Enigmac
Aug 7, 03:31 PM
Not a glimpse of the Finder...! :eek:
*cough* TOP SECRET *cough* :rolleyes:
*cough* TOP SECRET *cough* :rolleyes:
Eraserhead
Mar 24, 02:28 AM
I supported Bush's invasion of Afghanistan.
Same here.
I think all we really needed to do in Afghanistan was to spend some real money on infrastructure.
Of course that would mean playing nice with Afghanistan's neighbours.
Same here.
I think all we really needed to do in Afghanistan was to spend some real money on infrastructure.
Of course that would mean playing nice with Afghanistan's neighbours.
aricher
Sep 13, 12:44 PM
I think we can all read at normal size. Besides, how do you know the IT dude typed that vs. the poster just typing what he said?
I did a direct copy-paste from my IT guy's email. What a knucklehead - him not you.
I did a direct copy-paste from my IT guy's email. What a knucklehead - him not you.
NJRonbo
Jun 14, 05:46 PM
I would urge everyone to call their Radio Shack store
immediately and report back on this....
Just called 3 stores in my area and got the following
information....
Radio Shack will be giving PIN numbers to everyone
starting at 1pm EST tomorrow.
The PIN does not guarantee you will get an iPhone.
You walk in the store, Radio Shack goes into the
system and checks your eligibility then issues you
a PIN.
There are only a limited amount of PINs available.
These are NOT pre-orders per Apple's request.
And again, the PIN does not guarantee you will
get a phone.
immediately and report back on this....
Just called 3 stores in my area and got the following
information....
Radio Shack will be giving PIN numbers to everyone
starting at 1pm EST tomorrow.
The PIN does not guarantee you will get an iPhone.
You walk in the store, Radio Shack goes into the
system and checks your eligibility then issues you
a PIN.
There are only a limited amount of PINs available.
These are NOT pre-orders per Apple's request.
And again, the PIN does not guarantee you will
get a phone.
Vulpinemac
Apr 6, 02:51 PM
I've been going to my local Costco for the last month and they have a display kiosk on the floor with cards for sales and pick-up of the Xoom. During that time, the number of cards on the display have not dropped significantly and the majority of customers simply walk past it without looking. In fact, during my visits I've only seen one person (other than myself) take a serious look at the display's information. He walked away without taking a card.
This is why I'm far more interested in real sales numbers and not just units shipped into the market. The display holds some 100 cards and I'm willing to bet they haven't sold ten in a month.
This is why I'm far more interested in real sales numbers and not just units shipped into the market. The display holds some 100 cards and I'm willing to bet they haven't sold ten in a month.
maelstromr
Apr 25, 02:31 PM
Look out Apple...the chattel are beginning to rise. I hope these power-hungry thugs (Apple) get taken to the cleaners. Sad that Apple now views our location as a resource to be exploited.
While I can't say that I like the idea of private information being recorded without clear consumer knowledge or warning, I have to wonder what exactly is getting 'exploited' here? In two years when you throw your phone out Apple secretly searches your trash, takes it and markets to you based on where you went two years ago? Give me a break. :rolleyes:
While I can't say that I like the idea of private information being recorded without clear consumer knowledge or warning, I have to wonder what exactly is getting 'exploited' here? In two years when you throw your phone out Apple secretly searches your trash, takes it and markets to you based on where you went two years ago? Give me a break. :rolleyes:
sjo
Aug 11, 03:34 PM
Well only about 1.25bil out of the +6 actually have cell service and I'd suspect only about 300mil in Eurpoe use cell phones (according to internetworldstats.com estimates 291mil in Europe use the internet... I'd assume cell usage is similiar).
And factor in that the US, Canada and many of the other countries with CDMA service are amongst the most wealthy in the world. Those +150mil customers are nothing to sneeze at.
Well now you ignorant yankie ;) Firstly the mobile phone penetration in Europe is about 99% or maybe slighly more. You should really travel a bit to get some perspective.
And secondly, GSM has user base of over 1 billion while CDMA as you said has some 60m users. Which one you think would be more interesting market to cover for a new mobile phone manufacturer? And there is really no question of "we'll see which one wins" because GSM won a long long time ago, hands down.
And factor in that the US, Canada and many of the other countries with CDMA service are amongst the most wealthy in the world. Those +150mil customers are nothing to sneeze at.
Well now you ignorant yankie ;) Firstly the mobile phone penetration in Europe is about 99% or maybe slighly more. You should really travel a bit to get some perspective.
And secondly, GSM has user base of over 1 billion while CDMA as you said has some 60m users. Which one you think would be more interesting market to cover for a new mobile phone manufacturer? And there is really no question of "we'll see which one wins" because GSM won a long long time ago, hands down.
Object-X
Aug 26, 05:44 PM
Anyone know of benchmarks comparing the core duo with the core 2 duo?
Huntn
Apr 28, 10:11 AM
What is absolutely hilarious, last night there were sound bites of Republican's asking "Why did Obama bring this birth certificate thing up, we have work to do!!"
KingYaba
Aug 17, 09:02 AM
Well the Quad is still the fastest when it comes to CS2. But man, once those are intel native that thing is going to fly at lightspeed.
thatisme
Apr 27, 08:43 AM
No it's not.
And I think MOST people aren't blowing anything out of proportion. Being concerned about tracking information/privacy issues is important. Most people (stop generalizing just because some on this board are) are NOT over-reacting but were calling for deeper investigation into the issue.
Pot, meet kettle.
And I think MOST people aren't blowing anything out of proportion. Being concerned about tracking information/privacy issues is important. Most people (stop generalizing just because some on this board are) are NOT over-reacting but were calling for deeper investigation into the issue.
Pot, meet kettle.
Some_Big_Spoon
Mar 26, 02:40 PM
Initial release is buggy, and I've turned off most of the new features that have been hyped. My hope is, as always, speed improvements across the board, as the desktop/windows/pointer metaphor (in my opinion) has run its course.
obeygiant
Apr 27, 09:30 AM
Why should he? He released the short form BC, which is valid and legal proof of citizenship.
Hawaii law states that no one can request an original long form BC, not even the person who's name is on the BC, so Obama had to call in a few favors to get this. I'm surprised the right wing loons aren't accusing him of overstepping his bounds and destroying states' rights to get it.
Well I think he always could get the long form certificate you just have to file a freedom of information request and they have to go into a vault to get it. It takes weeks and about 10 man hours and costs money. The short form certificate which incidentally is more official takes about 10 minutes of standing in line.
Hawaii law states that no one can request an original long form BC, not even the person who's name is on the BC, so Obama had to call in a few favors to get this. I'm surprised the right wing loons aren't accusing him of overstepping his bounds and destroying states' rights to get it.
Well I think he always could get the long form certificate you just have to file a freedom of information request and they have to go into a vault to get it. It takes weeks and about 10 man hours and costs money. The short form certificate which incidentally is more official takes about 10 minutes of standing in line.
LagunaSol
Apr 6, 05:07 PM
It never ceases to amaze me at how many Android users have to flock to a site called "MacRumors" because they feel then need to lead us poor blinded Apple "fanboys" to the bright shining city on a hill that is Android paradise.
Android has taken fanboyism to epic new proportions. You can't go anywhere on the Web these days without the Android Brigade screaming at you about how awesome, "free" and "open" it is and how you should get on board. Just post the comment "ANDROID FTW!!!" on Engadget and watch the upvotes ensue. And while they're celebrating their epic market share gains, they are referring to iOS users as "sheep." Riiiight.
I thought the Apple vs Microsoft holy war was bad (and we have at least one pro MS astroturfer on this Apple-oriented site), but Google seriously has a mindlock on some of these people. (I'm not referring to all Android users, mind you, only the ranting/raving types (which seem to be the majority these days).
Android has taken fanboyism to epic new proportions. You can't go anywhere on the Web these days without the Android Brigade screaming at you about how awesome, "free" and "open" it is and how you should get on board. Just post the comment "ANDROID FTW!!!" on Engadget and watch the upvotes ensue. And while they're celebrating their epic market share gains, they are referring to iOS users as "sheep." Riiiight.
I thought the Apple vs Microsoft holy war was bad (and we have at least one pro MS astroturfer on this Apple-oriented site), but Google seriously has a mindlock on some of these people. (I'm not referring to all Android users, mind you, only the ranting/raving types (which seem to be the majority these days).
Tones2
Apr 19, 01:37 PM
You failed to read the blog. Wanna try again?
What, that ONE GUY thinks Apple has a solid case? Yeah, I got that part. :rolleyes:
The point being that almost EVERY smart phone even before the iPhone has a black, rectangular shape with square application icons on the Home Screen and a button or three at the bottom. Some closer than others to the iPhone and to EACH OTHER. Jeez...
What, that ONE GUY thinks Apple has a solid case? Yeah, I got that part. :rolleyes:
The point being that almost EVERY smart phone even before the iPhone has a black, rectangular shape with square application icons on the Home Screen and a button or three at the bottom. Some closer than others to the iPhone and to EACH OTHER. Jeez...
skunk
Apr 28, 01:16 PM
I ask you whether Rockwell Blake would be a competent President of the United States. You reply, "I have no idea. Who's Rockwell Blake?" You don't believe that he would be a competent President of the United States. You don't doubt that he would do that. You haven't formed any opinion about whether he would be a competent one.However, in your case, as opposed to your fictional version, you have formed an opinion.
*LTD*
Apr 10, 09:50 PM
Oh, we are totally getting an iPad app to go along with this program. I can feel it.
Impossible.
The iPad is not a serious computer. This will never happen.
It's just a fad.
Ignore the big-name game titles for iOS. Ignore the upcoming Photoshop app. Ignore the millions of sales. Ignore the copycats in the market.
It'll all go away very soon.
Impossible.
The iPad is not a serious computer. This will never happen.
It's just a fad.
Ignore the big-name game titles for iOS. Ignore the upcoming Photoshop app. Ignore the millions of sales. Ignore the copycats in the market.
It'll all go away very soon.
zacman
Apr 19, 02:22 PM
So the interesting fact is:
Verizon iPhone release didn't help Apple to stop losing marketshare although everyone said the deal will quadruple iPhone sales. :rolleyes:
iPhone Q1/11: 19 million (+ 2.5 million)
Android Q1/11: 38 million (+8 million)
Ouch. No wonder they are now sueing HTC and Samsung. If you can't beat them in the market, beat them in court. Apple must have learned that from Nokia (like they learned the choppy animations when you start third party apps in iOS 4.3.2 from Symbian).
Verizon iPhone release didn't help Apple to stop losing marketshare although everyone said the deal will quadruple iPhone sales. :rolleyes:
iPhone Q1/11: 19 million (+ 2.5 million)
Android Q1/11: 38 million (+8 million)
Ouch. No wonder they are now sueing HTC and Samsung. If you can't beat them in the market, beat them in court. Apple must have learned that from Nokia (like they learned the choppy animations when you start third party apps in iOS 4.3.2 from Symbian).
maclaptop
Apr 11, 05:42 PM
Do you really think they care? Even if they make a phone that doesn't make calls people will think it's the greatest innovation in the history of mankind.
This is so true it's sickening.
The number one function I'd like to see in the upcoming model is a phone that works as well as every other smartphone I own. Then I'd be able to rely on it, and promote it to my primary phone. Id like nothing better.
This is so true it's sickening.
The number one function I'd like to see in the upcoming model is a phone that works as well as every other smartphone I own. Then I'd be able to rely on it, and promote it to my primary phone. Id like nothing better.
Hastings101
Apr 25, 01:54 PM
I don't care if Google does it, that doesn't give Apple free reign to do it as well. Both Google and Apple need to be looked at a bit more closely.
Also, it's free publicity for Apple, especially if this becomes a big case :p
Also, it's free publicity for Apple, especially if this becomes a big case :p
macpross
Aug 6, 11:28 PM
Great joke, thanks very much...in the same line as Tiger Computer Dealers, right?
We already have a Mac Pro line of products, we are also the owners of AppleLocks, and MacMice. The Tiger thing was silly.
We already have a Mac Pro line of products, we are also the owners of AppleLocks, and MacMice. The Tiger thing was silly.
phatpat88
Jul 15, 12:46 AM
What about 4 SATA II Drives? This way I can have a mirrored 1TB RAID [clicks heals]
The speed of a RAID with the security of mirroring.. it doesn't get mucho better :)
The speed of a RAID with the security of mirroring.. it doesn't get mucho better :)
JoeG4
Apr 25, 03:08 PM
http://www.bgr.com/2011/04/22/google-our-smartphone-location-tracking-is-opt-in/
Just like iOS, the data is opt-in on Android Phones - better yet, Google tells you what they're going to do with it if you opt-in, unlike Apple.
Also: iTunes communicates with iPods and iPhones over an encrypted tunnel, both iOS and iTunes are fairly closed source to the point that they MIGHT be using this information and not telling you.
Either way, the fact that Apple never asks is disturbing, and BOTH practices should be illegal. To what benefit is this information to them? Opt-in for traffic status on navigation would be fair IF the navigation program (which is free with Android phones) was in use - that I could understand.
The amount of sensationalism and Apple apologism here as usual, is kinda sad. Lemme get this straight, you're ashamed of people standing up for their right to privacy? Personally I think MS and Google should also be banned from collecting this type of data unless they tell the user what they're doing with it in large print (and 1 sentence) and allow you to opt out.
Just like iOS, the data is opt-in on Android Phones - better yet, Google tells you what they're going to do with it if you opt-in, unlike Apple.
Also: iTunes communicates with iPods and iPhones over an encrypted tunnel, both iOS and iTunes are fairly closed source to the point that they MIGHT be using this information and not telling you.
Either way, the fact that Apple never asks is disturbing, and BOTH practices should be illegal. To what benefit is this information to them? Opt-in for traffic status on navigation would be fair IF the navigation program (which is free with Android phones) was in use - that I could understand.
The amount of sensationalism and Apple apologism here as usual, is kinda sad. Lemme get this straight, you're ashamed of people standing up for their right to privacy? Personally I think MS and Google should also be banned from collecting this type of data unless they tell the user what they're doing with it in large print (and 1 sentence) and allow you to opt out.
jmbear
Nov 29, 12:39 PM
See, that's the catch-22 for new artists. The labels are the ones that get tunes played on the radio. In the 50's and 60's they would strong-arm their stuff in, but I'm sure even nowadays they provide incentives (read: bribes) to get new stuff on the air. Especially if they think the band is really good and will make it in the long run. And don't fool yourself into thinking a new band can get huge without radio.
The internet can become the new radio. I am quite fond of looking for pre-made playlists, I will get the songs on LimeWire, listen to them, the ones I like, I buy legally, the ones I don�t I delete them. You don�t get commercials, just music. I am not saying that radio is going to dissapear completely. TV didn�t kill it. But its importance will diminish.
The problem is that the labels get the artists by the balls when they sign them up to ridiculous contracts. Your 1-4 examples look pretty good on paper, but in order to sell any significant number of copies of their music, anyone wanting it (but doesn't know it yet) has to wade through tons of (what that persons sees as) crap just to get any exposure to something they'll consider good. I'm sure there's a lot of music in the indie catalog that I would just love, but I don't have the time to wade through it all to find it. Instead, I'll listen to the radio and when I hear something I like, I'll try to pay attention to who it is. I may or may not end up buying it, or checking out what else they do, but without radio exposure, most good indie bands don't have a chance in hell of selling to anyone except those that happen to be in the bar where they're playing one weekend..
iTMS could potentially change this. There are some people that will do all the research for you (as in what is good music), then ratings will allow you to get the good songs! It�s similar (and somebody will flame me for saying this) to researching a product on Amazon or CNET, you usually look for a LCD screen, all the results pop, and you will go for the ones with the highest ratings, read the comments and eventually make up your mind. Some day you will look up for electronic music (which I love), all the DJ�s will pop, you will pick the highest rated songs or playlists (because most people like a song because other people like it), listen to their songs for free (yeah, just like radio), and then buy them if you want.
Now, if you take a look at already established and popular bands, that's a different story. Someone mentioned huge bands like Pink Floyd. Their last couple of CDs didn't need a big label to sell. People were going to buy it if they like Floyd no matter what. And in a case of that kind of popularity, the radio stations were going to play them with or without a major label. The same could be applied to other huge (classic) rock bands, as well as established artists in other music styles (country, rap, R&B, blues, etc...). Another example would be someone like Eric Clapton. He could put one out on "Clapton Records" and would sell nearly, if not exactly, the same number of CDs as he will on a major label..
I agree record labels + good music = superstars like Calpton, Floyd, U2 etc... But these bands became popular in a different time (before the internet). Internet is changing the record labels� business model, and that is what they afraid of. The new wait of creating bands and distributing their music is not as profitable for them as it used to.
Unfortunately, the number of artists (of any type of music) that could dismiss the labels and still sell as many CDs and get the same radio exposure are limited. And any new band is going to go nowhere without radio (or MTV/VH1) exposure.
Internet is offering them exposure. Right now MTV and VH1 are still popular. But YouTube, Yahoo!, MSN could become the new MTV and VH1.
Not really relevant, but interesting to think about is that most of you have probably seen the video of the ruma ruma guy (I can�t link it because I am at work and the proxie does not allow me to visit YouTube). But how many have actually seen the video for the song? YouTube made that fat kid a star, and most people probably know his face better than the guys that sing the song. Exposure.
In the end, I don't see the labels going away totally any time soon. They're in cahoots with the big FM music stations and in general, they do a good job of promoting new good bands that sign up. It's just a shame that there's really nothing to keep them from raping the artists. If there were just some way for new bands to get exposure to the masses without having to sell their souls to the labels then things would be better. Unfortunately, the Internet can only go so far in helping a new band with this.
I agree, they won�t go away anytime soon, but change is coming, and change will be good for artists and consumers, not for the record labels.
Sorry for my weird grammar or mispells, I am not a native english speaker, I don�t have a spell checker on this computer (in english at least) and I am too lazy to proof read what I wrote lol :)
The internet can become the new radio. I am quite fond of looking for pre-made playlists, I will get the songs on LimeWire, listen to them, the ones I like, I buy legally, the ones I don�t I delete them. You don�t get commercials, just music. I am not saying that radio is going to dissapear completely. TV didn�t kill it. But its importance will diminish.
The problem is that the labels get the artists by the balls when they sign them up to ridiculous contracts. Your 1-4 examples look pretty good on paper, but in order to sell any significant number of copies of their music, anyone wanting it (but doesn't know it yet) has to wade through tons of (what that persons sees as) crap just to get any exposure to something they'll consider good. I'm sure there's a lot of music in the indie catalog that I would just love, but I don't have the time to wade through it all to find it. Instead, I'll listen to the radio and when I hear something I like, I'll try to pay attention to who it is. I may or may not end up buying it, or checking out what else they do, but without radio exposure, most good indie bands don't have a chance in hell of selling to anyone except those that happen to be in the bar where they're playing one weekend..
iTMS could potentially change this. There are some people that will do all the research for you (as in what is good music), then ratings will allow you to get the good songs! It�s similar (and somebody will flame me for saying this) to researching a product on Amazon or CNET, you usually look for a LCD screen, all the results pop, and you will go for the ones with the highest ratings, read the comments and eventually make up your mind. Some day you will look up for electronic music (which I love), all the DJ�s will pop, you will pick the highest rated songs or playlists (because most people like a song because other people like it), listen to their songs for free (yeah, just like radio), and then buy them if you want.
Now, if you take a look at already established and popular bands, that's a different story. Someone mentioned huge bands like Pink Floyd. Their last couple of CDs didn't need a big label to sell. People were going to buy it if they like Floyd no matter what. And in a case of that kind of popularity, the radio stations were going to play them with or without a major label. The same could be applied to other huge (classic) rock bands, as well as established artists in other music styles (country, rap, R&B, blues, etc...). Another example would be someone like Eric Clapton. He could put one out on "Clapton Records" and would sell nearly, if not exactly, the same number of CDs as he will on a major label..
I agree record labels + good music = superstars like Calpton, Floyd, U2 etc... But these bands became popular in a different time (before the internet). Internet is changing the record labels� business model, and that is what they afraid of. The new wait of creating bands and distributing their music is not as profitable for them as it used to.
Unfortunately, the number of artists (of any type of music) that could dismiss the labels and still sell as many CDs and get the same radio exposure are limited. And any new band is going to go nowhere without radio (or MTV/VH1) exposure.
Internet is offering them exposure. Right now MTV and VH1 are still popular. But YouTube, Yahoo!, MSN could become the new MTV and VH1.
Not really relevant, but interesting to think about is that most of you have probably seen the video of the ruma ruma guy (I can�t link it because I am at work and the proxie does not allow me to visit YouTube). But how many have actually seen the video for the song? YouTube made that fat kid a star, and most people probably know his face better than the guys that sing the song. Exposure.
In the end, I don't see the labels going away totally any time soon. They're in cahoots with the big FM music stations and in general, they do a good job of promoting new good bands that sign up. It's just a shame that there's really nothing to keep them from raping the artists. If there were just some way for new bands to get exposure to the masses without having to sell their souls to the labels then things would be better. Unfortunately, the Internet can only go so far in helping a new band with this.
I agree, they won�t go away anytime soon, but change is coming, and change will be good for artists and consumers, not for the record labels.
Sorry for my weird grammar or mispells, I am not a native english speaker, I don�t have a spell checker on this computer (in english at least) and I am too lazy to proof read what I wrote lol :)
No comments:
Post a Comment