DeSnousa
Apr 28, 11:51 PM
I keep on hearing these sick setups, I need photos now ;) Show me your f@h setup please :)
balamw
Oct 3, 02:41 PM
I guess it depends how much of FairPlay they end up replicating. If they replicate the server too, then it'll probably be simple to tell iTunes to look at the third-party server (just capture the data going to Apple's IP address and send it off to DoubleTwist).
If they do that it probably wouldn't work with iTMS purchased tracks. This leads to the same kind of issue as Real faed, sure you can use the Real Store, but not at the same time as ITMS. ick.
(FWIW. They could probable accomplish a simple redirection just by adding an entry to the local hosts table, since Apple most likely addresses their servers by name not IP.)
We'll see if anything comes out of this, good or bad.
B
If they do that it probably wouldn't work with iTMS purchased tracks. This leads to the same kind of issue as Real faed, sure you can use the Real Store, but not at the same time as ITMS. ick.
(FWIW. They could probable accomplish a simple redirection just by adding an entry to the local hosts table, since Apple most likely addresses their servers by name not IP.)
We'll see if anything comes out of this, good or bad.
B
Surely
Apr 21, 11:18 AM
Who were those two bastards who voted down rdowns' post?
:D
The counter is crap anyway. It goes from -1 to +1 without a 0. And it seems completely random.
My guess is that others have voted while you had already loaded the page, and then when you voted, it updated all votes.
:D
The counter is crap anyway. It goes from -1 to +1 without a 0. And it seems completely random.
My guess is that others have voted while you had already loaded the page, and then when you voted, it updated all votes.
jhu
Oct 29, 08:31 PM
hey, im all for apple not releasing this software to the public.
Why? it may mean less viruses or hacks.
security through obscurity doesn't really work as well as its proponents would like to think. take pgp for example. it's completely open. how many cracks have there been for it?
Why? it may mean less viruses or hacks.
security through obscurity doesn't really work as well as its proponents would like to think. take pgp for example. it's completely open. how many cracks have there been for it?
Ommid
Apr 25, 11:52 AM
Curiouser and curiouser.
If it's a fake, whoever did it did a pretty interesting job on it.
It looks plausible.
I mean we had:
iphone 3g
iphone 3gs
why not
iphone 4
iphone 4gs
Which would give incentive for people to go for the white one I guess.
then the 5 comes out later?
It would be 4S ;)
If it's a fake, whoever did it did a pretty interesting job on it.
It looks plausible.
I mean we had:
iphone 3g
iphone 3gs
why not
iphone 4
iphone 4gs
Which would give incentive for people to go for the white one I guess.
then the 5 comes out later?
It would be 4S ;)
conradzoo
Sep 12, 07:27 AM
The Netherlands store is down too. :o
Just a broken link though. No Black screen.
Just a broken link though. No Black screen.
mmcc
Mar 29, 07:58 AM
It'll be their loss, especially since competitors like MS will follow suit and introduce a similar distribution model. Eventually everyone will be in the game, for the the simple reason that they'd like to duplicate Apple's success.
Whoa! The jury is still out as to whether the Mac App Store is a success. While a few apps at the top have trumpeted their success, I dare say there is a far greater mass of apps that are doing less business than before the Mac App Store opened.
In my own market segment the Mac App Store has reduced the cash flow for everyone due largely, among other factors, to the increased and sustained visibility of the freebies. It is crazy for Apple to court developers and then throw up a list of freebies alongside my own paid offering. Thanks so much -- for nothing! Where are the free alternatives to Garage Band, Keynote, or Numbers? You can be sure they are not on the same page in the Mac App Store...
As far as I am concerned as a developer, the Mac App Store is a waste of time unless we can all go write $1.99 apps that get downloaded by a million people (good luck!). Anything that requires significant development time is a loss. Plus, anything that costs real money can't be tried first from the Mac App Store. Developers still have to maintain websites, demos, and bandwidth but then pay Apple 30% for the sale in an environment that depresses prices. Success? By what measure and for whom?
Whoa! The jury is still out as to whether the Mac App Store is a success. While a few apps at the top have trumpeted their success, I dare say there is a far greater mass of apps that are doing less business than before the Mac App Store opened.
In my own market segment the Mac App Store has reduced the cash flow for everyone due largely, among other factors, to the increased and sustained visibility of the freebies. It is crazy for Apple to court developers and then throw up a list of freebies alongside my own paid offering. Thanks so much -- for nothing! Where are the free alternatives to Garage Band, Keynote, or Numbers? You can be sure they are not on the same page in the Mac App Store...
As far as I am concerned as a developer, the Mac App Store is a waste of time unless we can all go write $1.99 apps that get downloaded by a million people (good luck!). Anything that requires significant development time is a loss. Plus, anything that costs real money can't be tried first from the Mac App Store. Developers still have to maintain websites, demos, and bandwidth but then pay Apple 30% for the sale in an environment that depresses prices. Success? By what measure and for whom?
dethmaShine
May 2, 10:09 AM
283781
Rodimus Prime
Aug 7, 11:57 PM
Arguably true - but that illustrates a big weakness of the hybrid design...they are always going to take a weight penalty over a pure diesel or pure electric car.
Until we come up with a way to make batteries a lot lighter, more efficient and more green, they are going to force engineers to make big compromises.
but at the same time they carry the advantages of both which normally counter acts the extra weight. For example at low speeds electric is great and better than combustion engine. On the flip side combustion engines are better for maintain speed over long distance.
Basicly with the hybrid design you can get 40+ mpg in either city or hwy.
Until we come up with a way to make batteries a lot lighter, more efficient and more green, they are going to force engineers to make big compromises.
but at the same time they carry the advantages of both which normally counter acts the extra weight. For example at low speeds electric is great and better than combustion engine. On the flip side combustion engines are better for maintain speed over long distance.
Basicly with the hybrid design you can get 40+ mpg in either city or hwy.
ghostlyorb
Apr 16, 07:03 AM
I feel like Apple will be in the lead for quite sometime!
ulbador
Apr 25, 03:01 PM
What is "timer" set as and where does it come from?
I think from there you can see where your problem is.
I think from there you can see where your problem is.
Prodo123
Mar 18, 10:21 PM
So far people have told me why my iPhone 4 is inferior to other phones, and the reasons are ridiculous.
"It looks bad" LOL.
"It's made of glass" I have iArmor Casing (Reference to that steel back photo at 9to5mac)
"Its camera has less megapixels than mine" It shoots with better color balance.
"It's expensive" It costs as much as any other smartphone.
"It's too flat" It doesn't wobble around when I put it on the table.
"It's rectangular" It doesn't slip out of my hand, like pod-shaped phones.
"It's fragile" Again, iArmor Casing and 6 feet drops have not destroyed my phone yet.
"Customer service sucks" LOLOLOL.
"Antennagate much?" Never happened to me.
"You can't remove the battery" The battery doesn't need removing; it never dies.
"My phone shoots 1080p" Good luck storing 8 5-minute 1080p videos on a 16GB phone.
"Apple Fanboy" Thunderbolt is a good phone, and Apple has some serious issues with labor.
"App Store isn't open to everybody" and therefore has more reliable apps.
"Screen is too small" 326ppi makes up for it.
"iPhone 4 is slow" LOL.
"AT&T sucks" ...Moving on :D
"It looks bad" LOL.
"It's made of glass" I have iArmor Casing (Reference to that steel back photo at 9to5mac)
"Its camera has less megapixels than mine" It shoots with better color balance.
"It's expensive" It costs as much as any other smartphone.
"It's too flat" It doesn't wobble around when I put it on the table.
"It's rectangular" It doesn't slip out of my hand, like pod-shaped phones.
"It's fragile" Again, iArmor Casing and 6 feet drops have not destroyed my phone yet.
"Customer service sucks" LOLOLOL.
"Antennagate much?" Never happened to me.
"You can't remove the battery" The battery doesn't need removing; it never dies.
"My phone shoots 1080p" Good luck storing 8 5-minute 1080p videos on a 16GB phone.
"Apple Fanboy" Thunderbolt is a good phone, and Apple has some serious issues with labor.
"App Store isn't open to everybody" and therefore has more reliable apps.
"Screen is too small" 326ppi makes up for it.
"iPhone 4 is slow" LOL.
"AT&T sucks" ...Moving on :D
slb
Oct 29, 01:53 AM
Emagic already had the security dongle in place when Apple bought Logic from them. Apple just made it white and put their logo on it.
Emagic's employees are now Apple employees.
Again with the physical example fallacy. We're talking about information here. It has no intrinsic value. This means that if I steal it, you still have it.
This, too, is a tired argument. Of course it has intrinsic value; it's called "intellectual property." My example was meant to illustrate how ridiculous it is to expect Apple to just trust people to run out and buy a Mac just because they pirated OS X, as though you'd let people drive a Lamborghini on the honor system.
When you pirate digital information, you're still stealing indirectly by depriving the author of payment. In other words, you're stealing revenues owed to them, especially if you do it off a P2P network where your shared files are distributed to others and spread the piracy. Just because computers provide a method of perfect duplication of a product doesn't magically mean you have the right to freeload it and not pay someone for their work.
I'm so tired of these sorts of Slashdot-esque positions on piracy and intellectual property.
to Barack Obama convincing
Osama bin Laden Dead: U.S. Has
bin laden games bin laden
Osama Bin Laden Dead Shirt
Bak football game, Obama is
The house where Osama
Emagic's employees are now Apple employees.
Again with the physical example fallacy. We're talking about information here. It has no intrinsic value. This means that if I steal it, you still have it.
This, too, is a tired argument. Of course it has intrinsic value; it's called "intellectual property." My example was meant to illustrate how ridiculous it is to expect Apple to just trust people to run out and buy a Mac just because they pirated OS X, as though you'd let people drive a Lamborghini on the honor system.
When you pirate digital information, you're still stealing indirectly by depriving the author of payment. In other words, you're stealing revenues owed to them, especially if you do it off a P2P network where your shared files are distributed to others and spread the piracy. Just because computers provide a method of perfect duplication of a product doesn't magically mean you have the right to freeload it and not pay someone for their work.
I'm so tired of these sorts of Slashdot-esque positions on piracy and intellectual property.
Eye4Desyn
Mar 24, 03:17 PM
...and I haven't looked back. Started with 10.4 Tiger. Now on Snow Leopard and will definitely upgrade to Lion when available. Great OS and happy birthday OS X!
Cheers.
Cheers.
DoFoT9
Jul 17, 01:27 AM
^^ no thanks nicole. we are right :)
MattSepeta
Apr 27, 02:02 PM
I think it's all cool now. :)
:o
Back to the issue at hand, McDonalds....
I literally almost threw up towards the end of the video. Do you think the perpetrators were aware of the victim's transgender status? I could barely make out what they were saying in the video as I had to listen to it quietly...
Also- Let's realistically think about what the employees can/should have done... My initial instinct/gut reaction is for the manager to lock the doors to prevent the girls from running. Then you need to realize that McDonalds surely has policies in place for times like this, and the risk of an employee getting injured attempting to apprehend a criminal is a lawsuit waiting to happen....
Another gut reaction is that if the manager had a shotgun under the counter, this situation never would have devolved into the poor victim convulsing on the floor.
My last gut reaction is that Baltimore finally made it to my list of places to never return to.
:o
Back to the issue at hand, McDonalds....
I literally almost threw up towards the end of the video. Do you think the perpetrators were aware of the victim's transgender status? I could barely make out what they were saying in the video as I had to listen to it quietly...
Also- Let's realistically think about what the employees can/should have done... My initial instinct/gut reaction is for the manager to lock the doors to prevent the girls from running. Then you need to realize that McDonalds surely has policies in place for times like this, and the risk of an employee getting injured attempting to apprehend a criminal is a lawsuit waiting to happen....
Another gut reaction is that if the manager had a shotgun under the counter, this situation never would have devolved into the poor victim convulsing on the floor.
My last gut reaction is that Baltimore finally made it to my list of places to never return to.
iOrlando
Apr 15, 01:29 PM
looks like an iphone casket.
Lord Blackadder
Aug 3, 11:20 AM
While that part is true that we would burn more fuel at power planets one advantage you are forgetting about is the power planets are by far much more efficient at producing power than the internal combustion engine on your car. On top of that it is much easier to capture and clean the pollution the power planet produces over what the cars produce. On top of that we can easily most our power over to other renewable choices.
I agree with you that series hybrids gain efficiency by running the internal combustion engine at a narrow RPM range representing the engine's most efficient speed. It's been done for over a hundred years that way in generators and a series hybrid drivetrain is set up exactly the same way as a generator.
Power plants are usually more efficent per unit of energy than autos, but right now they do not have the capacity to support a big switch to electrics. Also, the notion that power plants are cleaner than cars is debatable - many are, but many are not all that clean.
The critical point is, our power grid needs to become FAR more robust (more, bigger power plants) before we can make a large-scale switch to electrics - and it will only be worthwhile if the power grid becomes significantly more efficient. It can be done, but it will take a long, long time - and probably have to involve a significant new construction program of nuclear power plants.
I heard it that the reason why BMW stopped selling diesel cars in the US was that the engines failed, due to the very poor quality. In Europe, you can get quality fuel, but in the US, diesel is still the fuel of trucks, primarily.
Just one statistics: in continental Europe (not in the UK), new diesel cars have been outselling petrol ones for almost a decade, despite the premium.
The US began transitioning to ultra-low sulphur diesel in and by now the transition is nearly complete. The new fuel standard brings us in line with European diesel. Before the credit crunch recession hit, many car manufacturers were planning to bring Eurpoean-market diesel cars over here in slightly modified form, but those plans were scuppered in the recession. Subaru, for example, has delayed the introduction of their diesel by a year or two.
But I think diesels will start arriving here in the next couple years, and people will buy them in increasing numbers. The USA is 40 years behind in the adoption of diesel passenger cars.
You shouldn't have any impression about Subarus. They really have the traction of a train (AWD ones, of course - why would you buy anything else?!), but everything else is just midrange quality at best.
I've had a 1998 Impreza estate several years ago and it was OK. Recently, I've had a 2007 Legacy Outback from work. Nice glass on the top and good traction, but I have no intention of trading a BMW or Mercedes for it the next time. The interior is low quality and Subaru has no understanding of fuel efficiency, it seems. OK, it's a 2.5L engine, automatic and AWD, but still... 25 imperial mpg?!
It's not really fair to compare a Subaru to a BMW or Merc though, is it? Those German luxury cars are much more expensive and the AWD variants are even more expensive still. A 5-series with AWD will cost 70%-80% more than a roughly equivalent Legacy. They are very different carsm with totally different customers in mind.
I have a 2000 Forester currently. Mechanically they are well-made cars, they have a strong AWD system and I like the ride quality over rough roads, which they handle much better than the Audis I've driven.
Their biggest weaknesses are only average fuel economy (by US standards; I get about 28 mpg combined), and average interior quality, especially in the Impreza and Foresters, though I have seen the latest models and they are much better. The 2.5L four is really a great engine in a lot of ways, but it's just not quite fuel efficient enough, and in my car that problem is exacerbated by the short-ratio gearbox, which is crying for a 6th gear.
Hybrids actually have an equal to worse carbon footprint than regular gasoline engine cars due to the production and disposal process of the batteries. As such, they are not green at all. They are just another one of these ****** feel good deals for hippies with no brains an engineering knowledge.
I disagree. Real hippies don't work and thus can't afford fancy hybrids.
Of the commercially available cars, a well designed diesel, able to operate on biodiesel from waste oil for example has by far the best carbon footprint or an ethanol burner that can work on ethanol fermented from plant waste via cellulose digesting bacteria.
I would prefer if we could get to the point where we either have cars running on ethanol generated from cellulose or keratin digestion or natural gas buring engines.
Unfortunately fuel cells are not that great either because of the palladium used in the batteries that is pretty toxic in production as well.
Cheers,
Ahmed
The problem with biodiesel is that it's far too scarce to adopt widely. Sure, it's great that Joe Hippie can run his 1979 Mercedes 300D wagon on fast food grease, but once everyone starts looking into biodiesel Joe Hippie won't be getting free oil handouts anymore.
Also, biodiesel demand has already started competing with food production and I can tell you right away I'd rather eat than drive.
You're right about fuel cell carbon footprints - but that's the least of their worries now because they still cost a fortune to make and have short useful lives, making them totally unpractical to sell.
So far the biggest problem is not getting internal combustion engines to burn alternative fuels (we've found many alternative fuels) but to produce enough alternative fuel and distribute it widely enough to replace petroleum - without interrupting things like food production or power generation.
I agree with you that series hybrids gain efficiency by running the internal combustion engine at a narrow RPM range representing the engine's most efficient speed. It's been done for over a hundred years that way in generators and a series hybrid drivetrain is set up exactly the same way as a generator.
Power plants are usually more efficent per unit of energy than autos, but right now they do not have the capacity to support a big switch to electrics. Also, the notion that power plants are cleaner than cars is debatable - many are, but many are not all that clean.
The critical point is, our power grid needs to become FAR more robust (more, bigger power plants) before we can make a large-scale switch to electrics - and it will only be worthwhile if the power grid becomes significantly more efficient. It can be done, but it will take a long, long time - and probably have to involve a significant new construction program of nuclear power plants.
I heard it that the reason why BMW stopped selling diesel cars in the US was that the engines failed, due to the very poor quality. In Europe, you can get quality fuel, but in the US, diesel is still the fuel of trucks, primarily.
Just one statistics: in continental Europe (not in the UK), new diesel cars have been outselling petrol ones for almost a decade, despite the premium.
The US began transitioning to ultra-low sulphur diesel in and by now the transition is nearly complete. The new fuel standard brings us in line with European diesel. Before the credit crunch recession hit, many car manufacturers were planning to bring Eurpoean-market diesel cars over here in slightly modified form, but those plans were scuppered in the recession. Subaru, for example, has delayed the introduction of their diesel by a year or two.
But I think diesels will start arriving here in the next couple years, and people will buy them in increasing numbers. The USA is 40 years behind in the adoption of diesel passenger cars.
You shouldn't have any impression about Subarus. They really have the traction of a train (AWD ones, of course - why would you buy anything else?!), but everything else is just midrange quality at best.
I've had a 1998 Impreza estate several years ago and it was OK. Recently, I've had a 2007 Legacy Outback from work. Nice glass on the top and good traction, but I have no intention of trading a BMW or Mercedes for it the next time. The interior is low quality and Subaru has no understanding of fuel efficiency, it seems. OK, it's a 2.5L engine, automatic and AWD, but still... 25 imperial mpg?!
It's not really fair to compare a Subaru to a BMW or Merc though, is it? Those German luxury cars are much more expensive and the AWD variants are even more expensive still. A 5-series with AWD will cost 70%-80% more than a roughly equivalent Legacy. They are very different carsm with totally different customers in mind.
I have a 2000 Forester currently. Mechanically they are well-made cars, they have a strong AWD system and I like the ride quality over rough roads, which they handle much better than the Audis I've driven.
Their biggest weaknesses are only average fuel economy (by US standards; I get about 28 mpg combined), and average interior quality, especially in the Impreza and Foresters, though I have seen the latest models and they are much better. The 2.5L four is really a great engine in a lot of ways, but it's just not quite fuel efficient enough, and in my car that problem is exacerbated by the short-ratio gearbox, which is crying for a 6th gear.
Hybrids actually have an equal to worse carbon footprint than regular gasoline engine cars due to the production and disposal process of the batteries. As such, they are not green at all. They are just another one of these ****** feel good deals for hippies with no brains an engineering knowledge.
I disagree. Real hippies don't work and thus can't afford fancy hybrids.
Of the commercially available cars, a well designed diesel, able to operate on biodiesel from waste oil for example has by far the best carbon footprint or an ethanol burner that can work on ethanol fermented from plant waste via cellulose digesting bacteria.
I would prefer if we could get to the point where we either have cars running on ethanol generated from cellulose or keratin digestion or natural gas buring engines.
Unfortunately fuel cells are not that great either because of the palladium used in the batteries that is pretty toxic in production as well.
Cheers,
Ahmed
The problem with biodiesel is that it's far too scarce to adopt widely. Sure, it's great that Joe Hippie can run his 1979 Mercedes 300D wagon on fast food grease, but once everyone starts looking into biodiesel Joe Hippie won't be getting free oil handouts anymore.
Also, biodiesel demand has already started competing with food production and I can tell you right away I'd rather eat than drive.
You're right about fuel cell carbon footprints - but that's the least of their worries now because they still cost a fortune to make and have short useful lives, making them totally unpractical to sell.
So far the biggest problem is not getting internal combustion engines to burn alternative fuels (we've found many alternative fuels) but to produce enough alternative fuel and distribute it widely enough to replace petroleum - without interrupting things like food production or power generation.
coder12
May 4, 06:53 AM
:.) It's so beautiful, like a double raaaaiinnboow!!
jmthigpen
May 3, 09:27 PM
just getting started...iPad 3!
MacBoobsPro
Sep 12, 07:20 AM
Tremendously Tremendous!
iMikeT
Oct 3, 05:44 PM
Jobs to keynote MacWorld, that's new to me.:D
ten-oak-druid
Apr 15, 06:34 PM
The title of this is bad. It sounds like the problem has to do with contract negotiations with record labels. This in fact means that google is having trouble getting its itunes store competitor off the ground.
Itunes is the application for playing media and the itunes store is the business for selling media through itunes.
Itunes began without any store for purchasing music. You do not need to go to the itunes store to use itunes. The application imports music from CDs. Other audio and movie files can be added without visiting the store.
The store is just a convenience.
I'm sure google can make a media player to compete with Apple's itunes. The title of this thread should refer to the store, not the application.
As for the store, I don't understand why the record labels do not just advertise their own stores for music. They sell DRM free music files on itunes so why not on their own sites? And why not on other sites? What is the big deal? If I buy an mp3 file from sony directly I can put it in itunes.
Amazon does this. They sell you digital music and you can choose to put it in itunes or whatever application you choose.
I imagine the real issue is with the movies which still have protection in the itunes store.
Still, the movie companies sell digital movie files outside of itunes for itunes. On DVDs for instance you can get a digital copy and use itunes or other applications to unlock the file. Why do the movie companies not just open a store front of their own for this?
Itunes is the application for playing media and the itunes store is the business for selling media through itunes.
Itunes began without any store for purchasing music. You do not need to go to the itunes store to use itunes. The application imports music from CDs. Other audio and movie files can be added without visiting the store.
The store is just a convenience.
I'm sure google can make a media player to compete with Apple's itunes. The title of this thread should refer to the store, not the application.
As for the store, I don't understand why the record labels do not just advertise their own stores for music. They sell DRM free music files on itunes so why not on their own sites? And why not on other sites? What is the big deal? If I buy an mp3 file from sony directly I can put it in itunes.
Amazon does this. They sell you digital music and you can choose to put it in itunes or whatever application you choose.
I imagine the real issue is with the movies which still have protection in the itunes store.
Still, the movie companies sell digital movie files outside of itunes for itunes. On DVDs for instance you can get a digital copy and use itunes or other applications to unlock the file. Why do the movie companies not just open a store front of their own for this?
yoda13
Sep 12, 12:39 AM
I can't wait to see what they got up their sleeve, hope I am stoked...:D
0 comments:
Post a Comment