dpaanlka
Jan 12, 06:37 PM
You all need to stop worrying about Steve Jobs rightful attitude is. Apple lost him once. Ten years later he came back. Now ten years after that, you all can't stand him? Are you kidding me? He can do whatever he wants! Worry about something more important!
And white text is not the best choice, because the background of MacRumors isn't white, it is color #FAFAFA. Get with the program people.
And white text is not the best choice, because the background of MacRumors isn't white, it is color #FAFAFA. Get with the program people.
Lunettes
Jan 10, 10:29 PM
Hope they don't shut down Steve's screen at the keynote...
MorphingDragon
Apr 29, 07:29 PM
I personally find that the "translucent plastic" in Windows 7 looks like it was ripped off from the 90s and a bad Linux window manager. Seriously, it screams "look at me, I'm trying too hard!".
And it's a complete rip-off of KDE 4.x.
So KDE4 is a bad 90s Linux Window Manager?
And it's a complete rip-off of KDE 4.x.
So KDE4 is a bad 90s Linux Window Manager?
Lord Blackadder
Aug 10, 01:10 PM
There's nothing really sinister about it. It's just harder to measure and to this point, there's been no point in trying to measure it in comparison to cars.
I understand that they have to be measured differently, but doesn't it make sense that they be compared apples-to-apples (if possible) to the vehicles they are intended to replace?
Most people do ignore it to a large extent, because they say "heck, if it costs me $1 to go 40 miles on electric vs. $2.85 to go 40 miles on gasoline, then that *must* be more efficient in some way". And they are probably right. Economics do tend to line up with efficiency (or government policy).
That is true, but as you pointed out later "green", "efficient", "alternative[to oil imports]" are not all the same thing. Perhaps they are more green but less efficient, or less efficient but more green. Just being more efficient in terms of bang for buck is not necessarily also good from an environmental or alternative energy standpoint. But you are right that the end cost per mile is going to weigh heavily when it comes to consumer acceptance of new types of autos.
I think it's great that European car manufacturers have invested heavily in finding ways to make more fuel efficient cars. And they have their governments to thank for that by making sure that diesel is given a tax advantage vs. gasoline. About 15 years ago, Europe recognized the potential for efficiency in diesels to ultimately outweigh the environmental downside. It was a short-term risk that paid off and now that they have shifted the balance, Europe is tightening their diesel emissions standards to match the US. Once that happens, I'm sure there will a huge market for TDIs in the US and we'll have a nice competitive landscape for driving-up fuel efficiency with diesels vs. gasoline hybrids vs. extended range electrics.
I would argue that Europe's switch to diesels did not involve quite the environmental tradeoff you imply - in the 70s we in the US were driving cars with huge gasoline engines, and to this day diesel regulation for trucks in this country is pretty minimal. Our emissions were probably world-leading then - partially due to the fact that we had the most cars on the roads by far. The problem lies (in my heavily biased opinion) in ignorance. People see smoke coming off diesel exhausts and assume they are dirtier than gasoline engines. But particulate pollution is not necessarily worse, just different. People are not educated about the differerence between gasoline engine pollution and diesel engine pollution. Not to mention the fact that diesel engines don't puff black smoke like they did in the 70s. I'm not arguing that diesels are necessarily cleaner, but they are arguably no worse than gasoline engines and are certainly more efficient.
Whether or not it's "greener" depends upon your definition of green. If you're worried about smog and air quality, then you might make different decisions than if you are worried about carbon dioxide and global warming. Those decisions may also be driven by where you live and where the electricity comes from.
A lot of people in the US (and I assume around the world) are also concerned about energy independence. For those people, using coal to power an electric car is more attractive than using foreign diesel. Any cleaner? Probably not, but probably not much dirtier and certainly cheaper. Our government realizes that we can always make power plants cleaner in the future through regulation, just as Europe realized they could make diesels cleaner in the future through regulation. Steven Chu is no dummy.
It's a fair point. Given the choice, I would prioritize moving to domestic fuel sources in the short term over a massive "go green" (over all alse) campaign.
Which is why we will need new metrics that actually make sense for comparing gasoline to pure electric, perhaps localized to account for the source of power in your area. For example, when I lived in Chicago, the electric was 90% nuclear. It's doesn't get any cleaner than that from an air quality / greenhouse gas standpoint. However, if you're on the east coast, it's probably closer to 60% coal.
I agree completely. The transition needs to be made as transparent as possible. People need to know the source, efficiency and cleanliness of their power source so that they can make informed choices.
I think you're smart enough to know that it's more efficient, but you're not willing to cede that for the sake of your argument, but I encourage you to embrace the idea that we should have extended range electrics *and* clean diesels *and* gasoline hybrids. There's more than one way to skin a cat.
I'm not trying to sound stubborn, I simply have not come accross the numbers anywhere. I don't get paid to do this research, ya know. I do it while hiding from the boss. ;)
I've seen that propaganda FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) before. It doesn't stand up to scrutiny. Let's consider that the power grid can handle every household running an air conditioner on a hot summer day. That's approximately 2000-3500 watts per household per hour during daytime peak load (on top of everything else on the grid.) Now let's consider that a Volt (or equivalent) has a 16kw battery that charges in 8 hours. That's 200 watts per hour, starting in the evening, or the equivalent of (4) 50 watt light bulbs. This is not exactly grid-overwhelming load.
I'm no math whiz (or electrician), but wouldn't 200 watts/hr * 8 hours = 1.6kw, rather than 16kw? I thought you'd need 2kw/hr * 8hrs to charge a 16kw battery.
It's not that I don't think people have looked into this stuff, it's just that I myself have no information on just how much energy the Volt uses and how much the grid can provide. In the short term, plugin hybrids are few in number and I don't see it being an issue. But it's something we need to work out in the medium/long term.
Or, some would argue that the biggest thing that Americans have trouble with are a few people telling them what the majority should or shouldn't do - which is, as it seems, the definition of "Communism", but I wouldn't go so far as to say that. :)
Communism means nothing in this country, because we've been so brainwashed by Cold War/right-wing rhetoric that, like "freedom", the term has been stolen for propaganda purposes until the original meanings have become lost in a massive sea of BS. I was using it for it's hyperbole value. :D
Most people do indeed realize that they can get better mileage with a smaller car and could "get by" with a much smaller vehicle. They choose not to and that is their prerogative. If the majority wants to vote for representatives who will make laws that increase fuel mileage standards, which in turn require automakers to sell more small cars - or find ways to make them more efficient - that is also their prerogative. (And, in case you haven't noticed, in the last major US election, voters did indeed vote for a party that is increasing CAFE standards.)
Well, that's the nature of democracy. But it's not so much a question of the fact that people realize a smaller car is more efficient, but a question of whether people really care about efficiency. I have recently lived in Nevada and Alaska, two states whose residents are addicted to burning fuel. Seemingly everyone has a pickup, RV and four-wheelers. Burning fuel is not just part of the daily transportation routine - it's a lifestyle.
CAFE standardsAnd if it's important to you, you should do your part and ride a bike to work or buy a TDI, or lobby your congressman for reduced emissions requirements, or stand up on a soap box and preach about the advantages of advanced clean diesel technology. All good stuff.
I walk to work. I used to commute 34 miles a day (total), and while I never minded it, I felt pretty liberated being able to ditch the car for my daily commute. Four years of walking and I don't want to go back. I love cars and motorsport, and I don't consider myself an environmentalist, but I got to the point where I realized that I was driving a lot more than necessary. That realization came when I moved out of a suburb (where you have to drive to get anywhere) and into first a small town and then a biggish city. In both cases it became possible to walk almost everywhere I needed to go. A tank of fuel lasted over a month (or longer) rather than a week from my highway-commuting days. And I lost weight as I hauled by fat backside around on foot. ;)
I won't be in the market for another car for a few years, and my current car (a Subaru) is not very fuel efficient - but then again it has literally not been driven more than half a dozen times in the last six months. When the time comes to replace it I'll be looking for something affordable (ruling out the Volt) but efficiency will be high on the priority list, followed by green-ness.
I wonder if all of you people who are proposing a diesel/diesel hybrid are Europeans, because in America, diesel is looked at as smelly and messy - it's what the trucks with black smoke use.
<snip>
As far as the Chevy Volt goes, I just don't like the name... but the price is right assuming they can get it into the high $20,000's rather quickly.
I'm an American, and yes I've seen the trucks with black smoke. We just need to discard that preconception. This isn't 1973 anymore. We also need to tighten up emissions regualtion on trucks.
The Volt is a practical car by all acoioutns, but it costs way too much. The battery is the primary contributing factor, I've heard that it costs somewhere between $8-15k by itself. Hopefully after GM has been producing such batteries for a few years the cost will drop substantially.
I understand that they have to be measured differently, but doesn't it make sense that they be compared apples-to-apples (if possible) to the vehicles they are intended to replace?
Most people do ignore it to a large extent, because they say "heck, if it costs me $1 to go 40 miles on electric vs. $2.85 to go 40 miles on gasoline, then that *must* be more efficient in some way". And they are probably right. Economics do tend to line up with efficiency (or government policy).
That is true, but as you pointed out later "green", "efficient", "alternative[to oil imports]" are not all the same thing. Perhaps they are more green but less efficient, or less efficient but more green. Just being more efficient in terms of bang for buck is not necessarily also good from an environmental or alternative energy standpoint. But you are right that the end cost per mile is going to weigh heavily when it comes to consumer acceptance of new types of autos.
I think it's great that European car manufacturers have invested heavily in finding ways to make more fuel efficient cars. And they have their governments to thank for that by making sure that diesel is given a tax advantage vs. gasoline. About 15 years ago, Europe recognized the potential for efficiency in diesels to ultimately outweigh the environmental downside. It was a short-term risk that paid off and now that they have shifted the balance, Europe is tightening their diesel emissions standards to match the US. Once that happens, I'm sure there will a huge market for TDIs in the US and we'll have a nice competitive landscape for driving-up fuel efficiency with diesels vs. gasoline hybrids vs. extended range electrics.
I would argue that Europe's switch to diesels did not involve quite the environmental tradeoff you imply - in the 70s we in the US were driving cars with huge gasoline engines, and to this day diesel regulation for trucks in this country is pretty minimal. Our emissions were probably world-leading then - partially due to the fact that we had the most cars on the roads by far. The problem lies (in my heavily biased opinion) in ignorance. People see smoke coming off diesel exhausts and assume they are dirtier than gasoline engines. But particulate pollution is not necessarily worse, just different. People are not educated about the differerence between gasoline engine pollution and diesel engine pollution. Not to mention the fact that diesel engines don't puff black smoke like they did in the 70s. I'm not arguing that diesels are necessarily cleaner, but they are arguably no worse than gasoline engines and are certainly more efficient.
Whether or not it's "greener" depends upon your definition of green. If you're worried about smog and air quality, then you might make different decisions than if you are worried about carbon dioxide and global warming. Those decisions may also be driven by where you live and where the electricity comes from.
A lot of people in the US (and I assume around the world) are also concerned about energy independence. For those people, using coal to power an electric car is more attractive than using foreign diesel. Any cleaner? Probably not, but probably not much dirtier and certainly cheaper. Our government realizes that we can always make power plants cleaner in the future through regulation, just as Europe realized they could make diesels cleaner in the future through regulation. Steven Chu is no dummy.
It's a fair point. Given the choice, I would prioritize moving to domestic fuel sources in the short term over a massive "go green" (over all alse) campaign.
Which is why we will need new metrics that actually make sense for comparing gasoline to pure electric, perhaps localized to account for the source of power in your area. For example, when I lived in Chicago, the electric was 90% nuclear. It's doesn't get any cleaner than that from an air quality / greenhouse gas standpoint. However, if you're on the east coast, it's probably closer to 60% coal.
I agree completely. The transition needs to be made as transparent as possible. People need to know the source, efficiency and cleanliness of their power source so that they can make informed choices.
I think you're smart enough to know that it's more efficient, but you're not willing to cede that for the sake of your argument, but I encourage you to embrace the idea that we should have extended range electrics *and* clean diesels *and* gasoline hybrids. There's more than one way to skin a cat.
I'm not trying to sound stubborn, I simply have not come accross the numbers anywhere. I don't get paid to do this research, ya know. I do it while hiding from the boss. ;)
I've seen that propaganda FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) before. It doesn't stand up to scrutiny. Let's consider that the power grid can handle every household running an air conditioner on a hot summer day. That's approximately 2000-3500 watts per household per hour during daytime peak load (on top of everything else on the grid.) Now let's consider that a Volt (or equivalent) has a 16kw battery that charges in 8 hours. That's 200 watts per hour, starting in the evening, or the equivalent of (4) 50 watt light bulbs. This is not exactly grid-overwhelming load.
I'm no math whiz (or electrician), but wouldn't 200 watts/hr * 8 hours = 1.6kw, rather than 16kw? I thought you'd need 2kw/hr * 8hrs to charge a 16kw battery.
It's not that I don't think people have looked into this stuff, it's just that I myself have no information on just how much energy the Volt uses and how much the grid can provide. In the short term, plugin hybrids are few in number and I don't see it being an issue. But it's something we need to work out in the medium/long term.
Or, some would argue that the biggest thing that Americans have trouble with are a few people telling them what the majority should or shouldn't do - which is, as it seems, the definition of "Communism", but I wouldn't go so far as to say that. :)
Communism means nothing in this country, because we've been so brainwashed by Cold War/right-wing rhetoric that, like "freedom", the term has been stolen for propaganda purposes until the original meanings have become lost in a massive sea of BS. I was using it for it's hyperbole value. :D
Most people do indeed realize that they can get better mileage with a smaller car and could "get by" with a much smaller vehicle. They choose not to and that is their prerogative. If the majority wants to vote for representatives who will make laws that increase fuel mileage standards, which in turn require automakers to sell more small cars - or find ways to make them more efficient - that is also their prerogative. (And, in case you haven't noticed, in the last major US election, voters did indeed vote for a party that is increasing CAFE standards.)
Well, that's the nature of democracy. But it's not so much a question of the fact that people realize a smaller car is more efficient, but a question of whether people really care about efficiency. I have recently lived in Nevada and Alaska, two states whose residents are addicted to burning fuel. Seemingly everyone has a pickup, RV and four-wheelers. Burning fuel is not just part of the daily transportation routine - it's a lifestyle.
CAFE standardsAnd if it's important to you, you should do your part and ride a bike to work or buy a TDI, or lobby your congressman for reduced emissions requirements, or stand up on a soap box and preach about the advantages of advanced clean diesel technology. All good stuff.
I walk to work. I used to commute 34 miles a day (total), and while I never minded it, I felt pretty liberated being able to ditch the car for my daily commute. Four years of walking and I don't want to go back. I love cars and motorsport, and I don't consider myself an environmentalist, but I got to the point where I realized that I was driving a lot more than necessary. That realization came when I moved out of a suburb (where you have to drive to get anywhere) and into first a small town and then a biggish city. In both cases it became possible to walk almost everywhere I needed to go. A tank of fuel lasted over a month (or longer) rather than a week from my highway-commuting days. And I lost weight as I hauled by fat backside around on foot. ;)
I won't be in the market for another car for a few years, and my current car (a Subaru) is not very fuel efficient - but then again it has literally not been driven more than half a dozen times in the last six months. When the time comes to replace it I'll be looking for something affordable (ruling out the Volt) but efficiency will be high on the priority list, followed by green-ness.
I wonder if all of you people who are proposing a diesel/diesel hybrid are Europeans, because in America, diesel is looked at as smelly and messy - it's what the trucks with black smoke use.
<snip>
As far as the Chevy Volt goes, I just don't like the name... but the price is right assuming they can get it into the high $20,000's rather quickly.
I'm an American, and yes I've seen the trucks with black smoke. We just need to discard that preconception. This isn't 1973 anymore. We also need to tighten up emissions regualtion on trucks.
The Volt is a practical car by all acoioutns, but it costs way too much. The battery is the primary contributing factor, I've heard that it costs somewhere between $8-15k by itself. Hopefully after GM has been producing such batteries for a few years the cost will drop substantially.
more...
MacsRgr8
Mar 24, 05:47 PM
Wow.... X years already!!
Well done Steve by saving Computer by evolving NeXTSTEP via Rhapsody and Mac OS X Server 1.x into Mac OS X!!
Some memories:
- Steve showing the OS strategy roadmap: Mac OS 8 / 9 vs. Mac OS X
- "Rhapsody" evolving into Mac OS X DP1
- Mac OS X DP3 incl. Aqua interface
- Mac OS X Public Beta "Kodiak"
- Mac OS X 10.0 "Cheetah"... I got the original CD (yes.. CD..) in Paris, France.
- Mac OS X 10.1 "Puma" and Office v. X
- Mac OS X 10.2 "Jaguar" and Photoshop 7
- Mac OS X 10.3 "Panther" largely regarded as the first real 100% usable version of OS X (not in the least because of app development)
- Mac OS X 10.4.1 "Tiger" Intel Developer Preview
- Mac OS X 10.5 "Leopard" Universal stuff
- Mac OS X 10.6.6 "Snow Leopard" and Mac App Store
- Mac OS X 10.7 "Lion" and optional Server Install
I <3 and Mac OS X
Well done Steve by saving Computer by evolving NeXTSTEP via Rhapsody and Mac OS X Server 1.x into Mac OS X!!
Some memories:
- Steve showing the OS strategy roadmap: Mac OS 8 / 9 vs. Mac OS X
- "Rhapsody" evolving into Mac OS X DP1
- Mac OS X DP3 incl. Aqua interface
- Mac OS X Public Beta "Kodiak"
- Mac OS X 10.0 "Cheetah"... I got the original CD (yes.. CD..) in Paris, France.
- Mac OS X 10.1 "Puma" and Office v. X
- Mac OS X 10.2 "Jaguar" and Photoshop 7
- Mac OS X 10.3 "Panther" largely regarded as the first real 100% usable version of OS X (not in the least because of app development)
- Mac OS X 10.4.1 "Tiger" Intel Developer Preview
- Mac OS X 10.5 "Leopard" Universal stuff
- Mac OS X 10.6.6 "Snow Leopard" and Mac App Store
- Mac OS X 10.7 "Lion" and optional Server Install
I <3 and Mac OS X
Anthony T
Apr 15, 03:48 PM
http://www.boygeniusreport.com/2010/04/15/images-of-4th-generation-iphone-emerge/
What do you guys think?
I think it could be real, since when the 3G photos leaked, everyone was like 'no way Apple is going for a plastic back' and no one believed they were real...but it turned out they were.
I'm not sure how I feel about those edges on the phone though. It should be more rounded out and smooth.
What do you guys think?
I think it could be real, since when the 3G photos leaked, everyone was like 'no way Apple is going for a plastic back' and no one believed they were real...but it turned out they were.
I'm not sure how I feel about those edges on the phone though. It should be more rounded out and smooth.
more...
tjb1
Apr 6, 12:52 PM
Just got it!
http://www.atpm.com/15.10/images/spacenavigator-front-above.jpg
http://www.atpm.com/15.10/images/spacenavigator-front-above.jpg
Drew n macs
Apr 8, 02:16 PM
Was at Best Try the other day and saw them selling styluses for the iPad...39.00
A Pogo Sketch on Amazon is $7.00...
And people wonder why retail is hurting...
A little off topic, how about 25-100 dollar hdmi cables. you might burn a consumer once or twice before they realize there are other alternatives (aka the internet and 3 dollars).
A Pogo Sketch on Amazon is $7.00...
And people wonder why retail is hurting...
A little off topic, how about 25-100 dollar hdmi cables. you might burn a consumer once or twice before they realize there are other alternatives (aka the internet and 3 dollars).
more...
getalifemacfans
Jan 9, 11:48 AM
What are your predictions for this years MacWorld?
i expect a new iphone(yes i do).the current iphone i think sucks i rather buy a nokia/sony ericson.
a new mbp.ore even bether i really want that new ultraportebole with nice penryn to go.
and what about that blueray?after warner has gone for the kill in toshibas heart and the theory microsoft just want chaos in blueray/hd sales so they can sell downloaded movies from the internett-maybe apple likes that theory as well ?would not suprise me.
And if they update the macpro why dont they update the cinema displays?(look at the name "cinema" displays you really expect something juicy with that name)
but like allways apple are allways interestet in proclaming that there products state of the art some of the products are.But if the product are state of the art - the product often speaks for it selfs..and if you are interested in a new fancy screen with that macpro check out the dell glass screen thats really something.
'And what about that games?why cant apple/steve jobs close the deal with more gamedesigners so that mac/appleusers can stop playing on windows on ther mac(never gonna hapend i supouse)...
dont allways wait for apple thats my tip but i really expect something groundbreaking to hapend inn MWSF - if not i would be just as shocking(thypical apple)...
i expect a new iphone(yes i do).the current iphone i think sucks i rather buy a nokia/sony ericson.
a new mbp.ore even bether i really want that new ultraportebole with nice penryn to go.
and what about that blueray?after warner has gone for the kill in toshibas heart and the theory microsoft just want chaos in blueray/hd sales so they can sell downloaded movies from the internett-maybe apple likes that theory as well ?would not suprise me.
And if they update the macpro why dont they update the cinema displays?(look at the name "cinema" displays you really expect something juicy with that name)
but like allways apple are allways interestet in proclaming that there products state of the art some of the products are.But if the product are state of the art - the product often speaks for it selfs..and if you are interested in a new fancy screen with that macpro check out the dell glass screen thats really something.
'And what about that games?why cant apple/steve jobs close the deal with more gamedesigners so that mac/appleusers can stop playing on windows on ther mac(never gonna hapend i supouse)...
dont allways wait for apple thats my tip but i really expect something groundbreaking to hapend inn MWSF - if not i would be just as shocking(thypical apple)...
elctropro
Jan 1, 01:26 AM
My understanding is that AT&T is pretty far along in its upgrade from HPSA (3G) network to HPSA+ (faster 3G). They're doing this to maximize their existing investment in their infrastructure, and they should be able to employ LTE a little faster than Verizon has been, since LTE is a more streamlined upgrade from HPSA+. They claim that this is best for customers long-term, because when LTE (4G) coverage gives out, users can fall back on widespread HPSA+ coverage with similar performance. Whereas with Verizon, when you move out of an area with 4G coverage, you notice a HUGE drop in speed going to their ancient EV-DO technology.
more...
firestarter
Apr 22, 12:24 PM
That's an awful idea. Posts will get downrated because someone disagrees with a perfectly valid opinion? I've already seen posts downrated because someone said they prefer Android over Apple or had a good thing to say about Microsoft. Hell, I'd probably get downrated just for my avatar.
As long as people are going to act like little children, using these ratings to hide posts is a horrible idea.
That's why you need meta-moderation. Weighs the balance of votes in favour of those who rate sensibly, stops people from just burying personalities they dislike.
As long as people are going to act like little children, using these ratings to hide posts is a horrible idea.
That's why you need meta-moderation. Weighs the balance of votes in favour of those who rate sensibly, stops people from just burying personalities they dislike.
jaw04005
Apr 9, 01:06 PM
If I remember correctly, PDF became an open standard a few years ago. I think it was late-ish in so maybe it was just too late in the development of Windows 7 to get it in, but now it will appear in 8.
Nah. Native PDF support (import and export) was supposed to be a feature of Windows Vista but was pulled at the last minute because of Adobe's lawsuit threat. Apparently, Microsoft and Adobe have worked it out. They've had it ready for a long time. You could even download a PDF plug-in for Office 07 directly from MSFT.
Nah. Native PDF support (import and export) was supposed to be a feature of Windows Vista but was pulled at the last minute because of Adobe's lawsuit threat. Apparently, Microsoft and Adobe have worked it out. They've had it ready for a long time. You could even download a PDF plug-in for Office 07 directly from MSFT.
more...
dyler
Oct 8, 12:50 PM
This is false advertising, Verizon does not have that 3G coverage and ATT has more than that. Verizon is the worst service I have ever used with the worst Phones I have ever used, MY iPhone works in more places than my Verizon phone ever did, this is all lies and Congress should talk about that not exclusive carrier models!!
Lollypop
Sep 12, 01:08 AM
I realize that, but there are more major studios that are not on that list owned by Disney than there are on the list. But maybe it will work out like the TV downloads have, as some have suggested, starting with just a few and adding more. The problem is, Apple does not currently dominate that market; there are other players right now that are equally strong with their video download services. It seems that the market seems to favor having a dominant player, like Windows for OS and iTMS for music downloads. This could leave the door open for Microsoft to dominate this market if Apple doesn't ramp up its selection quickly.
The iTMS had competition when it started, and it still does... if apple makes it easy and cheap to do movies, like they did with music the will give their competitors a run for their money... also remember, when the iTMS started it didnt have anything else of offer, now its got a lot of music, videos, podcasts and and and... resulting in a lot of content, the movie library can start out small and grow.
The iTMS had competition when it started, and it still does... if apple makes it easy and cheap to do movies, like they did with music the will give their competitors a run for their money... also remember, when the iTMS started it didnt have anything else of offer, now its got a lot of music, videos, podcasts and and and... resulting in a lot of content, the movie library can start out small and grow.
more...
g33
Apr 16, 08:54 AM
ugly as fook
i bet its a fake
i bet its a fake
Timepass
Aug 1, 04:26 PM
I have always thought Apple would eventually open up it's DRM of their own free will. At this time, there is no serious competitor to the iPod/iTunes combo. Should serious competition arise, perhaps sometime Zune, the iPods inability to play music from other sources will be a competitive disadvantage.
However, as a philosophical issue, I have a problem with any government interfering like this in a free market! Sometimes such interference is necessary to prevent harm to the public, but I don't see where this is the case with the iPod. It doesn't cause injury to the user, ( if you heed the volume warnings ), and there are alternatives. Those who don't like iPod/iTunes locking them in to one player are fully free to use the alternatives!]
It is a fine line. But really apple is flirting with needing the goverment to step in. Goverment waits to long to do anything and the damage is permant and compition is hurt for years to come. A good example is M$ got nailed for it but that didnt change the fact that it made the software the domante force on the market and they didnt have to give up the market share they took.
a completely free market is bad plan and simple. So is the other direction of the goverment controling everything. it has to be a balance bettween the 2. I am of the opinan that it is getting to the point in just DRM that it is getting close to the time where the goverment needs to step in and help clean up some of the mess before it gets out of hand and all they can do at most is damage control. Right now there is still time to prevent the damanage from happening. Apple got there market share power and now they are getting near to virtual monoploly standing in both the mp3 player market and online music store. Once you cross those lines and become a virtual monoploly in a market the rules change. No longer is using the power in one market to effect the other legal. (so Apple cannt use iTMS to effect ipod sales and ipod to effect iTMS sales as it does now.)
I also like to point out as people say pull out of those country you have to rememeber that they are just the first countries to pass these laws and THEY WILL NOT BE THE LAST. So should apple pull out of every country that pass those laws. Some how I think that is stupid idea. I expect in the next few years to see all of the EU have laws forcing open DRM and now you are talking about a large enough market that it really will effect the bottom line. And at some point the US is going to pass laws forcing open DRM. Now think about it. Apple can burn there bridges now or releliez this is where the market is heading weather they like it or not. Now either move now and deal or pay the price in permate damage down the road.
However, as a philosophical issue, I have a problem with any government interfering like this in a free market! Sometimes such interference is necessary to prevent harm to the public, but I don't see where this is the case with the iPod. It doesn't cause injury to the user, ( if you heed the volume warnings ), and there are alternatives. Those who don't like iPod/iTunes locking them in to one player are fully free to use the alternatives!]
It is a fine line. But really apple is flirting with needing the goverment to step in. Goverment waits to long to do anything and the damage is permant and compition is hurt for years to come. A good example is M$ got nailed for it but that didnt change the fact that it made the software the domante force on the market and they didnt have to give up the market share they took.
a completely free market is bad plan and simple. So is the other direction of the goverment controling everything. it has to be a balance bettween the 2. I am of the opinan that it is getting to the point in just DRM that it is getting close to the time where the goverment needs to step in and help clean up some of the mess before it gets out of hand and all they can do at most is damage control. Right now there is still time to prevent the damanage from happening. Apple got there market share power and now they are getting near to virtual monoploly standing in both the mp3 player market and online music store. Once you cross those lines and become a virtual monoploly in a market the rules change. No longer is using the power in one market to effect the other legal. (so Apple cannt use iTMS to effect ipod sales and ipod to effect iTMS sales as it does now.)
I also like to point out as people say pull out of those country you have to rememeber that they are just the first countries to pass these laws and THEY WILL NOT BE THE LAST. So should apple pull out of every country that pass those laws. Some how I think that is stupid idea. I expect in the next few years to see all of the EU have laws forcing open DRM and now you are talking about a large enough market that it really will effect the bottom line. And at some point the US is going to pass laws forcing open DRM. Now think about it. Apple can burn there bridges now or releliez this is where the market is heading weather they like it or not. Now either move now and deal or pay the price in permate damage down the road.
more...
Dagless
Apr 4, 01:33 PM
oh, and if the internet provider is giving you the run-around.
http://www.ip-adress.com/
go here, type in the IP address and it'll tell you exactly where the server is that they are connected to. It gives you the IP latitude and IP longitutde.
tell them that it is being connected at this server location and they'll be able to location exactly which hub it's being connected at and .. yea. trace the burgulars home down..
Now that just doesn't work for me either. It's saying I'm in Oxford. :confused:
http://www.ip-adress.com/
go here, type in the IP address and it'll tell you exactly where the server is that they are connected to. It gives you the IP latitude and IP longitutde.
tell them that it is being connected at this server location and they'll be able to location exactly which hub it's being connected at and .. yea. trace the burgulars home down..
Now that just doesn't work for me either. It's saying I'm in Oxford. :confused:
TheSlush
Apr 15, 01:17 PM
Kind of inspired by... ? LOL
http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2009/09/zune_back.jpg
http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2009/09/zune_back.jpg
Bistroengine
Apr 5, 06:04 PM
Yeah, I get it: Apple's iAd venture is doing really badly so they created this app to try to drum up some new business.
This app is vital if I want to be successful or wealthy? Huh?:confused:
hahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.........
Whoever spends their time looking at adverts is a lost cause and has no life. Seriously I think this is the most ridiculous thing apple has come up with.
Unfortunately, Clukas's quote above is a perfect example of how the majority of the board is reacting to this post. 'Lost cause', 'loser', 'moron', 'has no life' are all insults I've seen all over this posting. Incredibly immature and unnecessary if you ask me.
This app is vital if I want to be successful or wealthy? Huh?:confused:
hahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.........
Whoever spends their time looking at adverts is a lost cause and has no life. Seriously I think this is the most ridiculous thing apple has come up with.
Unfortunately, Clukas's quote above is a perfect example of how the majority of the board is reacting to this post. 'Lost cause', 'loser', 'moron', 'has no life' are all insults I've seen all over this posting. Incredibly immature and unnecessary if you ask me.
AlphaBob
May 2, 01:30 PM
I wonder how many people have been targeted/prosecuted based on the false assumption that the data logged was a record of the user's location, and not simply a list of WiFi and Cell tower devices obtained over a series of months.
I'd hate to think someone is sitting in jail as a result of this pseudo science being accepted as 'fact' by the courts.
I'd hate to think someone is sitting in jail as a result of this pseudo science being accepted as 'fact' by the courts.
Cybbe
Jul 22, 06:00 AM
Apple is right now the most disgusting company in the business.
Brocktoon
Jan 10, 12:06 AM
Macbook Pro update: announced 1/15, shipping 1/15 :)
Macbook Nano: announced 1/15, shipping in 6-8 weeks :mad:
Macbook Nano: announced 1/15, shipping in 6-8 weeks :mad:
Thomas Veil
Mar 4, 09:37 PM
Huh. They must've gone to the bullpen -- we're starting to see some relief bitching.
Somebody has already tried that FDR quote. And I replied:
Our labor unions are not narrow, self-seeking groups. They have raised wages, shortened hours and provides supplemental benefits. Through collective bargaining and grievance procedures, they have brought justice and democracy to the shop floor. But their work goes beyond their own job, and even beyond our borders. For the labor movement is people. Our unions have brought millions of men and women together ... and given them common tools for common goals. -- John F. KennedyAnyone else on the board, please feel free to borrow that quote whenever somebody invokes FDR.
Now: corporate contributions are legal money laundering operations. If you follow the money, I pay for goods which go into company funds which are used to contribute to buy Republican candidates who are dedicated to passing corporate-friendly laws that make my air dirtier and my food unhealthier, and that lower my standard of living until they finally ship my job to another country. Nice racket they have going. Has anybody ever noticed that the well never dries of money to buy off our government? I just love watching them cry about regulation; very classy.
The Wisconsin senators, on the other hand, are spoiled children...you know, just like Abe Lincoln (http://politicalwire.com/archives/2011/02/24/when_lincoln_fled.html). ;)
Somebody has already tried that FDR quote. And I replied:
Our labor unions are not narrow, self-seeking groups. They have raised wages, shortened hours and provides supplemental benefits. Through collective bargaining and grievance procedures, they have brought justice and democracy to the shop floor. But their work goes beyond their own job, and even beyond our borders. For the labor movement is people. Our unions have brought millions of men and women together ... and given them common tools for common goals. -- John F. KennedyAnyone else on the board, please feel free to borrow that quote whenever somebody invokes FDR.
Now: corporate contributions are legal money laundering operations. If you follow the money, I pay for goods which go into company funds which are used to contribute to buy Republican candidates who are dedicated to passing corporate-friendly laws that make my air dirtier and my food unhealthier, and that lower my standard of living until they finally ship my job to another country. Nice racket they have going. Has anybody ever noticed that the well never dries of money to buy off our government? I just love watching them cry about regulation; very classy.
The Wisconsin senators, on the other hand, are spoiled children...you know, just like Abe Lincoln (http://politicalwire.com/archives/2011/02/24/when_lincoln_fled.html). ;)
AppleScruff1
Apr 11, 12:04 AM
No, they licensed out their OS to everyone and anyone who could slam together a box and then set about strong-arming box-makers to use Windows and only Windows.
Plus, PCs were and are cheap.
The success of Windows has NOTHING to do with it's quality as an OS, and has everything to do with their comfortable universal licensing racket.
So how did they copy Apple? Having 90% of the market without a quality product one can only imagine what they could have done with a good product.
Plus, PCs were and are cheap.
The success of Windows has NOTHING to do with it's quality as an OS, and has everything to do with their comfortable universal licensing racket.
So how did they copy Apple? Having 90% of the market without a quality product one can only imagine what they could have done with a good product.