ctdonath
Oct 1, 02:06 PM
I live in one of fairly many Grade II Listed (http://www.heritage.co.uk/apavilions/glstb.html) buildings in the United Kingdom, much older but not quite as large as old Steve's, and there is no surprise when purchasing such a building that you are significantly restricted in what you can do to it.
England has a very long history of common people being subject to the will & whim of the rich & powerful & connected.
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.
What is it about the past that you don't like, Jobs?
How it gets in the way of the present & future.
When people stop shelling out good money, time & resources of their own (not confiscated-at-gunpoint taxpayer funds) for old things, maybe it's time to stop preserving what people don't actually want and start replacing it. Remember, Apple does not maintain a "museum of past Apple products" because those products no longer sold are, by current standards, failures - they may have been great then, but nobody wants to put up their own money for them today.
Yes, there is a valid argument and sociopolitical expenditure to preserve things which may not be of sustained current value. Question is where to draw the line. AFAIK, nobody actually wanted that house, and few are truly enamored by Spanish Revival architecture to a degree worth the substantial cost of preservation of such an example, and fewer still are truly enamored by the decedent who built it. The argument, IMHO, centers more around those wanting to either criticize Jobs at any opportunity, or whose relevance hinges on ability to find old homes they can spin as "historic".
Suitable acreage is costly in that region. The cost of preserving the "interesting creation" far exceeds the cost of replacing it with another interesting creation; as none are interested in putting up the money to preserve the former, those interested in putting up the money to create the latter win.
And yes, the old gives way to the new. Physical things are not important of themselves. It's not about wanton destruction for sake of destruction, it's about moving forward and removing obstacles thereto.
England has a very long history of common people being subject to the will & whim of the rich & powerful & connected.
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.
What is it about the past that you don't like, Jobs?
How it gets in the way of the present & future.
When people stop shelling out good money, time & resources of their own (not confiscated-at-gunpoint taxpayer funds) for old things, maybe it's time to stop preserving what people don't actually want and start replacing it. Remember, Apple does not maintain a "museum of past Apple products" because those products no longer sold are, by current standards, failures - they may have been great then, but nobody wants to put up their own money for them today.
Yes, there is a valid argument and sociopolitical expenditure to preserve things which may not be of sustained current value. Question is where to draw the line. AFAIK, nobody actually wanted that house, and few are truly enamored by Spanish Revival architecture to a degree worth the substantial cost of preservation of such an example, and fewer still are truly enamored by the decedent who built it. The argument, IMHO, centers more around those wanting to either criticize Jobs at any opportunity, or whose relevance hinges on ability to find old homes they can spin as "historic".
Suitable acreage is costly in that region. The cost of preserving the "interesting creation" far exceeds the cost of replacing it with another interesting creation; as none are interested in putting up the money to preserve the former, those interested in putting up the money to create the latter win.
And yes, the old gives way to the new. Physical things are not important of themselves. It's not about wanton destruction for sake of destruction, it's about moving forward and removing obstacles thereto.
LightSpeed1
Apr 13, 12:30 PM
Why not get a mini displayport straight to DVI cable? I never understood the use of an adapter. Maybe someone can shed some light?To be completely honest, I didn't look into such a cable. I knew about the adapter and assumed that was the only option.
SevenInchScrew
Nov 14, 05:07 PM
About the footsteps issue, while you may not hear someone else, your own footsteps are almost deafening now. I take the Ninja perk just to NOT hear my own footsteps.
Right, and that was what made it so good in MW2. You were super quiet, and could hear everyone else much better because of that. Now in Black Ops, while your own movements are certainly much quieter with Ninja, everyone else running around makes basically no noise, regardless of their Green perk. Because of that, no one HAS to use Ninja, and can still run around all stealthy, stabbing or shooting you in the back.
In MW2, you could easily hear people coming if you were paying attention, and get a jump on them. In Black Ops, since you can't hear anyone, ever, the game is a constant battle of internet connection and reflexes. What happens now is, you and an enemy both, surprisingly, come around a corner to face each other. What ensues is each person wildly spraying bullets until one of you falls over dead. That isn't very fun.
A new update or patch will be welcome, and I look forward to playing the game despite it's problems. Good fun.
I agree. Even though there are a few issues I have with the game, and a couple are close to game-breaking, the game has a lot of fun in it. With a good update/patch, it could be great.
Right, and that was what made it so good in MW2. You were super quiet, and could hear everyone else much better because of that. Now in Black Ops, while your own movements are certainly much quieter with Ninja, everyone else running around makes basically no noise, regardless of their Green perk. Because of that, no one HAS to use Ninja, and can still run around all stealthy, stabbing or shooting you in the back.
In MW2, you could easily hear people coming if you were paying attention, and get a jump on them. In Black Ops, since you can't hear anyone, ever, the game is a constant battle of internet connection and reflexes. What happens now is, you and an enemy both, surprisingly, come around a corner to face each other. What ensues is each person wildly spraying bullets until one of you falls over dead. That isn't very fun.
A new update or patch will be welcome, and I look forward to playing the game despite it's problems. Good fun.
I agree. Even though there are a few issues I have with the game, and a couple are close to game-breaking, the game has a lot of fun in it. With a good update/patch, it could be great.
ironsienna
Apr 30, 04:40 AM
That's interesting. The way you used a capital letter at the start of the sentence reminded me of my new project, available soon etc,,..
Hilarious :p
Now that Im looking on that though, I think that they got the idea from the tea round app site:
http://www.tearoundapp.com/
The slider looks so similar to the older - new ical design
Hilarious :p
Now that Im looking on that though, I think that they got the idea from the tea round app site:
http://www.tearoundapp.com/
The slider looks so similar to the older - new ical design
more...
yg17
Apr 22, 12:07 PM
Excuse me if this was already suggested:
Perhaps allow a post that receives a certain number of dislikes to be "hidden" from a general view unless someone decides to view it by clicking on a link.
Similar to how a moderator can you a deleted post, but for the general public.
That's an awful idea. Posts will get downrated because someone disagrees with a perfectly valid opinion? I've already seen posts downrated because someone said they prefer Android over Apple or had a good thing to say about Microsoft. Hell, I'd probably get downrated just for my avatar.
As long as people are going to act like little children, using these ratings to hide posts is a horrible idea.
Perhaps allow a post that receives a certain number of dislikes to be "hidden" from a general view unless someone decides to view it by clicking on a link.
Similar to how a moderator can you a deleted post, but for the general public.
That's an awful idea. Posts will get downrated because someone disagrees with a perfectly valid opinion? I've already seen posts downrated because someone said they prefer Android over Apple or had a good thing to say about Microsoft. Hell, I'd probably get downrated just for my avatar.
As long as people are going to act like little children, using these ratings to hide posts is a horrible idea.
robbieduncan
Apr 21, 10:41 AM
Interesting. Although I suspect open to abuse (particularly in PRSI). Also they don't visually line up well with the other buttons...
more...
irmatt
Apr 25, 02:06 PM
Is it just me or did Apple keep a tighter lid on this stuff in the past?
i just don't think people cared as much
i just don't think people cared as much
dr_lha
Oct 3, 03:41 PM
I seriously believe that we will see a Steve Keynote before the MacWorld.
I am sure this will be just before the holiday season to announce Apple's holiday lineup.
Holiday lineup is already in place, it was the day the announced the drop 2G Nano and 5.5G iPod. What more are you expecting? We'll probably get a MacBook Pro refresh but that is hardly a "big holiday season" announcement.
I am sure this will be just before the holiday season to announce Apple's holiday lineup.
Holiday lineup is already in place, it was the day the announced the drop 2G Nano and 5.5G iPod. What more are you expecting? We'll probably get a MacBook Pro refresh but that is hardly a "big holiday season" announcement.
more...
Demosthenes X
Nov 14, 02:34 PM
Been playing Zombie mode all weekend... it's really frustrating without a mic, though, since I can't communicate and everyone seems to be doing their own thing. Need to be able to talk to collaborate and get to the higher rounds, I think.
That said, it's super-addicting. Nothing relieves stress like blasting Zombies. :D
I haven't made it into the Multiplayer yet. The last few times I've tried the servers haven't been responding... I've had an easier time getting on the servers to play Zombies, though...
Single player campaign is pretty typical of COD, imo. It's pretty good... If anything, though, this game is encouraging me to go buy World at War for half the price and just play Zombies. Hah!
That said, it's super-addicting. Nothing relieves stress like blasting Zombies. :D
I haven't made it into the Multiplayer yet. The last few times I've tried the servers haven't been responding... I've had an easier time getting on the servers to play Zombies, though...
Single player campaign is pretty typical of COD, imo. It's pretty good... If anything, though, this game is encouraging me to go buy World at War for half the price and just play Zombies. Hah!
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.
more...
fsudaft
Mar 24, 01:59 AM
Back when I was about 8, we were jacked. However it was our house and the house next to us. We lost all of our console GAMES, the system still there. The other house lost their console SYSTEM, the games still there. Its nice to know that the world has not changed 10 years later.
No one said all criminals are smart.
No one said all criminals are smart.
jav6454
Apr 12, 11:55 PM
I think they missed the bomb in her hair. Why not do an X-RAY as well? God, what stupidity!
more...
SeattleMoose
Apr 30, 10:43 AM
Please restore the forums to their "pre-improvement" state.
Thanx :D
Thanx :D
butaro
Nov 24, 07:03 PM
better not be, i almost dropped some cashhhhhhhhhhhh
more...
nebulos
May 4, 01:20 AM
my posts are acting weird now. did i get flagged for daring to speak ill of the ipad? jeez. i didn't realize this was our religion.
kdarling
Oct 7, 08:44 AM
Surprised this hasn't been noted here yet...
USAToday interviewed (http://www.usatoday.com/tech/wireless/2009-10-06-verizon-google-android_N.htm)the Verizon Wireless CEO about their new Android partnership, and got an extra comment:
Meantime, (the CEO) says, the carrier is continuing to talk with Apple about bringing the iPhone to Verizon. McAdam says Verizon would love to have the device, anytime Apple is ready. "It's up to them to decide."
Until then, he says, the two companies are having "lots of discussions" about Verizon's network and how it might affect Apple.
Real, or just pushing ATT's buttons so they have to pay Apple more? Who knows.
USAToday interviewed (http://www.usatoday.com/tech/wireless/2009-10-06-verizon-google-android_N.htm)the Verizon Wireless CEO about their new Android partnership, and got an extra comment:
Meantime, (the CEO) says, the carrier is continuing to talk with Apple about bringing the iPhone to Verizon. McAdam says Verizon would love to have the device, anytime Apple is ready. "It's up to them to decide."
Until then, he says, the two companies are having "lots of discussions" about Verizon's network and how it might affect Apple.
Real, or just pushing ATT's buttons so they have to pay Apple more? Who knows.
more...
MattInOz
Sep 28, 08:53 PM
So are there enough Arch's on this board to have a mock up competition?
I see a plan like that and I already have an idea of how I'd elevate it what materials would be used. But also how I'd expect the Architect in question to create the the Form. Then again there is Steve's influence.
Then again there are probably 100's of ways this could look and still be in keeping with the Aesthetic and the plans. We see mock ups of every other product why not the iHouse?
Edit: Does anyone else think that is a wood fired dome (pizza) oven standing in the door way of the butlers kitchen?
I see a plan like that and I already have an idea of how I'd elevate it what materials would be used. But also how I'd expect the Architect in question to create the the Form. Then again there is Steve's influence.
Then again there are probably 100's of ways this could look and still be in keeping with the Aesthetic and the plans. We see mock ups of every other product why not the iHouse?
Edit: Does anyone else think that is a wood fired dome (pizza) oven standing in the door way of the butlers kitchen?
Reach9
Apr 25, 12:33 PM
Really hoping that this is the next iPhone. It looks odd and legit at the same time, so i'm not sure. Still, i hope the next iPhone will have a larger screen.
Uh, no... the iPhone 4 was called the iPhone 4 because it was the 4th version of the iPhone (not because it came after 3 in 3G). If the next iPhone is called the 4S, that'd be the 5th iPhone model. So the next one after that would be called the iPhone 6.
It would go:
iPhone
iPhone 3G
iPhone 3GS
iPhone 4
iPhone 4S (or iPhone 5)
iPhone 6
Yes, and due to basics of Marketing, chances are Apple will call it an iPhone 5, it makes no sense to skip "5" and go to 6. Also, iPhone 6 would be the 7th iPhone then. Apple isn't the one to confuse their customers like that, look at the iPad 2.
The 3GS was named as a substitute to get back into numerical ordering, that's what i think. It wouldn't make sense to go from iPhone 3G to iPhone 3, marketing wise.
Regardless, this update will be major and i can't wait for the next iPhone.
Uh, no... the iPhone 4 was called the iPhone 4 because it was the 4th version of the iPhone (not because it came after 3 in 3G). If the next iPhone is called the 4S, that'd be the 5th iPhone model. So the next one after that would be called the iPhone 6.
It would go:
iPhone
iPhone 3G
iPhone 3GS
iPhone 4
iPhone 4S (or iPhone 5)
iPhone 6
Yes, and due to basics of Marketing, chances are Apple will call it an iPhone 5, it makes no sense to skip "5" and go to 6. Also, iPhone 6 would be the 7th iPhone then. Apple isn't the one to confuse their customers like that, look at the iPad 2.
The 3GS was named as a substitute to get back into numerical ordering, that's what i think. It wouldn't make sense to go from iPhone 3G to iPhone 3, marketing wise.
Regardless, this update will be major and i can't wait for the next iPhone.
Macnoviz
Jan 6, 03:41 PM
Could the Arn make sure we don't see advertisements for the new iPhone/iTV/MacWhatever/iStuff thingies when we reach this page?
Tailpike1153
Mar 8, 10:08 PM
Yes, it's Apples highly erratic priorities that are puzzling.
Their extreme hypocrisy and superiority complex that causes them to go into denial in so many cases.
They stonewall and refuse to operate in a candid & open way with customers. Instead they practice silently hiding as many of their issues as possible.
Apples one true area of brilliance is their masterful art of marketing. In the finest example of typical American deceptive advertising, Apple describes their products as "magical & revolutionary".
What a crock.
They can't or won't even build a cool running MBP, after years on the market.
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1105643
I won't get into a furball over your post. Which large tech company operates in a candid & open way with customers?
Their extreme hypocrisy and superiority complex that causes them to go into denial in so many cases.
They stonewall and refuse to operate in a candid & open way with customers. Instead they practice silently hiding as many of their issues as possible.
Apples one true area of brilliance is their masterful art of marketing. In the finest example of typical American deceptive advertising, Apple describes their products as "magical & revolutionary".
What a crock.
They can't or won't even build a cool running MBP, after years on the market.
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1105643
I won't get into a furball over your post. Which large tech company operates in a candid & open way with customers?
stoid
Aug 7, 09:07 PM
Yes, obviously a 23 inch and a 24 inch cannot be the same panel. You are such a genius. But I wonder.. can a 30 inch apple and a 30 inch dell be the same panel?.. how about a 20 inch apple and a 20 inch dell?.
But forget all about that.. Are you saying the manufacturer gives apple the superior panels and leave the rejects for Dell?.. So cause Dell panel is 24 inch, they suck compared to apple 23 inch cause logically, since they are not the same size, it implies the Dell panel sucks!!!...
We must all get together and donate a nobel prize to you. You are such a genius, you make Einstein pale in comparison.
I don't want to leave you hanging but here's what happens.. The manufacter makes the panels. They cut a panel to apple specs and then the make the exact same panel (or one like it, hopefully, this manufacturer has quality control like every other company) and cuts the same panel to 24 inch to dell specifications.
Simple enough for you Einstein?.
Did you bother to read my whole post? Or were you too excited upon you first glorious revelation?
And maybe I'm not familiar enough with the LCD production process, but I understood that the pixel size was part of the panel so a 24 inch slab would have more pixels than a 23 inch slab. Both monitors have the same resolution.
I also asked how Dell claims greater contrast ratio and brightness (800:1 and 300cd/m2 on the 20 inch) than the Apple? Either someone's lying, or they aren't using identical parts.
edit: BTW, I'm just asking some simple questions trying to clear up my own confusion, there's no need to be a prick
But forget all about that.. Are you saying the manufacturer gives apple the superior panels and leave the rejects for Dell?.. So cause Dell panel is 24 inch, they suck compared to apple 23 inch cause logically, since they are not the same size, it implies the Dell panel sucks!!!...
We must all get together and donate a nobel prize to you. You are such a genius, you make Einstein pale in comparison.
I don't want to leave you hanging but here's what happens.. The manufacter makes the panels. They cut a panel to apple specs and then the make the exact same panel (or one like it, hopefully, this manufacturer has quality control like every other company) and cuts the same panel to 24 inch to dell specifications.
Simple enough for you Einstein?.
Did you bother to read my whole post? Or were you too excited upon you first glorious revelation?
And maybe I'm not familiar enough with the LCD production process, but I understood that the pixel size was part of the panel so a 24 inch slab would have more pixels than a 23 inch slab. Both monitors have the same resolution.
I also asked how Dell claims greater contrast ratio and brightness (800:1 and 300cd/m2 on the 20 inch) than the Apple? Either someone's lying, or they aren't using identical parts.
edit: BTW, I'm just asking some simple questions trying to clear up my own confusion, there's no need to be a prick
balamw
Oct 3, 12:14 AM
charcoal gray.
That was my point, until it's thoroughly tested in court (or repealed or modified) it remains up to interpretation, which makes most encryption/DRM reverse engineering related work in the US (somewhat) risky business.
DVD Jon may have found a way around this in that he's not currently trying to circumvent the access control, he appears to be trying to apply a compatible access control to files that would not otherwise have one.
B
That was my point, until it's thoroughly tested in court (or repealed or modified) it remains up to interpretation, which makes most encryption/DRM reverse engineering related work in the US (somewhat) risky business.
DVD Jon may have found a way around this in that he's not currently trying to circumvent the access control, he appears to be trying to apply a compatible access control to files that would not otherwise have one.
B
Surf Monkey
Mar 17, 02:02 AM
It's very hard to take anyone seriously who believes in fairy tales like karma.
Metaphor.
Metaphor.
kernkraft
Sep 29, 09:20 PM
Nice one, Steve ... he's worked for it.
We're here for a good time, not for a long time.
Actually, it was just at least a decade of intentional neglect. Also, most of the work was done by lawyers and architectural consultants.
I'm not fond of Spanish Revival, but this is not the way of doing things...
We're here for a good time, not for a long time.
Actually, it was just at least a decade of intentional neglect. Also, most of the work was done by lawyers and architectural consultants.
I'm not fond of Spanish Revival, but this is not the way of doing things...
0 comments:
Post a Comment