AppleScruff1
Apr 20, 11:55 AM
I think this was because Woolworth (Australian supermarket giant) applied for a blanket trademark that allows it to apply it's logo on anything - especially competing electronic goods, computers, music players, and branded phones. (I'm not saying it's right, just surfacing some more details)
P.
I think you are correct. Still ridiculous, IMHO. The Woolworth logo was a fancy W.
P.
I think you are correct. Still ridiculous, IMHO. The Woolworth logo was a fancy W.
aafuss1
Aug 6, 05:10 PM
Safari in Leopard-drag and drop tabs to reorganise, as with FireFox, and a My tabs features where you can save a set of tabs for easy recall later-like eg. IE7 on PC's.
Built in games-Chess, Puzzle on the Dashboard, new-a soltaire game similar to the iPos, Parachutes and mahjogg game. Classic Mac users may remember some Macs had a Eric's Solitare Sampler
Built in games-Chess, Puzzle on the Dashboard, new-a soltaire game similar to the iPos, Parachutes and mahjogg game. Classic Mac users may remember some Macs had a Eric's Solitare Sampler
gorgeousninja
Apr 20, 05:54 AM
WRONG! They weren't invented at Apple's Cupertino HQ, they were invented back in Palo Alto (Xerox PARC).
Secondly, your source is a pro-Apple website. Thats a problem right there.
I'll give you a proper source, the NYTimes (http://www.nytimes.com/1989/12/20/business/xerox-vs-apple-standard-dashboard-is-at-issue.html), which wrote an article on Xerox vs Apple back in 1989, untarnished, in its raw form. Your 'source' was cherry picking data.
Here is one excerpt.
Then Apple CEO John Sculley stated:
^^ thats a GLARING admission, by the CEO of Apple, don't you think? Nevertheless, Xerox ended up losing that lawsuit, with some saying that by the time they filed that lawsuit it was too late. The lawsuit wasn't thrown out because they didn't have a strong case against Apple, but because of how the lawsuit was presented as is at the time.
I'm not saying that Apple stole IP from Xerox, but what I am saying is that its quite disappointing to see Apple fanboys trying to distort the past into making it seem as though Apple created the first GUI, when that is CLEARLY not the case. The GUI had its roots in Xerox PARC. That, is a FACT.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/78/Rank_Xerox_8010%2B40_brochure_front.jpg
You're really pushing this aren't you? So what exactly is your point that has a significant relevance to the main topic? ...None, that's what.
Just because 30 years ago Apple took an idea initially developed by Xerox, but then improved upon it and subsequently released to the mass market a product that most people acknowledge as being the first home computer, has absolutely no bearing on the fact that Samsung have blatantly copied Apple's design.
Secondly, your source is a pro-Apple website. Thats a problem right there.
I'll give you a proper source, the NYTimes (http://www.nytimes.com/1989/12/20/business/xerox-vs-apple-standard-dashboard-is-at-issue.html), which wrote an article on Xerox vs Apple back in 1989, untarnished, in its raw form. Your 'source' was cherry picking data.
Here is one excerpt.
Then Apple CEO John Sculley stated:
^^ thats a GLARING admission, by the CEO of Apple, don't you think? Nevertheless, Xerox ended up losing that lawsuit, with some saying that by the time they filed that lawsuit it was too late. The lawsuit wasn't thrown out because they didn't have a strong case against Apple, but because of how the lawsuit was presented as is at the time.
I'm not saying that Apple stole IP from Xerox, but what I am saying is that its quite disappointing to see Apple fanboys trying to distort the past into making it seem as though Apple created the first GUI, when that is CLEARLY not the case. The GUI had its roots in Xerox PARC. That, is a FACT.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/78/Rank_Xerox_8010%2B40_brochure_front.jpg
You're really pushing this aren't you? So what exactly is your point that has a significant relevance to the main topic? ...None, that's what.
Just because 30 years ago Apple took an idea initially developed by Xerox, but then improved upon it and subsequently released to the mass market a product that most people acknowledge as being the first home computer, has absolutely no bearing on the fact that Samsung have blatantly copied Apple's design.
sirgant
Nov 29, 02:44 AM
What on earth are these people at music studio's thinking!!! Did they get royalties for every stereo sold? NO, so neither should they get anything for iPod or any hardware sales. Only for the products THEY supply, should they get money, being the music and movies/ video's, in other words the content.
This is typical behaviour of music studio's and I sincerely hope that Apple will not budge, nor should any other company. Of course MS is eager to pay as they need their Zune to succeed, and Universal is riding along for a slice of the pie, but who will loose out in the end is the consumer, as these royalties are eventually going to get calculated such that we will pay them......
We should all start protesting all record companies to clean up their act, in the mean time, the general consumer should to, copying of music is stealing, the prices on iTunes are fair and reasonable, so lets be nice and buy them properly, and the record companies can then make sure there is more for us to buy (some real refreshing new music would be nice, instead of all this "X factor, American idol, etc etc manufactured stuff....) , and not just fill their pockets as they are trying to do all the time
It's not music studios, but record companies, they are not the same entities.
A couple of things to clarify. I am actually a producer, who has a pre-existing deal with MCA/Universal Music Publishers.
1. Doug Morris, Chairman of Universal is a greedy bastard, who I wouldn't trust as far as I could throw him.
2. Artists, Songwriters & Producers are already getting screwed by major labels, not accounting properly, holding millions of dollars, using creative accounting practices etc.
3. The percentage breakdown with ITMS and labels is basically 65/35 as it is rounded off to the 100 in favor of the labels.
4. The real culprit here is Microsoft, who is whoring out Zunes in order to get a foothold on the marketplace. Consumers can speak with their pocketbooks, don't buy the crappy Zune players, but support your artists & songwriters who make a living off of sales, by purchasing music.
Thanks
This is typical behaviour of music studio's and I sincerely hope that Apple will not budge, nor should any other company. Of course MS is eager to pay as they need their Zune to succeed, and Universal is riding along for a slice of the pie, but who will loose out in the end is the consumer, as these royalties are eventually going to get calculated such that we will pay them......
We should all start protesting all record companies to clean up their act, in the mean time, the general consumer should to, copying of music is stealing, the prices on iTunes are fair and reasonable, so lets be nice and buy them properly, and the record companies can then make sure there is more for us to buy (some real refreshing new music would be nice, instead of all this "X factor, American idol, etc etc manufactured stuff....) , and not just fill their pockets as they are trying to do all the time
It's not music studios, but record companies, they are not the same entities.
A couple of things to clarify. I am actually a producer, who has a pre-existing deal with MCA/Universal Music Publishers.
1. Doug Morris, Chairman of Universal is a greedy bastard, who I wouldn't trust as far as I could throw him.
2. Artists, Songwriters & Producers are already getting screwed by major labels, not accounting properly, holding millions of dollars, using creative accounting practices etc.
3. The percentage breakdown with ITMS and labels is basically 65/35 as it is rounded off to the 100 in favor of the labels.
4. The real culprit here is Microsoft, who is whoring out Zunes in order to get a foothold on the marketplace. Consumers can speak with their pocketbooks, don't buy the crappy Zune players, but support your artists & songwriters who make a living off of sales, by purchasing music.
Thanks
myemosoul
Jun 17, 11:57 AM
The store i went to showed me the piece of paper with the directions on how to get the PIN numbers and it specifically said that if the store were to try and push a reserve through before 1pm it would be cancelled.
I for one certainly hope they honor this rule as my store waited until exactly 1pm to try to put mine through and couldn't get a PIN until an hour and a half later.
I for one certainly hope they honor this rule as my store waited until exactly 1pm to try to put mine through and couldn't get a PIN until an hour and a half later.
Eraserhead
Mar 1, 04:52 PM
^^ Well maybe, but the Obama administration doesn't believe that law is constitutional.
ThinkingMac
Sep 19, 10:01 AM
umm, how about more than a simple basic update.
We need:
Firewire 800
Superdrive DL w/ OPTION FOR BLU-RAY!!!
Nvidia 7800 or 7900 option!! we need option for best vid card!! upgrade to 512 mb vram
and..... Magsafe Airplane/Auto POWER ADAPTER!!
I agree and dont forget express card 54 so we can get our CF card readers
We need:
Firewire 800
Superdrive DL w/ OPTION FOR BLU-RAY!!!
Nvidia 7800 or 7900 option!! we need option for best vid card!! upgrade to 512 mb vram
and..... Magsafe Airplane/Auto POWER ADAPTER!!
I agree and dont forget express card 54 so we can get our CF card readers
Super Dave
Aug 6, 01:29 PM
Mac OS X Leopard
Introducing Vista 2.0
http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=207241438&size=l
:D
B
Is that Vista 2.0 thing real? I hadn't seen it before.
David :cool:
Introducing Vista 2.0
http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=207241438&size=l
:D
B
Is that Vista 2.0 thing real? I hadn't seen it before.
David :cool:
archurban
Sep 19, 02:08 AM
Mc keller, you're right. there are somebody misunderstand. we're not all geek, OK? I just use mac for my work or entertainment. my macbook will be kept for 2 years. so I don't care until 2008. plus, merom is only 10% better. it's not much different, and gets more hotter. I won't buy it.
mkrishnan
Aug 7, 04:35 PM
Well, do you think it's a copy of "Previous versions", which someone posted a link to in this thread?
It's very similar. I'm saying, who cares? It's a simple basic concept and Apple has a nice implementation going. :) And I actually believe that Apple's version will not have glaring security holes. :eek: :p Ahem...I installed Trillian on managed Win2k and XP machines as a standard user, and other users had access to my IM accounts without logging in!!!! :rolleyes:
Anyway, though, a Wiki Server in Leopard Server...mmmm... If only we lived in an Apple world. :D
That guy who made the angry video said it best... using a Mac is not so much using a computer but participating in the Apple experience. :D
It's very similar. I'm saying, who cares? It's a simple basic concept and Apple has a nice implementation going. :) And I actually believe that Apple's version will not have glaring security holes. :eek: :p Ahem...I installed Trillian on managed Win2k and XP machines as a standard user, and other users had access to my IM accounts without logging in!!!! :rolleyes:
Anyway, though, a Wiki Server in Leopard Server...mmmm... If only we lived in an Apple world. :D
That guy who made the angry video said it best... using a Mac is not so much using a computer but participating in the Apple experience. :D
dernhelm
Aug 7, 04:11 PM
Maybe not in a client type computer but it exists in Windows Server 2003 and it is called Volume Shadow Copy.
Of curse it doesn't look as nice !
You're the closest so far, except that it is by turns both not as sophisticated as a Snapshot, and in some sense more sophisticated. A snapshot allows you to "capture" the current state of a disk at a particular point in time - further new updates do not impact the snapshot. This assures a consistent backup as of a given point in time. This is not what Apple is doing here, as they are simply storing the old version of the file on the backup system.
However, in Time Machine, "snapshots" are not deliberate actions, they occur everytime something is changed. It would be tedious/near impossible to restore your entire disk back to a certain known good point using Time Machine - but that's a SysAdmin thing. It is almost simplicity itself to restore a given file or set of files back to what they were 30 minutes ago. And that is something that "everyman" needs a lot. If your choices are your current corrupt version, or the version as of the last snapshot, that is often a choice between bad and worse.
Of curse it doesn't look as nice !
You're the closest so far, except that it is by turns both not as sophisticated as a Snapshot, and in some sense more sophisticated. A snapshot allows you to "capture" the current state of a disk at a particular point in time - further new updates do not impact the snapshot. This assures a consistent backup as of a given point in time. This is not what Apple is doing here, as they are simply storing the old version of the file on the backup system.
However, in Time Machine, "snapshots" are not deliberate actions, they occur everytime something is changed. It would be tedious/near impossible to restore your entire disk back to a certain known good point using Time Machine - but that's a SysAdmin thing. It is almost simplicity itself to restore a given file or set of files back to what they were 30 minutes ago. And that is something that "everyman" needs a lot. If your choices are your current corrupt version, or the version as of the last snapshot, that is often a choice between bad and worse.
Lord Blackadder
Mar 23, 05:50 PM
Here we have an article laying out the case for non intervention (http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/03/2011322135442593945.html) by a Princeton law professor (emeritus) published by Al Jazeera. A worthy read, and here are two exerpts I've commented on.
In effect, overall historical trends vindicate trust in the dynamics of self-determination, even if short-term disasters may and do occur, and similarly underscores the problematic character of intervention, even given the purest of motivations, which rarely, if ever, exists in world politics.
I find it hard to disagree with this, but watching Gaddafi strongarm his way back into authority is a very bitter pill to swallow - plus, historical trends also suggest that other nations rarely resist the temptation to intervene when they feel they have something to gain by intervention (be it increased political influence, territorial gains, economic interests etc). The current structure of the UN is unable to prevent this. Also, even without direct intervention, the process of self-determination does not exist in a total vaccum. I wonder how the author regards more passive measures such as official censure, economic sanctions, asset-freezing etc etc? Do he consider those to be intereferences to self-determination?
The Charter in Article 2(7) accepts the limitation on UN authority to intervene in matters "essentially within the domestic jurisdiction" of member states unless there is a genuine issue of international peace and security present, which there was not, even in the claim, which was supposedly motivated solely to protect the civilian population of Libya.
But such a claim was patently misleading and disingenuous as the obvious goals, as manifest from the scale and character of military actions taken, were minimally to protect the armed rebels from being defeated, and possibly destroyed, and maximally, to achieve a regime change resulting in a new governing leadership that was friendly to the West, including buying fully into its liberal economic geopolitical policy compass.
Using a slightly altered language, the UN Charter embedded a social contract with its membership that privileged the politics of self-determination and was heavily weighted against the politics of intervention.
Neither position is absolute, but what seems to have happened with respect to Libya is that intervention was privileged and self-determination cast aside.
It is an instance of normatively dubious practise trumping the legal/moral ethos of containing geopolitical discretion with binding rules governing the use of force and the duty of non-intervention.
We do not know yet what will happen in Libya, but we do know enough to oppose such a precedent that exhibits so many unfortunate characteristics.
It is time to restore the global social contract between territorial sovereign states and the organised international community, which not only corresponds with the outlawry of aggressive war but also reflect the movement of history in support of the soft power struggles of the non-Western peoples of the world.
I do agree with him that it would be foolish not to recognize that the ultimate goal here is - yet again - regime change regardless of what the official statements and resolutions state.
But while the author adheres to a legal argument, reality is more expansive in my mind. Isn't the UN, by it's very nature, interventionalist on some level? Also, at what point does outside influence affect "self-determination" to the point that it is no longer that? Surely there will always be outside influence - but when does it interfere with self-determination?
Of course, all of these considerations are irrelevant if you are against the concept of the UN or even foreign alliances, as a vocal minority of conservatives are in the US. I imagine they'd prefer to let the "free market" somehow decide what happens.
In effect, overall historical trends vindicate trust in the dynamics of self-determination, even if short-term disasters may and do occur, and similarly underscores the problematic character of intervention, even given the purest of motivations, which rarely, if ever, exists in world politics.
I find it hard to disagree with this, but watching Gaddafi strongarm his way back into authority is a very bitter pill to swallow - plus, historical trends also suggest that other nations rarely resist the temptation to intervene when they feel they have something to gain by intervention (be it increased political influence, territorial gains, economic interests etc). The current structure of the UN is unable to prevent this. Also, even without direct intervention, the process of self-determination does not exist in a total vaccum. I wonder how the author regards more passive measures such as official censure, economic sanctions, asset-freezing etc etc? Do he consider those to be intereferences to self-determination?
The Charter in Article 2(7) accepts the limitation on UN authority to intervene in matters "essentially within the domestic jurisdiction" of member states unless there is a genuine issue of international peace and security present, which there was not, even in the claim, which was supposedly motivated solely to protect the civilian population of Libya.
But such a claim was patently misleading and disingenuous as the obvious goals, as manifest from the scale and character of military actions taken, were minimally to protect the armed rebels from being defeated, and possibly destroyed, and maximally, to achieve a regime change resulting in a new governing leadership that was friendly to the West, including buying fully into its liberal economic geopolitical policy compass.
Using a slightly altered language, the UN Charter embedded a social contract with its membership that privileged the politics of self-determination and was heavily weighted against the politics of intervention.
Neither position is absolute, but what seems to have happened with respect to Libya is that intervention was privileged and self-determination cast aside.
It is an instance of normatively dubious practise trumping the legal/moral ethos of containing geopolitical discretion with binding rules governing the use of force and the duty of non-intervention.
We do not know yet what will happen in Libya, but we do know enough to oppose such a precedent that exhibits so many unfortunate characteristics.
It is time to restore the global social contract between territorial sovereign states and the organised international community, which not only corresponds with the outlawry of aggressive war but also reflect the movement of history in support of the soft power struggles of the non-Western peoples of the world.
I do agree with him that it would be foolish not to recognize that the ultimate goal here is - yet again - regime change regardless of what the official statements and resolutions state.
But while the author adheres to a legal argument, reality is more expansive in my mind. Isn't the UN, by it's very nature, interventionalist on some level? Also, at what point does outside influence affect "self-determination" to the point that it is no longer that? Surely there will always be outside influence - but when does it interfere with self-determination?
Of course, all of these considerations are irrelevant if you are against the concept of the UN or even foreign alliances, as a vocal minority of conservatives are in the US. I imagine they'd prefer to let the "free market" somehow decide what happens.
LagunaSol
Apr 11, 04:57 PM
Checking email and Browsing the Internet is better on a bigger screen....Ability to open Office files, yes the iPhone does that well, but it's much better with a bigger screen.
Ah, so most of the stuff on Android is "better" only because it's on a bigger screen? :rolleyes:
So if Apple came out with a 6" iPhone, that would make it better than Android, right?
Navigation system..using an Android you don't have to pay $70 (TomTom) for something which should've come with your device.
And the navigation app I purchased houses all the map data on the device and doesn't rely on a data connection to operate. Unlike Android's stock navigation.
What did Android release which was later than the iOS which defined a smartphone?
Um, how about the entire OS?
Yup, but not many people want to lug around a 10" tablet and would like the extra screen real estate on their phones. I know i would.
There are also people (like me) who prefer not to carry something the size of an old-school Palm Pilot in their pocket.
Ah, so most of the stuff on Android is "better" only because it's on a bigger screen? :rolleyes:
So if Apple came out with a 6" iPhone, that would make it better than Android, right?
Navigation system..using an Android you don't have to pay $70 (TomTom) for something which should've come with your device.
And the navigation app I purchased houses all the map data on the device and doesn't rely on a data connection to operate. Unlike Android's stock navigation.
What did Android release which was later than the iOS which defined a smartphone?
Um, how about the entire OS?
Yup, but not many people want to lug around a 10" tablet and would like the extra screen real estate on their phones. I know i would.
There are also people (like me) who prefer not to carry something the size of an old-school Palm Pilot in their pocket.
tundrabuggy
Mar 31, 03:11 PM
You could say the same thing about Apple though. The Apple fad will go away and the extremely closed ecosystem which seems to not be really developing much in terms of UI or having an actual roadmap could end iOS.
I don't understand why people can't just see the pros and cons of both and accept both are great platforms. Its always a WAR with Apple fans. Apple against EVERYONE!
This is a short-sighted statement if I've ever seen one. The Apple "Fad" will go away?? Apple is paving the way for all the me-too products to rip-off, oh, I forget, in its proper term, its labeled "competition". First iPhone and iPad are created as explosively successful products, then all the copy-cats come, as Jobs predicted they would. Not an ounce of creativeness from the others, now, linguists and Lawyers are being hired to copy the name "App store" as well, they need to have it to compete. If Apple went away, innovation in this market would stifle for 5 years at least.
I don't understand why people can't just see the pros and cons of both and accept both are great platforms. Its always a WAR with Apple fans. Apple against EVERYONE!
This is a short-sighted statement if I've ever seen one. The Apple "Fad" will go away?? Apple is paving the way for all the me-too products to rip-off, oh, I forget, in its proper term, its labeled "competition". First iPhone and iPad are created as explosively successful products, then all the copy-cats come, as Jobs predicted they would. Not an ounce of creativeness from the others, now, linguists and Lawyers are being hired to copy the name "App store" as well, they need to have it to compete. If Apple went away, innovation in this market would stifle for 5 years at least.
jb510
Mar 25, 10:52 PM
Whatever happened to:
Alpha -> Beta -> Release Candidate -> Golden Master
I guess I can uncross my fingers of a file system miracle...
(yes I know and am looking forward to Z410, but would rather have Apple come up with something).
Alpha -> Beta -> Release Candidate -> Golden Master
I guess I can uncross my fingers of a file system miracle...
(yes I know and am looking forward to Z410, but would rather have Apple come up with something).
bretm
Apr 10, 11:10 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)
It's not like they threatened anyone. They likely went to the organizers and said "We'd like to make a really cool announcement at your event but we'd need most of your presentation and sponsorship space to do it." SuperMeet said sure, Apple paid, and here we are. It's not like the other sponsors didn't get their money back (I'm assuming.)
The other presenters just had to toss months of planning out the window and scramble to reschedule events w/less than a weeks notice during the industry's biggest annual convention. Hopefully the members of the audience that signed up to see the original line-up will be able to make it to all the reschedule events and, on top of that, everyone going to the SuperMeet has now paid money for tickets to what is nothing more than an Apple PR event.
Dick move by Apple but all will be forgiven as long as they release the holy grail of editing on Tuesday. If they preview 'iMovie Pro' lord help them...
He is asked if he will update his editing studio's workflow to the new Final Cut, and he basically danced around the question, pleaded the 5th, and made it pretty clear that he is holding back some reservations about how the industry will adapt to the changes.
To be fair to Mark (the head of Post at Bunim/Murray) there really isn't anything he could say due to the NDA. Just because what he saw of the new FCP might not lead him to believe it would work in Bunim/Murray's current workflow doesn't mean it might not be awesome for someone else's work flow. It was a tough spot for Mark to be in and I'm not exactly sure why he even kicked off the meeting with "I was there, but don't ask me about it because I'm under NDA". He could've never even have brought it up and it wouldn't have altered the course of the conversation at all.
Lethal
So Avid, Adobe and Canon spent 10 months preparing for a lecture at a FCP users group? And a FCP users group was going to be their main/only avenue for presentation? I think not. This is just another spot they will advertise at during NAB. I'm sure Avid will be at Adobe and Adobe at Avid user groups. FCP just decided to present at NAB at the last second and this was their only in.
It's not like they threatened anyone. They likely went to the organizers and said "We'd like to make a really cool announcement at your event but we'd need most of your presentation and sponsorship space to do it." SuperMeet said sure, Apple paid, and here we are. It's not like the other sponsors didn't get their money back (I'm assuming.)
The other presenters just had to toss months of planning out the window and scramble to reschedule events w/less than a weeks notice during the industry's biggest annual convention. Hopefully the members of the audience that signed up to see the original line-up will be able to make it to all the reschedule events and, on top of that, everyone going to the SuperMeet has now paid money for tickets to what is nothing more than an Apple PR event.
Dick move by Apple but all will be forgiven as long as they release the holy grail of editing on Tuesday. If they preview 'iMovie Pro' lord help them...
He is asked if he will update his editing studio's workflow to the new Final Cut, and he basically danced around the question, pleaded the 5th, and made it pretty clear that he is holding back some reservations about how the industry will adapt to the changes.
To be fair to Mark (the head of Post at Bunim/Murray) there really isn't anything he could say due to the NDA. Just because what he saw of the new FCP might not lead him to believe it would work in Bunim/Murray's current workflow doesn't mean it might not be awesome for someone else's work flow. It was a tough spot for Mark to be in and I'm not exactly sure why he even kicked off the meeting with "I was there, but don't ask me about it because I'm under NDA". He could've never even have brought it up and it wouldn't have altered the course of the conversation at all.
Lethal
So Avid, Adobe and Canon spent 10 months preparing for a lecture at a FCP users group? And a FCP users group was going to be their main/only avenue for presentation? I think not. This is just another spot they will advertise at during NAB. I'm sure Avid will be at Adobe and Adobe at Avid user groups. FCP just decided to present at NAB at the last second and this was their only in.
err404
Apr 25, 04:07 PM
With that and other simple info I can find out where you work, where you bank, where you live, what time you usually get home...
Have you looked at the actual data? I doubt it could be used to determine any of those things.
First it logs tower locations, not your location. This means that the data points can be off by miles.
Next the towers are not logged every you are in range. In fact weeks or months can go by between data point refreshes. This makes the data useless for observing user movement trends.
Lastly the data contains a lot of anomalies that further cloud the results. I have data on my phone from nearby cities that I have never visited, and some even hundreds of miles away.
Have you looked at the actual data? I doubt it could be used to determine any of those things.
First it logs tower locations, not your location. This means that the data points can be off by miles.
Next the towers are not logged every you are in range. In fact weeks or months can go by between data point refreshes. This makes the data useless for observing user movement trends.
Lastly the data contains a lot of anomalies that further cloud the results. I have data on my phone from nearby cities that I have never visited, and some even hundreds of miles away.
ezekielrage_99
Aug 17, 02:01 AM
A lot of folks are waiting for game benchmarks...bring 'em on!
Yeah put up some World of Warcraft or Doom 3 results, that's what this is all about a Mac being the fastest gaming machine :cool:
Yeah put up some World of Warcraft or Doom 3 results, that's what this is all about a Mac being the fastest gaming machine :cool:
stukick
Apr 8, 06:19 AM
Apple at Best Buy sucks anyway. No one in the store knows anything about Apple products. I love eavesdropping on a customer and sales person while they try and answer or explain Apple products to a potential customer. Usually after the sales person walks away, I swoop in and answer any of the customer's questions...correctly. :)
marksman
Mar 22, 03:14 PM
The screen is not 50% smaller. Nice way of making yourself look stupid.
LOL
http://i54.tinypic.com/dma9nn.png
LOL
http://i54.tinypic.com/dma9nn.png
edeloso
Nov 29, 09:05 AM
It would be a nice idea, if people would just give me $1 for talking to them.
jp102235
Mar 22, 01:00 PM
It won�t sell because the iPad lines will block the view in store.
I am amazed that lines are STILL long for ipad 2 (as in this morning) -> was any other i-device this well received ?
I am amazed that lines are STILL long for ipad 2 (as in this morning) -> was any other i-device this well received ?
heisetax
Jul 14, 08:24 PM
Doh! Well, again IMHO, it is my preference to have only one optical drive built in. I could always add an external later.
Why do the rest of us have to settle for your preference?
I know people that have their systems running that could get by with a 5-10 GB hard drive. Does that mean that we should feel that all systems should only have a 5-10 GB hard drive, maybe a CD drive & since we all will have the same small needs a floppy drive. A DVD writer could make a complete backup in most ccases. Why would we need one of them. So why have more than one external 5 1/4" slot.
I may only run probrams that I can download on the internet, why then even one external drive slot?
Sounds a little far out. But what is really far out? Everybody has different needs & wants. Many Windows systems have the ability to have at least 4 internally mounted external 5 1/4" drives 2-4 or more 3.5" external drives, several internal 3.5" drives, 10-in-1 flash card reader/writers & many more things. My old Mac Clones had space for 4 5 1/4" external & 2 3 1/2" external drives, with either 2 or 4 internal 3.5" drives.
There are people that need to run many different drives at once. They don't all want to have more external drives with all of those many, many cords than they absolutely have to. Right now I have 3 external drives hooked to my 17" PowerBook. Then there is usually a flash drive or 2 hook up to this system.
Remember that everyone does their computing different. That means that only a certain group would be happy with what you think is all that needs to be in a system. Others will think that you have too much.
My wife & me each have MDD PowerMac G4's for our desktop units. They both have DVD burne & CD burner drives. I miss the other slots that I have on myy Clones. I may have up to 6 internal 3.5" drives mounted. Usually a couple of SCSI drives, a couple PATA drives, & a couple SATA drives.s I still have 3-6 drives attached externally plus a NAS drive. Most external drives are FW800, with a couple FW400 drives & a 3 CF drives tower by Lexar.
What is the correct amount of drives? To me it is whatever it takes to properly get your computer job down. So to you, it will always be, why more than 1 internal 5 1/4" drive.
Bill the TaxMan
Why do the rest of us have to settle for your preference?
I know people that have their systems running that could get by with a 5-10 GB hard drive. Does that mean that we should feel that all systems should only have a 5-10 GB hard drive, maybe a CD drive & since we all will have the same small needs a floppy drive. A DVD writer could make a complete backup in most ccases. Why would we need one of them. So why have more than one external 5 1/4" slot.
I may only run probrams that I can download on the internet, why then even one external drive slot?
Sounds a little far out. But what is really far out? Everybody has different needs & wants. Many Windows systems have the ability to have at least 4 internally mounted external 5 1/4" drives 2-4 or more 3.5" external drives, several internal 3.5" drives, 10-in-1 flash card reader/writers & many more things. My old Mac Clones had space for 4 5 1/4" external & 2 3 1/2" external drives, with either 2 or 4 internal 3.5" drives.
There are people that need to run many different drives at once. They don't all want to have more external drives with all of those many, many cords than they absolutely have to. Right now I have 3 external drives hooked to my 17" PowerBook. Then there is usually a flash drive or 2 hook up to this system.
Remember that everyone does their computing different. That means that only a certain group would be happy with what you think is all that needs to be in a system. Others will think that you have too much.
My wife & me each have MDD PowerMac G4's for our desktop units. They both have DVD burne & CD burner drives. I miss the other slots that I have on myy Clones. I may have up to 6 internal 3.5" drives mounted. Usually a couple of SCSI drives, a couple PATA drives, & a couple SATA drives.s I still have 3-6 drives attached externally plus a NAS drive. Most external drives are FW800, with a couple FW400 drives & a 3 CF drives tower by Lexar.
What is the correct amount of drives? To me it is whatever it takes to properly get your computer job down. So to you, it will always be, why more than 1 internal 5 1/4" drive.
Bill the TaxMan
Bill McEnaney
Apr 30, 08:24 PM
Doesn't mean its a good idea or helpful to the nation, but its not libel/slander if its true.
Fair enough, but I think many are willing to make hasty public comments about others. On Chopped, a program on the Food Network, a judge accused a competitor of lying when the competitor said that before the show, he had already used an ingredient that he used incorrectly on the program. Maybe the contestant's other dish came out poorly when he first used that ingredient. I've written some programs in IBM 370 assembly language. So I've that language. But I've forgotten what I learned about it.
On other message board some posters accused others of homophobia, sounding as though they couldn't have cared less about whether or how much they harmed the reputations of the accused. On other boards, some posters accused me of homophobia, too. Unfortunately, I doubt that the accuser even wonder whether it would have been better to send me a private message instead.
I know that some people here believe that I'm too socially conservative. Although they may be right, I prefer too much caution to too little caution.
To their credit, everyone here has treated me politely, even when I've said things that offended them. Compared to posters I've met at some other boards, people here, including Lee Kohler, control themselves admirably. But if I, and I do mean I, calumniate someone politely publicly, privately, or both, polite wording doesn't make up for the harm I do to the calumniated person's reputation.
But its clear what you are implying
I didn't intend to imply anything.
Fair enough, but I think many are willing to make hasty public comments about others. On Chopped, a program on the Food Network, a judge accused a competitor of lying when the competitor said that before the show, he had already used an ingredient that he used incorrectly on the program. Maybe the contestant's other dish came out poorly when he first used that ingredient. I've written some programs in IBM 370 assembly language. So I've that language. But I've forgotten what I learned about it.
On other message board some posters accused others of homophobia, sounding as though they couldn't have cared less about whether or how much they harmed the reputations of the accused. On other boards, some posters accused me of homophobia, too. Unfortunately, I doubt that the accuser even wonder whether it would have been better to send me a private message instead.
I know that some people here believe that I'm too socially conservative. Although they may be right, I prefer too much caution to too little caution.
To their credit, everyone here has treated me politely, even when I've said things that offended them. Compared to posters I've met at some other boards, people here, including Lee Kohler, control themselves admirably. But if I, and I do mean I, calumniate someone politely publicly, privately, or both, polite wording doesn't make up for the harm I do to the calumniated person's reputation.
But its clear what you are implying
I didn't intend to imply anything.
0 comments:
Post a Comment