QCassidy352
Apr 6, 10:27 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
I would love to see a 15" laptop with no optical drive, with the specs and price somewhere between the MBA and MBP.
A 15" MBA (no optical) with dedicated graphics is my ideal Mac. It'll happen someday...
I would love to see a 15" laptop with no optical drive, with the specs and price somewhere between the MBA and MBP.
A 15" MBA (no optical) with dedicated graphics is my ideal Mac. It'll happen someday...
Denarius
Mar 22, 07:15 PM
I'm willing to accept the current level of US involvment, provided it is short-term and really is part of a broader coalition with UN backing. Whether it turns out to be justified depends on subsequent events.
Poor old Obama has been dragged into this kicking and screaming by Sarkozy, Cameron, the Arab League request for a no-fly zone and the request by the Libyan revolutionaries themselves. He's been stressing all the way that he wants another nation to take the lead and now nobody can decide who. The Italian's want NAC to be in control, whereas the French don't. The Arab League doesn't want NATO running it so the French are proposing that we do it by committee. :confused:
I think they need to offer a deal to Gadaffi of some sort. He needs to go, but if there are charges against him in the international courts then it'll be a fight to the death. Offer him an amnesty if he agrees to go into exile quickly.
Poor old Obama has been dragged into this kicking and screaming by Sarkozy, Cameron, the Arab League request for a no-fly zone and the request by the Libyan revolutionaries themselves. He's been stressing all the way that he wants another nation to take the lead and now nobody can decide who. The Italian's want NAC to be in control, whereas the French don't. The Arab League doesn't want NATO running it so the French are proposing that we do it by committee. :confused:
I think they need to offer a deal to Gadaffi of some sort. He needs to go, but if there are charges against him in the international courts then it'll be a fight to the death. Offer him an amnesty if he agrees to go into exile quickly.
jdminpdx
Apr 8, 01:31 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
I was at BB yesterday and inquired about buying one. They has them but the manager wouldn't sell me one. He refuses to tell me why and I was told that he was instructed to hault sales temporarily. Hmmm
I was at BB yesterday and inquired about buying one. They has them but the manager wouldn't sell me one. He refuses to tell me why and I was told that he was instructed to hault sales temporarily. Hmmm
rdowns
Jun 8, 06:56 PM
Apple really geared up for this rollout. Look how many countries and how fast they're ramping up. I bet all their big retail partners have it on launch day. Those retailers want in on the iPhone rush too.:D
dgree03
Apr 6, 03:48 PM
But hey, haven't you heard, Honeycomb is a real tablet OS. (Whatever the heck that means.)
Google must have used that line in a PowerPoint somewhere because I see it regurgitated verbatim on every single iPad vs. Honeycomb thread.
The Google brainwashing continues. ;)
What you and every other non-informed are missing is the Xoom lack of apps is a not really a con for 2 reason.
1. Unlike iOS, ALL APPS, in the android market scale to fit the 1280x800 screen. No x1 or x2 crap. So I can still ENJOY my facebooke app on a larger screen. Nothing is lost. "optimized for tablets" gives me the same information just with a different interface. So long has my twitter app or facebooke or squeezebox app scale so i can see all. I am a happy camper.
2. Unlike iOS i would argue that the xoom needs LESS apps to do functions that take iOS 3 or 4 apps to do. I dont need goodreader or the like because I have a native file system. I dont need skyfire because i have flash. I dont need to open in here, open in there. Every app can have access to each other...
Google must have used that line in a PowerPoint somewhere because I see it regurgitated verbatim on every single iPad vs. Honeycomb thread.
The Google brainwashing continues. ;)
What you and every other non-informed are missing is the Xoom lack of apps is a not really a con for 2 reason.
1. Unlike iOS, ALL APPS, in the android market scale to fit the 1280x800 screen. No x1 or x2 crap. So I can still ENJOY my facebooke app on a larger screen. Nothing is lost. "optimized for tablets" gives me the same information just with a different interface. So long has my twitter app or facebooke or squeezebox app scale so i can see all. I am a happy camper.
2. Unlike iOS i would argue that the xoom needs LESS apps to do functions that take iOS 3 or 4 apps to do. I dont need goodreader or the like because I have a native file system. I dont need skyfire because i have flash. I dont need to open in here, open in there. Every app can have access to each other...
PODshady
Nov 28, 10:24 PM
I think they'll be a long way off getting money from every iPod sold. For a start its such an illogical thing to ask for (Did the music companies ask for money for every CD player or Tape Recorder sold? Nope), plus I suspect the main reason that Microsoft agreed to pay money in the first place is that they needed to get the music labels on board to boost the Zune Music Store, Microsoft was in the weaker position here and I believe the labels exploited that weakness.
If the labels were to go to Apple and demand a royalty on every iPod and threatening to pull their catalogue if they didn't get it, they would actually come off worse than Apple in terms of lost revenue and it's because of this I reckon they haven't a chance...
I agree
If the labels were to go to Apple and demand a royalty on every iPod and threatening to pull their catalogue if they didn't get it, they would actually come off worse than Apple in terms of lost revenue and it's because of this I reckon they haven't a chance...
I agree
zelet
Aug 25, 04:02 PM
Another person who can never be satisfied.:rolleyes:
Are you telling me somebody who spent thousands of dollars on "premium" hardware doesn't have a right to be pissed when both systems he bought were DOA? That is stupid! Apple should have kissed his ass and gave him a new computer after the second major repair. He was nicer than I would have ever been. I would have gone to the Apple store and caused a HUGE scene in the middle of a busy Saturday about it.
Apple computers are expensive. They are worth it when they work (and they usually do) but when Apple makes a mistake they should correct it better than anybody.
Are you telling me somebody who spent thousands of dollars on "premium" hardware doesn't have a right to be pissed when both systems he bought were DOA? That is stupid! Apple should have kissed his ass and gave him a new computer after the second major repair. He was nicer than I would have ever been. I would have gone to the Apple store and caused a HUGE scene in the middle of a busy Saturday about it.
Apple computers are expensive. They are worth it when they work (and they usually do) but when Apple makes a mistake they should correct it better than anybody.
bedifferent
Apr 27, 08:39 AM
There's a nuclear disaster in Japan and treacherous weather throughout, people are jobless and homeless and the dollar's in the sh***er and our Supreme Court ruled that companies can give unlimited financial aid to any politician putting business interests in our government and people are worried about Apple possibly tracking them on their iDevice?
Let 'em, my life is BORING, they wouldn't be interested :p
Let 'em, my life is BORING, they wouldn't be interested :p
Sydde
Mar 17, 01:04 PM
�Change� means nothing ... you don�t want to deal with the monetary/financial crisis in this country, you want to keep the system together for the benefit of the banks and the big corporations and the politicians...When you voted for 'change' in you really voted for more of the same.
As opposed to voting for breaking the system down for the benefit of banks and big corporations? We have seen the actions of neo-liberals like Scott Walker: if he gets his way, the whole state will belong to Cargill and Schneider and Bergstrom and Johnsonville, etc, with no government left to protect citizens and businesses from corporate interests. Paul is cut from the same cloth. Put him in the Whitehouse and there will be millions of people protesting full time in DC, because they will have nothing else to do with their time.
Paul wants to shut down government. All that would be left is the few peace officers needed to protect business from millions of poor people. That is the neo-liberal utopia, as envisioned by Alisa Rosenbaum. This kind of policy has clearly been shown to be a recipe for potentially violent revolution:In his Brief History of Neoliberalism, the eminent social geographer David Harvey outlined "a theory of political economic practices that proposes that human well-being can best be advanced by liberating individual entrepreneurial freedoms and skills within an institutional framework characterised by strong private property rights, free markets, and free trade." Neoliberal states guarantee, by force if necessary, the "proper functioning" of markets; where markets do not exist (for example, in the use of land, water, education, health care, social security, or environmental pollution), then the state should create them.
Guaranteeing the sanctity of markets is supposed to be the limit of legitimate state functions, and state interventions should always be subordinate to markets. All human behavior, and not just the production of goods and services, can be reduced to market transactions.
The only people for whom Egyptian neoliberalism worked "by the book" were the most vulnerable members of society, and their experience with neoliberalism was not a pretty picture. Organised labor was fiercely suppressed. The public education and the health care systems were gutted by a combination of neglect and privatization. Much of the population suffered stagnant or falling wages relative to inflation. Official unemployment was estimated at approximately 9.4% last year (and much higher for the youth who spearheaded the January 25th Revolution), and about 20% of the population is said to live below a poverty line defined as $2 per day per person.
For the wealthy, the rules were very different. Egypt did not so much shrink its public sector, as neoliberal doctrine would have it, as it reallocated public resources for the benefit of a small and already affluent elite. Privatization provided windfalls for politically well-connected individuals who could purchase state-owned assets for much less than their market value, or monopolise rents from such diverse sources as tourism and foreign aid. Huge proportions of the profits made by companies that supplied basic construction materials like steel and cement came from government contracts, a proportion of which in turn were related to aid from foreign governments.source (http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/02/201122414315249621.html)
Except, Americans are not likely to wait 30 years before fighting back.
As opposed to voting for breaking the system down for the benefit of banks and big corporations? We have seen the actions of neo-liberals like Scott Walker: if he gets his way, the whole state will belong to Cargill and Schneider and Bergstrom and Johnsonville, etc, with no government left to protect citizens and businesses from corporate interests. Paul is cut from the same cloth. Put him in the Whitehouse and there will be millions of people protesting full time in DC, because they will have nothing else to do with their time.
Paul wants to shut down government. All that would be left is the few peace officers needed to protect business from millions of poor people. That is the neo-liberal utopia, as envisioned by Alisa Rosenbaum. This kind of policy has clearly been shown to be a recipe for potentially violent revolution:In his Brief History of Neoliberalism, the eminent social geographer David Harvey outlined "a theory of political economic practices that proposes that human well-being can best be advanced by liberating individual entrepreneurial freedoms and skills within an institutional framework characterised by strong private property rights, free markets, and free trade." Neoliberal states guarantee, by force if necessary, the "proper functioning" of markets; where markets do not exist (for example, in the use of land, water, education, health care, social security, or environmental pollution), then the state should create them.
Guaranteeing the sanctity of markets is supposed to be the limit of legitimate state functions, and state interventions should always be subordinate to markets. All human behavior, and not just the production of goods and services, can be reduced to market transactions.
The only people for whom Egyptian neoliberalism worked "by the book" were the most vulnerable members of society, and their experience with neoliberalism was not a pretty picture. Organised labor was fiercely suppressed. The public education and the health care systems were gutted by a combination of neglect and privatization. Much of the population suffered stagnant or falling wages relative to inflation. Official unemployment was estimated at approximately 9.4% last year (and much higher for the youth who spearheaded the January 25th Revolution), and about 20% of the population is said to live below a poverty line defined as $2 per day per person.
For the wealthy, the rules were very different. Egypt did not so much shrink its public sector, as neoliberal doctrine would have it, as it reallocated public resources for the benefit of a small and already affluent elite. Privatization provided windfalls for politically well-connected individuals who could purchase state-owned assets for much less than their market value, or monopolise rents from such diverse sources as tourism and foreign aid. Huge proportions of the profits made by companies that supplied basic construction materials like steel and cement came from government contracts, a proportion of which in turn were related to aid from foreign governments.source (http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/02/201122414315249621.html)
Except, Americans are not likely to wait 30 years before fighting back.
CaoCao
Mar 1, 04:11 PM
You know how stupid that argument is? You are comparing physical defects to a different mental state. Physiologically, gay people are not any bit different from straight people. (IE one identical twin gay, one not cases...)
Here is a much closer analog to your view:
"I hate you for liking the color yellow. Your views are sick and your practice of having yellow things in your home is sick and wrong and immoral. A three thousand year old book written by some uneducated shepperds told me that people who like the color yellow are going to burn in Hell because someone hates them."
Do you see just how stupid this whole thing is?
Well my other options were paedophilia, incest, bestiality etc.
Your analogy does not make sense because I do not hate homosexuals.
I made it quite clearly. If you don't get it, I can't help you any further.
Good to hear. Can we now assume you support marriage rights for gay people?
You have made it quite clear you suffer from a dearth of cogency.
That is their problem, not yours.
You could say the same about the Catholic church. My link was specifically in reply to being asked for evidence - actually proof - that Plato was a homosexual. As for supporting bad stuff, the US Constitution was once quite content to support slavery and the subordination of women, and so were many of the founding fathers, both of the early church and the USA.
What absolute bollocks! Homosexuality does not need treatment, since it is not a disease.
Ah, let us define slavery, does: "slavery is the condition of involuntary servitude in which a human being is regarded as no more than the property of another, as being without basic human rights; in other words, as a thing rather than a person" work for you?
Why not? Whether gays are treated equally under the Constitution has absolutely nothing to do with how you feel about them. Whether you grant them the human dignity of being treated equally has absolutely nothing to do with your Catholic dogma. You are making excuses.
Another red herring: nobody is asking you to be a caregiver, simply to stop pontificating about something you clearly know very little about. You are simply broadcasting your prejudices to no useful effect: you are not going to make anyone heterosexual by trashing their feelings and their very nature, you are just going to add to their discomfiture.
What a pity you did not learn from her to keep your own counsel.
Feeble. Do you pontificate about sky-diving too?
I have read many of Plato's dialogues, in Greek, and studied - and continue to study - Ancient Greek culture in depth. Your Dr Gould is bringing his own prejudices to the table. He should know better.
Homosexual friendship. Right.
But they are treated equal, any gay man can marry a woman and any lesbian woman can marry a man just as any heterosexual man can marry a woman and any heterosexual woman can marry a man
@CoCo & Bill: Please, just stop arguing with bogus reasons. The Catholic Church has everything wrong and upside down and only to control its followers. You two are a perfect example thereof.
CoCo, heterosexuality is not the norm, at least not outside our social understanding. In ancient Greece and Rome, sexuality wasn't even up for discussion. You followed a certain social conduct and explored your sexuality as you saw fit and didn't question it or that of others. When Christianity started taking over the laws and moral standards, they made it so they could control everything people do. Your reasoning comes from the same source as those who wrote the medical journals that condemn homosexuality as a mental illness. They did so out of fear of the unknown - the very essence th the Catholic Church uses to control its followers.
And Bill, please go out and live a little. Get a nice girlfriend and explore your and her sexuality a little and see how much more relaxed your attitude about the world can be. There's more to life than waiting for God's instructions. He certainly wouldn't want you to waste your life on such trivial things like analyzing other people's sexuality.
You two need to expand your world view and accept that there are plenty of things that make you uncomfortable, but there is no reason to condemn them so exhaustingly. You cannot reverse progress and you certainly cannot control the lives of other people.
There are plenty of folks in Northern Africa that can vouch for that.
Nay, the Romans and Greeks failed, they are retrogress
Here is a much closer analog to your view:
"I hate you for liking the color yellow. Your views are sick and your practice of having yellow things in your home is sick and wrong and immoral. A three thousand year old book written by some uneducated shepperds told me that people who like the color yellow are going to burn in Hell because someone hates them."
Do you see just how stupid this whole thing is?
Well my other options were paedophilia, incest, bestiality etc.
Your analogy does not make sense because I do not hate homosexuals.
I made it quite clearly. If you don't get it, I can't help you any further.
Good to hear. Can we now assume you support marriage rights for gay people?
You have made it quite clear you suffer from a dearth of cogency.
That is their problem, not yours.
You could say the same about the Catholic church. My link was specifically in reply to being asked for evidence - actually proof - that Plato was a homosexual. As for supporting bad stuff, the US Constitution was once quite content to support slavery and the subordination of women, and so were many of the founding fathers, both of the early church and the USA.
What absolute bollocks! Homosexuality does not need treatment, since it is not a disease.
Ah, let us define slavery, does: "slavery is the condition of involuntary servitude in which a human being is regarded as no more than the property of another, as being without basic human rights; in other words, as a thing rather than a person" work for you?
Why not? Whether gays are treated equally under the Constitution has absolutely nothing to do with how you feel about them. Whether you grant them the human dignity of being treated equally has absolutely nothing to do with your Catholic dogma. You are making excuses.
Another red herring: nobody is asking you to be a caregiver, simply to stop pontificating about something you clearly know very little about. You are simply broadcasting your prejudices to no useful effect: you are not going to make anyone heterosexual by trashing their feelings and their very nature, you are just going to add to their discomfiture.
What a pity you did not learn from her to keep your own counsel.
Feeble. Do you pontificate about sky-diving too?
I have read many of Plato's dialogues, in Greek, and studied - and continue to study - Ancient Greek culture in depth. Your Dr Gould is bringing his own prejudices to the table. He should know better.
Homosexual friendship. Right.
But they are treated equal, any gay man can marry a woman and any lesbian woman can marry a man just as any heterosexual man can marry a woman and any heterosexual woman can marry a man
@CoCo & Bill: Please, just stop arguing with bogus reasons. The Catholic Church has everything wrong and upside down and only to control its followers. You two are a perfect example thereof.
CoCo, heterosexuality is not the norm, at least not outside our social understanding. In ancient Greece and Rome, sexuality wasn't even up for discussion. You followed a certain social conduct and explored your sexuality as you saw fit and didn't question it or that of others. When Christianity started taking over the laws and moral standards, they made it so they could control everything people do. Your reasoning comes from the same source as those who wrote the medical journals that condemn homosexuality as a mental illness. They did so out of fear of the unknown - the very essence th the Catholic Church uses to control its followers.
And Bill, please go out and live a little. Get a nice girlfriend and explore your and her sexuality a little and see how much more relaxed your attitude about the world can be. There's more to life than waiting for God's instructions. He certainly wouldn't want you to waste your life on such trivial things like analyzing other people's sexuality.
You two need to expand your world view and accept that there are plenty of things that make you uncomfortable, but there is no reason to condemn them so exhaustingly. You cannot reverse progress and you certainly cannot control the lives of other people.
There are plenty of folks in Northern Africa that can vouch for that.
Nay, the Romans and Greeks failed, they are retrogress
backdraft
Aug 26, 04:30 PM
Yet iBooks and PowerBooks (PPC based systems) are part of this most recent battery recall (and a prior one)... it has nothing to do with switching to Intel. Apple has been using standard commodity parts in their systems for a VERY long time now.
...and while you are at the site why not look at some non-Intel based systems...
http://www.appledefects.com/wiki/index.php?title=Titanium_PowerBook_G4
http://www.appledefects.com/wiki/index.php?title=PowerBook_12%22
http://www.appledefects.com/wiki/index.php?title=Ibook
From the looks of it PPC based Mac's have MUCH fewer issues.
...and while you are at the site why not look at some non-Intel based systems...
http://www.appledefects.com/wiki/index.php?title=Titanium_PowerBook_G4
http://www.appledefects.com/wiki/index.php?title=PowerBook_12%22
http://www.appledefects.com/wiki/index.php?title=Ibook
From the looks of it PPC based Mac's have MUCH fewer issues.
mattsh
Sep 19, 06:24 AM
to be honest - i've been looking at the lenovo offerings and i'm attracted. i have been a diehard apple fan my entire life, but if all it means is i have to use tiger clone (aka vista) but at least have hardware that is current with technology i'll buy.
so yes, apple has a monopoly, but they can't be to jack ass about it because people will start to go other places no matter how good ilife is.
there is no excuse that one of the top 5 notebook venders in the united states on intel architecture is behind this much its competitors.
You know I've been thinking about this. Does Apple really NEED to update now? I mean what's the purpose of the update? Yes there is 64bit, but other then that? Not much. A LITTLE more speed, but OSX already runs pretty fast... faster then Windows would with comparible hardware. OSX already does more then Windows does and does it better. Maybe Apple doesn't NEED To stay up with the latest processor fad because they are already better then the competition.. maybe the competition NEEDS faster hardward because they OS is so bloated it runs slowly unless they have it. Ever think of that? Honestly, I'm 100% happy with my current MB which does not have the new processor in it. I launch most programs in under a second.:D
so yes, apple has a monopoly, but they can't be to jack ass about it because people will start to go other places no matter how good ilife is.
there is no excuse that one of the top 5 notebook venders in the united states on intel architecture is behind this much its competitors.
You know I've been thinking about this. Does Apple really NEED to update now? I mean what's the purpose of the update? Yes there is 64bit, but other then that? Not much. A LITTLE more speed, but OSX already runs pretty fast... faster then Windows would with comparible hardware. OSX already does more then Windows does and does it better. Maybe Apple doesn't NEED To stay up with the latest processor fad because they are already better then the competition.. maybe the competition NEEDS faster hardward because they OS is so bloated it runs slowly unless they have it. Ever think of that? Honestly, I'm 100% happy with my current MB which does not have the new processor in it. I launch most programs in under a second.:D
ccrandall77
Aug 11, 03:47 PM
Yes. EVERYONE. If you dont believe me, maybe you believe the economist:
http://www.economist.com/printedition/displayStory.cfm?Story_ID=4351974
Please note that the graph is about three years old. Nowadays a lot more of the countries are over 100%.
No, not EVERYONE. I own 4 cell phones. By your logic, I would be counted as 4 people.
http://www.economist.com/printedition/displayStory.cfm?Story_ID=4351974
Please note that the graph is about three years old. Nowadays a lot more of the countries are over 100%.
No, not EVERYONE. I own 4 cell phones. By your logic, I would be counted as 4 people.
cult hero
Mar 26, 12:25 AM
Some of the comments on this board are inane.
1) Launchpad is the selling point...Really? You think Versions, Resume, Mission Control, OS wide Full Screen App support are not selling points?
2) $129 is too much. This one cracks me up. Apple is bundling a $500 product into the OS (and other OS based servers are far more expensive) and people think $129 is too much?
3) When has Apple released an OS, and not shown new features on the final release keynote?
I don't know that #2 matters that much. A vast majority of the people buying the OS couldn't care less about the server tools. In fact of all the Mac users I know personally, I'd be the only one that would care about their inclusion.
Also, we don't know that the price point will be $129.00 yet. The price point is something I am VERY interested in seeing though. Will it be that high? Or will it be as cheap as Snow Leopard? Or somewhere in the middle? I'm personally guessing it'll be the latter. The AppStore is changing the general population's idea of what software should cost (which is, in my opinion, one of the best things about it). So we'll see.
1) Launchpad is the selling point...Really? You think Versions, Resume, Mission Control, OS wide Full Screen App support are not selling points?
2) $129 is too much. This one cracks me up. Apple is bundling a $500 product into the OS (and other OS based servers are far more expensive) and people think $129 is too much?
3) When has Apple released an OS, and not shown new features on the final release keynote?
I don't know that #2 matters that much. A vast majority of the people buying the OS couldn't care less about the server tools. In fact of all the Mac users I know personally, I'd be the only one that would care about their inclusion.
Also, we don't know that the price point will be $129.00 yet. The price point is something I am VERY interested in seeing though. Will it be that high? Or will it be as cheap as Snow Leopard? Or somewhere in the middle? I'm personally guessing it'll be the latter. The AppStore is changing the general population's idea of what software should cost (which is, in my opinion, one of the best things about it). So we'll see.
robanga
Mar 22, 01:48 PM
Can you imagine any scenario in which RIM remains relevant and does not continue its slide down?
Is there a founder waiting to come back and right the ship?
Will this product launch to a couple million sold in its first weeks, month or even quarter? Sold through now... not sold to a channel where they will sit on the shelf. This is an incredibly uphill battle for RIM, Motorola or whomever right now. Non-recognition of that is simply hope in a non-apple white horse.
I want Apple to have competition, without it they will grow complacent. I just don't see it on this front. Android phones is another story but tablets...yikes its going to take a lot more than this.
Is there a founder waiting to come back and right the ship?
Will this product launch to a couple million sold in its first weeks, month or even quarter? Sold through now... not sold to a channel where they will sit on the shelf. This is an incredibly uphill battle for RIM, Motorola or whomever right now. Non-recognition of that is simply hope in a non-apple white horse.
I want Apple to have competition, without it they will grow complacent. I just don't see it on this front. Android phones is another story but tablets...yikes its going to take a lot more than this.
Evangelion
Apr 8, 05:01 AM
another low for apple, i ordered Mar 19th still waiting ...
fiasco just continues, does not look nice apple.
How exactly is this Apple's fault? BB played shenanigans, Apple called them out on it.
And yes, you have to wait for your order to go through. I bet that's just terrible for all those entitled people out there who feel that world revolves around them, and when they want something, they have to have it NOW. Fact is that there are simply so many people buying iPads that Apple has problem satisfying demand.
fiasco just continues, does not look nice apple.
How exactly is this Apple's fault? BB played shenanigans, Apple called them out on it.
And yes, you have to wait for your order to go through. I bet that's just terrible for all those entitled people out there who feel that world revolves around them, and when they want something, they have to have it NOW. Fact is that there are simply so many people buying iPads that Apple has problem satisfying demand.
roadbloc
Mar 26, 06:43 PM
I'm glad rosetta is going away. Maybe the dev will finally update the app.
By saying that you clearly misunderstand the idea of a legacy app. Say I have an old PPC game that I still enjoy to play. Why on earth would the dev want to update the old game to work in intel, especially if the dev is busy with new and more profitable endeavours?
Windows manages to run legacy apps still. Even if you do have to resort to using the virtual machine they've called 'XP Mode.'
Fortunately, my one and only PPC program does indeed have an intel version that I wasn't aware of, so I'm fine.
By saying that you clearly misunderstand the idea of a legacy app. Say I have an old PPC game that I still enjoy to play. Why on earth would the dev want to update the old game to work in intel, especially if the dev is busy with new and more profitable endeavours?
Windows manages to run legacy apps still. Even if you do have to resort to using the virtual machine they've called 'XP Mode.'
Fortunately, my one and only PPC program does indeed have an intel version that I wasn't aware of, so I'm fine.
fivepoint
Apr 27, 02:27 PM
I am fairly confident that rather than pointing to a conspiracy, this simply shows that when scanned, the operator had enabled some sort of "auto-text" option that attempted to read and convert then embed the raw text info in the PDF, as to make the text "selectable" in preview programs.
It only worked on certain text, as is par for the course.
Hopefully you're not insinuating that I am pointing to a conspiracy, I'm pretty sure I was quite clear on that account.
As for the 'auto-text' thing... interesting, why though would the several dates, etc. be on separate layers? And why would the signatures be separate from the typed text? Just slightly different colorations? My only thought was that the thing was retouched in order to improve the appearance of a poor quality scan... but why would they be so sloppy in reassembling? Why not make it a single layer image before releasing? I don't buy that it was simply overlooked... It's the White House for crying out loud. It's as if they WANT they want the controversy to continue???
It only worked on certain text, as is par for the course.
Hopefully you're not insinuating that I am pointing to a conspiracy, I'm pretty sure I was quite clear on that account.
As for the 'auto-text' thing... interesting, why though would the several dates, etc. be on separate layers? And why would the signatures be separate from the typed text? Just slightly different colorations? My only thought was that the thing was retouched in order to improve the appearance of a poor quality scan... but why would they be so sloppy in reassembling? Why not make it a single layer image before releasing? I don't buy that it was simply overlooked... It's the White House for crying out loud. It's as if they WANT they want the controversy to continue???
j_maddison
Jul 20, 08:47 AM
THIS is why IBM was given the boot.
I doubt it had anything to do with the desktop/ server market. They switched because they had no viable alternative for their laptop range.
Jay
I doubt it had anything to do with the desktop/ server market. They switched because they had no viable alternative for their laptop range.
Jay
Butters
Aug 6, 01:14 PM
i don't care about see-through windows. I want something that works.
see-through windows are SOOOO jaguar
see-through windows are SOOOO jaguar
KnightWRX
Apr 20, 01:46 PM
They don't need to amend. This is a federal pleading so the standard is whether it puts Samsung on notice. This is a different standard than state courts, where they would have to be much more specific. Eventually they will have to prove which models are accused. Looks to me like the complaint is fine.
So all that is left is to discuss the actual merit of the trade dress claim, of course, something that will in the end be up to the judge.
We can use pictures all we want, something tells me Samsung is just going to bring in devices into the courtroom. Pictures can be misleading as certain angles/shots might make ressemblances show up that aren't quite there.
Also, it remains to be seen how much the judge will accept generic things like "rounded corner", since I don't think I've ever had a phone without rounded corners and how much in the end, he decides that the devices to ressemble or not each other.
Do you know of someone that looked up the icon trademarks on the USPTO site ? Did Apple even register them (I know you don't have to, unless you want punitive damages) ?
So all that is left is to discuss the actual merit of the trade dress claim, of course, something that will in the end be up to the judge.
We can use pictures all we want, something tells me Samsung is just going to bring in devices into the courtroom. Pictures can be misleading as certain angles/shots might make ressemblances show up that aren't quite there.
Also, it remains to be seen how much the judge will accept generic things like "rounded corner", since I don't think I've ever had a phone without rounded corners and how much in the end, he decides that the devices to ressemble or not each other.
Do you know of someone that looked up the icon trademarks on the USPTO site ? Did Apple even register them (I know you don't have to, unless you want punitive damages) ?
slothy420
Jun 15, 04:41 PM
Radio Shack is no longer doing Pre-orders...I was told there are no more iPhones available for them...
The Best Buy in my area is doing a $50 Pre-order but it's BS...The $50 doesn't go towards the iPhone...You're still going to have to pay full price (not guaranteed that you will get one on launch) and the $50 that was originally paid will be returned to you as a gift card. Are you serious????
I'm not sure where you are getting your information from, but it doesn't match my experience at BB this morning. I paid $50 for the deposit which was returned to me in the form of a $50 BB gift card, which the sales rep specifically told me to bring it back on the 24th and it would be applied towards my iPhone purchase. I have a 9am appt at the store (1st appt of the day) and will be the first one to walk out of there with my new iPhone 4.
The Best Buy in my area is doing a $50 Pre-order but it's BS...The $50 doesn't go towards the iPhone...You're still going to have to pay full price (not guaranteed that you will get one on launch) and the $50 that was originally paid will be returned to you as a gift card. Are you serious????
I'm not sure where you are getting your information from, but it doesn't match my experience at BB this morning. I paid $50 for the deposit which was returned to me in the form of a $50 BB gift card, which the sales rep specifically told me to bring it back on the 24th and it would be applied towards my iPhone purchase. I have a 9am appt at the store (1st appt of the day) and will be the first one to walk out of there with my new iPhone 4.
GermanSuplex
Jun 23, 10:30 AM
I've gotten no calls at all. I called twice yestereday (with the intent of talking to two different employees).
The first one said that they expect to be able to fulfill reservations (I was told last week I was the only one who reserved at that store), the second employee only told me "I haven't heard a thing."
The first one said that they expect to be able to fulfill reservations (I was told last week I was the only one who reserved at that store), the second employee only told me "I haven't heard a thing."
Macnoviz
Jul 20, 12:14 PM
Sorry I don't see that happening... Apple has basically always given developers a few months (to several months) lead time with the next major version of Mac OS X. That has taken place yet... so I don't see it being released at WWDC 2006.
I thought we were talking MWSF here, in January, so that's on par with expectations
I thought we were talking MWSF here, in January, so that's on par with expectations
No comments:
Post a Comment