ivladster
Mar 28, 04:20 PM
Welcome to 1984.
You know there are plenty of other platforms and OS, so no it's not 1984, it's 2011!
You know there are plenty of other platforms and OS, so no it's not 1984, it's 2011!
Veri
Oct 1, 03:55 PM
[Humanity] has a very long history of common people being subject to the will & whim of the rich & powerful & connected.
FTFY.
The USA exists precisely because some of those common people got tired of such treatment and made it clear they would do with their land what they saw fit.
You're just making history up. There is no allodial title to land in US law. There is no allodial title to land in Californian law. Where Jobs is and where I am, all land belongs to the government. Independence was from the British Crown, and while the US and/or its states might have had the opportunity to create absolute property ownership, today you have no recognition by the US and only a couple of states even considering it.
How [the past] gets in the way of the present & future.
There's enough space. But the eloquence of your argument would have been improved if you'd just quoted policy straight from 1984 :D.
FTFY.
The USA exists precisely because some of those common people got tired of such treatment and made it clear they would do with their land what they saw fit.
You're just making history up. There is no allodial title to land in US law. There is no allodial title to land in Californian law. Where Jobs is and where I am, all land belongs to the government. Independence was from the British Crown, and while the US and/or its states might have had the opportunity to create absolute property ownership, today you have no recognition by the US and only a couple of states even considering it.
How [the past] gets in the way of the present & future.
There's enough space. But the eloquence of your argument would have been improved if you'd just quoted policy straight from 1984 :D.
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.
Object-X
Sep 25, 11:29 AM
Adobe is almost getting as bad as Microsoft at delivering software. What's up with Darkroom? It's been in beta for over a year, meanwhile Apple has been steadily improving their product. Granted, some might feel that Aperture was so bad it should have been beta, but at least Apple took the chance to innovate in this space.
snberk103
Apr 15, 02:38 PM
...
If your argument is that security changes post 9/11 have made things better than the previous decade, I think showing it via statistics will be shaky at best. Zero passenger-carrying hijacks in the U.S. in the decade before 9/11 followed by zero passenger-carrying hijacks in the U.S. in the decade after 9/11 is not a statistic you can make a very solid conclusion off of.
...
My only claim is that something the TSA is doing is working to help prevent hijackings. This was in response to some arguments that nothing airport security was doing was in fact useful. If you go back, you will see I quoted both TSA and European stats, not just TSA. And that while there may have been no passenger hijackings in the 90s in the USA, there were a couple in Europe, and one in Japan. And then nothing in Europe and Japan or the USA since 9/11. Which I believe is due to increased airport security, similar to what the TSA does.
That's all I'm saying. I'm not advocating for the current screening, just refuting some baseless arguments that it's a total waste of money ("baseless" as in - "it's my opinion, and I'm not presenting any evidence to support it"). Opinions are fine, and everyone is entitled to them. Just don't expect me to accept an opinion as fact, if I can support my opposing opinion with at least some evidence.
(I'm using Japan and Europe 'cause they also have a tradition of terrorist organizations targeting their planes, and because they "harmonized" their screening standards to the TSA. No choice, if they wanted to continue flying their planes into or over US airspace. Other countries may have also harmonized (like Canada) but either they don't have a tradition of terrorism, or I don't have enough info about them.)
If your argument is that security changes post 9/11 have made things better than the previous decade, I think showing it via statistics will be shaky at best. Zero passenger-carrying hijacks in the U.S. in the decade before 9/11 followed by zero passenger-carrying hijacks in the U.S. in the decade after 9/11 is not a statistic you can make a very solid conclusion off of.
...
My only claim is that something the TSA is doing is working to help prevent hijackings. This was in response to some arguments that nothing airport security was doing was in fact useful. If you go back, you will see I quoted both TSA and European stats, not just TSA. And that while there may have been no passenger hijackings in the 90s in the USA, there were a couple in Europe, and one in Japan. And then nothing in Europe and Japan or the USA since 9/11. Which I believe is due to increased airport security, similar to what the TSA does.
That's all I'm saying. I'm not advocating for the current screening, just refuting some baseless arguments that it's a total waste of money ("baseless" as in - "it's my opinion, and I'm not presenting any evidence to support it"). Opinions are fine, and everyone is entitled to them. Just don't expect me to accept an opinion as fact, if I can support my opposing opinion with at least some evidence.
(I'm using Japan and Europe 'cause they also have a tradition of terrorist organizations targeting their planes, and because they "harmonized" their screening standards to the TSA. No choice, if they wanted to continue flying their planes into or over US airspace. Other countries may have also harmonized (like Canada) but either they don't have a tradition of terrorism, or I don't have enough info about them.)
dalvin200
Sep 12, 07:30 AM
come on guys.. stop crashing the iTunes Store :)
camsd85
Mar 17, 12:53 AM
I am a reward zone member, the receipt said I paid $530.00 cash. I also received my reward zone points for purchase believe it or not. Funny thing is the kid looked like he was having a crappy day to begin with and probably had it with the madness in the store and looked like he didn't know how to take 2 different forms of payment.
I'm not usually one to preach, especially if it was just Best Buy's loss--but the guy who rang you up might very well have lost his job for having $200+ cash missing from his register(since you mentioned that your receipt said $530 cash paid).
I'm not usually one to preach, especially if it was just Best Buy's loss--but the guy who rang you up might very well have lost his job for having $200+ cash missing from his register(since you mentioned that your receipt said $530 cash paid).
toothpaste
Apr 7, 10:48 PM
Just collected this...
Applaud the choice! Type or specs?
Applaud the choice! Type or specs?
RichardBeer
Mar 24, 03:17 PM
Awesome! Happy Birthday Apple Macintosh Operating System 10! <333
tvguru
Sep 12, 08:36 AM
*SMACK!*
Those are Movie Trailers for the iPod.
I can't help but laugh. :D
On a side not I had to ask my Aussie flat-mates where the Gong was. The Gong is defiantly easier to say. ;)
Those are Movie Trailers for the iPod.
I can't help but laugh. :D
On a side not I had to ask my Aussie flat-mates where the Gong was. The Gong is defiantly easier to say. ;)
JTR7
Oct 23, 03:43 PM
I think you both...
That was directed more at True... But, thanks for the enlightenment.
Obviously, you can understand the confusion.
That was directed more at True... But, thanks for the enlightenment.
Obviously, you can understand the confusion.
slb
Oct 28, 11:17 PM
The Free Software movement has nothing to do with "free-as-in-free-beer" software. Freeware is not Free Software. Free Software can cost ten thousand dollars. It's Free as in freedom.
I think the point being made is that there are many people who hide behind the banner of the Free Software movement and decide that because they can download Ubuntu for free means they should be able to download anything for free. It's the difference between free as in speech and free as in loading.
yeah, but Logic Pro requires a dongle.
Intel Macs have TPM chips, essentially "dongles."
a quick look at google will show you that Logic Pro 7 has definately been cracked... ;)
...and...
LOL. Look harder.
Wrong. :) The crack you find on Google simply turns Logic Pro into the limited but unprotected Logic Express. Logic Pro 7 has never been cracked, and you can't use any of Pro's features in the cracked Express.
Cubase SX 3 for the Mac has never been cracked either. The Windows version was finally cracked long after SX 3's release, but it was a herculean effort on the part of the hackers due to Steinberg's very strong copyright protection, which will no doubt be ramped up in SX 4.
OS X doesn't even have a serial number in the boxes. Apple's lack of caring of this extends to the point where they haven't even bothered to have the ability to tell the difference between a pirated copy and a legitimate copy of the OS. I don't see tyrannical anti-piracy policy coming anytime soon, and I don't see Apple taking drastic measures to prevent OS X on beige boxes soon either.
Oh, they will. Apple doesn't require serial numbers because they can afford to be more lax when they know that you still have to buy a Mac to run OS X. Illegally cracking OS X to avoid the Mac requirement screws over Apple for no good reason.
Everyone seems to be forgetting the math of piracy. It's not
gross profit = (unit price) (units in use - units pirated)
it's
gross profit = (unit price) (units in use - units pirated + sales gained due to piracy)
I've never understood people who adopt this argument. You're essentially saying that, because a few folks think piracy is free advertising, Apple should give up all its intellectual property and copyrights. It would be like me spending money on a Lamborghini and then handing the keys to random strangers in the hopes they'd return it the next morning to encourage them to buy one of their own. Get real!
I think the point being made is that there are many people who hide behind the banner of the Free Software movement and decide that because they can download Ubuntu for free means they should be able to download anything for free. It's the difference between free as in speech and free as in loading.
yeah, but Logic Pro requires a dongle.
Intel Macs have TPM chips, essentially "dongles."
a quick look at google will show you that Logic Pro 7 has definately been cracked... ;)
...and...
LOL. Look harder.
Wrong. :) The crack you find on Google simply turns Logic Pro into the limited but unprotected Logic Express. Logic Pro 7 has never been cracked, and you can't use any of Pro's features in the cracked Express.
Cubase SX 3 for the Mac has never been cracked either. The Windows version was finally cracked long after SX 3's release, but it was a herculean effort on the part of the hackers due to Steinberg's very strong copyright protection, which will no doubt be ramped up in SX 4.
OS X doesn't even have a serial number in the boxes. Apple's lack of caring of this extends to the point where they haven't even bothered to have the ability to tell the difference between a pirated copy and a legitimate copy of the OS. I don't see tyrannical anti-piracy policy coming anytime soon, and I don't see Apple taking drastic measures to prevent OS X on beige boxes soon either.
Oh, they will. Apple doesn't require serial numbers because they can afford to be more lax when they know that you still have to buy a Mac to run OS X. Illegally cracking OS X to avoid the Mac requirement screws over Apple for no good reason.
Everyone seems to be forgetting the math of piracy. It's not
gross profit = (unit price) (units in use - units pirated)
it's
gross profit = (unit price) (units in use - units pirated + sales gained due to piracy)
I've never understood people who adopt this argument. You're essentially saying that, because a few folks think piracy is free advertising, Apple should give up all its intellectual property and copyrights. It would be like me spending money on a Lamborghini and then handing the keys to random strangers in the hopes they'd return it the next morning to encourage them to buy one of their own. Get real!
UnReel ATX
Apr 6, 12:28 PM
These :] time to get ******.
gnasher729
Oct 4, 04:30 PM
Indeed, there would need to be a "helper" that checks to see where the track came from, and redirects it to DoubleTwist if necessary.
I'm interested in seeing where this all goes, it'll hopefully silence the complaints of the lack of an NZ iTMS.
Not necessarily. We don't know exactly how FairPlay works. Lets say I download my favorite song from iTMS. iTMS encrypts the song and adds my AppleID to it. When iTunes wants to play the song, it calls iTMS, gives it my AppleID, the iTMS returns a key to decrypt the song, iTunes decrypts it and plays it. Most likely iTunes will actually send both my AppleID + some ID for the song, so that if I crack the key for one song I cannot copy _all_ my songs.
Now the question is: Does iTMS keep track of all the songs that I bought or not? If it doesn't keep track of all the songs then the following would be possible: DoubleTwist adds a a random song id to the song. Then it adds _my_ AppleID and encrypts the file. When iTunes wants to play the song, it notices that it is encrypted, and takes my AppleID plus the song ID and sends it to iTMS. If iTMS doesn't keep track of songs then it will calculate which key would decrypt the file (if Apple had sold me a song with that song ID). And that key could be used to decrypt the song.
Another possibility: DoubleTwist could take the song ID and my AppleID from _any_ one song ABC that I bought from iTMS. It could be possible to find which key was used to encrypt that song from that information; nobody would have tried to make it difficult to find out. The decryption key is top secret, not the encryption key. So with this information, DoubleTwist could encrypt any song XYZ with exactly the same key as the one song ABC that I bought from iTMS. When I try to play any of those songs, iTunes will find the my Apple ID and the song ID of ABC attached to the song, sends it to iTMS, which returns the key to decrypt ABC, and uses it to decrypt XYZ. And since XYZ was encrypted with the same key as ABC, it will decrypt and play.
I'm interested in seeing where this all goes, it'll hopefully silence the complaints of the lack of an NZ iTMS.
Not necessarily. We don't know exactly how FairPlay works. Lets say I download my favorite song from iTMS. iTMS encrypts the song and adds my AppleID to it. When iTunes wants to play the song, it calls iTMS, gives it my AppleID, the iTMS returns a key to decrypt the song, iTunes decrypts it and plays it. Most likely iTunes will actually send both my AppleID + some ID for the song, so that if I crack the key for one song I cannot copy _all_ my songs.
Now the question is: Does iTMS keep track of all the songs that I bought or not? If it doesn't keep track of all the songs then the following would be possible: DoubleTwist adds a a random song id to the song. Then it adds _my_ AppleID and encrypts the file. When iTunes wants to play the song, it notices that it is encrypted, and takes my AppleID plus the song ID and sends it to iTMS. If iTMS doesn't keep track of songs then it will calculate which key would decrypt the file (if Apple had sold me a song with that song ID). And that key could be used to decrypt the song.
Another possibility: DoubleTwist could take the song ID and my AppleID from _any_ one song ABC that I bought from iTMS. It could be possible to find which key was used to encrypt that song from that information; nobody would have tried to make it difficult to find out. The decryption key is top secret, not the encryption key. So with this information, DoubleTwist could encrypt any song XYZ with exactly the same key as the one song ABC that I bought from iTMS. When I try to play any of those songs, iTunes will find the my Apple ID and the song ID of ABC attached to the song, sends it to iTMS, which returns the key to decrypt ABC, and uses it to decrypt XYZ. And since XYZ was encrypted with the same key as ABC, it will decrypt and play.
ju5tin81
Sep 12, 07:37 AM
Not gonna happen. Apple will let you watch in the living room, it will just be via wireless streaming.
Damn! It would've given them the edge over Amazons 'unbox' thing and made them seem fairer... Ah well...
As long as there are no big 'WARNING' screens that you can't skip through like on a DVD disc....
Damn! It would've given them the edge over Amazons 'unbox' thing and made them seem fairer... Ah well...
As long as there are no big 'WARNING' screens that you can't skip through like on a DVD disc....
sherlockholmes
May 3, 11:54 PM
None of the above.
The commercials are cringe worthy when the potential you have is limited to web browsing.
The potential is limited only by you imagination.
The commercials are cringe worthy when the potential you have is limited to web browsing.
The potential is limited only by you imagination.
Matthew Yohe
Mar 28, 10:22 PM
I think we are headed towards a "locked down" OS X, FWIW.
Uh, no.
Uh, no.
OdduWon
Oct 11, 03:41 AM
no, it needs crappy WIRELESS speakers. :cool:
Height and weight Chart for
todd2000
Oct 2, 03:06 PM
So Apple will figure out a way to block it, and just Sue him
Machead III
Sep 12, 03:58 AM
6 (SIX) PM UK time :)
I thought it was 5pm?
I thought it was 5pm?
toolioiep
Apr 10, 02:08 PM
Samsung PN50C8000 x3.
Continuing to build my ultimate theater room - just need to paint the in wall speakers that were installed.
Continuing to build my ultimate theater room - just need to paint the in wall speakers that were installed.
goober1223
Apr 5, 03:47 PM
I knew there'd be a lot of "wuts" but this makes sense. If you don't like it, don't download it. I'm sure plenty of people will and it only adds value to their advertisers.
Honestly though, some of the ads are really well done. Maybe I just appreciate them more than some others being that I am kind of in the industry.
The bigger problem is that Apple rejected an app that served just this purpose (but was surely less pretty), as was already mentioned. This is a cool app, but they should be giving all of the money they earn from it to those that tried to submit this app long ago. I love Apple and have been converting slowly since my first iPod several years ago, but this is absolutely lame of them, even if it only effected a few people.
Honestly though, some of the ads are really well done. Maybe I just appreciate them more than some others being that I am kind of in the industry.
The bigger problem is that Apple rejected an app that served just this purpose (but was surely less pretty), as was already mentioned. This is a cool app, but they should be giving all of the money they earn from it to those that tried to submit this app long ago. I love Apple and have been converting slowly since my first iPod several years ago, but this is absolutely lame of them, even if it only effected a few people.
lordonuthin
May 10, 08:13 PM
Seing your "adventures", no way I would ever try to do anything on a custom rig...
But it's so fun cursing at the thing because you did something wrong and have to reboot into the firmware yet again. Ahhh, but once you get it right it feels good that you only took 3 days this time, the last time took a week or more :p each time gets a little less painful, usually anyway. :rolleyes:
But it's so fun cursing at the thing because you did something wrong and have to reboot into the firmware yet again. Ahhh, but once you get it right it feels good that you only took 3 days this time, the last time took a week or more :p each time gets a little less painful, usually anyway. :rolleyes:
Forever
Sep 12, 07:51 AM
What time does it start GMT?
0 comments:
Post a Comment