Mattie Num Nums
Apr 22, 10:43 AM
wimax is not 4G. it even shows up with the wifi icon when it's connected. LTE is a real ITU standard that will eventually pave the way for real 4G
Really? When my EVO connects to WiMAX the 3G turns into a 4G.
Really? When my EVO connects to WiMAX the 3G turns into a 4G.
Squonk
Oct 24, 08:06 AM
Apple's headline: "...Seatbelts Sold Separately."
Bad marketing, seatbelts suggests crashing.
I hear you. Maybe, this means installing Windoze is optional... he he he ;)
Bad marketing, seatbelts suggests crashing.
I hear you. Maybe, this means installing Windoze is optional... he he he ;)
firestarter
May 1, 11:38 PM
It is not me who decided ... Osama was a Terrorist long before 911 ... you do not seem to know of his involvement ... you should read up on his life of Terrorism.
Yeah, it's all about one guy who was leader of the bad men. And none of the bad men could think for themselves, and now he's gone, they won't know what to do - and we'll all be happy and safe.
Sleep well!
Yeah, it's all about one guy who was leader of the bad men. And none of the bad men could think for themselves, and now he's gone, they won't know what to do - and we'll all be happy and safe.
Sleep well!
Mac-Addict
Oct 24, 08:39 AM
What about MACBOOKS?!
could be a few months.. January/Febuary.. Maybe Or earlier who knows.. maybe next week maybe tomorrow.. maybe I put to many maybes in this post..
could be a few months.. January/Febuary.. Maybe Or earlier who knows.. maybe next week maybe tomorrow.. maybe I put to many maybes in this post..
rovex
Apr 14, 02:13 AM
iPhone 5 is releasing in September, no question about it now
ThaDoggg
Jan 28, 09:22 AM
yeah im behind the times.
Awesome game...too bad I don't have time to play it anymore.
Awesome game...too bad I don't have time to play it anymore.
AppleScruff1
Apr 28, 02:49 PM
Actually it is because a 2 year old iPhone is better than any Android device out there.
We all know the iPhone 4 is streets ahead of any other smartphone, but the 3GS provides a superior experience as well. It is not about spec sheets, it is about performance, software, reliability and the rest.
Only in the minds of the mindless.
We all know the iPhone 4 is streets ahead of any other smartphone, but the 3GS provides a superior experience as well. It is not about spec sheets, it is about performance, software, reliability and the rest.
Only in the minds of the mindless.
AppleScruff1
Apr 23, 06:50 PM
It's obvious that at this point in time sales of any one phone model is going to be quite a bit less than iPhone sales. Model for model, nothing is close.
KnightWRX
Apr 22, 12:07 PM
4. Per Bash, i never said it wasnt part of GPL/GNU - it is - I agree.
Look, I'll just ignore you. Your knowledge of all of this is lacking and now you're backtracking. To answer that specific point. Yes, you did say Bash wasn't part of the GNU licensing, quite clearly showing you have no understanding of the situation :
Bash is under the GPL license - not GNU. Never has been GNU
Look, I'll just ignore you. Your knowledge of all of this is lacking and now you're backtracking. To answer that specific point. Yes, you did say Bash wasn't part of the GNU licensing, quite clearly showing you have no understanding of the situation :
Bash is under the GPL license - not GNU. Never has been GNU
KPOM
Apr 17, 08:03 PM
Is it huge, or is it only 30%?
These are all just rumours anyway.
Well the Samsung Series 9 already uses the chip that CNET is speculating will be in the MacBook Air, so we can compare its graphics performance.
These are all just rumours anyway.
Well the Samsung Series 9 already uses the chip that CNET is speculating will be in the MacBook Air, so we can compare its graphics performance.
beangibbs
Apr 25, 12:02 PM
matte screen option or fail.
Really? People downing the product already before we even know what it's going to have? Really?
Or are there people just trolling for a response?
Really? People downing the product already before we even know what it's going to have? Really?
Or are there people just trolling for a response?
reflex
Oct 24, 07:54 AM
Wonderful update. I hope the 160GB upgrade isn't too expensive, but 1GB standard and starting at 120GB are more than I expected or even hoped for.
I was also still doubting if I should get a MB or MBP, but that question has been settled today.
I was also still doubting if I should get a MB or MBP, but that question has been settled today.
kirk26
Apr 14, 01:45 PM
Great, another useless update :rolleyes:
yea, I know right? I hate it when they fix security issues with their phones. :rolleyes:
yea, I know right? I hate it when they fix security issues with their phones. :rolleyes:
Don't panic
Apr 26, 03:59 PM
so it's plutonius with 5.
hopefully you guys are right (although that would make me and appleguy prime suspects).
what are the little arrows next to the quote button?
hopefully you guys are right (although that would make me and appleguy prime suspects).
what are the little arrows next to the quote button?
clibinarius
Apr 28, 12:59 PM
So the iPhone went from being pummeled by Android to now just being badly beaten.
That is Awesome.
iOS for phones was being pummeled by Android. iPhone is kicking the heck out of every phone on the market individually.
That is Awesome.
iOS for phones was being pummeled by Android. iPhone is kicking the heck out of every phone on the market individually.
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).
SactoGuy18
Apr 29, 11:18 PM
I believe that Amazon uses 256 kbps variable bit rate compression for their MP3 Download store. Why MP3? The reason is simple: it allows maximum compatibility with all music players that can play back MP3 files out there. Sure, Amazon could use the AAC 256 kbps VBR format, but outside of the iPod support for the AAC format is iffy at best (only the higher end players from Sandisk's Sansa line and Creative support AAC).
bondsbw
Sep 30, 10:03 AM
Um.... I am pretty sure that Apple gets a higher subsidy from having an exclusive carrier agreement, lowering the cost to their customers, yet still keeping margins on the device high.
Someone to correct me if I am wrong.
So you're saying that AT&T gives Apple money...but that does nothing for Apple's business?
:rolleyes: Wow, both of you missed it entirely. My point is the same as yours.
The poster I replied to suggested that Apple could have split their contract so that both AT&T and Verizon would have the iPhone (meaning better overall service today). But in the end, that would mean less profit for Apple.
I was explaining that Apple would not have made an exclusive agreement had there been no extra money involved. That's my point.
Someone to correct me if I am wrong.
So you're saying that AT&T gives Apple money...but that does nothing for Apple's business?
:rolleyes: Wow, both of you missed it entirely. My point is the same as yours.
The poster I replied to suggested that Apple could have split their contract so that both AT&T and Verizon would have the iPhone (meaning better overall service today). But in the end, that would mean less profit for Apple.
I was explaining that Apple would not have made an exclusive agreement had there been no extra money involved. That's my point.
thatisme
May 3, 07:47 AM
still no return to the 24"... the perfect screen size for a good chunk of potential buyers, IMO
Rodimus Prime
Oct 1, 02:28 PM
All emergency calls are placed on a separate priority line/ or are given preference over all other calls at any point in time.
On top of that they will grab the tower with the best signal no matter what carrier it is on.
If you place a 911 call from an ATT phone and T-Mobile has a better tower in the area then you can sure as hell bet that the phone will be going to that tower.
emergency mode on a phone is very different than a normal call. It has the power to kick others off the line and you are given more dedicated bandwithe for the phone.
On top of that they will grab the tower with the best signal no matter what carrier it is on.
If you place a 911 call from an ATT phone and T-Mobile has a better tower in the area then you can sure as hell bet that the phone will be going to that tower.
emergency mode on a phone is very different than a normal call. It has the power to kick others off the line and you are given more dedicated bandwithe for the phone.
dgree03
Apr 28, 12:04 PM
Why do you keep comparing a single phone model to an entire platform used on 20 some devices?
Oh... that's right... it's all you can hang your hat on. Sorry... let's talk pummeled or badly beaten when any single Android phone outsells the iPhone.
Question should be, why does it matter how many android devices there are? There is still a one to one relationship, one customer buys-one device. Its android smartphones vs Apple Smartphones.
Oh... that's right... it's all you can hang your hat on. Sorry... let's talk pummeled or badly beaten when any single Android phone outsells the iPhone.
Question should be, why does it matter how many android devices there are? There is still a one to one relationship, one customer buys-one device. Its android smartphones vs Apple Smartphones.
rovex
May 2, 04:35 AM
Great news! Shame its taken so long but at least we got him eventually! :D
Now lets hope this is declared a national holiday and Apple releases the new iMac with a discount to celebrate :D
WE didn't find him, it was our American friends! :D
Now lets hope this is declared a national holiday and Apple releases the new iMac with a discount to celebrate :D
WE didn't find him, it was our American friends! :D
arjaosx
Apr 13, 03:19 PM
Pls look at post #94. Numbers speak for themselves and they tell me Apple won't get into TV business. Who's going to pay 2k every 2 - 3 years for a TV?
You might have inside sources at Apple, because you seem to be too sure that it will cost 2K and would only last for 2 - 3 years.
I remember people not wanting an iPad when the rumors broke out. Same thing.
You might have inside sources at Apple, because you seem to be too sure that it will cost 2K and would only last for 2 - 3 years.
I remember people not wanting an iPad when the rumors broke out. Same thing.
mBox
Mar 8, 09:19 AM
Love the show and will be watching all the re-runs but I suggest cancelling it.
Its not going to be the same without him.
Unless you can get Robert Downey to lower his status to TV.
Its not going to be the same without him.
Unless you can get Robert Downey to lower his status to TV.