I is Mac
Apr 4, 10:18 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
**** AT&T.
**** AT&T.
yadmonkey
May 2, 04:55 PM
You're only making excuses for the discrimination.
I'm sorry I engaged you because now you're just being unfair.
I'm sorry I engaged you because now you're just being unfair.
AppleNewton
May 6, 08:25 PM
its worked for me using wireless, just hold it down a while longer and wait until the hardware test icon shows up.
waw74
May 6, 12:26 PM
no, iOS sends only to one thing at a time, but you can do it from iTunes.
You can then use the remote app on the iTouch to control iTunes. (and control the zone volume levels.
You can then use the remote app on the iTouch to control iTunes. (and control the zone volume levels.
more...
foottuns
Oct 13, 05:02 AM
I am using spymac, I m not saying that apple services are bad but I rather use spymac and it also my cheaper.
Lord Blackadder
Jan 18, 12:41 PM
I have owned three "small" cars. A 1988 Ford Tempo, a 1990 Geo Storm, and a 1995 Ford Probe. All three were solid cars. However I have not bought a small car in many years for one reason. It's not that "big" cars are better because they're big. It's because generally speaking, the gas mileage on most smaller cars isn't better than those of standard sedans. In some cases it's worse. Case in point: Nissan Versa vs. Nissan Altima 2.5SL. The Altima destroys the Versa in real world mileage. Plus you get the added room and comfort and features. The price is only slightly higher in terms of monthly payments.
Part of that is due to engine choices in the US: because many of the engines used by foreign car companies are not federalized, and because US carmakers largley ignore the small car market, we don't get the most efficient engines for small cars.
Case in point: look at small cars sold in both Europe and the US, like the Mini Cooper, Volkswagen Golf, Ford Focus (different version, but same-ish size) or event the Smart. All of these cars come with smaller, more efficient engines in Europe, either as the base engine or as options. The US versions, however, all use larger, less efficient engines and omit the diesel options entirely. Thus, much of potential efficiency of these cars is wasted.
Therefore, it's not that the Altima is much more efficient than the Versa. Rather, the most efficient engine option in the Altima is as efficient as the rather inefficient engine that the Versa is saddled with here in the states. And it's our own fault, because Americans are stereotyped as demanding more powerful engines without regard to fuel economy.
The new Jetta and Passat are no exceptions - they get more engine choices outside the US.
Part of that is due to engine choices in the US: because many of the engines used by foreign car companies are not federalized, and because US carmakers largley ignore the small car market, we don't get the most efficient engines for small cars.
Case in point: look at small cars sold in both Europe and the US, like the Mini Cooper, Volkswagen Golf, Ford Focus (different version, but same-ish size) or event the Smart. All of these cars come with smaller, more efficient engines in Europe, either as the base engine or as options. The US versions, however, all use larger, less efficient engines and omit the diesel options entirely. Thus, much of potential efficiency of these cars is wasted.
Therefore, it's not that the Altima is much more efficient than the Versa. Rather, the most efficient engine option in the Altima is as efficient as the rather inefficient engine that the Versa is saddled with here in the states. And it's our own fault, because Americans are stereotyped as demanding more powerful engines without regard to fuel economy.
The new Jetta and Passat are no exceptions - they get more engine choices outside the US.
more...
NewMacOldGuy
Jun 19, 04:57 PM
Here: http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=939622&highlight=mayfair
jent
Feb 9, 02:19 PM
Here are the questions that remain to be officially answered:
� Which voice plans qualify and which don't?
� For those using Google Voice, is your own Google Voice number (since GV can be configured to call you) considered landline or mobile? What about the GV passthrough numbers for your non-GV contacts?
� So the A-list and rollover minutes essentially became useful only for U.S. landline numbers, correct?
� Which voice plans qualify and which don't?
� For those using Google Voice, is your own Google Voice number (since GV can be configured to call you) considered landline or mobile? What about the GV passthrough numbers for your non-GV contacts?
� So the A-list and rollover minutes essentially became useful only for U.S. landline numbers, correct?
more...
steeler
Jun 18, 04:19 PM
Sold.
Eduardo1971
Apr 6, 12:08 PM
Mmm....12 pita bites sounds delicious.
Mmm...12 peta bytes with hummus. Yum!
Mmm...12 peta bytes with hummus. Yum!
more...
ten-oak-druid
Apr 30, 01:38 PM
Samsung is losing money in a lot of areas. They found a buyer finally for their hard drive business:
Seagate buys up Samsung HDD division for $1.375 bi (http://www.afterdawn.com/news/article.cfm/2011/04/19/seagate_buys_up_samsung_hdd_division_for_1_375_billion)
Written by Andre Yoskowitz @ 19 Apr 2011
"As part of the deal, Samsung gets a 9.6 percent ownership stake in Seagate.
Seagate, for its part, will become the sole provider for HDD in Samsung PCs, notebooks, NAS and DVR alongside the extension of a number of cross-license agreements.
Additionally, Seagate now has a guaranteed supply of NAND flash memory for SSD, a huge bonus for the drive maker.
..."
As for this post:
Given the terrific success of the pads & phones, this attack on Samsung by Apple is quite out of place.
Apple isn't attacking Samsung. Apple is defending itself.
Seagate buys up Samsung HDD division for $1.375 bi (http://www.afterdawn.com/news/article.cfm/2011/04/19/seagate_buys_up_samsung_hdd_division_for_1_375_billion)
Written by Andre Yoskowitz @ 19 Apr 2011
"As part of the deal, Samsung gets a 9.6 percent ownership stake in Seagate.
Seagate, for its part, will become the sole provider for HDD in Samsung PCs, notebooks, NAS and DVR alongside the extension of a number of cross-license agreements.
Additionally, Seagate now has a guaranteed supply of NAND flash memory for SSD, a huge bonus for the drive maker.
..."
As for this post:
Given the terrific success of the pads & phones, this attack on Samsung by Apple is quite out of place.
Apple isn't attacking Samsung. Apple is defending itself.
mroboto
Jan 14, 06:30 PM
macbookair.com redirects to http://www.apple.com/?Will+We+see+a+MacBookAir+on+Tuesday?
Is Apple just dropping false info to cause rumors, then hit us with a curveball?
Hmmm. Seems fishy to me.
Is Apple just dropping false info to cause rumors, then hit us with a curveball?
Hmmm. Seems fishy to me.
more...
Anuba
Jan 12, 07:13 AM
You're right this isn't the portable media market - those devices are primitive compared to what's being offered here and yet the heavy weights were NEVER able to even dent THAT market. You would think the likes of SONY, HP MOTOROLA, M$SOFT and all the other consumer electronics giants, with all of their resources, could come up with something smart enough to compete with the iPod over the years, right?
We pretty much knew Sony would fail, they're the ultimate balldroppers. They refused mp3 for as long as humanly possible, instead trying to peddle advanced MiniDisc players with USB2, years into the iPod era. Sort of a repeat of the Betamax vs VHS war back in the 80s. When they eventually caved, they introduced some butt ugly, purple, blobby mp3 players nobody wanted. Now with PS3 they're even losing a market they completely dominated, they're getting pummeled by Xbox 360 and the technologically inferior Nintendo Wii. I bet they'll somehow manage to drop the ball with Blu-Ray, too. I never understood Sony, never will.
M$ entered the game way too late with Zune, and with this DRM quirk the Zune is doomed. It's not even out in Europe yet. With iPod, Apple has always made sure that anyone in the world can have it in their hand a few days after the Keynote. The only thing the competition can hope for is that the iPod one day grows stale in the public eye. When everyone has one, nodoby's special.
The iPod was revolutionary in its design and usability (and not the first portable media device by the way). Paired with the best online music store experience distanced it even further from the rest. That's what revolutionary means: a new playing field - a new system - a new product. Apple does this better than anyone in the world. I'm not sure the competition is just Nokia, SonyEricsson, and Motorola any more. Listen closely, Apple is attempting to reinvent the mobile phone by marrying what we traditionally associate with a smartphone (smartERphone actually) under a totally new "human friendly" and intuitive package. Those things tend to have mass appeal.
Yeah, but as you say they rolled out a complete solution with the iPod+iTunes+iTunes Store package. This may well be what separates iPod from Newton, NeXT and the Cube. With iPhone there are many loose ends. Apart from the Cingular exclusive being a dealbreaker for many, plus the fact that unlike the iPod it will only be available in the US for quite some time (here in Europe it's been a long, long time since we last saw a business class phone that doesn't support 3G), how is it going to attract corporate customers? Allegedly it won't even accept 3rd party software, yet businessmen will want to sync it up with MS Exchange/Outlook or Lotus Notes, and they'll probably want to snap in their TomTom or Wayfinder GPS module too. As of now, the gateway for all things iPhone is iTunes, and they're kidding themselves if they think corporate customers will trust a damn music jukebox with their mail, calendar and contacts. And if kids can't cram it chock full of Java games they won't want it either. So the market position really isn't anything like they have with the iPod. Market share is everything. Look at the Palm - say what you will about M$ but PDAs with their mobile OS were superior to Palm in so many ways it's insane, but noooooo, people just had to stay with the Palm, just like they'll stick to their Treo even when iPhone can cook breakfast for them.
Here's an interesting article in NY Times about some of the potential pitfalls for the iPhone: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/11/technology/11cnd-apple.html
Anyway, I agree, it's a win/win situation for consumers. At worst, iPhone itself will flop, at best, it will be a hit, but either way it will motivate the competition to beef up their technology. They might wanna start with the OS and the interface - Symbian OS looks like crap. Maybe M$ will Vista-fy theirs.
We pretty much knew Sony would fail, they're the ultimate balldroppers. They refused mp3 for as long as humanly possible, instead trying to peddle advanced MiniDisc players with USB2, years into the iPod era. Sort of a repeat of the Betamax vs VHS war back in the 80s. When they eventually caved, they introduced some butt ugly, purple, blobby mp3 players nobody wanted. Now with PS3 they're even losing a market they completely dominated, they're getting pummeled by Xbox 360 and the technologically inferior Nintendo Wii. I bet they'll somehow manage to drop the ball with Blu-Ray, too. I never understood Sony, never will.
M$ entered the game way too late with Zune, and with this DRM quirk the Zune is doomed. It's not even out in Europe yet. With iPod, Apple has always made sure that anyone in the world can have it in their hand a few days after the Keynote. The only thing the competition can hope for is that the iPod one day grows stale in the public eye. When everyone has one, nodoby's special.
The iPod was revolutionary in its design and usability (and not the first portable media device by the way). Paired with the best online music store experience distanced it even further from the rest. That's what revolutionary means: a new playing field - a new system - a new product. Apple does this better than anyone in the world. I'm not sure the competition is just Nokia, SonyEricsson, and Motorola any more. Listen closely, Apple is attempting to reinvent the mobile phone by marrying what we traditionally associate with a smartphone (smartERphone actually) under a totally new "human friendly" and intuitive package. Those things tend to have mass appeal.
Yeah, but as you say they rolled out a complete solution with the iPod+iTunes+iTunes Store package. This may well be what separates iPod from Newton, NeXT and the Cube. With iPhone there are many loose ends. Apart from the Cingular exclusive being a dealbreaker for many, plus the fact that unlike the iPod it will only be available in the US for quite some time (here in Europe it's been a long, long time since we last saw a business class phone that doesn't support 3G), how is it going to attract corporate customers? Allegedly it won't even accept 3rd party software, yet businessmen will want to sync it up with MS Exchange/Outlook or Lotus Notes, and they'll probably want to snap in their TomTom or Wayfinder GPS module too. As of now, the gateway for all things iPhone is iTunes, and they're kidding themselves if they think corporate customers will trust a damn music jukebox with their mail, calendar and contacts. And if kids can't cram it chock full of Java games they won't want it either. So the market position really isn't anything like they have with the iPod. Market share is everything. Look at the Palm - say what you will about M$ but PDAs with their mobile OS were superior to Palm in so many ways it's insane, but noooooo, people just had to stay with the Palm, just like they'll stick to their Treo even when iPhone can cook breakfast for them.
Here's an interesting article in NY Times about some of the potential pitfalls for the iPhone: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/11/technology/11cnd-apple.html
Anyway, I agree, it's a win/win situation for consumers. At worst, iPhone itself will flop, at best, it will be a hit, but either way it will motivate the competition to beef up their technology. They might wanna start with the OS and the interface - Symbian OS looks like crap. Maybe M$ will Vista-fy theirs.
asdfghjkl123456
Mar 11, 10:41 PM
Hello, I recently got the texting app "Text Now". I accidentaly chose for it to not allow push notifications, even though I want it to. How would I go about fixing that? I tried re-downloading but it didn't work.
more...
edesignuk
Feb 14, 01:12 PM
Just to let know everybody that i just sent my first complain about edesignuk as a moderator.
I'm gonna have to go with the crowd here and ask why? I'm not aware that I've done anything other than move a couple of threads, and ban a few spammers :confused:
Its fair to say that you and I don't really get along often, but I'm certainly not out to get anyone.
Amorphous silica is an
more...
and amorphous silica
and amorphous silica
Amorphous Silica
I'm gonna have to go with the crowd here and ask why? I'm not aware that I've done anything other than move a couple of threads, and ban a few spammers :confused:
Its fair to say that you and I don't really get along often, but I'm certainly not out to get anyone.
maclaptop
Apr 29, 10:25 PM
When it comes to Samsung, Apples out of its league.
Given the terrific success of the pads & phones, this attack on Samsung by Apple is quite out of place.
Any resemblance between a Galaxy and iPhone is to Apples advantage anyway. Yet that said, Jobs has always been highly paranoid.
Given the terrific success of the pads & phones, this attack on Samsung by Apple is quite out of place.
Any resemblance between a Galaxy and iPhone is to Apples advantage anyway. Yet that said, Jobs has always been highly paranoid.
more...
bretm
Nov 19, 12:07 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/532.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Mobile/8B117 Safari/6531.22.7)
It goes to show you that they can still make a profit with $100 off. I guess the price gouging by Apple continues.
They're not making a profit by any means. Since it seems the Marshalls that had them had only 5 or so, it's just a way to get you in the store. The real investigation might be a bait and switch kind of thing. Although there was only bait. But at what point is the advertising side illegal? What if they only had one for sale and took out huge billboard ads? Obviously the purchase of one iPad and one billboard would be cheap advertising to get lots of people in the store hoping to get a cheap iPad.
I'm certain TJ MAXX ran this by their legal team...
If they are willing to sell the product at a $100 loss, that's their choice. You may not have a warranty, etc, because they aren't "authorized" by Apple as a price-controlled reseller, but that doesn't mean it's illegal for them to sell it.
I sold my iPad on craigslist at a loss. I'm not authorized to do that and Steve doesn't care.
Without a reciept or without a reciept from an authorized dealer, Apple would still have to provide warranty service from the manufacture date.
It goes to show you that they can still make a profit with $100 off. I guess the price gouging by Apple continues.
They're not making a profit by any means. Since it seems the Marshalls that had them had only 5 or so, it's just a way to get you in the store. The real investigation might be a bait and switch kind of thing. Although there was only bait. But at what point is the advertising side illegal? What if they only had one for sale and took out huge billboard ads? Obviously the purchase of one iPad and one billboard would be cheap advertising to get lots of people in the store hoping to get a cheap iPad.
I'm certain TJ MAXX ran this by their legal team...
If they are willing to sell the product at a $100 loss, that's their choice. You may not have a warranty, etc, because they aren't "authorized" by Apple as a price-controlled reseller, but that doesn't mean it's illegal for them to sell it.
I sold my iPad on craigslist at a loss. I'm not authorized to do that and Steve doesn't care.
Without a reciept or without a reciept from an authorized dealer, Apple would still have to provide warranty service from the manufacture date.
glocke12
May 4, 06:31 PM
You mean Clinton who was actively engaged in multiple attempts to kill Binladen pre-911? An activity that Bush canceled after he was elected?
Your right we should follow the example of the president who allowed 911 to happen. Then failed to accomplish the task of killing him while also driving us into debt revoking our civil liberties and allowing American's to begin torturing those they SUSPECTED had useful information.
Maybe you should read this.
http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/did_bill_clinton_pass_up_a_chance_1.html
"et�s start with what everyone agrees on: In April 1996, Osama bin Laden was an official guest of the radical Islamic government of Sudan � a government that had been implicated in the attacks on the World Trade Center in 1993. By 1996, with the international community treating Sudan as a pariah, the Sudanese government attempted to patch its relations with the United States. At a secret meeting in a Rosslyn, Va., hotel, the Sudanese minister of state for defense, Maj. Gen. Elfatih Erwa, met with CIA operatives, where, among other things, they discussed Osama bin Laden.
It is here that things get murky. Erwa claims that he offered to hand bin Laden over to the United States. Key American players � President Bill Clinton, then-National Security Adviser Sandy Berger and Director of Counterterrorism Richard Clarke among them � have testified there were no "credible offers" to hand over bin Laden. The 9/11 Commission found "no credible evidence" that Erwa had ever made such an offer. On the other hand, Lawrence Wright, in his Pulitzer Prize-winning "The Looming Tower," flatly states that Sudan did make such an offer. Wright bases his judgment on an interview with Erwa and notes that those who most prominently deny Erwa's claims were not in fact present for the meeting.
"
As for Bush "allowing" this to happen, that is complete B.S. It happened on his watch, but he is as responsible for 9/11 as Bill Clinton was, who was as responsible for it as the Easter Bunny was...
Your right we should follow the example of the president who allowed 911 to happen. Then failed to accomplish the task of killing him while also driving us into debt revoking our civil liberties and allowing American's to begin torturing those they SUSPECTED had useful information.
Maybe you should read this.
http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/did_bill_clinton_pass_up_a_chance_1.html
"et�s start with what everyone agrees on: In April 1996, Osama bin Laden was an official guest of the radical Islamic government of Sudan � a government that had been implicated in the attacks on the World Trade Center in 1993. By 1996, with the international community treating Sudan as a pariah, the Sudanese government attempted to patch its relations with the United States. At a secret meeting in a Rosslyn, Va., hotel, the Sudanese minister of state for defense, Maj. Gen. Elfatih Erwa, met with CIA operatives, where, among other things, they discussed Osama bin Laden.
It is here that things get murky. Erwa claims that he offered to hand bin Laden over to the United States. Key American players � President Bill Clinton, then-National Security Adviser Sandy Berger and Director of Counterterrorism Richard Clarke among them � have testified there were no "credible offers" to hand over bin Laden. The 9/11 Commission found "no credible evidence" that Erwa had ever made such an offer. On the other hand, Lawrence Wright, in his Pulitzer Prize-winning "The Looming Tower," flatly states that Sudan did make such an offer. Wright bases his judgment on an interview with Erwa and notes that those who most prominently deny Erwa's claims were not in fact present for the meeting.
"
As for Bush "allowing" this to happen, that is complete B.S. It happened on his watch, but he is as responsible for 9/11 as Bill Clinton was, who was as responsible for it as the Easter Bunny was...
R94N
Aug 17, 03:13 AM
Decided to change it back to this black and white picture. I like the monochrome look.
http://i254.photobucket.com/albums/hh83/sdrkrelt/th_Screenshot2010-07-23at121215AM.png (http://s254.photobucket.com/albums/hh83/sdrkrelt/?action=view¤t=Screenshot2010-07-23at121215AM.png)
Yeah, it's pretty nice. I like some of the standard backgrounds, although you get bored of them after a while.
http://i254.photobucket.com/albums/hh83/sdrkrelt/th_Screenshot2010-07-23at121215AM.png (http://s254.photobucket.com/albums/hh83/sdrkrelt/?action=view¤t=Screenshot2010-07-23at121215AM.png)
Yeah, it's pretty nice. I like some of the standard backgrounds, although you get bored of them after a while.
acslater017
Mar 25, 10:51 AM
I hope I'm wrong, but I don't see iOS 5 offering us too much at this point.
I wouldn't mind a new map app- yesterday I got lost, my car GPS sent me on a goose chase, and my iPhone didn't help much.
I'm just wondering when they're going to unveil it! If I'm not mistaken, March/April is usually the announcement period, with a launch in June-July.
They haven't announced anything yet, which either means that they're working on something HUGE, or it's behind schedule
I wouldn't mind a new map app- yesterday I got lost, my car GPS sent me on a goose chase, and my iPhone didn't help much.
I'm just wondering when they're going to unveil it! If I'm not mistaken, March/April is usually the announcement period, with a launch in June-July.
They haven't announced anything yet, which either means that they're working on something HUGE, or it's behind schedule
fraeone
Jan 24, 04:12 AM
lame.
qpawn
Dec 19, 01:11 AM
here's my little contribution to this contest...
Reao
Feb 1, 12:18 PM
http://i.imgur.com/QA1oo.jpg
Love it! :D
Love it! :D
kdarling
Apr 27, 04:36 PM
We’re an engineering-driven company. When people accuse us of things, the first thing we want to do is find out the truth. That took a certain amount of time to track all of these things down. And the accusations were coming day by day. By the time we had figured this all out, it took a few days.
As someone who has to track down things like this constantly, I'm pretty unimpressed at the (lack of) speed of their code checking. This was not an obscure bug or complicated. It was just a too-large buffer definition and an execution path that always downloaded info.
And people think Apple can check binary app store submissions for bugs or trojans in just a few minutes, when they can't even find their own bugs in a few days with commented source code.
Then writing it up and trying to make it intelligible when this is a very high-tech topic took a few days.
Again unimpressed. There've been accurate explanations posted here before Apple spoke up, that took just minutes to compose.
And here we are less than a week later.
Although I've defended Apple over and over again on this topic, this just smacks of hoping it would blow over.
The right thing to do would've been to immediately say a week ago, "we're looking into it".
As someone who has to track down things like this constantly, I'm pretty unimpressed at the (lack of) speed of their code checking. This was not an obscure bug or complicated. It was just a too-large buffer definition and an execution path that always downloaded info.
And people think Apple can check binary app store submissions for bugs or trojans in just a few minutes, when they can't even find their own bugs in a few days with commented source code.
Then writing it up and trying to make it intelligible when this is a very high-tech topic took a few days.
Again unimpressed. There've been accurate explanations posted here before Apple spoke up, that took just minutes to compose.
And here we are less than a week later.
Although I've defended Apple over and over again on this topic, this just smacks of hoping it would blow over.
The right thing to do would've been to immediately say a week ago, "we're looking into it".
No comments:
Post a Comment