rjohnstone
Apr 29, 03:46 PM
Can you name a few more? I have only seen Sony support AAC on their PMP devices.
Moto Android phones play AAC iTunes music just fine too.
One of the reasons why I picked the phone I have now.
I have a large iTunes library that I have no desire to repurchase or convert to another format.
DoubleTwist syncs them over without any issues.
My thoughts exactly. Reeks of collusion and I could see lawsuits flying over this.
I would like to know how you came to that conclusion?
Vendors offer different pricing to retailers all the time.
I would be more worried if they were all priced the same. (Price fixing is a big no no in the eyes of the DOJ)
Moto Android phones play AAC iTunes music just fine too.
One of the reasons why I picked the phone I have now.
I have a large iTunes library that I have no desire to repurchase or convert to another format.
DoubleTwist syncs them over without any issues.
My thoughts exactly. Reeks of collusion and I could see lawsuits flying over this.
I would like to know how you came to that conclusion?
Vendors offer different pricing to retailers all the time.
I would be more worried if they were all priced the same. (Price fixing is a big no no in the eyes of the DOJ)
.jpg "Wallpaper Backgrounds")
Young Spade
May 4, 02:59 AM
I'm not so sure the next iPhone will look like the current iphone 4. It probably will be, but i don't know.. They're delaying it and with the white one just released (which of course looks the same).. They've handed out prototype A5 iphones to developers just to make sure the new design won't be leaked. I think Apple could come out with a surprise regarding the design of the next iPhone.
It wouldn't make sense for the iPhone 5 to have the same design as the iPhone 4. Think about it. You have two great phones out now, the iPhone 4 and the new white iPhone 4. Apple's main goal is to make money. With that many phones sold, would it make more sense to sell another phone that looks exactly the same as the one many people have or give them something completely new to upgrade or buy off contract to?
It wouldn't make sense for the iPhone 5 to have the same design as the iPhone 4. Think about it. You have two great phones out now, the iPhone 4 and the new white iPhone 4. Apple's main goal is to make money. With that many phones sold, would it make more sense to sell another phone that looks exactly the same as the one many people have or give them something completely new to upgrade or buy off contract to?
DeaconGraves
Apr 29, 02:55 PM
can anyone tell me why this market is so important? even at .99 cents a song the margins for the retailer can't be that much.
It's the battle for your credit card.
Both Apple and Amazon want to be your one-stop shop for media. If you're purchasing your music from one of them, they hope that you'll also purchase your movies, tv shows, and e-books from them as well.
Amazon has an even greater incentive because of everything else they sell. They'll gladly take a profit hit on a song if it means that buyer will come back and buy a stereo (or an iMac!)
It's the battle for your credit card.
Both Apple and Amazon want to be your one-stop shop for media. If you're purchasing your music from one of them, they hope that you'll also purchase your movies, tv shows, and e-books from them as well.
Amazon has an even greater incentive because of everything else they sell. They'll gladly take a profit hit on a song if it means that buyer will come back and buy a stereo (or an iMac!)
.jpg "Wallpaper Backgrounds")
Funkymonk
Apr 18, 12:25 PM
Personally it's a lot easier to swallow $99 a year for a new Apple TV (set top box) than $999 a year for a new Apple branded television.
lol yet some morons out there would still buy every year
lol yet some morons out there would still buy every year
jholzner
Oct 18, 04:44 PM
"Q on Mac Pro demand. A: Very positive reaction to Mac Pro. Still feel there is a delay in purchasing related to Creative Suite (Universal)"
They said the same thing about pro desktop sales when we were waiting on a carbon version from Adobe. Then, it was released and Pro sales didn't increase. Too bad you can't put Xeon in a MBP :P
They said the same thing about pro desktop sales when we were waiting on a carbon version from Adobe. Then, it was released and Pro sales didn't increase. Too bad you can't put Xeon in a MBP :P
Legion93
May 1, 11:01 PM
As long as it has Zombies I'm game. Killing Nazi zombies was getting old anyways.
Taliban zombies...
Weapons:
AK-47
C4
RPG-7
Round 1, fight!
Taliban zombies...
Weapons:
AK-47
C4
RPG-7
Round 1, fight!
peapody
Jan 28, 03:33 PM
Are the Transcends pretty good cards? I need to get some high capacity SD cards for some read only storage, and I've never had any experience with SDHC cards.
Where'd you pick these up?
I got this one off of amazon.
Transcends in general are pretty good, but nots as good as lexar and sandisk I find. This class 10 card is not truly class 10 I hear...the speeds don't reach as high as the sandisk extremes. However, I picked up this card because I have a 16gb class 6 card that has served me well for about a year now, and is still kicking despite heavy use. The cost and my previous experiences with the brand made it a nice choice for me. For read only I think it is a great choice. For use with dslrs and high speed writing, I might look into the sandisk extreme class 10 instead.
Where'd you pick these up?
I got this one off of amazon.
Transcends in general are pretty good, but nots as good as lexar and sandisk I find. This class 10 card is not truly class 10 I hear...the speeds don't reach as high as the sandisk extremes. However, I picked up this card because I have a 16gb class 6 card that has served me well for about a year now, and is still kicking despite heavy use. The cost and my previous experiences with the brand made it a nice choice for me. For read only I think it is a great choice. For use with dslrs and high speed writing, I might look into the sandisk extreme class 10 instead.
LethalWolfe
Apr 29, 05:01 PM
I say that it's not wise to just lower prices if you're going to lose money on every sale.
Selling loss leaders is a very common retail tactic and is used by just about everyone (including Apple).
Lethal
Selling loss leaders is a very common retail tactic and is used by just about everyone (including Apple).
Lethal
iJohnHenry
Feb 1, 09:07 AM
I was just curious, because it seems as if it is a "different" person posting. Perhaps in a day or two we'll see you posting how your little sister or mom got hold of your MacRumors account and posted all kind of weird stuff.
Your Unfailing Love preview
I Am In Love wallpaper
.png "live laugh love wallpaper")
live laugh love wallpaper
Heart Love Wallpaper Computer
Emo Love Wallpaper
Animated Love Wallpapers for
love Wallpaper, Background
Free Classic Love Wallpapers
To Love Quote Wallpaper.
stock photo : Love Wallpaper
aibo82
Mar 29, 08:22 AM
There won't be iPhone 5!
It will be the launch of the White iPhone 4 to fall in line with the White iPad 2!
With an A5 chip and called the iPhone 4S! That's it ready for iOS 5 then we'll see the major spec bump next year! (iphone5)
iPad 2 got bad cams because of the thinness bull if they stick an 8mp cam in the new iPhone in a few months I'll be **** as they could of stuck the 5mp ones in iPad 2 and fattened it up 1mm!
;)
It will be the launch of the White iPhone 4 to fall in line with the White iPad 2!
With an A5 chip and called the iPhone 4S! That's it ready for iOS 5 then we'll see the major spec bump next year! (iphone5)
iPad 2 got bad cams because of the thinness bull if they stick an 8mp cam in the new iPhone in a few months I'll be **** as they could of stuck the 5mp ones in iPad 2 and fattened it up 1mm!
;)
bdkennedy1
Mar 31, 03:43 PM
I thought I created a word to describe how I feel about this new iCal, but it appears in the urban dictionary. BLORF!
Sean*
Sep 13, 01:21 PM
http://images.play.com/covers/13069732m.jpg
320GB external for Time Machine.
320GB external for Time Machine.
southernpaws
Apr 22, 02:58 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
This will likely offend the diehard apple fanboys and the people who want to steve jobs to have their kid. But it needs to be said because it will add to the discussion. Read on at your on discretion:
Apple inc. Idea of technology is simple if product A is X weight and Y thin. Any upgrade to product A that will and can result in the weight being greater then X then the upgrade is not a worthwhile addition to the phone.
I like apple but they are to damn cautious of a company. Google is know for its innovations, but more ever it does things that most people would not think of many of these Ideas fail others become standard. Apple needs to be more on the front lines and take risk. Nothing wrong with a few bad products.
Is it a bad thing that apple doesn't want to increase the size of the iPhone? There are people who want/accept huge phones but the fact remains that the motorola razr is historically one of the most successful phones and people criticized the iPhone on its realease for it's size.
The majority of the market wants smaller phones. Apple should go after that
Also. Re: innovation. Ever hear of. Um. The iPhone? Or the iPad?
Google isn't known for innovations they're known as a search company that's expanding their reach. Google has never "innovated" with a larger phone. They just make a very good OS...but your comparison is false
This will likely offend the diehard apple fanboys and the people who want to steve jobs to have their kid. But it needs to be said because it will add to the discussion. Read on at your on discretion:
Apple inc. Idea of technology is simple if product A is X weight and Y thin. Any upgrade to product A that will and can result in the weight being greater then X then the upgrade is not a worthwhile addition to the phone.
I like apple but they are to damn cautious of a company. Google is know for its innovations, but more ever it does things that most people would not think of many of these Ideas fail others become standard. Apple needs to be more on the front lines and take risk. Nothing wrong with a few bad products.
Is it a bad thing that apple doesn't want to increase the size of the iPhone? There are people who want/accept huge phones but the fact remains that the motorola razr is historically one of the most successful phones and people criticized the iPhone on its realease for it's size.
The majority of the market wants smaller phones. Apple should go after that
Also. Re: innovation. Ever hear of. Um. The iPhone? Or the iPad?
Google isn't known for innovations they're known as a search company that's expanding their reach. Google has never "innovated" with a larger phone. They just make a very good OS...but your comparison is false
081440
Aug 16, 05:55 PM
So far, Leopard is something I'm not willing to pay for.
I expected just a little bit of a UI change, it just looks like a little updated version of Tiger.
I really wonder what these top secret features are because the current features aren't impressing me enough to open my wallet.
Don't speak too soon. Just because you don't know what the new features are doesn't mean you won't like them!
I expected just a little bit of a UI change, it just looks like a little updated version of Tiger.
I really wonder what these top secret features are because the current features aren't impressing me enough to open my wallet.
Don't speak too soon. Just because you don't know what the new features are doesn't mean you won't like them!
needsomecoffee
Apr 11, 02:28 PM
Evidently not too many folks watched all the segments from yesterday's post about FCP in one of the NAB discussions. Towards the end of that discussion, the biz dev guy from 3ality described a demo at Intel he attended. Recalling (a little fuzzy on this) he said Intel had set up a processor in one location, and the processors memory in another location ONE MILE DISTANT connected by ThBolt. They then ran some cpu/memory intensive demo. He was blow away that it ran super fast. Try doing that with USB.
All I can say is, "Thank God." Near term I get rid of tons of cables -- I have seven attached to my MBP on my desktop right now (external monitor, FW800 for external drive, Ethernet, FW400 for scanner, USB for keyboard, USB for printer, and audio out to external speakers). Long-term it is possible Thunderbolt will enable changes we can't envision right now.
My only issue is the name "Thunderbolt" and the weird lightening bolt (that to date has always meant "touch this an you die from electrocution"). Light Peak was nearly perfect IMHO. Oh well, I'm guessing some committee group came up with this.
All I can say is, "Thank God." Near term I get rid of tons of cables -- I have seven attached to my MBP on my desktop right now (external monitor, FW800 for external drive, Ethernet, FW400 for scanner, USB for keyboard, USB for printer, and audio out to external speakers). Long-term it is possible Thunderbolt will enable changes we can't envision right now.
My only issue is the name "Thunderbolt" and the weird lightening bolt (that to date has always meant "touch this an you die from electrocution"). Light Peak was nearly perfect IMHO. Oh well, I'm guessing some committee group came up with this.
Luman
Apr 29, 02:52 PM
I haven't bought a single song from Amazon, not because I'm against them (I luv my Prime membership), but because they only sell MP3's that simply don't sound as good as an AAC file at an equivalent bit rate. Dropping the price to 69 cents doesn't improve the quality of the product and that's not good enough for me.
Viva la FLAC! Viva la Apple Lossless! Viva la.. um... AAC! :D
Viva la FLAC! Viva la Apple Lossless! Viva la.. um... AAC! :D
parapup
Apr 28, 12:54 PM
How about the expression, "A rising tide lifts all boats."
All boats except Symbian (it's too huge a s[t]inking ship to be lifted by any tide) and Windows Phone 7 ( they made a paper boat in the hope of getting lifted but sadly it looks like the tide is too big for it to ride)
All boats except Symbian (it's too huge a s[t]inking ship to be lifted by any tide) and Windows Phone 7 ( they made a paper boat in the hope of getting lifted but sadly it looks like the tide is too big for it to ride)
tjsdaname
Dec 4, 11:21 AM
You want a GUN for Christmas?
-J
yes
-J
yes
FX4568
Apr 17, 08:49 PM
Are you talking about this article (http://news.cnet.com/8301-13924_3-20031434-64.html?tag=posts;msg5118115) from back in February that has been discussed ad infinitum on here?
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1126201&highlight=
Are you referring to a newer cnet story? Do you have a link? Thanks, I am personally holding off and really hoping its true... we'll see!
Also clock rate is not the only factor for determining chip speed... in fact it is a very small factor. The new processor is not just .17 hz faster, its a whole new architecture. Its why the 2.0 Ghz i7 in the 2011 MBPs are faster than the a 3.2 Ghz Pentium 4 Prescott from 2004.
It was a video released on 4/8/2011.
I cant link it since CNET doesnt actually show URL for videos.
Go to Cnet, Videos, Apple Byte, and it will be the second video on the list.
Yea, I have been corrected in that, but the argument on GPU still stands.
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1126201&highlight=
Are you referring to a newer cnet story? Do you have a link? Thanks, I am personally holding off and really hoping its true... we'll see!
Also clock rate is not the only factor for determining chip speed... in fact it is a very small factor. The new processor is not just .17 hz faster, its a whole new architecture. Its why the 2.0 Ghz i7 in the 2011 MBPs are faster than the a 3.2 Ghz Pentium 4 Prescott from 2004.
It was a video released on 4/8/2011.
I cant link it since CNET doesnt actually show URL for videos.
Go to Cnet, Videos, Apple Byte, and it will be the second video on the list.
Yea, I have been corrected in that, but the argument on GPU still stands.
Aquaduck04
May 4, 08:58 AM
Wait, tell me what the source is again? A CSR via a forum member?? Gotta be joking..
MagnusVonMagnum
Nov 20, 10:40 AM
If you don't address those very good reasons, your argument won't be very convincing. We do not want the CPU suck, the identity leaking, the UI inconsistencies, and the very real risk of "zero day" Adobe bugs.
Whom am I trying to convince? Illogical and irrational people who worship Steve Jobs and hate what he hates? Such people will not care or listen to any form of reason. That's why the word fanatic is in fanboy. No, I talk about an option to turn Flash on or off at will and you find it offensive to even offer an option. That is irrational at best.
Everything you fear would be avoided if someone just turned Flash OFF (or it could default to off and have to be turned on). I've said since the first post the word OPTION. You don't seem to comprehend that word or understand why those of us that would want the choice of having Flash are not asking you to give up anything in the process. You could always turn it off if it were present. We cannot turn it on if it's not present.
In other words, you are not competent to carry on a rational discussion. You're just here to vent.
No, I just don't see any point in trying to carry on a logical, rational discussion with someone whose "argument" is based purely on emotion. If it weren't, you wouldn't object to an option for those of us that don't agree with Steve Jobs point of view because an option satisfies all your arguments against having Flash because you can always just leave it OFF. It cannot do harm if it's off no matter how paranoid you may become about having it on your device.
Many millions of people have Flash installed on their Macs (let alone those using Windows and Linux) and they could remove it. They know that if they do, some web sites will cease to function properly and thus they leave it on. The security concerns you mentioned will be addressed as all security bugs are in both OSX and Windows.
Users of those 120M+ devices don't have to hope. They are already free of Flash!
Free of Flash? You say that in a tone that sounds like they're free of slavery or something. No, what they're free of is the ability to access millions of web sites that require Flash to view them or much of their content and I do not see that as a good thing. But my point of view doesn't require you to see it. I said from the first post I wanted an option to use Flash. You could still choose to turn it off if it were there. I cannot turn on what is not present nor should I have to buy some absurd 3rd party converter that requires their web site to be running to use it.
The analogy makes no sense. Nobody is forcing you to use any Apple product.
And so that makes it OK for him to behave as he does? A lot of us like Apple products, but we would like them a lot better if Steve would just stick to making the products unfettered instead of trying to force his opinions and world view on people in the process. He doesn't like Flash so he decides for everyone they should not use Flash. What if Steve decided iOS shall no longer support MP3 files, only AAC? I suppose you would accept that as OK too? Update iOS and your MP3s no longer function. Yes, that would be just wonderful if they did that. After all, AAC is superior to MP3, so why should Apple support a legacy inferior heavily pirated format? By your logic, they should not.
If you really want the "full web experience" of zero-day Adobe bugs, get an Android phone. Note: Android phones were vulnerable to the last zero-day Adobe bug. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt)
I don't want a phone period guy. I only want and use an iPod Touch. Is there an Android iPod Touch? Android didn't exist when Apple made the claims of accessing the full Internet either and it doesn't make that any less a lie.
The fact that I can't catch zero-day Adobe attacks on my iPhone is a great reason to praise Apple's decision.
You act as if Apple has no vulnerabilities to attack. That is extremely naive to the point of emotionalism once again. In fact it's just the opposite. Apple's security is rated as bad compared to Windows and only the fact that there are so few Mac users compared to Windows has saved it thus far. As the popularity of iOS devices has exploded, it's inevitable that it will start attracting malware. It's only a matter of time. Will you wish you never bought an iPhone on that day or will you recognize that companies simply have to find and patch vulnerabilities. Apple has patched numerous security flaws in OSX over the years. Should we plug our ears and say there is no such thing?
Do tell: what exact sites are you talking about? What exact legacy flash applications are running on those sites to which you can find no substitute?
A quick search (you do know how to do that don't you?) reveals offhand a few example sites that don't use HTML5 video (which could and may in the future, but that doesn't help someone today):
Gametrailers
GiantBomb
Vimeo
Playstation Blog
Stiq of Joy
Engadget
Try some of these effects on this site this with HTML5:
http://superior-web-solutions.com/
Maybe read this article on Flash. Most HTML5 is just a video player. Flash isn't just a video player and it didn't even start as one.
http://www.andrewgreig.com/2010/06/html5-is-not-a-flash-replacement-and-shouldnt-be-seen-that-way/
Perhaps you want an open standard? So when does Apple stop requiring Quicktime on their web sites? :rolleyes:
Nobody is holding a gun to your head. Nobody is holding you hostage.
If you don't like the choices that Apple made, then ditch your iOS device and get an Android. Simple.
No, they're just boring me to death with emotional arguments why everyone should either worship Steve Jobs or leave the platform and get an Android instead similar to the "love OSX or leave it" arguments the fanboys regularly produce.
This is the first little lie in your rant. The iOS users don't find it inconvenient. If Flash were so damn important to them, they would have bought some device that could run Flash.
The fact that you think my statement is a "lie" based on a subjective opinion tells me you cannot even tell fact from fiction let alone lies from opinions. Trying to see someone else's point of view is completely foreign to you. You view the world through tinted lenses. What you say is akin to if you don't like something about OSX, go buy a Windows machine, as if there aren't any compromises along the way on that platform either (not to mention having to replace possibly thousands and thousands of dollars worth of software for a given platform to do so). Not liking something about a given platform and wanting to change it doesn't mean another platform is more viable in ALL areas or that a person may wish to spend a lot of money to make that change just because of that one issue. Perhaps you'd like to send me a free Android phone to replace my aging 1st Gen iPod Touch that I bought before Android even existed? I'd happily consider such an offer. Of course I'll need replacement apps as well.
The people who bought those 120M+ devices disagree with you.
You seem to forge that I and others that actually want Flash are part of those people dude. Get over yourself. Just because you don't like Flash doesn't mean the rest of us have hatred for it. Some of us simply don't like our iPhones, iPads and iPod Touches crippled for no reason. Besides, how you try to turn my initial argument that I'd prefer to see an option to use Flash for those of us that want it rather than no option into this flipping crusade against all things Apple and Flash alike is beyond me. You are making mountains out of mole hills and lies out of opinions. For what? I can't make you see things the way I see them. I never wanted to try. That's why I said OPTION. But you would deny everyone who wants that option to have it just like Steve Jobs. Steve does it because he's a control freak (he was once ousted from Apple for this very reason). I imagine you do it because you love Apple. Sadly, I actually prefer Steve's reason.
This is the second little lie. Apple did provide a choice: they approved the SkyFire App. They didn't have to do that.
Didn't they? It doesn't violate their rules for an app so how could they not approve it without being outright liars? Oh wait. They have done that before so I can see your point. ;)
Apple has also announced they will approve Flash Apps using Adobe's cross-compiler for iOS. If there actually are crucial Flash apps -- you haven't named a single specific one so far -- the owners of those apps should be able to easily cross-compile their apps for the iOS App Store.
Apple formerly announced they would NOT support it. Why did they change their minds? Could it have something to do with the Justice Department starting an investigation into anti-trust behaviors by Apple policies? Noooo....it couldn't be that. Apple is allowed to single out companies it doesn't like and compete with to just willy-nilly throw specifically into their license agreements.
And that is the third little lie. Flash is a proprietary and legacy platform. It's on the way down now.
I say if you don't have Flash you don't have the full Internet and you call that a "lie" based on the above quote? What freaking UNIVERSE do you live in??????? ROTFLMAO. You cannot tell a statement of fact from an idea in your head that somehow says that the "full internet" doesn't include sites that use "propriety" formats. Come on man. That position not only ignore reality it even invalidiates Apple's own web site as being part of the "full Internet" !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You need to try harder. Calling someone a liar when they are obviously stating facts and/or opinions just makes you look immature.
because accusing someone of lying when it's obvious
Even Adobe has acknowledged that a Flash-only choice is a bankrupt strategy (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999). After websites start offering their content with an open standard, you've gotta ask: what exactly is the value in continuing to prop up Flash?
First of all, you are the one that is calling it a "bankrupt strategy". I see nothing in that thread by Adobe that even addresses the matter. Adobe is simply trying to sell products and if they can easily sell more products to Apple users by providing an easy way to convert their hard work Flash sites into HTML5, they are going to do so and laugh all the way to the bank. That in NO WAY invalidates the fact that there are still plenty of Flash only sites out there and plenty of flash uses (e.g. Flash games) that HTML5 is no simple substitute for regardless. Until the Internet is Flash free, there is going to be a need and a will by people to have the option to view Flash.
The mere fact that this Skyfire app has raked in over $1 MILLION in sales already shows just how big that will is. Yet you reject the desire to be able to use Flash web sites as meaningless and unnecessary while the thread title alone proves you wrong.
Whom am I trying to convince? Illogical and irrational people who worship Steve Jobs and hate what he hates? Such people will not care or listen to any form of reason. That's why the word fanatic is in fanboy. No, I talk about an option to turn Flash on or off at will and you find it offensive to even offer an option. That is irrational at best.
Everything you fear would be avoided if someone just turned Flash OFF (or it could default to off and have to be turned on). I've said since the first post the word OPTION. You don't seem to comprehend that word or understand why those of us that would want the choice of having Flash are not asking you to give up anything in the process. You could always turn it off if it were present. We cannot turn it on if it's not present.
In other words, you are not competent to carry on a rational discussion. You're just here to vent.
No, I just don't see any point in trying to carry on a logical, rational discussion with someone whose "argument" is based purely on emotion. If it weren't, you wouldn't object to an option for those of us that don't agree with Steve Jobs point of view because an option satisfies all your arguments against having Flash because you can always just leave it OFF. It cannot do harm if it's off no matter how paranoid you may become about having it on your device.
Many millions of people have Flash installed on their Macs (let alone those using Windows and Linux) and they could remove it. They know that if they do, some web sites will cease to function properly and thus they leave it on. The security concerns you mentioned will be addressed as all security bugs are in both OSX and Windows.
Users of those 120M+ devices don't have to hope. They are already free of Flash!
Free of Flash? You say that in a tone that sounds like they're free of slavery or something. No, what they're free of is the ability to access millions of web sites that require Flash to view them or much of their content and I do not see that as a good thing. But my point of view doesn't require you to see it. I said from the first post I wanted an option to use Flash. You could still choose to turn it off if it were there. I cannot turn on what is not present nor should I have to buy some absurd 3rd party converter that requires their web site to be running to use it.
The analogy makes no sense. Nobody is forcing you to use any Apple product.
And so that makes it OK for him to behave as he does? A lot of us like Apple products, but we would like them a lot better if Steve would just stick to making the products unfettered instead of trying to force his opinions and world view on people in the process. He doesn't like Flash so he decides for everyone they should not use Flash. What if Steve decided iOS shall no longer support MP3 files, only AAC? I suppose you would accept that as OK too? Update iOS and your MP3s no longer function. Yes, that would be just wonderful if they did that. After all, AAC is superior to MP3, so why should Apple support a legacy inferior heavily pirated format? By your logic, they should not.
If you really want the "full web experience" of zero-day Adobe bugs, get an Android phone. Note: Android phones were vulnerable to the last zero-day Adobe bug. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt)
I don't want a phone period guy. I only want and use an iPod Touch. Is there an Android iPod Touch? Android didn't exist when Apple made the claims of accessing the full Internet either and it doesn't make that any less a lie.
The fact that I can't catch zero-day Adobe attacks on my iPhone is a great reason to praise Apple's decision.
You act as if Apple has no vulnerabilities to attack. That is extremely naive to the point of emotionalism once again. In fact it's just the opposite. Apple's security is rated as bad compared to Windows and only the fact that there are so few Mac users compared to Windows has saved it thus far. As the popularity of iOS devices has exploded, it's inevitable that it will start attracting malware. It's only a matter of time. Will you wish you never bought an iPhone on that day or will you recognize that companies simply have to find and patch vulnerabilities. Apple has patched numerous security flaws in OSX over the years. Should we plug our ears and say there is no such thing?
Do tell: what exact sites are you talking about? What exact legacy flash applications are running on those sites to which you can find no substitute?
A quick search (you do know how to do that don't you?) reveals offhand a few example sites that don't use HTML5 video (which could and may in the future, but that doesn't help someone today):
Gametrailers
GiantBomb
Vimeo
Playstation Blog
Stiq of Joy
Engadget
Try some of these effects on this site this with HTML5:
http://superior-web-solutions.com/
Maybe read this article on Flash. Most HTML5 is just a video player. Flash isn't just a video player and it didn't even start as one.
http://www.andrewgreig.com/2010/06/html5-is-not-a-flash-replacement-and-shouldnt-be-seen-that-way/
Perhaps you want an open standard? So when does Apple stop requiring Quicktime on their web sites? :rolleyes:
Nobody is holding a gun to your head. Nobody is holding you hostage.
If you don't like the choices that Apple made, then ditch your iOS device and get an Android. Simple.
No, they're just boring me to death with emotional arguments why everyone should either worship Steve Jobs or leave the platform and get an Android instead similar to the "love OSX or leave it" arguments the fanboys regularly produce.
This is the first little lie in your rant. The iOS users don't find it inconvenient. If Flash were so damn important to them, they would have bought some device that could run Flash.
The fact that you think my statement is a "lie" based on a subjective opinion tells me you cannot even tell fact from fiction let alone lies from opinions. Trying to see someone else's point of view is completely foreign to you. You view the world through tinted lenses. What you say is akin to if you don't like something about OSX, go buy a Windows machine, as if there aren't any compromises along the way on that platform either (not to mention having to replace possibly thousands and thousands of dollars worth of software for a given platform to do so). Not liking something about a given platform and wanting to change it doesn't mean another platform is more viable in ALL areas or that a person may wish to spend a lot of money to make that change just because of that one issue. Perhaps you'd like to send me a free Android phone to replace my aging 1st Gen iPod Touch that I bought before Android even existed? I'd happily consider such an offer. Of course I'll need replacement apps as well.
The people who bought those 120M+ devices disagree with you.
You seem to forge that I and others that actually want Flash are part of those people dude. Get over yourself. Just because you don't like Flash doesn't mean the rest of us have hatred for it. Some of us simply don't like our iPhones, iPads and iPod Touches crippled for no reason. Besides, how you try to turn my initial argument that I'd prefer to see an option to use Flash for those of us that want it rather than no option into this flipping crusade against all things Apple and Flash alike is beyond me. You are making mountains out of mole hills and lies out of opinions. For what? I can't make you see things the way I see them. I never wanted to try. That's why I said OPTION. But you would deny everyone who wants that option to have it just like Steve Jobs. Steve does it because he's a control freak (he was once ousted from Apple for this very reason). I imagine you do it because you love Apple. Sadly, I actually prefer Steve's reason.
This is the second little lie. Apple did provide a choice: they approved the SkyFire App. They didn't have to do that.
Didn't they? It doesn't violate their rules for an app so how could they not approve it without being outright liars? Oh wait. They have done that before so I can see your point. ;)
Apple has also announced they will approve Flash Apps using Adobe's cross-compiler for iOS. If there actually are crucial Flash apps -- you haven't named a single specific one so far -- the owners of those apps should be able to easily cross-compile their apps for the iOS App Store.
Apple formerly announced they would NOT support it. Why did they change their minds? Could it have something to do with the Justice Department starting an investigation into anti-trust behaviors by Apple policies? Noooo....it couldn't be that. Apple is allowed to single out companies it doesn't like and compete with to just willy-nilly throw specifically into their license agreements.
And that is the third little lie. Flash is a proprietary and legacy platform. It's on the way down now.
I say if you don't have Flash you don't have the full Internet and you call that a "lie" based on the above quote? What freaking UNIVERSE do you live in??????? ROTFLMAO. You cannot tell a statement of fact from an idea in your head that somehow says that the "full internet" doesn't include sites that use "propriety" formats. Come on man. That position not only ignore reality it even invalidiates Apple's own web site as being part of the "full Internet" !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You need to try harder. Calling someone a liar when they are obviously stating facts and/or opinions just makes you look immature.
because accusing someone of lying when it's obvious
Even Adobe has acknowledged that a Flash-only choice is a bankrupt strategy (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999). After websites start offering their content with an open standard, you've gotta ask: what exactly is the value in continuing to prop up Flash?
First of all, you are the one that is calling it a "bankrupt strategy". I see nothing in that thread by Adobe that even addresses the matter. Adobe is simply trying to sell products and if they can easily sell more products to Apple users by providing an easy way to convert their hard work Flash sites into HTML5, they are going to do so and laugh all the way to the bank. That in NO WAY invalidates the fact that there are still plenty of Flash only sites out there and plenty of flash uses (e.g. Flash games) that HTML5 is no simple substitute for regardless. Until the Internet is Flash free, there is going to be a need and a will by people to have the option to view Flash.
The mere fact that this Skyfire app has raked in over $1 MILLION in sales already shows just how big that will is. Yet you reject the desire to be able to use Flash web sites as meaningless and unnecessary while the thread title alone proves you wrong.
nagromme
Aug 15, 10:09 AM
"Warning for losing Form data"
They've got my money :D (And Firefox-style Find!)
And I really have to believe that the old metal look will be gone in the end, replaced by the new iTunes look.
Current theme count for the record:
* White aqua (with three different toolbar styles: old, unified/no-line, and little-icons-on-gray-pills like Mail)
* Textured metal
* Smooth metal (iTunes)
* Dashboard (non-aqua sliders)
* Black bezel (like the floating controls in iPhoto)
* Pro aqua (gray with thinner title bars--Final Cut etc.)
* EDIT: new "quick look (http://guides.macrumors.com/Image:leopardquicklook.png)" theme?
All of those are used by multiple apps. There are also special variations like GarageBand, but those are fun and not objectionable to me.
EDIT: Actually, none of the above are objectionable to me--they have their uses--just so we get down to ONE metal look instead of two :) And my vote for best toolbar is the big icons (not gray pills), but in the unified/no-line format. Just like Tiger's System Preferences. (Not like Mail, not like Safari Preferences.) But it looks like the gray pill thing is spreading in Leopard. I can deal... just make it more consistent.
Don't get me started on all the different kinds of non-icon toolbar buttons that appear in metal apps :) Some look like glass, some like metal, etc.....
They've got my money :D (And Firefox-style Find!)
And I really have to believe that the old metal look will be gone in the end, replaced by the new iTunes look.
Current theme count for the record:
* White aqua (with three different toolbar styles: old, unified/no-line, and little-icons-on-gray-pills like Mail)
* Textured metal
* Smooth metal (iTunes)
* Dashboard (non-aqua sliders)
* Black bezel (like the floating controls in iPhoto)
* Pro aqua (gray with thinner title bars--Final Cut etc.)
* EDIT: new "quick look (http://guides.macrumors.com/Image:leopardquicklook.png)" theme?
All of those are used by multiple apps. There are also special variations like GarageBand, but those are fun and not objectionable to me.
EDIT: Actually, none of the above are objectionable to me--they have their uses--just so we get down to ONE metal look instead of two :) And my vote for best toolbar is the big icons (not gray pills), but in the unified/no-line format. Just like Tiger's System Preferences. (Not like Mail, not like Safari Preferences.) But it looks like the gray pill thing is spreading in Leopard. I can deal... just make it more consistent.
Don't get me started on all the different kinds of non-icon toolbar buttons that appear in metal apps :) Some look like glass, some like metal, etc.....
louis Fashion
Apr 13, 08:14 PM
one call makes you taller
one call makes you small
But the phone that mother gives you
won't do anything at all
just go ask ATT when it drops your calllll
one call makes you small
But the phone that mother gives you
won't do anything at all
just go ask ATT when it drops your calllll
mwheeler609
Apr 14, 08:31 PM
:DOnly way i'm getting this phone is if I walk in apple and can swap my black one either easily or by bull****ing a defect and asking for white. otherwise iPhone 5 is worth the wait even if its not soon, I mean phones are usually in our pockets anyway....when they are not, i usually look at my screen...:D
No comments:
Post a Comment