MDMac
Jan 6, 02:24 AM
I can't wait! I'm having trouble sleeping nights... :p
ariel
Sep 25, 11:46 AM
...well...I've been using Aperture 1.1 with 765k+ images on a 24" 800mhz G3 and it really rocks!...
I'm assuming you slipped and meant to type 20"...right?
Geez... musta been having a wet dream when i typed that LOL
Yes it is 20" and i use every bit of it heehee
I'm assuming you slipped and meant to type 20"...right?
Geez... musta been having a wet dream when i typed that LOL
Yes it is 20" and i use every bit of it heehee
AppliedVisual
Oct 17, 02:33 PM
Tape!?! :confused: who on earth uses tape anymore? This is.. 2006. And I was always under the impression that a medium with moving parts would be more prone to failure than one without. Certainly my VHS and cassette library have had their share of tapes being chewed up by the machine or worn out from use.
Tape is still the most reliable, long-term archival media available. Newer tape systems can transfer over 150MB/sec. to and from the tape and store several hundred GB on a single tape. Cost-wise, tape is expensive to buy into, but if you have sufficeint archival needs, it pays for itself over time. Many tape solutions once they reach their ROI point afer a year or two, often are cheaper than HDD storage by half or more. Sounds weird, I know, but that's the way it still is.
Most large data centers covering everything from web storage, insurance databases, financial institutions etc... Have mostly converted over to large-scale redundant servers and storage networks using RAID subsystems. This serves all their immediate storage and backup needs on site and is very reliable if managed properly. But nearly all of them still use an additional tape archival workflow for off-site data storage. There really is no other way right now... Wish there was. Hence the reason tape systems also keep evolving and pretty much match HDD capacity with tape capacity in most cases and transfer rates continue to improve. Comparing tape archival systems to VHS or miniDV tape is not a good comparison, data tapes (or at least the good ones) are very robust and actually very hard to damage. Short of placing them in a magnetic field for a period of time, they're mostly indestructable. They do have moving parts, but hardly any compared to a hard drive.
Using hard drives as an archival solution is a bad idea... Hard drives are not designed for this and can corrupt data over time. Not to mention, the platter system and motors are not designed to sit stationary for years at a time for long-term storage. Optical media isn't too bad, but most photo-sensitive dyes and films used in optical media will decay over time. CD-R media was originally claimed to have a lifespan of 30 to 100 years. Now that it's been around for 30+ years, we're finding out that claim was somewhat exaggerated. Recordable DVD media and HD-DVD and BD are no different, just higher data density on the discs. And also not anywhere near practical for large-scale solutions. Just how do you archive and manage 300 petabytes per year to DVD-R???
For small business type users and home users though, DVD-R media in addition to a good redundant RAID setup probably makes the most sense. Unless they're pushing lots of data doing HD video editing or something like that. In which case, it may still make sense to give tape a consideration as the long-term archive solution. Prosumer level tape archive systems exist and are not that expensive and much more reliable than shelved hard drives and much easier to manage than optical media. The VXA2 format can afford someone an external Firewire tape system w/2 tapes for < $1K. Tapes hold up to 160GB each and factoring in the cost of the drive plus enough tapes to back up about 3 terrabytes of data, the cost becomes cheaper than individual hard drives. So a few terrabytes down the road and you could be wishing you had considered tape if you're still using DVD-R. OTOH, DVD-R is just fine and dandy if a terrabyte or two is all you need. Because you can fit a lot of discs in a shoebox and sharpie pen to label them is pretty cheap too.
External drives are *not* long term archiving solutions. They are useful for storing vast amounts of data that presumably you want to actually access and use (and possibly modify) on a regular basis; also, they are good for the kind of incremental backups you refer to, Time Machine, Retrospect, other 3rd party backup tools can be used for this. But if you have important files you know aren't going to change, while having them on HDD is useful for instant access, that's not where they should be permanently archived -- they should be burned to a permanent medium, preferably more than one copy, and stored in a safe place (or places). If your drive fails and you still need the data to be on that drive, you can then restore from the permanent medium.
Um... I guess I got carried away and didn't mean to elaborate on what you already said. But, er... um.. Yep, I agree.
Tape is still the most reliable, long-term archival media available. Newer tape systems can transfer over 150MB/sec. to and from the tape and store several hundred GB on a single tape. Cost-wise, tape is expensive to buy into, but if you have sufficeint archival needs, it pays for itself over time. Many tape solutions once they reach their ROI point afer a year or two, often are cheaper than HDD storage by half or more. Sounds weird, I know, but that's the way it still is.
Most large data centers covering everything from web storage, insurance databases, financial institutions etc... Have mostly converted over to large-scale redundant servers and storage networks using RAID subsystems. This serves all their immediate storage and backup needs on site and is very reliable if managed properly. But nearly all of them still use an additional tape archival workflow for off-site data storage. There really is no other way right now... Wish there was. Hence the reason tape systems also keep evolving and pretty much match HDD capacity with tape capacity in most cases and transfer rates continue to improve. Comparing tape archival systems to VHS or miniDV tape is not a good comparison, data tapes (or at least the good ones) are very robust and actually very hard to damage. Short of placing them in a magnetic field for a period of time, they're mostly indestructable. They do have moving parts, but hardly any compared to a hard drive.
Using hard drives as an archival solution is a bad idea... Hard drives are not designed for this and can corrupt data over time. Not to mention, the platter system and motors are not designed to sit stationary for years at a time for long-term storage. Optical media isn't too bad, but most photo-sensitive dyes and films used in optical media will decay over time. CD-R media was originally claimed to have a lifespan of 30 to 100 years. Now that it's been around for 30+ years, we're finding out that claim was somewhat exaggerated. Recordable DVD media and HD-DVD and BD are no different, just higher data density on the discs. And also not anywhere near practical for large-scale solutions. Just how do you archive and manage 300 petabytes per year to DVD-R???
For small business type users and home users though, DVD-R media in addition to a good redundant RAID setup probably makes the most sense. Unless they're pushing lots of data doing HD video editing or something like that. In which case, it may still make sense to give tape a consideration as the long-term archive solution. Prosumer level tape archive systems exist and are not that expensive and much more reliable than shelved hard drives and much easier to manage than optical media. The VXA2 format can afford someone an external Firewire tape system w/2 tapes for < $1K. Tapes hold up to 160GB each and factoring in the cost of the drive plus enough tapes to back up about 3 terrabytes of data, the cost becomes cheaper than individual hard drives. So a few terrabytes down the road and you could be wishing you had considered tape if you're still using DVD-R. OTOH, DVD-R is just fine and dandy if a terrabyte or two is all you need. Because you can fit a lot of discs in a shoebox and sharpie pen to label them is pretty cheap too.
External drives are *not* long term archiving solutions. They are useful for storing vast amounts of data that presumably you want to actually access and use (and possibly modify) on a regular basis; also, they are good for the kind of incremental backups you refer to, Time Machine, Retrospect, other 3rd party backup tools can be used for this. But if you have important files you know aren't going to change, while having them on HDD is useful for instant access, that's not where they should be permanently archived -- they should be burned to a permanent medium, preferably more than one copy, and stored in a safe place (or places). If your drive fails and you still need the data to be on that drive, you can then restore from the permanent medium.
Um... I guess I got carried away and didn't mean to elaborate on what you already said. But, er... um.. Yep, I agree.
Chundles
Sep 12, 08:07 AM
I thought tht too, but there's already a section on the page for trailer. Just about the iTunes Videos
The link from Transporter 2 includes Movies+Trailers in the URL. As does the one below it, the other two include Games+Trailers.
Here's the full link from the Transporter 2 bit.
http://phobos.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/inboundRedirect?omni-ch=Store+Front&omni-pg=Movie+Trailers&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.apple.com%2Fmoviesxml%2Fh%2Findex.xml
The link from Transporter 2 includes Movies+Trailers in the URL. As does the one below it, the other two include Games+Trailers.
Here's the full link from the Transporter 2 bit.
http://phobos.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/inboundRedirect?omni-ch=Store+Front&omni-pg=Movie+Trailers&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.apple.com%2Fmoviesxml%2Fh%2Findex.xml
more...
Torrijos
Jul 21, 04:55 PM
Even if Rim, Palm, etc. exhibit the same antenna problems as the iPhone 4, Apple is acting like a cry baby by trying to shift the discussion to include their competitors. �Teacher, the other kids are being bad too, don�t punish me alone�.
Actually it was the competitors that tried to use the antenna problems as a selling point and as propaganda.
http://conversations.nokia.com/2010/06/28/how-do-you-hold-your-nokia/
So the lot of them are fair game...
As for bloggers that just wanted to troll the issue to drive their numbers up the presentation (and answers that followed) were pretty much Jobs telling them to try and get a journalist degree and get their facts straight, and who could blame him?
Since the iPhone 4 as started shipping we've had the antenna problem that has being described as if the phone could simply not be used (numbers debunked that) without real investigation, fake Jobs e-mail, fake reports of an engineer warnings etc.
If it wasn't for anandtech this all would be a complete disaster. The way different technology sites reported the story is just pathetic.
Actually it was the competitors that tried to use the antenna problems as a selling point and as propaganda.
http://conversations.nokia.com/2010/06/28/how-do-you-hold-your-nokia/
So the lot of them are fair game...
As for bloggers that just wanted to troll the issue to drive their numbers up the presentation (and answers that followed) were pretty much Jobs telling them to try and get a journalist degree and get their facts straight, and who could blame him?
Since the iPhone 4 as started shipping we've had the antenna problem that has being described as if the phone could simply not be used (numbers debunked that) without real investigation, fake Jobs e-mail, fake reports of an engineer warnings etc.
If it wasn't for anandtech this all would be a complete disaster. The way different technology sites reported the story is just pathetic.
Full of Win
May 2, 09:37 AM
VICTORY. I just Apple does not replace it with some more invasive.
more...
Hephaestus
Mar 18, 08:57 PM
alright dude, sorry for the rant. but based on your response, you're really not getting my point, so I'm going to stop trying.
No I get your point, and on reflection maybe envy was too strong a word. I don't know man I'm just going to give up too. :p
No I get your point, and on reflection maybe envy was too strong a word. I don't know man I'm just going to give up too. :p
zephxiii
Dec 19, 08:31 PM
CDMA is not even close to being the dominate tech in cellular in China.
more...
scott523
Oct 3, 01:25 PM
This is a little disappointing that Steve is confirming to keynote MWSF 2007 when it's just October, which means he probably wants us to wait (I hope not). :(
Besides, hasn't Steve keynoted MWSF every year?
Besides, hasn't Steve keynoted MWSF every year?
mcrain
Apr 26, 10:29 AM
Yes, I do. She's female. No it doesn't matter, even if she was pre-op she wouldn't nor would any transsexual pee standing up in a female public restroom. I certainly never did before I had surgery. For what it's worth I used female loos for four years before I went under the knife, not one single incident, not one single person expressed any kind of discomfort, not one single eyelid batted.
This obsession with the loos is ridiculous. They're just toilets. We have to piss just like anyone else, is it too much to ask to do it with dignity without undue hassle?
Thanks, I honestly did not know the answer to that question, and I would guess that others did not know as well. I hope my asking did not offend you.
This obsession with the loos is ridiculous. They're just toilets. We have to piss just like anyone else, is it too much to ask to do it with dignity without undue hassle?
Thanks, I honestly did not know the answer to that question, and I would guess that others did not know as well. I hope my asking did not offend you.
more...
TomCondon
Apr 5, 03:26 PM
Well, then I'm a complete moron.
Some people are actually interested in marketing, and would love to have a centralized place to view how large companies are advertising on one of the largest mobile spaces in the world.
By all means, go back to playing Doodle Jump.
gladly, be boring.
Those ads are not exactly the pinnacle of creativity
MCRIB BACK
Some people are actually interested in marketing, and would love to have a centralized place to view how large companies are advertising on one of the largest mobile spaces in the world.
By all means, go back to playing Doodle Jump.
gladly, be boring.
Those ads are not exactly the pinnacle of creativity
MCRIB BACK
wnurse
Aug 8, 12:25 AM
Did you bother to read my whole post? Or were you too excited upon you first glorious revelation?
And maybe I'm not familiar enough with the LCD production process, but I understood that the pixel size was part of the panel so a 24 inch slab would have more pixels than a 23 inch slab. Both monitors have the same resolution.
I also asked how Dell claims greater contrast ratio and brightness (800:1 and 300cd/m2 on the 20 inch) than the Apple? Either someone's lying, or they aren't using identical parts.
edit: BTW, I'm just asking some simple questions trying to clear up my own confusion, there's no need to be a prick
Who said anything about Dell claiming greater contrast. Which of my post said that Dell claimed greater contrast ratio and brightness?. I would never make that claim (The dell website claims that the Dell 24 inch is 700:1 contrast, same as the Apple panels, which just got that upgrade while the Dell panels where that for a while). As to brightness, Dell 24 inch is 400 cd/m2 while the apple 23 inch is also 400 cd/m2. I'm neither a Dell fanboy nor an apple fanboy (as i so fondly point out time after time, i have a apple power G5 mac with a 20 inch Dell monitor). I would never make claims such as Dell monitor is better than Apple monitor unless I knew that to be true.. I pointed out that they used the same panels. Yes, the size may be different but they come off the same manufacturing line. To see Dell specs, here is the link for the 24 inch http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/productdetail.aspx?c=us&l=en&s=dhs&cs=19&sku=222-0863
They are the same panels except notice Dell has more features which puzzles me greatly. Apple wants to charge a premium for their monitor and that is fine with me but come on!!!.. have more features than the other guy please!!!.. you know how annonying it is for a Dell fanboy to come up to you and say.. hey, our monitor is the same but mine is better and cheaper (better in terms of more features, not brightness or contrast). If you think features don't matter, you are living in la la land. I like the fact that i can hook up more things to my Dell monitor than i could have with an apple monitor. If the apple monitor was more versatile and offered more features, i'd consider paying the premium but i am not gonna get an overpriced apple monitor cause stevie says so.. I don't see him offering me rides on his boat.. why the hell should i get trapped in his reality distortion field?. Give me something better and i will gladly hand over my money to Stevie so he can get a bigger boat (and without any complaints).
As to my first glorius revelation, you must be a newbie. you should search for my name in other apple forums. I don't suffer fools gladly (or people who reply to a post too quickly). When i post, i do not expect an instantaneous response. It's ok to google the information before you respond. I can wait!!. If you don't know or understand, say so but do not try to make a point about something you don't know about. You replied to one of my post about how wrong I was that dell and apple were using the same panel and now you claim you don't know about the lcd production process?.. and you complain about me being mean?.. you leave yourself open to such an attack when you start making statements you have no idea are true or not.
Google is a great resource.. I don't know everything either (i wish i did but unfortunately, time is finite and my brain only has so much capacity).. but I always research stuff on google before posting. It helps (also helps to view the company you are bashing website to see their monitor specs before posting).
BTW, since the apple 30 inch is definetly a better value than Dell 30 inch (although i am sure Michael will not take that lying down.. watch for dell to suddenly drop prices on their monitors) i am soliciting funds to my "get a apple 30 inch monitor" foundation. I get the feeling i will not be seeing your dollar. Oh well. Maybe I haven't antagonized everyone in all the forums and i can get some donations to my wonderful foundation (whoose sole purpose is to get me a 30 inch apple monitor).
And maybe I'm not familiar enough with the LCD production process, but I understood that the pixel size was part of the panel so a 24 inch slab would have more pixels than a 23 inch slab. Both monitors have the same resolution.
I also asked how Dell claims greater contrast ratio and brightness (800:1 and 300cd/m2 on the 20 inch) than the Apple? Either someone's lying, or they aren't using identical parts.
edit: BTW, I'm just asking some simple questions trying to clear up my own confusion, there's no need to be a prick
Who said anything about Dell claiming greater contrast. Which of my post said that Dell claimed greater contrast ratio and brightness?. I would never make that claim (The dell website claims that the Dell 24 inch is 700:1 contrast, same as the Apple panels, which just got that upgrade while the Dell panels where that for a while). As to brightness, Dell 24 inch is 400 cd/m2 while the apple 23 inch is also 400 cd/m2. I'm neither a Dell fanboy nor an apple fanboy (as i so fondly point out time after time, i have a apple power G5 mac with a 20 inch Dell monitor). I would never make claims such as Dell monitor is better than Apple monitor unless I knew that to be true.. I pointed out that they used the same panels. Yes, the size may be different but they come off the same manufacturing line. To see Dell specs, here is the link for the 24 inch http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/productdetail.aspx?c=us&l=en&s=dhs&cs=19&sku=222-0863
They are the same panels except notice Dell has more features which puzzles me greatly. Apple wants to charge a premium for their monitor and that is fine with me but come on!!!.. have more features than the other guy please!!!.. you know how annonying it is for a Dell fanboy to come up to you and say.. hey, our monitor is the same but mine is better and cheaper (better in terms of more features, not brightness or contrast). If you think features don't matter, you are living in la la land. I like the fact that i can hook up more things to my Dell monitor than i could have with an apple monitor. If the apple monitor was more versatile and offered more features, i'd consider paying the premium but i am not gonna get an overpriced apple monitor cause stevie says so.. I don't see him offering me rides on his boat.. why the hell should i get trapped in his reality distortion field?. Give me something better and i will gladly hand over my money to Stevie so he can get a bigger boat (and without any complaints).
As to my first glorius revelation, you must be a newbie. you should search for my name in other apple forums. I don't suffer fools gladly (or people who reply to a post too quickly). When i post, i do not expect an instantaneous response. It's ok to google the information before you respond. I can wait!!. If you don't know or understand, say so but do not try to make a point about something you don't know about. You replied to one of my post about how wrong I was that dell and apple were using the same panel and now you claim you don't know about the lcd production process?.. and you complain about me being mean?.. you leave yourself open to such an attack when you start making statements you have no idea are true or not.
Google is a great resource.. I don't know everything either (i wish i did but unfortunately, time is finite and my brain only has so much capacity).. but I always research stuff on google before posting. It helps (also helps to view the company you are bashing website to see their monitor specs before posting).
BTW, since the apple 30 inch is definetly a better value than Dell 30 inch (although i am sure Michael will not take that lying down.. watch for dell to suddenly drop prices on their monitors) i am soliciting funds to my "get a apple 30 inch monitor" foundation. I get the feeling i will not be seeing your dollar. Oh well. Maybe I haven't antagonized everyone in all the forums and i can get some donations to my wonderful foundation (whoose sole purpose is to get me a 30 inch apple monitor).
more...
geiger167
Sep 12, 06:43 AM
the distribution rights are totally different for movies.
when a tv show comes out in the us the uk channels buy the rights from the us companies and this often means we don't get the shows in the UK for ages. and they don't come to ITunes in uk as it would be for apple to negotiate this with the uk tv company like channel 4.
some films are released internationally at the same time and so are the DVDs thus there is no reason why these films can't be released on an ITMS in the US, UK and wherever else the DVD would be released worldwide on the same date.
my cousin's an itunes lawyer working nr regents street store in london so she was explaining about tv shows to me....i'll try find out about the probs with movies if indeed the ITMS is released today and not in the UK.
sound reasonable?
Yes understand what you are saying but movie distrubution outside USA is only likely to make the situation worse than the current TV show problems. For example a film distrubuted in America will very likely be distrubuted outside by a different Studio, making any foreign rights to show the movie even more complex. Also dvds generally are released much earlier in US than in europe so a movie available in US say tomorrow on a hypothecical US itunes may not be available to release for download for months on a EURO itunes even if there are no problems with the already mentions foreign distrubution rights. The only reason I complain about this situation is I am perfectly free to import region 1 dvds into the UK to watch for my own personal use (which I have done for many years) so why cant I download a movie or show from Itunes, what exactly is the difference using this example ? Also annoying is that in the UK 10 meg internet lines are now very common (and likely to increase in speed in the next 12 months) so the structure is there already for a download service to succeed (also in most EURO contires like Sweden who have led the way with internet connection speeds for years)
I'm still like a crack whore waiting for a fix anticipating the news though lol
when a tv show comes out in the us the uk channels buy the rights from the us companies and this often means we don't get the shows in the UK for ages. and they don't come to ITunes in uk as it would be for apple to negotiate this with the uk tv company like channel 4.
some films are released internationally at the same time and so are the DVDs thus there is no reason why these films can't be released on an ITMS in the US, UK and wherever else the DVD would be released worldwide on the same date.
my cousin's an itunes lawyer working nr regents street store in london so she was explaining about tv shows to me....i'll try find out about the probs with movies if indeed the ITMS is released today and not in the UK.
sound reasonable?
Yes understand what you are saying but movie distrubution outside USA is only likely to make the situation worse than the current TV show problems. For example a film distrubuted in America will very likely be distrubuted outside by a different Studio, making any foreign rights to show the movie even more complex. Also dvds generally are released much earlier in US than in europe so a movie available in US say tomorrow on a hypothecical US itunes may not be available to release for download for months on a EURO itunes even if there are no problems with the already mentions foreign distrubution rights. The only reason I complain about this situation is I am perfectly free to import region 1 dvds into the UK to watch for my own personal use (which I have done for many years) so why cant I download a movie or show from Itunes, what exactly is the difference using this example ? Also annoying is that in the UK 10 meg internet lines are now very common (and likely to increase in speed in the next 12 months) so the structure is there already for a download service to succeed (also in most EURO contires like Sweden who have led the way with internet connection speeds for years)
I'm still like a crack whore waiting for a fix anticipating the news though lol
balamw
Oct 3, 02:41 PM
I guess it depends how much of FairPlay they end up replicating. If they replicate the server too, then it'll probably be simple to tell iTunes to look at the third-party server (just capture the data going to Apple's IP address and send it off to DoubleTwist).
If they do that it probably wouldn't work with iTMS purchased tracks. This leads to the same kind of issue as Real faed, sure you can use the Real Store, but not at the same time as ITMS. ick.
(FWIW. They could probable accomplish a simple redirection just by adding an entry to the local hosts table, since Apple most likely addresses their servers by name not IP.)
We'll see if anything comes out of this, good or bad.
B
If they do that it probably wouldn't work with iTMS purchased tracks. This leads to the same kind of issue as Real faed, sure you can use the Real Store, but not at the same time as ITMS. ick.
(FWIW. They could probable accomplish a simple redirection just by adding an entry to the local hosts table, since Apple most likely addresses their servers by name not IP.)
We'll see if anything comes out of this, good or bad.
B
more...
ghostface147
May 2, 09:56 AM
Any word on whether there'll be an update for iPhone 3G users? The highest version of iOS they can use currently is 4.2.1, which presumably has the location cache problems too?
Since the 3G is considered end of life, no. I also believe that the 3G doesn't have GPS, just used triangulation solely.
Since the 3G is considered end of life, no. I also believe that the 3G doesn't have GPS, just used triangulation solely.
superfula
Apr 29, 06:54 PM
NT 4 and Windows 95/98 don't use the same kernel at all. They might share the GUI sub-system (actually, it's called the Win32 sub-system, which is probably what Windows Team blog is referring when referring to API versions, since Win32 is the Windows API) (and yes, I know the 64 bit version is called Win64, just like the 16 bit version was called Win16), but they do not share the same architecture/kernel at all, which Smitty inferred. So no, Smitty wasn't right at all, is use of the word kernel was wrong and confusing.
Read my post. I didn't say he was right about them being the same kernal. I simply said he was right about the naming conventions.
The version in question isn't simply the gui version number, but the code base version as a whole.
Anyway, the only way it makes sense again is Windows NT releases. I doubt the Windows Team Blog are in on marketing meetings. ;)
The only way it makes sense is by using the actual version numbers that MS gave us, which are quite easily found. ;) Not only in Windows but in several sources through the net. I'll believe the info MS gives us vs someone from macrumors.
Read my post. I didn't say he was right about them being the same kernal. I simply said he was right about the naming conventions.
The version in question isn't simply the gui version number, but the code base version as a whole.
Anyway, the only way it makes sense again is Windows NT releases. I doubt the Windows Team Blog are in on marketing meetings. ;)
The only way it makes sense is by using the actual version numbers that MS gave us, which are quite easily found. ;) Not only in Windows but in several sources through the net. I'll believe the info MS gives us vs someone from macrumors.
more...
kresh
Oct 31, 02:52 PM
What on Earth are you talking about? What are people stealing in the Arn's summary? The modified code isn't capable of running OS X, and until they closed the source, Darwin worked on most generic x86 platforms anyway.
Someone fixes a lack of functionality that existed in previous public versions and you call it "stealing"? WTF?
Because they fixed it with the intent to use it with Aqua. They will be stealing Aqua. I sincerely doubt anyone will go through the trouble just for command line only.
Even the blogger that was mentioned has a screen shot of Aqua running. There's the theft for ya :)
Someone fixes a lack of functionality that existed in previous public versions and you call it "stealing"? WTF?
Because they fixed it with the intent to use it with Aqua. They will be stealing Aqua. I sincerely doubt anyone will go through the trouble just for command line only.
Even the blogger that was mentioned has a screen shot of Aqua running. There's the theft for ya :)
Anuba
Jan 12, 07:52 PM
i don't know i still who they plan to sell it ... sure there are mac enthusiasts (i would take it too when given as a present) but 10 million within a year without any real range of products ...
Did he really say 10 million within a year? Surely he jests. It's not even coming out in Europe until and if he's thinking 10 million in the US alone, um... that's like 15% of Cingular's customer base.
Did he really say 10 million within a year? Surely he jests. It's not even coming out in Europe until and if he's thinking 10 million in the US alone, um... that's like 15% of Cingular's customer base.
Anonymous Freak
Oct 12, 11:56 AM
Nice try, SavMan. But I'm not buying your interesting yet psuedoscientific explanation for why 5G iPods only 'appear' to scratch more easily.
White 5G iPods are just as easily scratched as the black ones, as any disappointed owner will tell you. I've had a 4G iPod for 2 years, carrying it back and forth to work in my pocket. I take it out of a Belkin case to recharge it, then put it back in for transport. The thing still looks practically new. I know someone else who purchased a new white 5G iPod. Within moments of gentle handling, the thing is covered with light scratches.
It seems to me that a softer grade of acrylic is being used on these latest iPods. I'm not the only one who's noticed this problem. I don't believe that it's the result of some optical coincidence. Everyone knows that there are hundreds (if not thousands) of complaints to be found on the net.
Whatever the reason is, a manufacturer who doesn't care what their customers have to say about their expensive products will soon find those customers flocking to other companies' products. Hellooooo Zune!
And no amount of fanboy cheerleading will stop it.
If you have a black nano or 5G iPod, try putting black electrical tape on the sides, covering the 'face' of acrylic. The scratches will seem significantly less obvious. I can attest that my 3G iPod (rounded corners) has just as many scratches as my white nano, and my 3G iPod was very well taken care of (always in its included case,) whereas my nano was usually just thrown in my pocket.
SavMan's explanation seems to be a very good explanation. Not fanboyness. (If I did more than just listen to music on my nano, I'd probably be angry about the more obviousness of the scratches on it. But since I almost never look at the screen, it just doesn't bother me. Just like the scratches on the 3G's screen don't bother me.)
White 5G iPods are just as easily scratched as the black ones, as any disappointed owner will tell you. I've had a 4G iPod for 2 years, carrying it back and forth to work in my pocket. I take it out of a Belkin case to recharge it, then put it back in for transport. The thing still looks practically new. I know someone else who purchased a new white 5G iPod. Within moments of gentle handling, the thing is covered with light scratches.
It seems to me that a softer grade of acrylic is being used on these latest iPods. I'm not the only one who's noticed this problem. I don't believe that it's the result of some optical coincidence. Everyone knows that there are hundreds (if not thousands) of complaints to be found on the net.
Whatever the reason is, a manufacturer who doesn't care what their customers have to say about their expensive products will soon find those customers flocking to other companies' products. Hellooooo Zune!
And no amount of fanboy cheerleading will stop it.
If you have a black nano or 5G iPod, try putting black electrical tape on the sides, covering the 'face' of acrylic. The scratches will seem significantly less obvious. I can attest that my 3G iPod (rounded corners) has just as many scratches as my white nano, and my 3G iPod was very well taken care of (always in its included case,) whereas my nano was usually just thrown in my pocket.
SavMan's explanation seems to be a very good explanation. Not fanboyness. (If I did more than just listen to music on my nano, I'd probably be angry about the more obviousness of the scratches on it. But since I almost never look at the screen, it just doesn't bother me. Just like the scratches on the 3G's screen don't bother me.)
leekohler
May 5, 09:27 PM
Dude. I haven't once suggested banning guns.
These days I'd be satisfied with a hint of awareness.
I was under the impression you had. Here you gave me that impression:
It's impossible to enforce a gun ban when all you have to do is drive to the next town to buy them.
If we were to implement restrictions it would have to be nation-wide, or else it would be too easily thwarted.
Fair enough. It took your statement as referring to bans.
Frankly awareness, or more specifically education, is the only solution. Gun owners need more education, particularly those who arm themselves for home defense or concealed carry. If citizens are expected to demonstrate proficiency in driving a car before being allowed on the road - and further proficiency for special kinds of driving (such as racing licenses, commercial licenses, limousine drivers, police driving training etc etc), then gun owners should get considerably more training in self-defense with firearms. Most hunters agree that mandatory hunter-safety classes are a good idea. If that is the case, self-defense training is even more necessary.
Furthermore, the public at large needs to be more educated about laws, regulations and firearms themselves. Fear of firearms can be healthy. Willfull ignorance towards them, not so much.
Exactly. I have never understood why my more liberal friends want to ban anything. Education is the key to solving the vast majority of our problems, not ignorance or fear. I grew up around guns all my life and had fun with them. I also loved archery.
After starting to play hockey and having skydived for three years, the one thing I've finally learned that is the most helpful thing in life is this- do things that scare you. Learn about them. You'll be better off, and you'll grow immensely as a person. Those things will also bring incredible people into your life.
Go to a firing range and learn about guns, citizenzen- even if it scares and repulses you. Trust me, you'll be all the better for it, and you might learn something about yourself you never knew was there. After all, knowledge is power.
These days I'd be satisfied with a hint of awareness.
I was under the impression you had. Here you gave me that impression:
It's impossible to enforce a gun ban when all you have to do is drive to the next town to buy them.
If we were to implement restrictions it would have to be nation-wide, or else it would be too easily thwarted.
Fair enough. It took your statement as referring to bans.
Frankly awareness, or more specifically education, is the only solution. Gun owners need more education, particularly those who arm themselves for home defense or concealed carry. If citizens are expected to demonstrate proficiency in driving a car before being allowed on the road - and further proficiency for special kinds of driving (such as racing licenses, commercial licenses, limousine drivers, police driving training etc etc), then gun owners should get considerably more training in self-defense with firearms. Most hunters agree that mandatory hunter-safety classes are a good idea. If that is the case, self-defense training is even more necessary.
Furthermore, the public at large needs to be more educated about laws, regulations and firearms themselves. Fear of firearms can be healthy. Willfull ignorance towards them, not so much.
Exactly. I have never understood why my more liberal friends want to ban anything. Education is the key to solving the vast majority of our problems, not ignorance or fear. I grew up around guns all my life and had fun with them. I also loved archery.
After starting to play hockey and having skydived for three years, the one thing I've finally learned that is the most helpful thing in life is this- do things that scare you. Learn about them. You'll be better off, and you'll grow immensely as a person. Those things will also bring incredible people into your life.
Go to a firing range and learn about guns, citizenzen- even if it scares and repulses you. Trust me, you'll be all the better for it, and you might learn something about yourself you never knew was there. After all, knowledge is power.
dunk321
Mar 17, 01:12 AM
Haaaaaaa just shared a launch day story, and the majority of you would have hauled ass with iPad in hand for the price I paid. Haters lmfao
noodlelegs
Jan 4, 12:29 PM
It's January 4th and no sign of the Verizon iPhone. Oh well, there's always next year.
benjayman2
Apr 7, 12:17 AM
About damn time too...
Looking forward to shooting with this new gear...
I am literally glowing green. Hopefully one day I'll I'll be as pro as this pic is. Gah I can't hold it in OMGFJFC that is BAMF canon haul if I ever saw one.
Looking forward to shooting with this new gear...
I am literally glowing green. Hopefully one day I'll I'll be as pro as this pic is. Gah I can't hold it in OMGFJFC that is BAMF canon haul if I ever saw one.
dalvin200
Sep 12, 07:40 AM
I might be getting confused here - but isn't the music store just a web thingy and not part of the software? i.e. store and media player distinct, though interlinked
yeah, but there is a link in your itunes software (client) which has "Music Store" - u know.. down the left side where your playlists are..
Wouldn't they need to change that to a generic "Store" or something..
yeah, but there is a link in your itunes software (client) which has "Music Store" - u know.. down the left side where your playlists are..
Wouldn't they need to change that to a generic "Store" or something..
No comments:
Post a Comment