kainjow
Nov 5, 12:32 AM
Oh yeah, your opinions mean a lot to us now, that's for sure.
Not.
Did you just watch Borat? :D
Not.
Did you just watch Borat? :D
Chip NoVaMac
Dec 1, 11:41 PM
Wisely my other half suggested at $75 limit for Christmas. :) Forces us to listen to each other and think more about what might be a surprise, and a thoughtful gift. This is our first Christmas together.
So it has been fun in teasing with things that we have been finding. Though I get a pass since it is also their birthday month I think. LOL
So far I think that what I have come up with so far, speaks from the heart in the time we have known each each other. Hesitant in sharing the details on here; since he knows this is where I hang at times... But promise to share the response I get - good or bad ROFL
So it has been fun in teasing with things that we have been finding. Though I get a pass since it is also their birthday month I think. LOL
So far I think that what I have come up with so far, speaks from the heart in the time we have known each each other. Hesitant in sharing the details on here; since he knows this is where I hang at times... But promise to share the response I get - good or bad ROFL
allmIne
Sep 17, 08:09 AM
http://s.petco.com/Assets/product_images/8/800443052068C.jpg
A little late to this particular party, but the bigger dog looks like it's... having fun :D
A little late to this particular party, but the bigger dog looks like it's... having fun :D
Jayrod
Jul 28, 12:18 PM
Microsoft has waited WAY too long to make any type of impact on the portable music device industry. iPod has been around now for too long, and has too strong of a grip on the marketshare for anyone to try to threaten their hold. This Zune thing will have to have some aspect to it that is totally it's own for anyone to take any notice to it whatsoever.
Peace
Jul 12, 10:54 AM
Don't think MS is after iPod ?
Read this :
http://ilounge.com/index.php/news/comments/microsoft-approaches-ipod-accessory-makers-for-zune/
Read this :
http://ilounge.com/index.php/news/comments/microsoft-approaches-ipod-accessory-makers-for-zune/
pmz
May 4, 07:34 AM
Bunch of lying crap. My upgrade date hasn't "moved" as this lying reader claims happened to him, it is still 6/19/2011. Every year my upgrade date coincides very closely with the release of the new iPhone. AT&T isn't going to just push my date back (a date I earn by paying a lot every month) because there is no new iPhone in June. So this guy is confusing two separate issues in order to get his BS story out. Maybe the rep said that, maybe he didn't, but he has absolutely no info from Apple, because Apple would never ever ever ever make such a statement to AT&T.
renewed
Sep 15, 08:49 PM
In the UK, there's a 4GB Reach bundle. Only reason I mentioned it.
Yeah I heard about that on a news site. They were laughing about it since you can't do co-op with them. Ironic.
Mine is the 250 GB though so should be good to go.
Yeah I heard about that on a news site. They were laughing about it since you can't do co-op with them. Ironic.
Mine is the 250 GB though so should be good to go.
sprtnbsblplya
Sep 16, 09:30 AM
http://www.washingtonian.com/page_dbimages/9463/georgetowncupcake.sisters.png
1 Chocolate birthday, 2 chocolate pb swirl, 2 pumpkin spice, 1 red velvet, and 1 vanilla/chocolate. Picking them up tomorrow
Nice. How were the pumpkin ones? I'm thinking about getting my wife cupcakes instead of a traditional cake for her bday.
I go to school at Gtown down the street so its just a quick stop on the way home.
1 Chocolate birthday, 2 chocolate pb swirl, 2 pumpkin spice, 1 red velvet, and 1 vanilla/chocolate. Picking them up tomorrow
Nice. How were the pumpkin ones? I'm thinking about getting my wife cupcakes instead of a traditional cake for her bday.
I go to school at Gtown down the street so its just a quick stop on the way home.
AidenShaw
Mar 29, 11:30 PM
That is all it is for most people. I barely know what WWDC is, I just know I usually end up watching a keynote online from it.
Back in the day, Apple participated in user conferences called MacWorld. There was an winter one in San Francisco, and a summer/late summer one on the east coast. There also was a late spring developer conference in San Francisco - but that was mostly irrelevant if you weren't an Apple OSX developer.
Life was good.
But, the turtle-necked overlord got into a hissy-fit with the company that was organizing the conferences.
The summer MacWorld was cancelled for petty reasons. Soon after, Apple withdrew from the winter conference as well.
So, today, the only venue that Apple has control over is the late spring developer conference - which they've co-opted to trumpet whatever the PR department needs at the time.
Back in the day, Apple participated in user conferences called MacWorld. There was an winter one in San Francisco, and a summer/late summer one on the east coast. There also was a late spring developer conference in San Francisco - but that was mostly irrelevant if you weren't an Apple OSX developer.
Life was good.
But, the turtle-necked overlord got into a hissy-fit with the company that was organizing the conferences.
The summer MacWorld was cancelled for petty reasons. Soon after, Apple withdrew from the winter conference as well.
So, today, the only venue that Apple has control over is the late spring developer conference - which they've co-opted to trumpet whatever the PR department needs at the time.
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!
Sounds Good
Apr 21, 02:27 PM
Likely the Sandy Bridge. Editing uses CPU power.
Thanks.
Thanks.
chrmjenkins
Apr 30, 07:28 PM
I scanned chrmjenkins, and he is a villager.
Someone asked about my first scan, and unfortunately that was Appleguy123, who was killed before I had the nerve to out myself.
Ok guys, now you know I'm clean. It's still possible that aggie could be the wolf who is trying to buy (my) our trust.
Since eldiablojoe was alpha, we have to ask who he would infect among the rest of us. It's really a toss up. Aggie makes sense, especially if he was able to scan and kill the hunter and then name me clean because he knew I had to be.
Also makes sense to infect hunter, but I don't even know if he is still alive.
Someone asked about my first scan, and unfortunately that was Appleguy123, who was killed before I had the nerve to out myself.
Ok guys, now you know I'm clean. It's still possible that aggie could be the wolf who is trying to buy (my) our trust.
Since eldiablojoe was alpha, we have to ask who he would infect among the rest of us. It's really a toss up. Aggie makes sense, especially if he was able to scan and kill the hunter and then name me clean because he knew I had to be.
Also makes sense to infect hunter, but I don't even know if he is still alive.
orangerizzla
Apr 1, 09:18 AM
That is really ugly... Is it my imagination or has the general design @ Apple been going a bit haywire recently?
twoodcc
Jul 24, 08:33 PM
seems interesting. i don't know if i would use it that much, but this could be a good thing.
mattk39
Jul 28, 12:02 PM
Because of their money ? :confused:
In what is shaping up to be a clash between computer titans, many are keeping close watch to see whether Microsoft will break through or break down (http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/20060728/microsoft-zune-apple-ipod.htm) in the face of iPod dominance.
In what is shaping up to be a clash between computer titans, many are keeping close watch to see whether Microsoft will break through or break down (http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/20060728/microsoft-zune-apple-ipod.htm) in the face of iPod dominance.
dethmaShine
Apr 16, 06:58 AM
First, OS X is very much like the last versions of NeXTSTEP was, aside from Quartz/Appkit frameworks and GUI layer. Foundation is basically what was shipping in the 90s, the kernel/BSD userland, etc...
Apple has done a lot of work on it, and I've said so in my posts several times. I'm not diminishing their work in anyway.
Yeah, OS X is pretty much the same. There's nothing that apple has put in it. Most of the frameworks are derived from NeXTSTEP. Happy now?
Again, I'm simply stating that pissing over Google because they "acquired" and used "open source" is quick disingenuous in the face of Apple having done the same for both their flagship OSes.
No one is pissing over google's work. It was a response to one of your s*****[censored] comments, here:
By that same vein, what has Apple ever developed that's anything close to a OS ? And no, Mac OS X, a bunch of components bought/taken from the open source community doesn't count... it's just a Unix distribution with a GUI layer on top.
You replied to a person who was talking about ChromeOS being just a giant browser which is absolutely true.
You sound like one of those people on engadget who are always claiming that Apple has just been copying/modifying stuff and selling it as their own.
How do you know ? You saw Android in 2005 ? You can seriously compare what Andy's company made back then to what is actually shipping now ? The evolution from Android 1.0 to 2.3/3.0 is quite astounding by itself, who knows what went on between 2005 and version 1.0 that shipped in late 2009.
That's not what I meant. I meant that Google buys a lot of companies and makes a lot of acquisitions and sell their product as Google's. There's nothing bad in that. But there's nothing false about it as well. Developing/Not developing Android was never my point.
Why even attempt to diminish the work ? Apple does the same acquisition, they use open source projects to quicken development. The histories are similar, the goals are similar. Why hate Google over it, and why do you think it doesn't also reflect on Apple when you do ?
OK, which company doesn't? Apple does it too. But they are not buying other people's products and just selling them outright. You know you're dreaming when you claim that Mac OS X has very less to do with apple and much to do with every other thing they 'copied'.
I will leave the rest of your post out and just report it to the mods instead. I suggest editing your post to remove your clear lack of respect. If you want to discuss the merits of each at the fine detail, I don't think this is the thread for it. Again, let's drop the Google hate and talk OS X instead.
[/quote]
Are you the one who's talking about lack of respect? Just look at your post history. You call people fools; you tell them they don't know anything.
Nevermind, please report. Thanks.
Very well said, just like you insert pro-google comments in every other thread.
Apple has done a lot of work on it, and I've said so in my posts several times. I'm not diminishing their work in anyway.
Yeah, OS X is pretty much the same. There's nothing that apple has put in it. Most of the frameworks are derived from NeXTSTEP. Happy now?
Again, I'm simply stating that pissing over Google because they "acquired" and used "open source" is quick disingenuous in the face of Apple having done the same for both their flagship OSes.
No one is pissing over google's work. It was a response to one of your s*****[censored] comments, here:
By that same vein, what has Apple ever developed that's anything close to a OS ? And no, Mac OS X, a bunch of components bought/taken from the open source community doesn't count... it's just a Unix distribution with a GUI layer on top.
You replied to a person who was talking about ChromeOS being just a giant browser which is absolutely true.
You sound like one of those people on engadget who are always claiming that Apple has just been copying/modifying stuff and selling it as their own.
How do you know ? You saw Android in 2005 ? You can seriously compare what Andy's company made back then to what is actually shipping now ? The evolution from Android 1.0 to 2.3/3.0 is quite astounding by itself, who knows what went on between 2005 and version 1.0 that shipped in late 2009.
That's not what I meant. I meant that Google buys a lot of companies and makes a lot of acquisitions and sell their product as Google's. There's nothing bad in that. But there's nothing false about it as well. Developing/Not developing Android was never my point.
Why even attempt to diminish the work ? Apple does the same acquisition, they use open source projects to quicken development. The histories are similar, the goals are similar. Why hate Google over it, and why do you think it doesn't also reflect on Apple when you do ?
OK, which company doesn't? Apple does it too. But they are not buying other people's products and just selling them outright. You know you're dreaming when you claim that Mac OS X has very less to do with apple and much to do with every other thing they 'copied'.
I will leave the rest of your post out and just report it to the mods instead. I suggest editing your post to remove your clear lack of respect. If you want to discuss the merits of each at the fine detail, I don't think this is the thread for it. Again, let's drop the Google hate and talk OS X instead.
[/quote]
Are you the one who's talking about lack of respect? Just look at your post history. You call people fools; you tell them they don't know anything.
Nevermind, please report. Thanks.
Very well said, just like you insert pro-google comments in every other thread.
mgauss7
Apr 30, 01:02 AM
What doesn't Amazon sell? toilet paper, tampons, tooth paste, and it is worth 80 billion, when it should be worth 1 billion. It is an uninspired discounter, like online-Walmart.
On Amazon you can buy used comic books, used read softcover novels, used 10 year old PaperMate pens, it is like a giant flea market.
They need sales and prestige to keep up their scam.
High valuations should belong to high tech companies. Amazon says the Kindle is their heart, when it represents less than 0.1% of its sales.
On Amazon they sell fertilizer made from dung.
Apple is instead a high tech company. It makes money by selling high advanced technology.
Unlike Amazon, which has no research and development budget (how much research do you need to carry Q-tips and tampons?), Apple is not a scam. It is what it says it ism a high tech edge company. Amazon says the same, but it is sad flea market selling dirty used bird feeders.
Image (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/29/amazon-undercuts-itunes-with-69-cent-pricing-on-new-release-mp3s/)
Image (http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/29/153727-amazon_69c_new_releases.jpg)
As noted by the Los Angeles Times (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/music_blog/2011/04/price-war-amazon-launches-69-cent-mp3-store-for-top-selling-tunes.html), Amazon has taken Apple's iTunes Store head-on in the digital music marketplace with its new feature of 69-cent on popular new release tracks. The new, lower price marks a substantial discount from iTunes, which typically charges $1.29 for current hits.The report notes that Amazon has been stuck at about 10% of the digital music download market for several years, finding itself unable to eat further into Apple's dominant position with iTunes.
Apple initially used a standard $0.99 price point for iTunes Store music content, but shifted to a tiered pricing model (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/04/07/itunes-variable-pricing-live-more-countries-supported/) in April with much of the store's content remaining at the original $0.99 price point but certain popular content bumped up to $1.29 while older back catalog material in some cases dropped to $0.69. Amazon and Wal-Mart quickly followed suit (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/04/08/amazon-and-wal-mart-mp3-stores-adopt-variable-pricing/) with their own tiered pricing models.
Apple's shift to tiered pricing was made at the request of major record labels seeking more control over content pricing and was part of the negotiations that led Apple to be able to offer its entire iTunes Store music catalog free of digital rights management (DRM) restrictions.
Article Link: Amazon Undercuts iTunes With 69-Cent Pricing on New Release MP3s (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/29/amazon-undercuts-itunes-with-69-cent-pricing-on-new-release-mp3s/)
On Amazon you can buy used comic books, used read softcover novels, used 10 year old PaperMate pens, it is like a giant flea market.
They need sales and prestige to keep up their scam.
High valuations should belong to high tech companies. Amazon says the Kindle is their heart, when it represents less than 0.1% of its sales.
On Amazon they sell fertilizer made from dung.
Apple is instead a high tech company. It makes money by selling high advanced technology.
Unlike Amazon, which has no research and development budget (how much research do you need to carry Q-tips and tampons?), Apple is not a scam. It is what it says it ism a high tech edge company. Amazon says the same, but it is sad flea market selling dirty used bird feeders.
Image (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/29/amazon-undercuts-itunes-with-69-cent-pricing-on-new-release-mp3s/)
Image (http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/29/153727-amazon_69c_new_releases.jpg)
As noted by the Los Angeles Times (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/music_blog/2011/04/price-war-amazon-launches-69-cent-mp3-store-for-top-selling-tunes.html), Amazon has taken Apple's iTunes Store head-on in the digital music marketplace with its new feature of 69-cent on popular new release tracks. The new, lower price marks a substantial discount from iTunes, which typically charges $1.29 for current hits.The report notes that Amazon has been stuck at about 10% of the digital music download market for several years, finding itself unable to eat further into Apple's dominant position with iTunes.
Apple initially used a standard $0.99 price point for iTunes Store music content, but shifted to a tiered pricing model (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/04/07/itunes-variable-pricing-live-more-countries-supported/) in April with much of the store's content remaining at the original $0.99 price point but certain popular content bumped up to $1.29 while older back catalog material in some cases dropped to $0.69. Amazon and Wal-Mart quickly followed suit (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/04/08/amazon-and-wal-mart-mp3-stores-adopt-variable-pricing/) with their own tiered pricing models.
Apple's shift to tiered pricing was made at the request of major record labels seeking more control over content pricing and was part of the negotiations that led Apple to be able to offer its entire iTunes Store music catalog free of digital rights management (DRM) restrictions.
Article Link: Amazon Undercuts iTunes With 69-Cent Pricing on New Release MP3s (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/29/amazon-undercuts-itunes-with-69-cent-pricing-on-new-release-mp3s/)
nobunaga209
Jan 29, 11:44 PM
Gorgeous bike! Be careful!
Thx and def will do!
That is sick. I want one so bad but my folks are being difficult. I am allowed to have one I just cant park it anywhere on their property and seeing as I still live in their house that makes it tough to own one.
Man that's a bummer dude but hopefully it'll turn around; maybe a U-Store it??
Thx and def will do!
That is sick. I want one so bad but my folks are being difficult. I am allowed to have one I just cant park it anywhere on their property and seeing as I still live in their house that makes it tough to own one.
Man that's a bummer dude but hopefully it'll turn around; maybe a U-Store it??
iLilana
Mar 31, 10:43 AM
integrate iChat and face time already!!!!
danielwsmithee
Jul 24, 03:25 PM
I would have got the wireless keyboard/mouse set for my iMac if this was available at the time. Oh well. I'm considering switching to the Logitech Laser anyways. I get sick of the MM not recognizing right clicks.
FloatingBones
Nov 26, 11:43 PM
this very thread and the sales thereof indicate a HUGE interest in being able to view Flash on iOS devices and no amount of BS nonsense on your part will change that fact.
The popularity of SkyFire is a wake-up call to website owners to update their media inventory from legacy Flash wrappers to HTML5.
Your implication that people would return an iOS device based on just a single feature alone is ludicrous.
Flash is either a mission-critical for people or it is not. Evidently it is not mission-critical to the owners of 120M+ iOS devices.
I've pointed out there is no equivalent of the iPod Touch from Android and therefore no reasonable alternative regardless of one's feelings about the inability to view Flash web sites.
Makes no difference. If Flash were mission-critical, they wouldn't be using an iPad.
Instead of just acknowledging that not everyone likes Steve Jobs decision to not allow Flash
We're all very clear you don't like the decision. There are plenty of Flash fanboys. If they want Flash in browsers, they shouldn't use iPhones, iPads, or iPod Touches.
The owners of 120M+ iOS devices are doing just fine without Flash. There are serious problems with Flash on laptop and desktop computers:
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.
Too many security advocates are wary of using Adobe products because of Adobe's poor track record against security attacks.
You can't competently address those serious concerns with Flash in a browser.
(hardly an unreasonable opinion to have and clearly shared by everyone who bought this app to be able to view those sites)
See above. There are serious fundamental problems with Flash on websites. There's also a fundamental problem with Flash for advertisers: more users are blocking their ads with click-to-flash blockers every day. Putting your content in Flash now decreases the odds that it will be seen by users.
Adobe understands all of this. They are providing tools to update sites from Flash to HTML5 (http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2010/10/adobe-demos-flash-to-html5-conversion-tool.html). Sites should do the same and get their videos updated to HTML5. Lose the Flash, and you'll be able to serve up your content to all browser users on all platforms.
I'm sure there's some reason you're unhappy with that solution. That's fine. You're welcome to be a Flash Luddite if you wish.
The popularity of SkyFire is a wake-up call to website owners to update their media inventory from legacy Flash wrappers to HTML5.
Your implication that people would return an iOS device based on just a single feature alone is ludicrous.
Flash is either a mission-critical for people or it is not. Evidently it is not mission-critical to the owners of 120M+ iOS devices.
I've pointed out there is no equivalent of the iPod Touch from Android and therefore no reasonable alternative regardless of one's feelings about the inability to view Flash web sites.
Makes no difference. If Flash were mission-critical, they wouldn't be using an iPad.
Instead of just acknowledging that not everyone likes Steve Jobs decision to not allow Flash
We're all very clear you don't like the decision. There are plenty of Flash fanboys. If they want Flash in browsers, they shouldn't use iPhones, iPads, or iPod Touches.
The owners of 120M+ iOS devices are doing just fine without Flash. There are serious problems with Flash on laptop and desktop computers:
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.
Too many security advocates are wary of using Adobe products because of Adobe's poor track record against security attacks.
You can't competently address those serious concerns with Flash in a browser.
(hardly an unreasonable opinion to have and clearly shared by everyone who bought this app to be able to view those sites)
See above. There are serious fundamental problems with Flash on websites. There's also a fundamental problem with Flash for advertisers: more users are blocking their ads with click-to-flash blockers every day. Putting your content in Flash now decreases the odds that it will be seen by users.
Adobe understands all of this. They are providing tools to update sites from Flash to HTML5 (http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2010/10/adobe-demos-flash-to-html5-conversion-tool.html). Sites should do the same and get their videos updated to HTML5. Lose the Flash, and you'll be able to serve up your content to all browser users on all platforms.
I'm sure there's some reason you're unhappy with that solution. That's fine. You're welcome to be a Flash Luddite if you wish.
seanpholman
Mar 12, 01:23 AM
Bummer to hear, I was hoping I would get mine Saturday. I'l be down in SD in the AM, so maybe I will try down there.
--Sean
--Sean
OriginalMacRat
May 3, 11:52 PM
I'm trying to old out with my cracked screen 3GS. Not sure I can wait until September...
Most 3rd party shops will replace the 3GS screen for $50.
Take it to the Apple Store and they'll replace it for $99.
Most 3rd party shops will replace the 3GS screen for $50.
Take it to the Apple Store and they'll replace it for $99.
Krevnik
Apr 15, 04:29 PM
OSX was not built on UNIX, it is Mach/XNU with a BSD subsystem, it is UNIX-like, much like linux.