mattwolfmatt
Sep 28, 04:57 PM
If this is the iPhone of houses, I guess my house is the Zune of houses. Or perhaps a 1st Gen nano . . . old, small, and ugly.
DFDureiko
Oct 18, 09:10 AM
Being a die hard Apple/Mac guy, it killed me when Apple went to ATT, as I was Verizon and really liked their service. a week and a half ago, my phone failed, one of our lines was out of contract, so I finally got a 3GS 16gig. it's so amazing (to me, i'm new:) that I guess I'll stick with it, most of the time I'm in the country (rural CT and FL) and have had no dropped calls. From this thread I'm guessing dropped calls are a problem in metropolitan areas?
If I could have had some clear answer from Verizon, even a "maybe by midsummer" I'd have kept patiently waiting. But all the Verizon reps, both stores and call center, said "I've heard NOTHING of us getting an iPhone"
Just my luck if it comes out in March, and I'm locked into ATT:)
One other thing I find strange seeing that ATT and Verizon are the two largest cell company's in the US, is why still, There is no ATT coverage in the western states (ie Montana, Wyoming etc) only Verizon? any idea why ATT is not expanding out there after all these years?
Dan
If I could have had some clear answer from Verizon, even a "maybe by midsummer" I'd have kept patiently waiting. But all the Verizon reps, both stores and call center, said "I've heard NOTHING of us getting an iPhone"
Just my luck if it comes out in March, and I'm locked into ATT:)
One other thing I find strange seeing that ATT and Verizon are the two largest cell company's in the US, is why still, There is no ATT coverage in the western states (ie Montana, Wyoming etc) only Verizon? any idea why ATT is not expanding out there after all these years?
Dan
arn
Apr 27, 03:58 AM
Perhaps a little quick on the draw here but it isn't working for me. The boxes have gone but the actual voting buttons still take me back to the forum index page.
I have cleared my cache and logged out and back in again.
What version of IE are you on?
arn
I have cleared my cache and logged out and back in again.
What version of IE are you on?
arn
CEAbiscuit
Aug 7, 03:46 PM
Unfortunately they are still seriously lacking in ports. Digital DVI only...no VGA, S-Video, etc with input toggle switch. No easy way to hook up an Xbox 360 for instance. Or to give the monitor a second life as a tv if you upgrade to larger displays.
I hope they change their stance on this because it's a deal breaker for me.
Um, hate to say it, but the Dells have most of those things. My xbox is plugged in right along side my computer. Just hate that d*ll logo staring me in the face all the time.
I hope they change their stance on this because it's a deal breaker for me.
Um, hate to say it, but the Dells have most of those things. My xbox is plugged in right along side my computer. Just hate that d*ll logo staring me in the face all the time.
dunk321
Mar 17, 10:52 AM
Lets keep the flaming going lol, Maybe it will reach 500 posts, lmao funny how people believe everything they read in a forum, sec I'm also a lawyer, and Doctor, yea I can pick any profession I want on MacRumors, everyone enjoy their iPad, I'm going back to the real world, while the debate in this thread continues.
KnightWRX
Mar 25, 11:07 AM
Excuse my ignorance, but does an OS that runs lil' apps on a poxy hand-held computer scale up to run full-blown applications (think FCS) on a multi-core, heavy-hardware computer?
Linux ring a bell ? ;) Linux runs on everything and does just fine (be it the lowly SoC based embedded system using a BusyBox userspace or that massive supercomputing cluster built with thousands of nodes).
OS X and iOS already share a lot of internals. It's mostly in the userspace where the differences lie.
Linux ring a bell ? ;) Linux runs on everything and does just fine (be it the lowly SoC based embedded system using a BusyBox userspace or that massive supercomputing cluster built with thousands of nodes).
OS X and iOS already share a lot of internals. It's mostly in the userspace where the differences lie.
AndyR
Apr 11, 02:41 AM
meet my new desk mascot.
http://twitpic.com/show/thumb/4hmpd9.jpg
it even makes angry bird sounds!!!
want want want want arrrrrrgggghhhhh!!! :d
http://twitpic.com/show/thumb/4hmpd9.jpg
it even makes angry bird sounds!!!
want want want want arrrrrrgggghhhhh!!! :d
GoKyu
Apr 29, 07:05 PM
When I read the subject, I got a little hopeful...when I saw the screenshot showing Spaces/Expos�, I really thought the "UI tweak" was that they'd let us use the old Spaces if we wanted to.
Guess not, it's still that b******ized Mission Control...
Guess not, it's still that b******ized Mission Control...
Music-Man
Sep 12, 08:12 AM
what time is the event on in Australian ESTD ?????
3am :(
I was just getting ready to go to bed for a couple of hours before 3 but I'm a little hyped now.
Bloody Apple
3am :(
I was just getting ready to go to bed for a couple of hours before 3 but I'm a little hyped now.
Bloody Apple
ssteve
Oct 6, 12:18 PM
Except Verizon does that too!!!!
Are you amongst tall buildings when you experience these dropped calls on Verizon? Maybe Verizon drops these calls because of the same reason AT&T does....
Don't get me wrong. I won't get an iPhone until I can get it on Verizon. I live in AZ and there are only two small spots where I ever lose a call and most of the time when I am in these areas, the calls do not drop.
Verizon...Get the iPhone.
Are you amongst tall buildings when you experience these dropped calls on Verizon? Maybe Verizon drops these calls because of the same reason AT&T does....
Don't get me wrong. I won't get an iPhone until I can get it on Verizon. I live in AZ and there are only two small spots where I ever lose a call and most of the time when I am in these areas, the calls do not drop.
Verizon...Get the iPhone.
Branskins
Apr 29, 09:46 PM
Versions seems to work a lot faster. It has animated stars!!!!
netdog
Sep 12, 07:31 AM
Can't wait :D
The Australian store is claiming that the store is busy or to check my connection :confused:
Same in the UK.
The Australian store is claiming that the store is busy or to check my connection :confused:
Same in the UK.
TuffLuffJimmy
Apr 17, 05:56 AM
How does Gnome 3.0 on Linux compare to the new UI in OSX Lion?
I've been playing around with Gnome 3.0, and it seems like the designers have a similar philosophy about desktop navigation.
Gnome 3.0 Preview (This is not my video):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=joBXc3IGRBw
That's a pretty sick OS. I haven't ever run Fedora on a computer of mine, but my uncle swears by it. That video has convinced me to run it on my next box.
I've been playing around with Gnome 3.0, and it seems like the designers have a similar philosophy about desktop navigation.
Gnome 3.0 Preview (This is not my video):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=joBXc3IGRBw
That's a pretty sick OS. I haven't ever run Fedora on a computer of mine, but my uncle swears by it. That video has convinced me to run it on my next box.
Ommid
Apr 25, 12:09 PM
The resolution would stay the same, so no extra coding would be required. Only the pixel density would change (PPI).
What would the extra space mean though?
What would the extra space mean though?
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....
Surely
Apr 6, 11:31 PM
I just ordered this cable for my 2011 Soul so that I can access my iPhone's iPod through the steering wheel controls/stereo (iPod menu displays on the stereo). It also charges the iPhone/iPod. The dealer charges $60........ $29.99 on Amazon.:rolleyes:
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41C9914d-GL._AA300_.jpg
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41C9914d-GL._AA300_.jpg
sarper
Apr 26, 07:34 AM
Before posting it's always a good idea to read the article and a little bit of the thread, not just the headline. Had you done any research, something I expect of developers, you would know that the general consensus is that it will be a larger screen with the same resolution. Also, Apple is giving you quite an amazing product and App Store to sling your wares instead of complaining you should maybe just put a little more effort into your applications and thank Apple for the opportunity they're giving you and others.
How come people still keep picking up on this point, it surprises me, especially from a developer. A larger screen doesn't necessarily mean problems for apps, a change in resolution does. That, coupled with the previous rumors of a bigger screen with the same resolution mean that if this is true, it doesn't make any difference to developers because there will be the same number of pixels in the screen. All it means is that everything will be very slightly bigger.
It's exactly like you say, if you assumed a certain resolution when coding your app, only a change in resolution affects you. Screen size means nothing, it's all about the pixels. 960x640 is the same whether it is on a 3.5" screen or a 4" screen for a developer.
Oh please don't be so smart. What you say means to lose the pixel density of Retina Display. Would you want that?
How come people still keep picking up on this point, it surprises me, especially from a developer. A larger screen doesn't necessarily mean problems for apps, a change in resolution does. That, coupled with the previous rumors of a bigger screen with the same resolution mean that if this is true, it doesn't make any difference to developers because there will be the same number of pixels in the screen. All it means is that everything will be very slightly bigger.
It's exactly like you say, if you assumed a certain resolution when coding your app, only a change in resolution affects you. Screen size means nothing, it's all about the pixels. 960x640 is the same whether it is on a 3.5" screen or a 4" screen for a developer.
Oh please don't be so smart. What you say means to lose the pixel density of Retina Display. Would you want that?
tvachon
Jan 9, 09:24 AM
Sweet, somthing to check out post work, pre gym!
How long is the keynote speech anyway?
2 hours this time around, which is significantly longer than most keynotes Steve does.
How long is the keynote speech anyway?
2 hours this time around, which is significantly longer than most keynotes Steve does.
charlituna
Dec 25, 02:56 PM
I don't buy the flash argument. Thats actually a pretty complicated subject...
Well yes, there's the whole "Adobe doesn't make Flash for the Mac, they make it for Windows and lazily port it" stuff. But that's actually part of the point. Apple values the user experience more than following the herd. So they leave out some crap port of Flash rather than include it because 'all other phones have Flash so we have to also, even if it sucks'
Now, can anyone please explain what the difference between 'true 4G' and LTE?
Is LTE something else entirely? Something that bridges the CDMA and GSM technologies, allowing CDMA phones to use chips, and chip-based phones to be compatible with CDMA networks?
My understanding is that LTE is a whole new language, totally different from both CDMA and GSM. So phones would be, for a time, dual chips.
As for the 'real 4g' and 'fake 4g' I've been told that it is not unlike the HD video issue that has cropped up thanks to folks like itunes and Amazon. They use 720p video which is high def when compared to standard def, but purists say that HD is 1080p/i or higher.
In the same way there is 4g in the sense of 4th generation which is an improvement over the 3rd generation. and 4g which is 4th generation AND a particular minimum level of speed etc. And so say the naysayers, many folks saying '4g' mean the former and not the latter.
Well yes, there's the whole "Adobe doesn't make Flash for the Mac, they make it for Windows and lazily port it" stuff. But that's actually part of the point. Apple values the user experience more than following the herd. So they leave out some crap port of Flash rather than include it because 'all other phones have Flash so we have to also, even if it sucks'
Now, can anyone please explain what the difference between 'true 4G' and LTE?
Is LTE something else entirely? Something that bridges the CDMA and GSM technologies, allowing CDMA phones to use chips, and chip-based phones to be compatible with CDMA networks?
My understanding is that LTE is a whole new language, totally different from both CDMA and GSM. So phones would be, for a time, dual chips.
As for the 'real 4g' and 'fake 4g' I've been told that it is not unlike the HD video issue that has cropped up thanks to folks like itunes and Amazon. They use 720p video which is high def when compared to standard def, but purists say that HD is 1080p/i or higher.
In the same way there is 4g in the sense of 4th generation which is an improvement over the 3rd generation. and 4g which is 4th generation AND a particular minimum level of speed etc. And so say the naysayers, many folks saying '4g' mean the former and not the latter.
leekohler
Apr 25, 04:00 PM
I think the OP's point- and I agree- is that they went a lot further then just NOT doing something right. They did something wrong. Its past the point of should have had an armed guard....its now into looking at what they did and maybe holding them accountable for their actions, too.
Yes, they did. They encouraged it and called no one. This went on for a very long time too. Some of you need to go watch the video before you comment. I fixed the link. You will not believe what you see.
Yes, they did. They encouraged it and called no one. This went on for a very long time too. Some of you need to go watch the video before you comment. I fixed the link. You will not believe what you see.
maclaptop
Apr 29, 10:41 PM
This may be off-topic, but does anyone know if the recently purchased Mac products are "grandfathered in" for a Lion release? In other words, I just bought a new MacBook Pro yesterday... am I going to need to pay to upgrade to Lion?
It would, of course, be nice if the upgrade was free for recent purchasers similar to what MS did with the release of Win 7, but I'm assuming that since I can't find anything out about it, there's probably nothing to be hopeful about.
Based on past practices I expect this will cost us over one hundred dollars.
It would, of course, be nice if the upgrade was free for recent purchasers similar to what MS did with the release of Win 7, but I'm assuming that since I can't find anything out about it, there's probably nothing to be hopeful about.
Based on past practices I expect this will cost us over one hundred dollars.
firestarter
Apr 22, 02:06 PM
So we need moderators for this? I thought the complaint was that there aren't enough of them. Plus I would find it difficult yo determine a legitimate -1, to one that was added for malicious reasons.
No, moderation becomes distributed amongst all members. Have a look at Slashdot - they developed the system there to manage their large number of comments.
If you gain a lot of positive ratings on your own posts, you get 'kudos' points.
Kudos score means you're invited to 'meta moderate' that is, to judge whether others are rating comments fairly or not. This removes the problem of people unfairly trying to bury or promote based on personal reasons, since meta-moderation helps reduce the weighting of trollish raters.
It seems to work well, producing a self-moderating environment where you can easily filter thread comments to quickly read the best posts.
The problem with the system MR appears to be building is that all ratings appear to have the same weight, whether coming from a respected forum member or a troll.
Possible ways to fix this might be:
- meta moderation
- preventing the frequency that you can vote up/down a certain individual
- weight votes based on some other measure of goodness
- reduce weighting based on warnings/time-outs etc.
No, moderation becomes distributed amongst all members. Have a look at Slashdot - they developed the system there to manage their large number of comments.
If you gain a lot of positive ratings on your own posts, you get 'kudos' points.
Kudos score means you're invited to 'meta moderate' that is, to judge whether others are rating comments fairly or not. This removes the problem of people unfairly trying to bury or promote based on personal reasons, since meta-moderation helps reduce the weighting of trollish raters.
It seems to work well, producing a self-moderating environment where you can easily filter thread comments to quickly read the best posts.
The problem with the system MR appears to be building is that all ratings appear to have the same weight, whether coming from a respected forum member or a troll.
Possible ways to fix this might be:
- meta moderation
- preventing the frequency that you can vote up/down a certain individual
- weight votes based on some other measure of goodness
- reduce weighting based on warnings/time-outs etc.
gorgeousninja
Apr 17, 04:15 PM
Under sharia law a woman who was raped would need like 9 witnesses to prove the man guilty. And her testimony in other cases would be half that of a man's.
Sharia law isn't a very good thing to bring up ;)
Indeed I would hate to live under such a system...
but, I do think that it is worth reminding kids who smugly proclaim that they are involved in illegal activities because of skewed morals and misguided self-entitlement that there are penalties and consequences for such actions... don't you?
Sharia law isn't a very good thing to bring up ;)
Indeed I would hate to live under such a system...
but, I do think that it is worth reminding kids who smugly proclaim that they are involved in illegal activities because of skewed morals and misguided self-entitlement that there are penalties and consequences for such actions... don't you?
SkippyThorson
Apr 15, 12:41 PM
Is it just me, or is the writing on the 3rd photo a bit skewed, or rotated in an odd way?
You're entirely right, it does. It makes sense that the awkward image is the oldest too, since that was the earliest image. The other ones are a bit better because they obviously took time. The angles however on the back of the device, going from the middle out to the corners, are just awkward though.
I don't see how they would go back to angles after touting the more curved and comfortable 3G / 3GS back. There was a big focus on how much more comfortable the new iPhone was to hold compared to the first.
Regardless of the validity, I personally think the chances are very high for a unibody type iPhone, it only makes sense. Apple did a unibody macbook (plastic). Its Apple, everything standardizes and is consistent, otherwise Steve's head will explode.
You could be right too, especially that last line. Things are almost always uniform. However, when the iPod Classic went to metal, and the iPhone went to plastic, that was an unexpected switch. The iPhone has never really been "in line".
You're entirely right, it does. It makes sense that the awkward image is the oldest too, since that was the earliest image. The other ones are a bit better because they obviously took time. The angles however on the back of the device, going from the middle out to the corners, are just awkward though.
I don't see how they would go back to angles after touting the more curved and comfortable 3G / 3GS back. There was a big focus on how much more comfortable the new iPhone was to hold compared to the first.
Regardless of the validity, I personally think the chances are very high for a unibody type iPhone, it only makes sense. Apple did a unibody macbook (plastic). Its Apple, everything standardizes and is consistent, otherwise Steve's head will explode.
You could be right too, especially that last line. Things are almost always uniform. However, when the iPod Classic went to metal, and the iPhone went to plastic, that was an unexpected switch. The iPhone has never really been "in line".
No comments:
Post a Comment