW already makes diesel cars that use the company's EfficientDynamics technology to regenerate wasted energy. In the end, what might solve our energy crisis is the combination of alternative energy, frugality on the user end and trying to capture and re-use as much energy and energy-intensive (to make) products as possible. To me, there is no great difference between a hybrid and a BMW diesel that stops in stationary traffic. Of course, in city centres, using a purely electric drive helps to keep the air clean, which is something that diesel engines are not good at.
Well, they should research capacitors then, never wear out, and charge veeeeewy quick. Like EEstor (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EEStor)
Very good point. And not without a bit of irony as Rudolf Diesel patented his engine in the U.S. (608,845), and we don't use it - though that's because of the Oil companies, not the car companies.
I agree we should use the diesel. After the apocalypse, you could make your own fuel from zombie bodies!
Used vegetable oil or quality diesel would be a start...
True on the economies of scale bit - although the batteries are always going to be pricey.
I keep hammering the same point here, but the Volt would see a quite significant fuel economy boost by switching to a diesel engine to charge the batteries and run the motors. Sort it out, US car companies...it's not like we don't sell diesel here.
I heard it that the reason why BMW stopped selling diesel cars in the US was that the engines failed, due to the very poor quality. In Europe, you can get quality fuel, but in the US, diesel is still the fuel of trucks, primarily.
Just one statistics: in continental Europe (not in the UK), new diesel cars have been outselling petrol ones for almost a decade, despite the premium.
That's the great thing about a platform like the Volt, or anything like it: you can easily change whatever gives the electricity. Gas not working right? The American public finally getting their asses out of their collective heads about diesel? Just get one the right size, and hook it up to the generator. It works for trains. Small fusion reactors finally a possibility? Bingo!
If GM hadn't ****ed up when they tried bringing diesel cars to the market, it wouldn't be anywhere near as bad. We still have some old M-B diesels kicking around, and probably a good bunch of them run on SVO by now.
Subaru still sells FWD cars, just not in the US or Europe.
You may easily change the source of electricity (actually, you cannot, it mainly comes from coal and oil in the US, I think), but so far, there is no decent technology available to solve the problem of storing electricity. Batteries suck and the Volt still uses ancient batteries that you would find in all sorts of consumer products. That is a car, running on laptop batteries (or AA's, if you prefer).
Why did you burst my bubble of Subarus awesomeness? :(
Don't forget the dealership markup. Some of the automotive blogs have people complaining that the dealerships are adding a $10k markup to the already expensive vehicle.
You shouldn't have any impression about Subarus. They really have the traction of a train (AWD ones, of course - why would you buy anything else?!), but everything else is just midrange quality at best.
I've had a 1998 Impreza estate several years ago and it was OK. Recently, I've had a 2007 Legacy Outback from work. Nice glass on the top and good traction, but I have no intention of trading a BMW or Mercedes for it the next time. The interior is low quality and Subaru has no understanding of fuel efficiency, it seems. OK, it's a 2.5L engine, automatic and AWD, but still... 25 imperial mpg?!
pgw3
Aug 1, 04:27 PM
I don't FEEL ignorant and stupid. Maybe that's because I took the time to READ and UNDERSTAND the limitations imposed on me by iTunes/iPod before I BOUGHT in. And maybe because I understand that what I am BUYING is a DIGITAL DATA FILE that must be interpreted by a certain APPLICATION to become music, and that this was EXPLAINED to me before I BOUGHT. That I don't OWN the MUSIC, and that there are LIMITATIONS to what I can do with it. ( And if you think I'm wrong on that last point, let a copyright holder catch you using their music for commmercial gain. Write back to us and describe the world of hurt that descends on you)!
The fact of the matter is that reasonable DRM's protect the artists who are the source of the music. And Apples DRM is one the most reasonable in the industry, both protecting the artist, and allowing fair use by the customer.
The problem is that the license says that the limitations can change at any time, so one doesn't really know what one buys, even if one has read the license - which I'm sure most people has not. I don't believe that the complaint is first and foremost about the DRM (which one may have opinions about exactly how it is implemented and shared but most anyway recognises it as a necessary evil) but rather what is summarised in these two sentences: "it is unreasonable that the agreement the consumer must give consent to is regulated by English law. That iTunes disclaims all liability for possible damage the software may cause and that it may alter the rights to the music". I think most of us agree that it is not reasonable that that which we buy can destroy anything on our computer and that they can e.g. suddenly just allow me to play a song just five times. And even though we all trust and like Apple these sort of licences are getting sillier and sillier (and it is certainlly not just Apple, it is basically the whole industry) and I think it is really good that someone who has the time and knowledge to fight it takes a stand against it, even though I believe shutting down the store may be overkill but I'm sure it won't come to that.
Cheers,
Peter
The fact of the matter is that reasonable DRM's protect the artists who are the source of the music. And Apples DRM is one the most reasonable in the industry, both protecting the artist, and allowing fair use by the customer.
The problem is that the license says that the limitations can change at any time, so one doesn't really know what one buys, even if one has read the license - which I'm sure most people has not. I don't believe that the complaint is first and foremost about the DRM (which one may have opinions about exactly how it is implemented and shared but most anyway recognises it as a necessary evil) but rather what is summarised in these two sentences: "it is unreasonable that the agreement the consumer must give consent to is regulated by English law. That iTunes disclaims all liability for possible damage the software may cause and that it may alter the rights to the music". I think most of us agree that it is not reasonable that that which we buy can destroy anything on our computer and that they can e.g. suddenly just allow me to play a song just five times. And even though we all trust and like Apple these sort of licences are getting sillier and sillier (and it is certainlly not just Apple, it is basically the whole industry) and I think it is really good that someone who has the time and knowledge to fight it takes a stand against it, even though I believe shutting down the store may be overkill but I'm sure it won't come to that.
Cheers,
Peter
ariel
Sep 25, 11:19 AM
Actually neither Lightroom or Aperture can do watermarks (other than EXIF data.).
Aperture can indeed do watermarks on export.
Aperture can indeed do watermarks on export.
whooleytoo
Jan 8, 09:17 AM
Just think, could WWDC 2007 be the first keynote we all watch on our big screen TVs, streaming over iTV?
I wonder, would it be possible to introduce an element of P2P technology to spread the load of live keynote broadcasts? Obviously, streaming isn't as suited to P2P as file downloads, but it still could help.
I wonder, would it be possible to introduce an element of P2P technology to spread the load of live keynote broadcasts? Obviously, streaming isn't as suited to P2P as file downloads, but it still could help.
Khazov Denis
Apr 16, 09:43 AM
http://img.skitch.com/20100416-1fcq6stwput2wkx8w2c3wdw3sf.jpg
http://img.skitch.com/20100416-x24u8rjfyc781wmh9ms3us6y4e.jpg
http://img.skitch.com/20100416-x24u8rjfyc781wmh9ms3us6y4e.jpg
ImageWrangler
Oct 6, 12:54 PM
AT&T is evil, let's get that out of the way, so if the iPhone came to a different network I'd be all over that like, well, like a person that thinks AT&T is evil and hates sleeping with the devil.
That said, some of the peeps defending Verizon also beg a chuckle. Evil? No, not that I'm aware of. But super stellar league of awesome as many are implying? Uhhh, no, definitely not.
My sig other has Verizon with a (semi)smart phone, and I have AT&T with the iPhone. At home she can only make calls from the kitchen as her signal goes in and out, I get five bars of 3G anywhere in the house, in the basement, the barn, the garage. We leave the house and travel west she goes to analog then no service, I'm fine however. There is a bizarrre dead zone near where we live where I do go to EDGE for a bit, but otherwise fine. NYC where I'm from, in the city, full bars, but yes, dropped calls, but my friends there regardless of network complain about it. Think about it, big steel buildings in concrete canyons where you can't make sight-line with any cell array, many of which are tacked on buildings (ugly as that is), c'mon, get serious. And her Verizon drops calls in NYC same rate I do only I get a stronger signal.
So half of this "Verizon is teh godz herherher" is kinda overblown here. Decent I'm sure, sup0r awesome as some are saying? Uh, no, not hardly.
That said I'd welcome the option even though, sadly, with Verizon's spotty coverage all over upstate New York probably sadly would have to stay with AT&T until VERIZON got better service.
That said, some of the peeps defending Verizon also beg a chuckle. Evil? No, not that I'm aware of. But super stellar league of awesome as many are implying? Uhhh, no, definitely not.
My sig other has Verizon with a (semi)smart phone, and I have AT&T with the iPhone. At home she can only make calls from the kitchen as her signal goes in and out, I get five bars of 3G anywhere in the house, in the basement, the barn, the garage. We leave the house and travel west she goes to analog then no service, I'm fine however. There is a bizarrre dead zone near where we live where I do go to EDGE for a bit, but otherwise fine. NYC where I'm from, in the city, full bars, but yes, dropped calls, but my friends there regardless of network complain about it. Think about it, big steel buildings in concrete canyons where you can't make sight-line with any cell array, many of which are tacked on buildings (ugly as that is), c'mon, get serious. And her Verizon drops calls in NYC same rate I do only I get a stronger signal.
So half of this "Verizon is teh godz herherher" is kinda overblown here. Decent I'm sure, sup0r awesome as some are saying? Uh, no, not hardly.
That said I'd welcome the option even though, sadly, with Verizon's spotty coverage all over upstate New York probably sadly would have to stay with AT&T until VERIZON got better service.
kvizzel
Mar 17, 05:44 AM
That's messed up.
The kid is going to have to pay.
You know, karma is a bitch.
The kid is going to have to pay.
You know, karma is a bitch.
No comments:
Post a Comment