macmax
Jul 21, 08:01 PM
Watch the BUNNY :confused:
What a PERFECT name for MS ...
... ZUNE ...
... much later then SUNE !!!
��� WoW !!!
Nothing looks more similar to a TOILET :eek: I think I will FLUSH ...
http://www.gizmodo.com/gadgets/top/microsoft-argos-final-name-the-zune-186359.php
never seen something so Ugly!!!!!!!!!!Yikes!!!!!
What a PERFECT name for MS ...
... ZUNE ...
... much later then SUNE !!!
��� WoW !!!
Nothing looks more similar to a TOILET :eek: I think I will FLUSH ...
http://www.gizmodo.com/gadgets/top/microsoft-argos-final-name-the-zune-186359.php
never seen something so Ugly!!!!!!!!!!Yikes!!!!!
FloatingBones
Nov 25, 12:34 AM
For the last time, STOP SPEAKING FOR OTHER PEOPLE!!! You have NO right what-so-ever to speak for anyone but yourself and yet you continue to state that EVER SINGLE iOS USER hates Flash and is glad to be rid of it and yet this Skyfire app proves just the opposite.
What I said: Users of the 120M+ iOS devices are doing just fine without Flash plugins is completely true. There are no Flash plugins for this device. Nobody can run a shred of Flash content in their browser on this device.
No amount of nonsensical shouting will change the facts.
You have every right to give your opinion on the matter, but it is your opinion, not the opinion of every single iOS user in existence.
But owners of those 120M+ iOS devices are doing just fine without Flash. Nobody forced them to buy those devices. If they were somehow "disappointed" because there are no Flash plugins available, nobody prevented them from returning them or reselling them.
That is NOT a shortcoming of Flash dude.
Also incorrect. There are huge shortcomings of Flash, and you've never addressed them.
You've never addressed the identity-leaking of Flash cookies: Flash doesn't honor the cookie privacy settings of the browser. More than half of the top 100 websites are now using Flash cookies to track users and store information about them. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-209.txt) Do you actually like the fact that those sites do an end-run around the cookie privacy settings by using Flash? I can't find a single rational person that likes the identity-leaking.
You've never addressed the quirkiness that Flash brings to the browser UI. On my Mac, scrolling works differently when my mouse is over a Flash region. Certain keyboard shortcuts cease to work. Text that appears in a Flash window is not searchable with the browser's text-finding feature. My Mac doesn't behave like a Mac inside of a Flash window.
The engineering choice made for iOS is simplicity. Layering Flash on top of the browser would compromise that simplicity. Click-to-flash semantics would add yet another layer of clutter and obfuscation to the UI.
You've never addressed Adobe's inability to deal competently to secure their software. Security experts believe that Adobe is going to surpass Microsoft as the #1 target for security attacks. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-231.htm) Besides Flash, Adobe Reader is a vector for zero day bugs (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt). I really don't know how you do that: it's a PDF reader! The bugs have been around in Adobe Reader for years and Adobe still hasn't fixed them.
If Apple enabled Flash in iOS Safari, they would be farming out the correct operation of their iOS browser to a company that has proven to be one of the least competent companies in dealing with malware attacks. Noted security expert Steve Gibson mocks their cluelessness:
"[Adobe:] how is that quarterly update cycle going for you?" (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt)
I have yet to find a single Flash enthusiast who can address those issues. I'm hardly surprised that you can't address them, either.
That is a shortcoming of Steve Jobs' choosing.
Nonsense. They are engineering and design choices. If Apple made bad engineering and design choices, they would never have sold 120M+ of these devices.
If you think they are a "shortcoming": there are simple solutions. Don't buy an iOS device. If you did buy one, sell it. Or maybe you can see if it will blend (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAl28d6tbko).
One thing is certain: Apple will not compromise their iOS browser with Flash, and complaining about that is rather silly.
Even if Flash is on the road to becoming obsolete, that doesn't mean people don't want to be able to access the entire Web in the here and now.
Adobe Flash is on the road to becoming obsolete. Even Adobe acknowledges the fact (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999).
Between the 120M+ iOS devices, the click-to-flash plugins disable Flash downloads on Windows, Mac OS X and Linux machines, and Adobe's new Flash-to-HTML5 conversion tools (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999), the abandonment of Flash will continue to accelerate.
You just don't seem to comprehend that.
You are correct. Flash is a legacy technology, and its day has passed.
You seem to have this deep seated hatred of Flash
There are fundamental failings in both the design and deployment of Flash. I listed three of those earlier in my reply.
The thing that got my attention was when I realized that Flash was maintaining its own set of cookies and that those cookies did not honor the privacy settings of my browser. I then learned about click-to-flash plugins to minimize my exposure to Flash. The shocking thing to me was how much disabling Flash improved the browsing experience: faster page loads, less flashing advertisements, and far less CPU usage.
and I can tell that if Steve had said "I LOVE Flash" instead you would almost undoubtedly be here fighting against HTML5 and for Flash.
You imply that I blindly agree with Apple's (and Jobs's) decisions. That is not the case.
I strongly disagree with Apple's decision to prevent Hypermac from selling external batteries for Mac computers (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1032695). Hypermac makes a quality product, and they are filling a niche that Apple ignores. Magsafe is a wonderful technology, but they should be licensing this tech to third-party vendors. I fondly hope that Apple addresses this deficiency in their strategy and product accessories soon.
If you search, you can find where I commented on this in the public record weeks ago.
Yes, I honestly believe that. You have no vested interest in either one. You're just being Steve's doormat.
Now you know better.
I see no reason why ANYONE should have to convert to HTML5.
Too many laptop users are tired of the CPU loading and battery suck of Flash apps.
Too many users don't like that Flash alters the UI inside of the browsers: altered scrolling behavior, keyboard shortcuts that don't work in Flash, text searches that don't work with text in a Flash app.
Too many privacy advocates are bothered that Flash maintains a separate set of cookies and those cookies do not honor the privacy settings of the browser. Commercial websites are using those Flash cookies to track users. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-209.txt)
Too many security advocates are wary of using Adobe products because of Adobe's poor track record against security attacks.
Even if all those four large concerns were addressed, websites have to deal with the growing number of users that use Flash-blocking plugins. Advertisers that deliver their ads with Flash have no guarantee that users will allow those Flash apps to be downloaded and run on their machines.
Those are the reasons why Flash's viability for delivering web content is in decline. Even if you don't see the reasons, Adobe does (http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2010/10/adobe-demos-flash-to-html5-conversion-tool.html).
What I said: Users of the 120M+ iOS devices are doing just fine without Flash plugins is completely true. There are no Flash plugins for this device. Nobody can run a shred of Flash content in their browser on this device.
No amount of nonsensical shouting will change the facts.
You have every right to give your opinion on the matter, but it is your opinion, not the opinion of every single iOS user in existence.
But owners of those 120M+ iOS devices are doing just fine without Flash. Nobody forced them to buy those devices. If they were somehow "disappointed" because there are no Flash plugins available, nobody prevented them from returning them or reselling them.
That is NOT a shortcoming of Flash dude.
Also incorrect. There are huge shortcomings of Flash, and you've never addressed them.
You've never addressed the identity-leaking of Flash cookies: Flash doesn't honor the cookie privacy settings of the browser. More than half of the top 100 websites are now using Flash cookies to track users and store information about them. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-209.txt) Do you actually like the fact that those sites do an end-run around the cookie privacy settings by using Flash? I can't find a single rational person that likes the identity-leaking.
You've never addressed the quirkiness that Flash brings to the browser UI. On my Mac, scrolling works differently when my mouse is over a Flash region. Certain keyboard shortcuts cease to work. Text that appears in a Flash window is not searchable with the browser's text-finding feature. My Mac doesn't behave like a Mac inside of a Flash window.
The engineering choice made for iOS is simplicity. Layering Flash on top of the browser would compromise that simplicity. Click-to-flash semantics would add yet another layer of clutter and obfuscation to the UI.
You've never addressed Adobe's inability to deal competently to secure their software. Security experts believe that Adobe is going to surpass Microsoft as the #1 target for security attacks. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-231.htm) Besides Flash, Adobe Reader is a vector for zero day bugs (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt). I really don't know how you do that: it's a PDF reader! The bugs have been around in Adobe Reader for years and Adobe still hasn't fixed them.
If Apple enabled Flash in iOS Safari, they would be farming out the correct operation of their iOS browser to a company that has proven to be one of the least competent companies in dealing with malware attacks. Noted security expert Steve Gibson mocks their cluelessness:
"[Adobe:] how is that quarterly update cycle going for you?" (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt)
I have yet to find a single Flash enthusiast who can address those issues. I'm hardly surprised that you can't address them, either.
That is a shortcoming of Steve Jobs' choosing.
Nonsense. They are engineering and design choices. If Apple made bad engineering and design choices, they would never have sold 120M+ of these devices.
If you think they are a "shortcoming": there are simple solutions. Don't buy an iOS device. If you did buy one, sell it. Or maybe you can see if it will blend (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAl28d6tbko).
One thing is certain: Apple will not compromise their iOS browser with Flash, and complaining about that is rather silly.
Even if Flash is on the road to becoming obsolete, that doesn't mean people don't want to be able to access the entire Web in the here and now.
Adobe Flash is on the road to becoming obsolete. Even Adobe acknowledges the fact (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999).
Between the 120M+ iOS devices, the click-to-flash plugins disable Flash downloads on Windows, Mac OS X and Linux machines, and Adobe's new Flash-to-HTML5 conversion tools (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999), the abandonment of Flash will continue to accelerate.
You just don't seem to comprehend that.
You are correct. Flash is a legacy technology, and its day has passed.
You seem to have this deep seated hatred of Flash
There are fundamental failings in both the design and deployment of Flash. I listed three of those earlier in my reply.
The thing that got my attention was when I realized that Flash was maintaining its own set of cookies and that those cookies did not honor the privacy settings of my browser. I then learned about click-to-flash plugins to minimize my exposure to Flash. The shocking thing to me was how much disabling Flash improved the browsing experience: faster page loads, less flashing advertisements, and far less CPU usage.
and I can tell that if Steve had said "I LOVE Flash" instead you would almost undoubtedly be here fighting against HTML5 and for Flash.
You imply that I blindly agree with Apple's (and Jobs's) decisions. That is not the case.
I strongly disagree with Apple's decision to prevent Hypermac from selling external batteries for Mac computers (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1032695). Hypermac makes a quality product, and they are filling a niche that Apple ignores. Magsafe is a wonderful technology, but they should be licensing this tech to third-party vendors. I fondly hope that Apple addresses this deficiency in their strategy and product accessories soon.
If you search, you can find where I commented on this in the public record weeks ago.
Yes, I honestly believe that. You have no vested interest in either one. You're just being Steve's doormat.
Now you know better.
I see no reason why ANYONE should have to convert to HTML5.
Too many laptop users are tired of the CPU loading and battery suck of Flash apps.
Too many users don't like that Flash alters the UI inside of the browsers: altered scrolling behavior, keyboard shortcuts that don't work in Flash, text searches that don't work with text in a Flash app.
Too many privacy advocates are bothered that Flash maintains a separate set of cookies and those cookies do not honor the privacy settings of the browser. Commercial websites are using those Flash cookies to track users. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-209.txt)
Too many security advocates are wary of using Adobe products because of Adobe's poor track record against security attacks.
Even if all those four large concerns were addressed, websites have to deal with the growing number of users that use Flash-blocking plugins. Advertisers that deliver their ads with Flash have no guarantee that users will allow those Flash apps to be downloaded and run on their machines.
Those are the reasons why Flash's viability for delivering web content is in decline. Even if you don't see the reasons, Adobe does (http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2010/10/adobe-demos-flash-to-html5-conversion-tool.html).
backspinner
Oct 19, 06:43 AM
but try bringing a white MacBook into a corporate office meeting...
the white macbooks are totaly accepted by women in an office setting...
the white macbooks are totaly accepted by women in an office setting...
LT1FirebirdSLP
May 4, 06:31 AM
Never ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever.........
...take anything an AT&T rep says at face value. This is coming from a type of representative, where in my battles earlier this year with AT&T attempting to get back to unlimited data, who told me there was nothing they could do but gave me advice on how to seamlessly switch to Verizon (including how to port my phone number and suggested I keep my AT&T account open until I switch to VZ).
While I fully believe this story did actually take place, I believe the rep has 'ZERO' credibility.
FYI: My later wrangling with corporate was a lot more pleasant and yielded me my Unlimited iPhone data plan back.
...take anything an AT&T rep says at face value. This is coming from a type of representative, where in my battles earlier this year with AT&T attempting to get back to unlimited data, who told me there was nothing they could do but gave me advice on how to seamlessly switch to Verizon (including how to port my phone number and suggested I keep my AT&T account open until I switch to VZ).
While I fully believe this story did actually take place, I believe the rep has 'ZERO' credibility.
FYI: My later wrangling with corporate was a lot more pleasant and yielded me my Unlimited iPhone data plan back.
Shadow
Jul 21, 11:14 AM
New PowerBooks next Tuesday!!! :D :p
KREX725
Oct 18, 09:59 PM
An example of a "cash cow"
Microsoft Windows XP
Microsoft Office
Nearly everything else MS does is at a loss or does not generate a lot of cash.
What about all of those profits from the XBox 360????? Don't those things just consist of about $8.00 worth of plastic????? :p
Microsoft Windows XP
Microsoft Office
Nearly everything else MS does is at a loss or does not generate a lot of cash.
What about all of those profits from the XBox 360????? Don't those things just consist of about $8.00 worth of plastic????? :p
Intell
Apr 26, 03:16 PM
Just a reminder: About 45 minutes to go and you vote must be bolded or I won't count it. Eldiablojoe I'm looking at your post/vote.
solafide
Apr 29, 02:48 PM
I wonder if this new pricing scheme is being enabled by the record labels with lower wholesale pricing to Amazon (to try, yet again, to take power out of Apple's hands), or if Amazon is simply doing this at a loss?
Why would Amazon want to take a loss - to support non-Apple mp3 players?
For Apple, they are not making much, if any money - they always planned it as a break-even business - the real value was the content eco-system tied to their products (= value for customers).
Why would Amazon want to take a loss - to support non-Apple mp3 players?
For Apple, they are not making much, if any money - they always planned it as a break-even business - the real value was the content eco-system tied to their products (= value for customers).
leekohler
Apr 27, 01:43 PM
Nope. This was your first reply to me before I even mentioned "fact" :
Yes it was, as you were claiming to "know" that it was faked. Claiming that was offensive in the very least.
Yep, I truly hit a nerve. Your abrupt rant wasn't necessary, and why you only quoted me on it when others said the same thing is mystifying. Don't let your emotions get in the way of things.
Hi kettle.
Yes it was, as you were claiming to "know" that it was faked. Claiming that was offensive in the very least.
Yep, I truly hit a nerve. Your abrupt rant wasn't necessary, and why you only quoted me on it when others said the same thing is mystifying. Don't let your emotions get in the way of things.
Hi kettle.
zombierunner
May 3, 08:44 AM
*sigh* Every time someone makes this mistake...
Bear in mind that the US prices do not include sales tax of any kind. In your case Australian prices include GST which I believe currently runs at 10%? If you're anything like the UK there may be additional import taxes to pay and the cost of doing business is likely to be higher (everything from shipping costs to salaries affect the price you pay at the checkout). Add in a margain that Apple will calculate to protect themselves from changes in the exchange rate and you'll probably be very close to price parity. Just as in the UK you're paying extra for the product because of the country, not because of Apple.
That's not to say Apple DON'T screw up on exchange rates and gouge the heck out of us non-Americans of course. The Mac Mini being the most recent, and painful, example. But you need to make sure you compare like for like before complaining.
UK VAT is a total Bi#ch
Bear in mind that the US prices do not include sales tax of any kind. In your case Australian prices include GST which I believe currently runs at 10%? If you're anything like the UK there may be additional import taxes to pay and the cost of doing business is likely to be higher (everything from shipping costs to salaries affect the price you pay at the checkout). Add in a margain that Apple will calculate to protect themselves from changes in the exchange rate and you'll probably be very close to price parity. Just as in the UK you're paying extra for the product because of the country, not because of Apple.
That's not to say Apple DON'T screw up on exchange rates and gouge the heck out of us non-Americans of course. The Mac Mini being the most recent, and painful, example. But you need to make sure you compare like for like before complaining.
UK VAT is a total Bi#ch
Hwangsta
May 3, 07:44 AM
I was hoping for i7...c'mon apple WHY!
oh, BTO option, I hope they have i7 in stores
oh, BTO option, I hope they have i7 in stores
Btrthnezr3
Jan 29, 09:47 PM
http://www.shunsai-inc.com/blog/media/sour-skittles-bag.jpg
For the step-son as a congratulations on his team winning their 3rd game! He's getting better every game!
For the step-son as a congratulations on his team winning their 3rd game! He's getting better every game!
mikemac11
Apr 15, 01:46 PM
Looks like mostly bug fixes. Only thing new I have found is the result of putting a window out of focus.
iCal is still same design too.
iCal is still same design too.
CharBroiled20s
Jun 27, 03:43 PM
Should have let the charge stand IMO, they agreed to the terms and conditons:rolleyes:
Well IMO you'd feel differently if your credit card incurred an accidental and irreversible thousand dollar charge. :p
Well IMO you'd feel differently if your credit card incurred an accidental and irreversible thousand dollar charge. :p
Eye4Desyn
Apr 25, 11:51 AM
The new iMacs couldn't come any faster. It's about time! (does happy dance) :D
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
randyharris
Jul 10, 04:06 PM
Toolbars and drop down menus are the things Microsoft have DROPPED from Office 2007.
The pictures I've seen of Windows Office 2007 most certainly still has icon bars, it's just redesigned to be grouped more than a scatter approach.
And just because MSFT is changing it, doesn't mean that it will be more efficient. (It may be, but I haven't tried it yet.) I have heard a few pundits harp on the new setup saying in efforts to make things more simple they dumbed it down too much for a power user.
Randy
The pictures I've seen of Windows Office 2007 most certainly still has icon bars, it's just redesigned to be grouped more than a scatter approach.
And just because MSFT is changing it, doesn't mean that it will be more efficient. (It may be, but I haven't tried it yet.) I have heard a few pundits harp on the new setup saying in efforts to make things more simple they dumbed it down too much for a power user.
Randy
gnasher729
Apr 22, 04:14 AM
Even more entertaining is the fact that Apple is so arrogant they fail to realize how stupid they look.
Suing their biggest vendor.
It doesn't get any more stupid than that.
Samsung is so arrogant, they fail to realize how stupid they look.
Ripping off their biggest customer. Then suing their biggest customer.
It doesn't get any more stupid than that.
What is apple complaining about
I think this is a lawsuit its best for everyone to avoid.
Another repost of this picture that was long since debunked. The picture claims that the Samsung F700 was showed first on Cebit 2006. If you google for "Samsung Cebit 2006" and then for "Samsung Cebit 2007", the first finds lots of photos of Samsung phones that look completely different than any iPhone, the second finds a tech website that dug out a link to their own reporting from Cebit 2007 where the F700 was shown as a reply to the iPhone and the LG phone.
Suing their biggest vendor.
It doesn't get any more stupid than that.
Samsung is so arrogant, they fail to realize how stupid they look.
Ripping off their biggest customer. Then suing their biggest customer.
It doesn't get any more stupid than that.
What is apple complaining about
I think this is a lawsuit its best for everyone to avoid.
Another repost of this picture that was long since debunked. The picture claims that the Samsung F700 was showed first on Cebit 2006. If you google for "Samsung Cebit 2006" and then for "Samsung Cebit 2007", the first finds lots of photos of Samsung phones that look completely different than any iPhone, the second finds a tech website that dug out a link to their own reporting from Cebit 2007 where the F700 was shown as a reply to the iPhone and the LG phone.
TroyBoy30
Apr 15, 02:13 PM
battery life is still the same on my 4 as the day i bought it. no loss over night and almost an hour of usage before it drops to 99%
twoodcc
Sep 19, 12:10 PM
http://foldingforum.org/viewforum.php?f=54
Everything we need is there. Just way over my head.
i see a lot of thread titles with the word "problem" in there
Everything we need is there. Just way over my head.
i see a lot of thread titles with the word "problem" in there
Millionaire2K
Apr 29, 03:41 PM
it is not against the law in any way to give a different deal to someone else. Amazon bring more to the table than Apple and to add to it Apple strong arming has pissed a lot of people off and they want to break Apple strong hold.
Exactly. Apple says they will pay 70% to the music companies. They worked out their deals with them at that rate. If another company wants to sell music, they by no means have to get the same deal as every other company selling music. It�s just nuts to think that way.
All companies go and negotiate their own deals. Wal-Mart negotiates for most products they sell. They never say �What�s Target paying you?, we have to match that� but they might say �What�s Target paying you?, we have to BEAT that� They could end up paying more or less depending on how good the company is at negotiating. Also bigger companies with more products sold normally will get a better deal. A lot of companies would be screwed if Wal-Mart stopped carrying their products. This leverage allows Wal-Mart to work out great deals.
Nothing is preventing Apple from reworking their deals. However no company has to change any deal unless they both agree to terms.
Stop feeling �poor Apple� just because another company �may� have a better deal. It�s just business.
Exactly. Apple says they will pay 70% to the music companies. They worked out their deals with them at that rate. If another company wants to sell music, they by no means have to get the same deal as every other company selling music. It�s just nuts to think that way.
All companies go and negotiate their own deals. Wal-Mart negotiates for most products they sell. They never say �What�s Target paying you?, we have to match that� but they might say �What�s Target paying you?, we have to BEAT that� They could end up paying more or less depending on how good the company is at negotiating. Also bigger companies with more products sold normally will get a better deal. A lot of companies would be screwed if Wal-Mart stopped carrying their products. This leverage allows Wal-Mart to work out great deals.
Nothing is preventing Apple from reworking their deals. However no company has to change any deal unless they both agree to terms.
Stop feeling �poor Apple� just because another company �may� have a better deal. It�s just business.
AndroidfoLife
Apr 22, 02:23 PM
The dates are wrong as the F700 was unveiled after Apple announced the iPhone at MacWorld in 2007
It was Released a month after macworld 07, it takes far longer then a month to copy a design and put it into mass production. Apple is in the wrong on this one. Samsung can easily say it is continuing its original design and mixing it with android.
It was Released a month after macworld 07, it takes far longer then a month to copy a design and put it into mass production. Apple is in the wrong on this one. Samsung can easily say it is continuing its original design and mixing it with android.
thisisahughes
Apr 23, 04:31 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) Mobile/8H7)
Apple replies. "LOL! What?"
Apple replies. "LOL! What?"
nies
Apr 25, 08:32 PM
Plutonius just for the fun of it haha...
