thejadedmonkey
Oct 11, 01:21 AM
I'm sure I'll get snarkey comments, but here goes: If I can't check my email on it, I'm not interested.
I've got a couple iPods and a shuffle. They play music, and that's great, but I want something that gets MY information to me. When that happens, they've got me sold.
That's really funny.. I was just wishing my iPod (3G) could sync my email from outlook for reading on-the-go.
I've got a couple iPods and a shuffle. They play music, and that's great, but I want something that gets MY information to me. When that happens, they've got me sold.
That's really funny.. I was just wishing my iPod (3G) could sync my email from outlook for reading on-the-go.
psycoswimmer
Jan 9, 02:58 PM
Okay. I don't know when the keynote will update but I'll do what I usually do. Now that I already know the products, I'll go to apple.com and check the site and then watch the keynote later to see them "in action". This is what I usually do, anyway.
Suture
Mar 29, 06:54 AM
The cops are working on background info on both houses to try and get a warrant. It seems there have been other break-ins in the area and they are hoping to catch the guy (or girl) who has been doing it. Right now, my 360 showing up on my network has been the biggest lead they have gotten because it narrows down the area by quite a bit.
Glad to hear this. Hopefully you'll get your 360 back soon!
Glad to hear this. Hopefully you'll get your 360 back soon!
quentoncassidy
Dec 10, 07:02 PM
As mentioned, the spawning is terrible. IMO worse than in MW2 (which seemed hard to believe at first)
They shouldn't spawn anywhere near me. I hate spawning near the enemies too and die within 5 seconds of spawning. Personally, I'd rather wait 5-10 seconds for a spawning point to open up instead of dying right away.
They shouldn't spawn anywhere near me. I hate spawning near the enemies too and die within 5 seconds of spawning. Personally, I'd rather wait 5-10 seconds for a spawning point to open up instead of dying right away.
bruinsrme
Oct 6, 11:35 AM
It was a good message until they stated "Before you pick a phone, pick a network." That would be valid in an iPhone-less world. They would still be selling us phones based on a spinning CGI rendering of a phone's outer shell. "Look! A plastic candy bar! You like candy, don't you? Then you'll love our rectangular phone! Brand new features like rounded edges and three colors!"
Apple changed the game. The device should now be the focus. The service should be an afterthought in the background.
Why would anyone by something as expensive as an iPhone if the coverage is not as good As another carrier or existan at all? Yeah I want to pay $90 a month for a phone that doesn't work well in the area I spent most of my time in.
Apple changed the game. The device should now be the focus. The service should be an afterthought in the background.
Why would anyone by something as expensive as an iPhone if the coverage is not as good As another carrier or existan at all? Yeah I want to pay $90 a month for a phone that doesn't work well in the area I spent most of my time in.
LarryC
Apr 29, 04:29 PM
Well, that's a good thing. I am glad that they are listening to what the customers want. I was beginning to think that the old maxim of "the customer is always right" had died.
snberk103
Apr 15, 08:03 PM
Well actually we know the TSA methods don't work because both of the incidents were from European airports that mirror what the TSA does. Added to the number of weapons that make it through TSA checkpoints, it's easy to see that the TSA does in fact not work to the extent that it is expected to.
All we know is that increased security screening is not perfect. Perhaps you can extrapolate the European experience (in this case) to the TSA... but that's as far as you can go.
I understood your rather simplistic attempt at game theory just fine. The problem remains that one side is not a rational actor. The command portion of terrorists have virtually nothing to lose with a botched attempt, and neither does the fanatic patsy. A 50/50 ratio isn't good enough for our security because the downside for both command and patsy are much smaller than the upside (from their perspective). The chances of failure need to be much higher in order to effectively deter terrorists.
Do you always start with the insulting tone (see bolding) when the debate isn't going your way? I would argue that both sides are rational actors, though both sides may also employ non-rational players. The higher echelons of terrorist organizations have shown themselves to very worried about being captured by the fact that they are so hard to catch. If they didn't care, they wouldn't be going to a great deal of trouble to avoid it. Therefore, to my mind, they are rational actors. That 50/50 number is one that I threw into the argument as an "for argument's sake". Please don't rely on it for anything factual. The TSA in fact catches more than 50% of their training/testing planted weapons. And yes, I think even if the the number was as low as 50/50 a rational actor would do everything... oh heck... I've already written all that - you've not presented anything else of substance in it's place, so I'll just save my typing finger....
Sacrificing these things is appropriate when there is a tangible gain. There hasn't been much of a tangible gain with TSA, and this is coming from the head of Israeli Security. We're paying a lot and getting almost nothing in return. Every year there's a new "standard" put out there to make it seem like TSA is doing something, but time and again security experts have lambasted TSA and its efforts as a dog and pony show.
Your own opinion of flying should be an example of how ridiculous things have gotten. If people now become disgruntled and irritated every time they fly, for perhaps marginal gains in security, then our methods have failed.
That's the funny thing. I've never actually said that the TSA is the best thing around. All I've said is that the TSA is doing something. That's all - that the TSA is doing something right. Not everything. Just something. Go back and look it up. Even the head of the Israeli security never said they were useless (as in doing nothing right). Just that it wasn't the best use of resources. Oh, and if you know Israelis (and I do), then you'll also know that there is another Israeli who knows just as much as that first fellow, and she thinks the TSA is doing things just fine.
It is difficult to prove, but you can make an educated guess about what the cause is. Other than the correlational evidence, there is no other good data to suggest that TSA has actually been effective. In no field is correlation enough to establish anything but correlation.
That's the problem with 90% of the decisions Governments make. All they have is correlational connections. Or incomplete causal relationships. Or... basically the best they can do is make an educated guess, and hope for the best.
No, that's not how it works. If you want to assert your idea as correct, the burden is on you to show that it is correct. I am going to try to poke holes in your reasoning, and it's up to you to show that my criticisms are invalid on the bases of logic and evidence.
No, on two counts. 1) You asserted "Our attempts at security are at best as good as Lisa's rock...". I countered your assertion by saying that the TSA must be doing something right, and used the stats on hijackings. I (to paraphrase you) "poked hole in your reasoning". You've presented nothing that counters my evidence, except to try mocking it as simplistic. If it is, then show how it is.... If my argument doesn't convince you. Then say so, and then leave it at that. I have my opinion, you have yours. But if you want me to change my opinion you had better do better. 2) I've forgotten - cr*p.
So far you've only cited correlation, which is not sufficient evidence for causation. You ignored my criticism based on military intervention, changing travel patterns, etc, and only want to trumpet your belief that correlation is enough. It's not. If you don't want to do more on Mac Rumors, then don't post anymore on this topic concerning this line of discussion.
You are right correlations don't show causation. But they are evidence for it. If you have evidence that shows otherwise, present it.
hippy hairstyles.
hippie hairstyle. hippie
cutesy hippie hairstyles,
her hippie hairstyle.
hippy hairstyles. Hippy hairstyles for girls? Hippy hairstyles for girls? xPismo. Oct 28, 04:58 PM. Apple will need to open up osX to generic PC#39;s but i can
contemporary hippy look.
Hippie Hairstyle
And some HIPPIE PETS!
Nicole Richie Hippie headband
hippy hairstyle.
hippy hairstyles. hippie on
hippie hairstyle. hippy. dba7dba. Mar 22, 04:27 PM. Samsung can say all they want about
All we know is that increased security screening is not perfect. Perhaps you can extrapolate the European experience (in this case) to the TSA... but that's as far as you can go.
I understood your rather simplistic attempt at game theory just fine. The problem remains that one side is not a rational actor. The command portion of terrorists have virtually nothing to lose with a botched attempt, and neither does the fanatic patsy. A 50/50 ratio isn't good enough for our security because the downside for both command and patsy are much smaller than the upside (from their perspective). The chances of failure need to be much higher in order to effectively deter terrorists.
Do you always start with the insulting tone (see bolding) when the debate isn't going your way? I would argue that both sides are rational actors, though both sides may also employ non-rational players. The higher echelons of terrorist organizations have shown themselves to very worried about being captured by the fact that they are so hard to catch. If they didn't care, they wouldn't be going to a great deal of trouble to avoid it. Therefore, to my mind, they are rational actors. That 50/50 number is one that I threw into the argument as an "for argument's sake". Please don't rely on it for anything factual. The TSA in fact catches more than 50% of their training/testing planted weapons. And yes, I think even if the the number was as low as 50/50 a rational actor would do everything... oh heck... I've already written all that - you've not presented anything else of substance in it's place, so I'll just save my typing finger....
Sacrificing these things is appropriate when there is a tangible gain. There hasn't been much of a tangible gain with TSA, and this is coming from the head of Israeli Security. We're paying a lot and getting almost nothing in return. Every year there's a new "standard" put out there to make it seem like TSA is doing something, but time and again security experts have lambasted TSA and its efforts as a dog and pony show.
Your own opinion of flying should be an example of how ridiculous things have gotten. If people now become disgruntled and irritated every time they fly, for perhaps marginal gains in security, then our methods have failed.
That's the funny thing. I've never actually said that the TSA is the best thing around. All I've said is that the TSA is doing something. That's all - that the TSA is doing something right. Not everything. Just something. Go back and look it up. Even the head of the Israeli security never said they were useless (as in doing nothing right). Just that it wasn't the best use of resources. Oh, and if you know Israelis (and I do), then you'll also know that there is another Israeli who knows just as much as that first fellow, and she thinks the TSA is doing things just fine.
It is difficult to prove, but you can make an educated guess about what the cause is. Other than the correlational evidence, there is no other good data to suggest that TSA has actually been effective. In no field is correlation enough to establish anything but correlation.
That's the problem with 90% of the decisions Governments make. All they have is correlational connections. Or incomplete causal relationships. Or... basically the best they can do is make an educated guess, and hope for the best.
No, that's not how it works. If you want to assert your idea as correct, the burden is on you to show that it is correct. I am going to try to poke holes in your reasoning, and it's up to you to show that my criticisms are invalid on the bases of logic and evidence.
No, on two counts. 1) You asserted "Our attempts at security are at best as good as Lisa's rock...". I countered your assertion by saying that the TSA must be doing something right, and used the stats on hijackings. I (to paraphrase you) "poked hole in your reasoning". You've presented nothing that counters my evidence, except to try mocking it as simplistic. If it is, then show how it is.... If my argument doesn't convince you. Then say so, and then leave it at that. I have my opinion, you have yours. But if you want me to change my opinion you had better do better. 2) I've forgotten - cr*p.
So far you've only cited correlation, which is not sufficient evidence for causation. You ignored my criticism based on military intervention, changing travel patterns, etc, and only want to trumpet your belief that correlation is enough. It's not. If you don't want to do more on Mac Rumors, then don't post anymore on this topic concerning this line of discussion.
You are right correlations don't show causation. But they are evidence for it. If you have evidence that shows otherwise, present it.
Mr. Gates
Apr 26, 07:13 AM
Such a small difference !
Who cares ? :confused:
Gimmie a 4 inch screen, then we'll talk !
Who cares ? :confused:
Gimmie a 4 inch screen, then we'll talk !
jessica.
Apr 13, 11:12 AM
Whatta Fu**!????????????????????????? :eek:
Who is the background voice, is it another sibling or the girl saying I don't want to get pat down?
No, the voice is not saying that at all. I'm not even sure you could twist the words around enough to make them sound like "I don't want to get pat down".
It's out of context but still ridiculous.
Who is the background voice, is it another sibling or the girl saying I don't want to get pat down?
No, the voice is not saying that at all. I'm not even sure you could twist the words around enough to make them sound like "I don't want to get pat down".
It's out of context but still ridiculous.
OneMike
Mar 18, 02:06 PM
I have a Seido Spring-Clip, which shows off my phone more than some other cases. I don't know, I just can't picture some stranger coming up to me talking about how my phone sucks. Never had that happen.
I did get inquiries about my phone from strangers, but always positive.
I joke around with friends about it, but that's different.
End of the day though, no phone is perfect. Buy what makes you happy. Everyone has different needs.
I did get inquiries about my phone from strangers, but always positive.
I joke around with friends about it, but that's different.
End of the day though, no phone is perfect. Buy what makes you happy. Everyone has different needs.
hob
Jan 9, 01:22 PM
This is getting unbearable now. It's all happened, and i don't know what! Such a test of our resolve and patience...
How much longer is the wait usually?
MA.
Was this your idea? I'll kill ya :p
It's normally up pretty snappy. That being said I've normally got my head in all their new sites and stuff to keep me happy...
I accidentally just went on BBC News... spoilt one surprise for myself :(
How much longer is the wait usually?
MA.
Was this your idea? I'll kill ya :p
It's normally up pretty snappy. That being said I've normally got my head in all their new sites and stuff to keep me happy...
I accidentally just went on BBC News... spoilt one surprise for myself :(
Nekbeth
Apr 26, 10:29 PM
What if after pressing the start button, you create a timer and start it. Then pressing the cancel button invalidates and releases it. Then pressing the start button would create another timer, using the same pointer.
Totally untested and probably broken code below, but should demonstrate the idea:
-(IBAction)startButton:(id) sender {
// myTimer is declared in header file ...
if (myTimer!=nil) { // if the pointer already points to a timer, you don't want to create a second one without stoping and destroying the first
[myTimer invalidate];
[myTimer release];
}
// Now that we know myTimer doesn't point to a timer already..
myTimer = [NSTimer scheduledTimerWithTimeInterval:aTimeInterval target:self selector:@selector(echoIt:) userInfo:myDict repeats:YES];
[myTimer retain];
}
-(IBAction)cancelIt:(id) sender {
[myTimer invalidate];
[myTimer release]; // This timer is now gone, and you won't reuse it.
}
Update *** "I though it worked but the timer kept going on the background.
crashed :confused:
wlh99, do you get an exception in the invalid method " [myTimer Invalidate]" ?
Totally untested and probably broken code below, but should demonstrate the idea:
-(IBAction)startButton:(id) sender {
// myTimer is declared in header file ...
if (myTimer!=nil) { // if the pointer already points to a timer, you don't want to create a second one without stoping and destroying the first
[myTimer invalidate];
[myTimer release];
}
// Now that we know myTimer doesn't point to a timer already..
myTimer = [NSTimer scheduledTimerWithTimeInterval:aTimeInterval target:self selector:@selector(echoIt:) userInfo:myDict repeats:YES];
[myTimer retain];
}
-(IBAction)cancelIt:(id) sender {
[myTimer invalidate];
[myTimer release]; // This timer is now gone, and you won't reuse it.
}
Update *** "I though it worked but the timer kept going on the background.
crashed :confused:
wlh99, do you get an exception in the invalid method " [myTimer Invalidate]" ?
sjo
Oct 28, 04:38 PM
The thin veneer is off the vast majority of people that clamor for OSS.
Whenever I hear the OSS crowd scream "Software should be FREE!" I translate that to mean "I refuse to pay someone for their work, thus I will STEAL it"!
I don't blame Apple. The OSS community abused what they had and turned to piracy by stealing the GUI. Kudos Apple.
OSX as we know it would not exist without the work "OSS crowd" did and does. So it's only appropriate for Apple to contribute back to the community, as it has done and hopefully continues to do.
Whenever I hear the OSS crowd scream "Software should be FREE!" I translate that to mean "I refuse to pay someone for their work, thus I will STEAL it"!
I don't blame Apple. The OSS community abused what they had and turned to piracy by stealing the GUI. Kudos Apple.
OSX as we know it would not exist without the work "OSS crowd" did and does. So it's only appropriate for Apple to contribute back to the community, as it has done and hopefully continues to do.
*LTD*
Mar 16, 09:52 AM
Purely due to the amount of manufacturers creating Android devices.
Which is the entire problem with Android. And which is why you will never, ever, see any single Android device outsell the iPhone.
Which is the entire problem with Android. And which is why you will never, ever, see any single Android device outsell the iPhone.
Hovey
Jul 21, 03:12 PM
Apple should simply focus on resolving their own issues. It's not their job to be the "tattle tell" police pointing out problems or potential problems with their competitors. The press and/or markets will uncover issues with Apple competitors.
They weren't doing it for that purpose. It was to show people that it's a common problem with physics no matter who makes the phone. People were thinking that only Apple's iPhone has the problem and they were simply saying, no, it's not because it's apple product, it's because it's a cell phone.
They weren't doing it for that purpose. It was to show people that it's a common problem with physics no matter who makes the phone. People were thinking that only Apple's iPhone has the problem and they were simply saying, no, it's not because it's apple product, it's because it's a cell phone.
GGJstudios
Apr 21, 12:08 PM
So it's a like/dislike system that nets the like/dislikes to a numerical value, assuming the dislikes are negative. That is why when you change from a vote down to an up, you are removing your dislike and adding a like. Correct?
Exactly.
Exactly.
darkplanets
Apr 12, 10:59 PM
Yeah, the TSA is pretty absurd. The airport I use just got body scanners-- now when I fly I make sure to shake my junk around for the world to see.
Coming soon to the Internet near you.
Coming soon to the Internet near you.
Yannick
Oct 17, 09:53 AM
yawn! the disc is dead.
(dying, at least.)
I personnally don't agree. Movies you can buy and download still have poorer resolution, only one language, no bonus. Plus it takes so much room on your hard drive! You end up having to burn them anyway on a disc, or having to buy two huge hard drives for backup/safety purpose in case your hard drive dies. I own something like 150 DVD. That's about 1 TB (2 TB if you backup)� You really can't compare it to the music situation. Movies on DVD are cheaper than music CD. I get brand new DVDs through internet for an average of 7 � ($8.77). For me to buy a movie on iTunes, it would have to sell for 3 or 4 � ($4 or $5) to be worth it.
(dying, at least.)
I personnally don't agree. Movies you can buy and download still have poorer resolution, only one language, no bonus. Plus it takes so much room on your hard drive! You end up having to burn them anyway on a disc, or having to buy two huge hard drives for backup/safety purpose in case your hard drive dies. I own something like 150 DVD. That's about 1 TB (2 TB if you backup)� You really can't compare it to the music situation. Movies on DVD are cheaper than music CD. I get brand new DVDs through internet for an average of 7 � ($8.77). For me to buy a movie on iTunes, it would have to sell for 3 or 4 � ($4 or $5) to be worth it.
rdowns
May 4, 04:15 PM
Absurd. Sadly, that word has lost much of its meaning due to its overuse in describing the crazy right wing social agenda happening.
iliketomac
Nov 23, 07:11 PM
I can confirm these are indeed the prices you will see. As for other details, none have been given. I'm sure we'll be told the details just before opening, such as what discounts can or cannot be combined by customers, etc. Expect all new signage in the stores, as well as a switch from the traditional black shirts to bright red shirts which display a product on front and a clever saying on the back. iPod, iPod Shuffle, MacBook & iMac will be the variety you'll see.
Also of note...if you bought recently (in the last few days) and want to get in on the dicounted prices, bring your product back in and plead with the store managers...they have the authority to return and re-ring the sale with the discount sans any restocking fee. Of course, they also have the right to be jerks and say no.
One last thing...don't plan on getting much attention from the Mac Specialist tomorrow, they'll be busy ringing out sales. Know what you want and get in line. They've been building stock for the last few weeks, but some items, such as iMacs and MacBooks are in limited quantities. (Perhaps 30 of each model in stock...maximum)
VERY WELL SAID.... there are enough hints and temptations by Apple to encourage the local consumer - just head on in the retail stores or online first thing tomorrow..... :D Happy Shopping!!
Also of note...if you bought recently (in the last few days) and want to get in on the dicounted prices, bring your product back in and plead with the store managers...they have the authority to return and re-ring the sale with the discount sans any restocking fee. Of course, they also have the right to be jerks and say no.
One last thing...don't plan on getting much attention from the Mac Specialist tomorrow, they'll be busy ringing out sales. Know what you want and get in line. They've been building stock for the last few weeks, but some items, such as iMacs and MacBooks are in limited quantities. (Perhaps 30 of each model in stock...maximum)
VERY WELL SAID.... there are enough hints and temptations by Apple to encourage the local consumer - just head on in the retail stores or online first thing tomorrow..... :D Happy Shopping!!
kdarling
Oct 22, 04:26 PM
So you looked around and deemed them fixed or drove around and tested them?
Tested.
In my neighborhood, which is surrounded by hills and lots of state parks, there were several well known holes for all carriers.
Certain valleys, certain sections of road. Every local person knew exactly where they were, because cell service just disappeared in those places. That map was bang on.
Then a couple of years ago, several new towers finally got approved and built, and the dead spots disappeared. (Alas, the skyline isn't as pretty as it used to be, however.)
I can still see those old dead spots marked on that map. The website says it's been up since 2001. Looks like people often enter data, but don't take the time to go back and remove it, assuming there's a way to do that.
Tested.
In my neighborhood, which is surrounded by hills and lots of state parks, there were several well known holes for all carriers.
Certain valleys, certain sections of road. Every local person knew exactly where they were, because cell service just disappeared in those places. That map was bang on.
Then a couple of years ago, several new towers finally got approved and built, and the dead spots disappeared. (Alas, the skyline isn't as pretty as it used to be, however.)
I can still see those old dead spots marked on that map. The website says it's been up since 2001. Looks like people often enter data, but don't take the time to go back and remove it, assuming there's a way to do that.
Matthew Yohe
Mar 28, 10:22 PM
I think we are headed towards a "locked down" OS X, FWIW.
Uh, no.
Uh, no.
KnightWRX
Mar 10, 04:34 AM
Umm, a touch screen on a computer like that is really stupid because if your using it solidly for more than 1 hour your arms would fall off :rolleyes:
Funny how before Steve said that, you would have been one to repeatedly ask for a touch screen iMac. ;)
I just look to Steve to see the trends in posting on Macrumors. Whatever the guy says, it means it will become defacto opinion on this site.
Funny how before Steve said that, you would have been one to repeatedly ask for a touch screen iMac. ;)
I just look to Steve to see the trends in posting on Macrumors. Whatever the guy says, it means it will become defacto opinion on this site.
tophergt
Oct 19, 04:54 PM
We're talking about hardware here, not OS. So Vista should have very little effect on Apple's PC marketshare, unless of course Vista's release encourages people to buy new PCs from Dell, HP, etc.
Yeah, that was my point--if there is an imminent OS release, there exists a significant number of consumers who will wait so that they can get Vista for "free." Same concept as not purchasing that iMac or MacBook in mid-march when you know that 10.5 will be out in a month.
Yeah, that was my point--if there is an imminent OS release, there exists a significant number of consumers who will wait so that they can get Vista for "free." Same concept as not purchasing that iMac or MacBook in mid-march when you know that 10.5 will be out in a month.
