ritmomundo
Mar 18, 06:11 PM
Ok fair enough, that was poorly phrased. What I meant was "It seems that some smart phone owners feel some kind of envy to me because I own an iPhone 4."
Lol, serious? Sorry bro, sounds pretty much the same to me. You're still assuming that because someone compares features with you, or comments on your phone, that they are jealous of you because of your phone.
Lol, serious? Sorry bro, sounds pretty much the same to me. You're still assuming that because someone compares features with you, or comments on your phone, that they are jealous of you because of your phone.
D*I*S_Frontman
Jan 12, 06:28 PM
Look, people--
There is nothing amazingly new or innovative technology-wise in the iPhone. Everything in it has been done before, and it does not even employ some of the latest (3G) features that its competition does.
Niether did the original iPod. Grasshopper, go and learn from Thread #500. People thought that product was "crippled" by high price and no new technology ("An overpriced HDD-based mp3 player with a B&W LCD display? Who cares?").
I predict that Apple will have 20% of the entire cell phone market and 50+% of the high-end communication device within three years of its June release. That will mean 150-200 million units.
In the intervening six months before formal release, or shortly thereafter, some of the smaller issues will be attended to (like the ability to at least open and review MS files, sync'ing issues, interfacing w/iTunes Store, what have you). The rest won't matter.
Apple does not sell products, people. They sell personal productivity, great user experiences, wow and chic. This phone phone meets all of those criteria. For consumer devices like these, a streamlined and intuitive user experience is like money in the bank. The only thing innovative about the iPod is the stupid click-wheel, and yet 75% of the ENTIRE aac/mp3 player market is controlled by ONE COMPANY. The one with the click-wheel.
So it is with this product. If the final build quality of the unit proves durable, reliable, and cosmetically superior, and the unit functions as billed, it will not only make a huge forray into that giant market, but essentially create a new one.
Right now, the "smartphone" is really a piece of business equipment. Apple just invented the quintessential "consumer" version of the same product. It doesn't matter that it is expensive or lacks some high-end features. If is actually works as effortlessly and seamlessly as billed, it will become another cultural icon. Apple marketing will see to it that everyone on the planet is aware of how "cool" this device is.
I'm glad to be on record here. I hope that when this thread is reviewed three years from now, everyone is talking about the foolish naysayers of Thread #3245138 (or whatever this one is).
There is nothing amazingly new or innovative technology-wise in the iPhone. Everything in it has been done before, and it does not even employ some of the latest (3G) features that its competition does.
Niether did the original iPod. Grasshopper, go and learn from Thread #500. People thought that product was "crippled" by high price and no new technology ("An overpriced HDD-based mp3 player with a B&W LCD display? Who cares?").
I predict that Apple will have 20% of the entire cell phone market and 50+% of the high-end communication device within three years of its June release. That will mean 150-200 million units.
In the intervening six months before formal release, or shortly thereafter, some of the smaller issues will be attended to (like the ability to at least open and review MS files, sync'ing issues, interfacing w/iTunes Store, what have you). The rest won't matter.
Apple does not sell products, people. They sell personal productivity, great user experiences, wow and chic. This phone phone meets all of those criteria. For consumer devices like these, a streamlined and intuitive user experience is like money in the bank. The only thing innovative about the iPod is the stupid click-wheel, and yet 75% of the ENTIRE aac/mp3 player market is controlled by ONE COMPANY. The one with the click-wheel.
So it is with this product. If the final build quality of the unit proves durable, reliable, and cosmetically superior, and the unit functions as billed, it will not only make a huge forray into that giant market, but essentially create a new one.
Right now, the "smartphone" is really a piece of business equipment. Apple just invented the quintessential "consumer" version of the same product. It doesn't matter that it is expensive or lacks some high-end features. If is actually works as effortlessly and seamlessly as billed, it will become another cultural icon. Apple marketing will see to it that everyone on the planet is aware of how "cool" this device is.
I'm glad to be on record here. I hope that when this thread is reviewed three years from now, everyone is talking about the foolish naysayers of Thread #3245138 (or whatever this one is).
MacinDoc
Sep 12, 12:57 AM
Disney is the 2nd largest media company in the world. I surely hope you don't think we're just getting Mickey Mouse and Daffy Duck movies. Here's just the movie companies that Disney owns:
Walt Disney Pictures
Touchstone Pictures
Hollywood Pictures
Miramax Films
Buena Vista Home Entertainment
Pixar
I think that's quite a good start.
-Matt
I realize that, but there are more major studios that are not on that list owned by Disney than there are on the list. But maybe it will work out like the TV downloads have, as some have suggested, starting with just a few and adding more. The problem is, Apple does not currently dominate that market; there are other players right now that are equally strong with their video download services. It seems that the market seems to favor having a dominant player, like Windows for OS and iTMS for music downloads. This could leave the door open for Microsoft to dominate this market if Apple doesn't ramp up its selection quickly.
Walt Disney Pictures
Touchstone Pictures
Hollywood Pictures
Miramax Films
Buena Vista Home Entertainment
Pixar
I think that's quite a good start.
-Matt
I realize that, but there are more major studios that are not on that list owned by Disney than there are on the list. But maybe it will work out like the TV downloads have, as some have suggested, starting with just a few and adding more. The problem is, Apple does not currently dominate that market; there are other players right now that are equally strong with their video download services. It seems that the market seems to favor having a dominant player, like Windows for OS and iTMS for music downloads. This could leave the door open for Microsoft to dominate this market if Apple doesn't ramp up its selection quickly.
aristobrat
Jan 12, 05:30 PM
it is my personal opinion that there also exists a 'Church of Apple' with 'members' who are smug, patronizing, holier-than-thou, basking in the glory of some perceived exclusivity and enlightenment, borderline brainwashed lodge brothers with a special handshake. It sickens me to no end. Again, this is merely one man's opinion, I know you wouldn't agree so let's just leave it there.
IMO, I think the general religion is "smug, matronizing, hollier-than-thou, etc", and it breaks down into sub-regions called Apple, Microsoft, Coke, Pepsi, etc, each with their own church. I'm not a fan of the Apple people that are like that, nor am I a fan of the Microsoft people who act that way either.
Well, I'm sure the iPhone was meant as a mere appetizer for the 30th anniversary... not "Well, it took us 30 years but dagnammit, we finally managed to make a thingamabob that rings!"
I was glad to hear Steve say "over the course of the next several months, we're going to roll out some awesome stuff for the Mac." :)
IMO, I think the general religion is "smug, matronizing, hollier-than-thou, etc", and it breaks down into sub-regions called Apple, Microsoft, Coke, Pepsi, etc, each with their own church. I'm not a fan of the Apple people that are like that, nor am I a fan of the Microsoft people who act that way either.
Well, I'm sure the iPhone was meant as a mere appetizer for the 30th anniversary... not "Well, it took us 30 years but dagnammit, we finally managed to make a thingamabob that rings!"
I was glad to hear Steve say "over the course of the next several months, we're going to roll out some awesome stuff for the Mac." :)
Tundraboy
Apr 29, 02:01 PM
And people kept telling me that OSX and iOS weren't going to merge in any meaningful manner for years ahead, if ever. Yeah right. I'd bet the one after this has them nearly fully merged and I mean towards iOS for the most part. OSX will be dumbed down to the lowest common brain cell and you won't be able to get free/open software anymore. It'll have to come through the App Store or not at all. Wait and see. That is the point I'll be moving on.
I feel the same way, it'll be ironic when you have to use a Windows PC to jailbreak Apple computers so you can install software that you want!!!!!! When it comes to that I'll be moving on as well.
I feel the same way, it'll be ironic when you have to use a Windows PC to jailbreak Apple computers so you can install software that you want!!!!!! When it comes to that I'll be moving on as well.
phineas
Oct 6, 01:22 PM
I have tried Verizon. It sucks. Even with the discount I get for working for GM it still sucks. Droped calls all the time. Half the time the conversation cut in and out and both sides would have to repeat their selves. And their customer service sucked too.
I have had no problems with AT&T and have had great customer service. I think ill keep my network.
Dropped calls can also be from the equipment, and not just the carrier
I have had no problems with AT&T and have had great customer service. I think ill keep my network.
Dropped calls can also be from the equipment, and not just the carrier
snberk103
Apr 13, 12:03 PM
I would prefer the cheaper and more effective way; profiling.
Also, you can't say security has been working well-- look at the number of incidences of things going through security accidentally via negligence (knives, guns, etc)-- while there's no official numbers, the anecdotal evidence is quite moving.
Actually, there is documented evidence (which I'm not going to look up, because it supports your contention). The TSA does publish numbers (though buried deep in their reports) on the number of times undercover agents are able to slip weapons through security on training/testing runs. The number is quite high, if you look at it in a "Sky is falling way". But that is the incomplete picture.
Suppose, just for argument's sake, you actually have a 50/50 chance of slipping something through security. Is that "good enough" to mount an operation? Consider that there are at least a dozen people involved, to support just one operative. You can try to separate them into cells - but that doesn't mean that they are entirely hidden... it just gives them time to try to escape while their links are followed. Plus, there is a lot of money involved.
Do you risk those 12 people, plus a large chunk of scarce resources, on a venture that only has a 50/50 chance of getting something onto the plane. (we haven't even considered that most bombs on planes lately have not gone off properly, eg. shoe bomber and underwear bomber)... or that if the intent is to forcibly take over the plane there might be sky marshall - or just a plane load of passengers who are not going to sit idly by.
So you try and reduce that risk by making the plan more "fool proof" and sophisticated - but this adds complexity ...and complex things/plans breakdown and require more resources and more people. More people means adding people with doubts, and the chances of leaking. Plus more resources, which brings attention to the operation. And as you add more people and resources, the "downside" to being caught gets bigger, so you try to reduce that risk by making it even more "foolproof".
If you are one of the 12+ people supporting the operative, and you have a 50/50 chance of being caught and spending a very long and nasty session in jail - even before you get your day in court - and you have no chance of the "ultimate reward" .... don't you think you might start having doubts, and talking to people? Sometimes the wrong people?
I don't buy for a minute all of the stories of traffic cops stopping a car for a routine check and finding "bad things" that were going to be used. The intelligence services have, imho, a pretty good idea of what is happening in these groups, and use these innocent looking traffic stops (and other coincidental discoveries) so that their undercover agents aren't suspected.
That is the value, imo, of the security checks. The barriers are are high enough to get the "bad" operations big and cumbersome, and to make the plans too complex to escape notice by the authorities. It's the planning and organization of getting past the security checks that the authorities are looking for. Once that "bad thing" is in the airport, the authorities have already lost most of the game. Then the security screening is just a last ditch attempt to catch something.
The real danger is the single lone-wolf person with a grudge, who hasn't planned in advance, and doesn't really care if they get caught. They have a 50/50 chance of getting through because the only security layer at that point is the security checkpoint. The intelligence services will not have picked them up, nor will the no-fly list incidentally.
.... all of this is just mho, of course..... read the later john lecarre though, for more chilling details....
Also, you can't say security has been working well-- look at the number of incidences of things going through security accidentally via negligence (knives, guns, etc)-- while there's no official numbers, the anecdotal evidence is quite moving.
Actually, there is documented evidence (which I'm not going to look up, because it supports your contention). The TSA does publish numbers (though buried deep in their reports) on the number of times undercover agents are able to slip weapons through security on training/testing runs. The number is quite high, if you look at it in a "Sky is falling way". But that is the incomplete picture.
Suppose, just for argument's sake, you actually have a 50/50 chance of slipping something through security. Is that "good enough" to mount an operation? Consider that there are at least a dozen people involved, to support just one operative. You can try to separate them into cells - but that doesn't mean that they are entirely hidden... it just gives them time to try to escape while their links are followed. Plus, there is a lot of money involved.
Do you risk those 12 people, plus a large chunk of scarce resources, on a venture that only has a 50/50 chance of getting something onto the plane. (we haven't even considered that most bombs on planes lately have not gone off properly, eg. shoe bomber and underwear bomber)... or that if the intent is to forcibly take over the plane there might be sky marshall - or just a plane load of passengers who are not going to sit idly by.
So you try and reduce that risk by making the plan more "fool proof" and sophisticated - but this adds complexity ...and complex things/plans breakdown and require more resources and more people. More people means adding people with doubts, and the chances of leaking. Plus more resources, which brings attention to the operation. And as you add more people and resources, the "downside" to being caught gets bigger, so you try to reduce that risk by making it even more "foolproof".
If you are one of the 12+ people supporting the operative, and you have a 50/50 chance of being caught and spending a very long and nasty session in jail - even before you get your day in court - and you have no chance of the "ultimate reward" .... don't you think you might start having doubts, and talking to people? Sometimes the wrong people?
I don't buy for a minute all of the stories of traffic cops stopping a car for a routine check and finding "bad things" that were going to be used. The intelligence services have, imho, a pretty good idea of what is happening in these groups, and use these innocent looking traffic stops (and other coincidental discoveries) so that their undercover agents aren't suspected.
That is the value, imo, of the security checks. The barriers are are high enough to get the "bad" operations big and cumbersome, and to make the plans too complex to escape notice by the authorities. It's the planning and organization of getting past the security checks that the authorities are looking for. Once that "bad thing" is in the airport, the authorities have already lost most of the game. Then the security screening is just a last ditch attempt to catch something.
The real danger is the single lone-wolf person with a grudge, who hasn't planned in advance, and doesn't really care if they get caught. They have a 50/50 chance of getting through because the only security layer at that point is the security checkpoint. The intelligence services will not have picked them up, nor will the no-fly list incidentally.
.... all of this is just mho, of course..... read the later john lecarre though, for more chilling details....
MacRumorUser
Nov 26, 05:33 PM
It's excellent not only in 3D but as a game in general. Levels are just about as varied and as long as they need to be that it never feels like a chore.
3D truly adds to the immersion. You enable it in the options menu (stereoscopic support).
3D truly adds to the immersion. You enable it in the options menu (stereoscopic support).
IJ Reilly
Oct 23, 10:27 AM
I would love for apple to use 10 billion to innovate fantastically, enter new markets, go green, and more. I don't think it's going to happen- the purpose of 10 billion in the bank for apple is having 10 billion in the bank. Apple's expertise is in taking big risks (at least large for a compnay of their size), a good number of which pay off very, very well. But people- investors, CEOs, are risk adverse, and a huge pile of cash to operate on, so big they can operate and continue to invest in risky and exciting products, mitigates their risks. For apple, a pile of money might actually be worth more than investing that money at a high rate of return.
Huge cash hordes are only good for three things, in order of desirability: reinvesting in future growth (which is why it's called capitalism); returning to the stockholders in the form of dividends; or holding for a rainy day. The last reason, which you seem to think is the best one, should be seen by investors as a signal that the company lacks confidence in the future.
Actually, there's a fourth use of excess cash: a stock buy-back. Apple isn't doing this with the money currently, either.
I agree, the huge stockpile of cash is an issue. That's money that should be working for Apple, and IMHO that should be in the form of purchasing other companies that will strengthen Apple in key areas, like music distribution and/or audio/video/graphics production.
And I also agree with you on the dividend issue. A small investment of that money into dividends may have the exact effect as you describe. On the other hand, putting that money into new products/enhancing existing products, may do more for Apple's long-term health vs. providing a dividend to improve the 'optics' of the company in shareholders' eyes.
New investments in technologies and products would be by far the best use of the money. With Apple's cash, they could set up a research arm similar to Xerox PARC or the old Bell Labs and place themselves in the forefront of new technology for a long time. Instead, they seem to be notably stingy with their R&D dollars. Purchasing technologies by buying out smaller companies could also be advantageous, and Apple does do some of this, but not much -- not enough to make even a dent in their cash hoard.
Huge cash hordes are only good for three things, in order of desirability: reinvesting in future growth (which is why it's called capitalism); returning to the stockholders in the form of dividends; or holding for a rainy day. The last reason, which you seem to think is the best one, should be seen by investors as a signal that the company lacks confidence in the future.
Actually, there's a fourth use of excess cash: a stock buy-back. Apple isn't doing this with the money currently, either.
I agree, the huge stockpile of cash is an issue. That's money that should be working for Apple, and IMHO that should be in the form of purchasing other companies that will strengthen Apple in key areas, like music distribution and/or audio/video/graphics production.
And I also agree with you on the dividend issue. A small investment of that money into dividends may have the exact effect as you describe. On the other hand, putting that money into new products/enhancing existing products, may do more for Apple's long-term health vs. providing a dividend to improve the 'optics' of the company in shareholders' eyes.
New investments in technologies and products would be by far the best use of the money. With Apple's cash, they could set up a research arm similar to Xerox PARC or the old Bell Labs and place themselves in the forefront of new technology for a long time. Instead, they seem to be notably stingy with their R&D dollars. Purchasing technologies by buying out smaller companies could also be advantageous, and Apple does do some of this, but not much -- not enough to make even a dent in their cash hoard.
Monkey194545
Dec 13, 10:31 AM
This is utter ********. The experience is key, and LTE hardware is nowhere near advanced enough to guarantee the experience that Apple would demand for a device the stature of the iPhone.
Remember: we're talking about the company that withheld phone wallpapers on the Original and 3G iPhones because the experience would have been several milliseconds too slow.
Fact: Verizon is not expecting LTE-capable hardware until mid-2011. There's no way Apple magically has an LTE phone ready to go while everyone else won't have one for 6 months.
Fact: Apple declined to integrate 3G into the iPhone when 3G was already available, because the hardware wasn't power-efficent enough. One of the main distinguishing features of the iPhone is its battery life. They're not going to tarnish that image by hacking first-generation, power-hogging LTE hardware into the phone, in ADDITION to CDMA, which is another radio tech they're only now deploying.
These sources are full of ****. QED.
On your first point: It is also the company that came out with the iphone 4 and its antenna problems.
Your second point: Don't you think Verizon would take the oppurtunity to give apple what they really want over the Android phones: The first 4g phone on Verizon network. That would be a huge advantage. Just because the network isnt fully up yet doesn't mean Verizon couldn't have given apple the tech to make a 4g iphone. Verizon see android phone sales dropping and know that an iphone would boost sales by a huge amount.
Your third point: It would only be one chip, read the article for reference. How do you know how much battery it uses? It may be only a small amount more than 3g. Att's 3g sucked when the 3g iphone came out. It still sucks. Don't underestimate apple and verizon. You may be surprised!
Edit: By no means am a I acknowledging the merit or lack there of of this article
Remember: we're talking about the company that withheld phone wallpapers on the Original and 3G iPhones because the experience would have been several milliseconds too slow.
Fact: Verizon is not expecting LTE-capable hardware until mid-2011. There's no way Apple magically has an LTE phone ready to go while everyone else won't have one for 6 months.
Fact: Apple declined to integrate 3G into the iPhone when 3G was already available, because the hardware wasn't power-efficent enough. One of the main distinguishing features of the iPhone is its battery life. They're not going to tarnish that image by hacking first-generation, power-hogging LTE hardware into the phone, in ADDITION to CDMA, which is another radio tech they're only now deploying.
These sources are full of ****. QED.
On your first point: It is also the company that came out with the iphone 4 and its antenna problems.
Your second point: Don't you think Verizon would take the oppurtunity to give apple what they really want over the Android phones: The first 4g phone on Verizon network. That would be a huge advantage. Just because the network isnt fully up yet doesn't mean Verizon couldn't have given apple the tech to make a 4g iphone. Verizon see android phone sales dropping and know that an iphone would boost sales by a huge amount.
Your third point: It would only be one chip, read the article for reference. How do you know how much battery it uses? It may be only a small amount more than 3g. Att's 3g sucked when the 3g iphone came out. It still sucks. Don't underestimate apple and verizon. You may be surprised!
Edit: By no means am a I acknowledging the merit or lack there of of this article
whoooaaahhhh
Jan 8, 02:10 PM
When you spend the whole year waiting for the event you want the moment to be perfect.
What are we doing here...losing our virginity? Yeesh!
What are we doing here...losing our virginity? Yeesh!
rtdgoldfish
Mar 21, 12:34 PM
Man that sucks hard. Last year our apartment was broken into and my girlfriend's 17" Powerbook was stolen and oddly enough some undergarmets from Victoria's Secret. That was all they stole too...I didn't understand why they didn't take the plasma, stereo equipment, jewelry etc. The cops said that the theives were probably in a hurry...
Anyway, there probably isn't anything you can do about it. The cops almost never get prints and (at least in my area) are pretty apathetic about this type of thing. In our case, they didn't really investigate too much at all. There were reports of similar cases at other apartment complexes around the area but I got the feeling that none of the police departments share evidence or collaborated on it because when I called the detectives about it they acted like they didn't know what I was talking about.
Delicious Library is an awesome program!
They told me last night they didn't think they got any good prints. And the ones that were good will turn out to be my own I bet. And yes, Delicious Library rocks. The cop couldn't believe that I had a database of every single game, DVD, CD and book that I owned.
Well now you have an escuse to go out and buy an Elite xbox 360 in black :D
I guess, I'm so sad cuz Guitar Hero 2 comes out in two weeks now and I don't think I'll have a 360 to play it on :(
This really sucks. :( I just bought a new house and am going to almost immediately get it wired up for an alarm, though I probably don't need to. It's out in the middle of nowhere. :P Anyhow, if you want to set up a donation paypal account I bet a lot of us can chip in $5 each or something to help. :)
LOL, if you really feel that bad about it my PayPal address is rtdgoldfish@gmail.com. I won't say no. :D
Anyway, there probably isn't anything you can do about it. The cops almost never get prints and (at least in my area) are pretty apathetic about this type of thing. In our case, they didn't really investigate too much at all. There were reports of similar cases at other apartment complexes around the area but I got the feeling that none of the police departments share evidence or collaborated on it because when I called the detectives about it they acted like they didn't know what I was talking about.
Delicious Library is an awesome program!
They told me last night they didn't think they got any good prints. And the ones that were good will turn out to be my own I bet. And yes, Delicious Library rocks. The cop couldn't believe that I had a database of every single game, DVD, CD and book that I owned.
Well now you have an escuse to go out and buy an Elite xbox 360 in black :D
I guess, I'm so sad cuz Guitar Hero 2 comes out in two weeks now and I don't think I'll have a 360 to play it on :(
This really sucks. :( I just bought a new house and am going to almost immediately get it wired up for an alarm, though I probably don't need to. It's out in the middle of nowhere. :P Anyhow, if you want to set up a donation paypal account I bet a lot of us can chip in $5 each or something to help. :)
LOL, if you really feel that bad about it my PayPal address is rtdgoldfish@gmail.com. I won't say no. :D
zeppiecr
Sep 25, 03:39 PM
Prob a dumb question but is my mac fast enough to run aperture?
20 inch imac
2 gb ram
intel 2.0
20 inch imac
2 gb ram
intel 2.0
imutter
Apr 6, 07:16 PM
http://i351.photobucket.com/albums/q478/webkinzmutter/c8f00597.png
ArtOfWarfare
Sep 28, 01:15 PM
No screening room (http://img263.imageshack.us/img263/2859/xxapple1984.jpg)?
Thats not apart of what a home should be. Homes are for eating, sleeping, loving, and relaxing. A screening room is for... Well, none of those.
Thats not apart of what a home should be. Homes are for eating, sleeping, loving, and relaxing. A screening room is for... Well, none of those.
Russell L
Sep 27, 02:22 AM
For those of you running Aperture on a Mac Pro, did you notice the new RAM requirement on http://www.apple.com/aperture/specs/? It says "2GB of RAM required for Mac Pro." I've been running Aperture just fine on my new Mac Pro with the standard 1GB of RAM. Like many new Mac Pro owners, I've been holding off on upgrading the RAM until it gets a little cheaper. The 1.5 update installer better not refuse to install on my Mac because of insufficient RAM; I'll be pretty upset if it does. :(
Russell
Russell
mrgreen4242
Sep 12, 10:59 AM
Must be alot coming out today, if the store is down 1hr and 15min before the actual event.
Oooh, ya the whole Apple store is down now... so ~5 hours before the event iTMS goes down, and 1+ hour before the web store goes down. Doesn't the store usually only go down right before an event? Like for WWDC it went down maybe 15 minutes ahead of the keynote, or at least that's how I remember it.
Seems like maybe we'll get more than iPods... maybe a new line of media systems (like my predicted Mac mini Media Edition)?
Exciting stuff! Glad it doesn't start 'till after I get back from lunch! ;)
EIT: Odd that the store sign says we'll be back within the hour when the event doesn't even start for an hour... I assume its just a standard template page, but how hard would it have been to change the text to say 'in a couple of hours', or at 2pm EST, or even 'as soon as possible!'?
Oooh, ya the whole Apple store is down now... so ~5 hours before the event iTMS goes down, and 1+ hour before the web store goes down. Doesn't the store usually only go down right before an event? Like for WWDC it went down maybe 15 minutes ahead of the keynote, or at least that's how I remember it.
Seems like maybe we'll get more than iPods... maybe a new line of media systems (like my predicted Mac mini Media Edition)?
Exciting stuff! Glad it doesn't start 'till after I get back from lunch! ;)
EIT: Odd that the store sign says we'll be back within the hour when the event doesn't even start for an hour... I assume its just a standard template page, but how hard would it have been to change the text to say 'in a couple of hours', or at 2pm EST, or even 'as soon as possible!'?
MacFan1957
Jul 21, 10:23 AM
I hate to add to this whole tiresome "debate" but it does amuse me how a video of an iPhone 4 losing signal is proof *positive* of a design flaw whereas a similar video of a different smartphone is no proof at all!
I have an iPhone 4, its the best phone I have ever had and by a mile! I'm happy with it and frankly I'm pretty much sick and tired of folks telling me I'm mad or stupid for saying so!
Keith
I have an iPhone 4, its the best phone I have ever had and by a mile! I'm happy with it and frankly I'm pretty much sick and tired of folks telling me I'm mad or stupid for saying so!
Keith
Bonte
Oct 29, 02:24 PM
They will take "because it'll kill Apple's hardware business, which is where Apple makes most of their money" as an answer, however.
Apple's interests lie in selling high-margin solutions, not bottom-of-the-market extremely low margin PCs.
Think of Dell as Ford, and Apple as BMW.
The computer - car analogy has to stop, it makes no sense at all. The most reliable car is the Toyota Corolla because it is the longest in production and has the errors worked out a long time ago, worst reliable cars are short production but expensive models like the Ferrari. Ford has less luxury options but may well be more reliable than BMW, price and luxury isn't the key factor here.
As for the "high-margin solutions" Apple has a good position at the moment, price is competitive and high standard. It looks like Apple wants to keep a firm grip on the top end models but losing it on the low end, there is no sub $500 Mac! (except maybe the "iTV") Licensing an OS has a typical $80 price point and that is more than they make on a Mac Mini (hard- and software together) so it makes sense to me.
A few years back Steve said that Apple would focus more on software than on hardware (and brought the iPod on the market :) ), the release of 10.5 may well be the turning point for the OS. If Mac sales go the way of the iPod then i agree there is no need to license but if not i see no other option. Its not if but when.
Apple's interests lie in selling high-margin solutions, not bottom-of-the-market extremely low margin PCs.
Think of Dell as Ford, and Apple as BMW.
The computer - car analogy has to stop, it makes no sense at all. The most reliable car is the Toyota Corolla because it is the longest in production and has the errors worked out a long time ago, worst reliable cars are short production but expensive models like the Ferrari. Ford has less luxury options but may well be more reliable than BMW, price and luxury isn't the key factor here.
As for the "high-margin solutions" Apple has a good position at the moment, price is competitive and high standard. It looks like Apple wants to keep a firm grip on the top end models but losing it on the low end, there is no sub $500 Mac! (except maybe the "iTV") Licensing an OS has a typical $80 price point and that is more than they make on a Mac Mini (hard- and software together) so it makes sense to me.
A few years back Steve said that Apple would focus more on software than on hardware (and brought the iPod on the market :) ), the release of 10.5 may well be the turning point for the OS. If Mac sales go the way of the iPod then i agree there is no need to license but if not i see no other option. Its not if but when.
demallien
Oct 9, 03:34 AM
Finding where the keys are on your HDD is the easy part, accessing and using them is the task that takes months... [Simple way to find the location of the keys. Image your HDD. Purchase file from iTunes. Image your HDD compare the two images. The new key(s) (and the file itself) must be in the bits that changed.]
Sure. Of course, the guys working on DRM at Apple aren't idiots. If you were an engineer charged with defeating this type of attack, what would you do? I can tell you what I would do, I would start changing a whole load of bits on your harddrive, not because it's necessary, but because it makes it that much harder for you to find the stuff that changed.
It's a moot point anyway. Any file that you download from iTunes is going to be at least a few megs in size. The key is going to be somewhere in the order of a couple of hundred bytes. Which bytes amongst the several megs are the key? They aren't necessarily contiguous, they're almost certainly encrypted by another key hidden elsewhere in the system, and they may even be fiddled by a virtual machine after decryption, just to muddle things up a little bit more.
Finding the approximate location on the HD is simple. Fiding the actual key in the right order is an extremely difficult task.
As someone who does this for a living, can you comment on my read of the hacks that have been released in the later post http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=2917258&postcount=96. It still seems to me that where DRM has been hacked has relied on key retrieval or finding the weak spot in the chain.
B
Um, of course DRM hacks rely on either retrieving the key, or finding the weak link. They are the only two attacks possible - grab the data after the program has decrypted it for use, or find the key/algorithm so that you can do the decryption yourself. At the moment the first attack is nearly trivial to implement, although that will change a bit when the manufacturers start moving on to a "Trusted Computing" style platform. All you need to do is write your own audio driver that sits between the computer and the real driver. It picks of the data and stores it as it's sent to the speakers.
The second solution is much more difficult, but far more elegant. It allows you to keep intact all of the metadata associated with the file (track name, lyrics, album name etc etc). BUT, you have to be clever enough to recover the key.
Sure. Of course, the guys working on DRM at Apple aren't idiots. If you were an engineer charged with defeating this type of attack, what would you do? I can tell you what I would do, I would start changing a whole load of bits on your harddrive, not because it's necessary, but because it makes it that much harder for you to find the stuff that changed.
It's a moot point anyway. Any file that you download from iTunes is going to be at least a few megs in size. The key is going to be somewhere in the order of a couple of hundred bytes. Which bytes amongst the several megs are the key? They aren't necessarily contiguous, they're almost certainly encrypted by another key hidden elsewhere in the system, and they may even be fiddled by a virtual machine after decryption, just to muddle things up a little bit more.
Finding the approximate location on the HD is simple. Fiding the actual key in the right order is an extremely difficult task.
As someone who does this for a living, can you comment on my read of the hacks that have been released in the later post http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=2917258&postcount=96. It still seems to me that where DRM has been hacked has relied on key retrieval or finding the weak spot in the chain.
B
Um, of course DRM hacks rely on either retrieving the key, or finding the weak link. They are the only two attacks possible - grab the data after the program has decrypted it for use, or find the key/algorithm so that you can do the decryption yourself. At the moment the first attack is nearly trivial to implement, although that will change a bit when the manufacturers start moving on to a "Trusted Computing" style platform. All you need to do is write your own audio driver that sits between the computer and the real driver. It picks of the data and stores it as it's sent to the speakers.
The second solution is much more difficult, but far more elegant. It allows you to keep intact all of the metadata associated with the file (track name, lyrics, album name etc etc). BUT, you have to be clever enough to recover the key.
Object-X
Sep 25, 11:20 AM
Why are people rating this news as negative? It seems like a decent update to a good program, and it's free for existing Aperture users. What were you expecting?
Because they didn't announce MacBook Pro's with Core 2 Duo! Why else?
Because they didn't announce MacBook Pro's with Core 2 Duo! Why else?
drewc1138
Apr 5, 03:12 PM
Some people are actually interested in marketing, and would love to have a centralized place to view how large companies are advertising on one of the largest mobile spaces in the world.
By all means, go back to playing Doodle Jump.
By all means, go back to playing Doodle Jump.
dime21
May 5, 09:05 AM
My girlfriend is Chinese and she just doesn't understand our obsession with guns (understandably so). I don't either!
What are people so afraid of that they need guns to protect themselves from?
You must not read the news much. Or check out the robbery, rape, and murder statistics for your town. But I'll bet you're a nice friendly guy, and you live in the nice part of town, so it couldn't possibly happen to you, am I right? :rolleyes:
The better question here, is why do you feel so immune to violent crime?
Are you also confused about our obsessions with free speech? freedom of religion? or freedom of the press perhaps? Because those are protected in the Bill of Rights as well. Guns however, are unique in that they are the only material object, the only physical thing, that the Bill of Rights expressly protects ownership of. So we don't take to kindly to confused legislators who would try and take them away, or place unusual restrictions on that right.
What are people so afraid of that they need guns to protect themselves from?
You must not read the news much. Or check out the robbery, rape, and murder statistics for your town. But I'll bet you're a nice friendly guy, and you live in the nice part of town, so it couldn't possibly happen to you, am I right? :rolleyes:
The better question here, is why do you feel so immune to violent crime?
Are you also confused about our obsessions with free speech? freedom of religion? or freedom of the press perhaps? Because those are protected in the Bill of Rights as well. Guns however, are unique in that they are the only material object, the only physical thing, that the Bill of Rights expressly protects ownership of. So we don't take to kindly to confused legislators who would try and take them away, or place unusual restrictions on that right.
thesheep
Aug 23, 08:26 AM
I bought a new 23" display last week, from the UK Apple Store website. I rang them before I ordered to check that it would be one with the new specs. They confirmed that it would be.
Now the monitor has arrived and it has serial number 2A6171XXXXX. Apparently manufactured in April 2006. I just rang technical support and they said it isn't one with the new specs. They didn't know if there was a new model number, or when they're getting the new specs in, or anything at all really.
If anyone is very keen to get the new version in the UK, I suggest you wait a while and try to be extremely specific when you do order.
Other than that it seems to be a really great display and I'm probably not going to bother sending it back.
However, I do have one issue with it. It seems that certain shades of bright green are much more saturated and more 'garish' on the display than they are on my Powerbook display. If I look at the same image on both, the difference is really noticeable. Not really sure what to do about it. I imagine it is probably the display that's inaccurate, rather than the powerbook, but I can't be sure. Anyone had any experiences like this? It is particularly noticeable on 'yellowy-green' colours, which look much more garish on the cinema display.
Now the monitor has arrived and it has serial number 2A6171XXXXX. Apparently manufactured in April 2006. I just rang technical support and they said it isn't one with the new specs. They didn't know if there was a new model number, or when they're getting the new specs in, or anything at all really.
If anyone is very keen to get the new version in the UK, I suggest you wait a while and try to be extremely specific when you do order.
Other than that it seems to be a really great display and I'm probably not going to bother sending it back.
However, I do have one issue with it. It seems that certain shades of bright green are much more saturated and more 'garish' on the display than they are on my Powerbook display. If I look at the same image on both, the difference is really noticeable. Not really sure what to do about it. I imagine it is probably the display that's inaccurate, rather than the powerbook, but I can't be sure. Anyone had any experiences like this? It is particularly noticeable on 'yellowy-green' colours, which look much more garish on the cinema display.
No comments:
Post a Comment