CalBoy
Mar 13, 04:11 PM
To say that Apple innovates anything these days is disingenuous, at best.
What Apple does is define what is stylish and chic. This isn't a negative thing, however. Style is very important because a poorly designed product can be a pain to use and doesn't make us feel good about our purchases.
There are a host of innovators across the tech world, but Apple isn't one of them. If I want to find the next building material or breakthrough mechanism, I'm certainly not going to look at Apple.
On the other hand, if I want to find the one company that is going to take existing technology and make it stylish, sleek, easy to use, and generally fun to use, then I look squarely at Apple.
No matter how frustrated I become with some of Apple's choices (for example, why can't I have a matte mbp without a custom order like I could a few years ago?), I must admit that its products are always beautiful and much easier to use than others on the market.
That's really where Apple's strength lies. Other companies haven't figured out how to "un-techhead" their product lines.
What Apple does is define what is stylish and chic. This isn't a negative thing, however. Style is very important because a poorly designed product can be a pain to use and doesn't make us feel good about our purchases.
There are a host of innovators across the tech world, but Apple isn't one of them. If I want to find the next building material or breakthrough mechanism, I'm certainly not going to look at Apple.
On the other hand, if I want to find the one company that is going to take existing technology and make it stylish, sleek, easy to use, and generally fun to use, then I look squarely at Apple.
No matter how frustrated I become with some of Apple's choices (for example, why can't I have a matte mbp without a custom order like I could a few years ago?), I must admit that its products are always beautiful and much easier to use than others on the market.
That's really where Apple's strength lies. Other companies haven't figured out how to "un-techhead" their product lines.
CalBoy
Apr 15, 04:21 PM
As I said, I understood the point you were trying to make. But.... you can't take two non-TSA incidents and use those to make a case against the TSA specifically. All you can do is say that increased security, similar to what the TSA does, can be shown to not catch everything. I could just as easily argue that because the two incidents (shoe and underwear bombers) did not occur from TSA screenings then that is proof the TSA methods work. I could, but I won't because we don't really know that is true. Too small a sample to judge.
Well actually we know the TSA methods don't work because both of the incidents were from European airports that mirror what the TSA does. Added to the number of weapons that make it through TSA checkpoints, it's easy to see that the TSA does in fact not work to the extent that it is expected to.
Did you not read my post above? Or did you not understand it? Or did I not write clearly? I'll assume the 3rd. Past history is that bombs are not put on planes by lone wolf fanatics. They are placed there by a whole operation involving a number of people... perhaps a dozen, maybe? The person carrying the bomb may be a brainwashed fool (though, surprisingly - often educated) - but the support team likely aren't fools. The team includes dedicated individuals who have specialized training and experience that are needed to mount further operations. The bomb makers, the money people, the people who nurture the bomb carrier and ensure that they are fit (mentally) to go through with a suicide attack. These people, the support crew, are not going to like 50/50 odds.
I understood your rather simplistic attempt at game theory just fine. The problem remains that one side is not a rational actor. The command portion of terrorists have virtually nothing to lose with a botched attempt, and neither does the fanatic patsy. A 50/50 ratio isn't good enough for our security because the downside for both command and patsy are much smaller than the upside (from their perspective). The chances of failure need to be much higher in order to effectively deter terrorists.
You are right. There has been a cost to dignity, time and money. Most of life is. People are constantly balancing personal and societal security/safety against personal freedoms. In this case what you think is only part of the balance between society and security. You feel it's too far. I can't argue. I don't fly anymore unless I have to. But, I also think that what the TSA (and CATSA, & the European equivalents) are doing is working. I just don't have to like going through it.
Sacrificing these things is appropriate when there is a tangible gain. There hasn't been much of a tangible gain with TSA, and this is coming from the head of Israeli Security. We're paying a lot and getting almost nothing in return. Every year there's a new "standard" put out there to make it seem like TSA is doing something, but time and again security experts have lambasted TSA and its efforts as a dog and pony show.
Your own opinion of flying should be an example of how ridiculous things have gotten. If people now become disgruntled and irritated every time they fly, for perhaps marginal gains in security, then our methods have failed.
Give the man/woman/boy a cigar! There is no way to prove it, other than setting controlled experiments in which make some airports security free, and others with varying levels of security. And in some cases you don't tell the travelling public which airports have what level (if any) of security - but you do tell the bad guys/gals.
It is difficult to prove, but you can make an educated guess about what the cause is. Other than the correlational evidence, there is no other good data to suggest that TSA has actually been effective. In no field is correlation enough to establish anything but correlation.
I cited a sharp drop-off in hijackings at a particular moment in history. Within the limits of a Mac Rumours Forum, that is as far as I'm going to go. If you an alternative hypothesis, you have to at least back it up with something. My something trumps your alternative hypothesis - even if my something is merely a pair of deuces - until you provide something to back up your AH.
No, that's not how it works. If you want to assert your idea as correct, the burden is on you to show that it is correct. I am going to try to poke holes in your reasoning, and it's up to you to show that my criticisms are invalid on the bases of logic and evidence.
So far you've only cited correlation, which is not sufficient evidence for causation. You ignored my criticism based on military intervention, changing travel patterns, etc, and only want to trumpet your belief that correlation is enough. It's not. If you don't want to do more on Mac Rumors, then don't post anymore on this topic concerning this line of discussion.
puntos de crochet. en crochet
Puntos De Ganchillo
puntos crochet. puntos de
Diversos puntos a crochet
Punto crochet quot;piñaquot;
puntos de crochet.
Punto básicos Ganchillo
Guia de Puntos crochet 2009
Patrones de puntos en crochet
Este punto a crochet es muy
como-hacer-los-puntos-de-
Aguja de crochet N°2. PUNTOS
puntos de crochet (incluye
a crochet 002 puntos
Puntos crochet
puntos de crochet.
puntos con flores y falso
Reacent Post
Well actually we know the TSA methods don't work because both of the incidents were from European airports that mirror what the TSA does. Added to the number of weapons that make it through TSA checkpoints, it's easy to see that the TSA does in fact not work to the extent that it is expected to.
Did you not read my post above? Or did you not understand it? Or did I not write clearly? I'll assume the 3rd. Past history is that bombs are not put on planes by lone wolf fanatics. They are placed there by a whole operation involving a number of people... perhaps a dozen, maybe? The person carrying the bomb may be a brainwashed fool (though, surprisingly - often educated) - but the support team likely aren't fools. The team includes dedicated individuals who have specialized training and experience that are needed to mount further operations. The bomb makers, the money people, the people who nurture the bomb carrier and ensure that they are fit (mentally) to go through with a suicide attack. These people, the support crew, are not going to like 50/50 odds.
I understood your rather simplistic attempt at game theory just fine. The problem remains that one side is not a rational actor. The command portion of terrorists have virtually nothing to lose with a botched attempt, and neither does the fanatic patsy. A 50/50 ratio isn't good enough for our security because the downside for both command and patsy are much smaller than the upside (from their perspective). The chances of failure need to be much higher in order to effectively deter terrorists.
You are right. There has been a cost to dignity, time and money. Most of life is. People are constantly balancing personal and societal security/safety against personal freedoms. In this case what you think is only part of the balance between society and security. You feel it's too far. I can't argue. I don't fly anymore unless I have to. But, I also think that what the TSA (and CATSA, & the European equivalents) are doing is working. I just don't have to like going through it.
Sacrificing these things is appropriate when there is a tangible gain. There hasn't been much of a tangible gain with TSA, and this is coming from the head of Israeli Security. We're paying a lot and getting almost nothing in return. Every year there's a new "standard" put out there to make it seem like TSA is doing something, but time and again security experts have lambasted TSA and its efforts as a dog and pony show.
Your own opinion of flying should be an example of how ridiculous things have gotten. If people now become disgruntled and irritated every time they fly, for perhaps marginal gains in security, then our methods have failed.
Give the man/woman/boy a cigar! There is no way to prove it, other than setting controlled experiments in which make some airports security free, and others with varying levels of security. And in some cases you don't tell the travelling public which airports have what level (if any) of security - but you do tell the bad guys/gals.
It is difficult to prove, but you can make an educated guess about what the cause is. Other than the correlational evidence, there is no other good data to suggest that TSA has actually been effective. In no field is correlation enough to establish anything but correlation.
I cited a sharp drop-off in hijackings at a particular moment in history. Within the limits of a Mac Rumours Forum, that is as far as I'm going to go. If you an alternative hypothesis, you have to at least back it up with something. My something trumps your alternative hypothesis - even if my something is merely a pair of deuces - until you provide something to back up your AH.
No, that's not how it works. If you want to assert your idea as correct, the burden is on you to show that it is correct. I am going to try to poke holes in your reasoning, and it's up to you to show that my criticisms are invalid on the bases of logic and evidence.
So far you've only cited correlation, which is not sufficient evidence for causation. You ignored my criticism based on military intervention, changing travel patterns, etc, and only want to trumpet your belief that correlation is enough. It's not. If you don't want to do more on Mac Rumors, then don't post anymore on this topic concerning this line of discussion.
frjonah
Apr 29, 10:12 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.
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.
wpotere
Apr 13, 08:52 AM
The official 9/11 commission report speaks for itself.
Linky (http://www.usatoday.com/travel/columnist/mcgee/2008-02-27-state-of-airline-security_N.htm)
So much about that. Even when you read biased **** like the recent RAND Corp report the findings are astounding. What baffles me even more is their conclusion that international airtravel is the threat and domestic security should be reduced again. Nevermind that the 9/11 flights were all domestic flights and the 9/11 gang would have most likely been caught had they tried this stunt on an international flight with the pre 9/11 security measures of international travel. There is so much misinformation and ******** being propagated in this arena my trust in the competence of anyone involved in this business is absolute zero.
That is a 2+ year old blog article and proves nothing. :rolleyes:
So tell me since you seem to be so wise, what would you do to fix this problem? Rather than tear down the current solution how about telling us what you would do to FIX it? We clearly can't get rid of screening as that leaves us open for attack using planes as missles.
Linky (http://www.usatoday.com/travel/columnist/mcgee/2008-02-27-state-of-airline-security_N.htm)
So much about that. Even when you read biased **** like the recent RAND Corp report the findings are astounding. What baffles me even more is their conclusion that international airtravel is the threat and domestic security should be reduced again. Nevermind that the 9/11 flights were all domestic flights and the 9/11 gang would have most likely been caught had they tried this stunt on an international flight with the pre 9/11 security measures of international travel. There is so much misinformation and ******** being propagated in this arena my trust in the competence of anyone involved in this business is absolute zero.
That is a 2+ year old blog article and proves nothing. :rolleyes:
So tell me since you seem to be so wise, what would you do to fix this problem? Rather than tear down the current solution how about telling us what you would do to FIX it? We clearly can't get rid of screening as that leaves us open for attack using planes as missles.
lordonuthin
Aug 16, 06:21 PM
well here's something weird going on. when i stand my computer up, the temps go up. and when i lay it down, they go back down. here is a youtube video of it. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZXCSPXOOZ5U)
but i do have a theory. the only thing i can think of is the cpu cooler isn't air tight, even though i screwed it as tight as i could. oh well, i guess i'll check it laid down
That is weird :confused:
but i do have a theory. the only thing i can think of is the cpu cooler isn't air tight, even though i screwed it as tight as i could. oh well, i guess i'll check it laid down
That is weird :confused:
Plymouthbreezer
Oct 25, 05:07 PM
Obviously, you can understand the confusion.
:rolleyes:
:rolleyes:
Pyrix
Jan 9, 05:17 PM
All I get is
'Due to exceptional demand, your request could not be completed at this time.
Please try again at a later time.'
'Due to exceptional demand, your request could not be completed at this time.
Please try again at a later time.'
Dr.Gargoyle
Aug 2, 06:53 AM
Loosing Denmark, or Norway or both, doesn't matter one bit. It is a courtesy that Apple even allowed these small and meaningless countries to join in on the fun.
Since you claim you work in Denmark, you should know Denmark, as well as Sweden, is a part of European Union (EU). If you had done your homework, you should also know that EU implies that all non-nation specific laws should be idential for all countries in EU (very much the same as in US). That is, if the French and the scandinavians find that Apples DRM violates consumer rights, it has a very good chance to become accepted all over EU. Furthermore, since EU has about 460 million people whereas US only have 296 milion people, it should according to your argumentation about minor markets imply that Apple rather should dump the US market than the european market. :rolleyes:
You should know by now that a company sole purpose is to make money for the shareholders, and nothing else. I very much doubt that board of Apple or its partners even would consider dumping a close to half a billion potential customers.
Since you claim you work in Denmark, you should know Denmark, as well as Sweden, is a part of European Union (EU). If you had done your homework, you should also know that EU implies that all non-nation specific laws should be idential for all countries in EU (very much the same as in US). That is, if the French and the scandinavians find that Apples DRM violates consumer rights, it has a very good chance to become accepted all over EU. Furthermore, since EU has about 460 million people whereas US only have 296 milion people, it should according to your argumentation about minor markets imply that Apple rather should dump the US market than the european market. :rolleyes:
You should know by now that a company sole purpose is to make money for the shareholders, and nothing else. I very much doubt that board of Apple or its partners even would consider dumping a close to half a billion potential customers.
balamw
Apr 28, 07:37 PM
I first started a new project in order to avoid confusion and made some changes, the result is what I think " a working timer " with start, stop and reset buttons.
Maybe now you can go back and realize that you could have saved yourself and the rest of us a lot of time and effort by adhering to the recommendations from the links I posted. (Seriously, read them.)
Be specific. Be complete. Post complete, compilable code that demonstrates your problem. (If you need to, make a separate toy app, divide and conquer).
This is part of the "step back" that everyone was telling you to do early on, and is a basic skill for all kinds of troubleshooting. By breaking down the problem and explaining it to someone else you will often get an epiphany of your own. Like:
If I see the code now it seems a bit obvious why the timer never stopped before.
If the solution was handed to you it wouldn't (a) be that obvious [because you wouldn't understand it] and (b) wouldn't be exactly what you want.
For obvious reasons I'm not posting it and if some of you wonder why, it's for same reasons nobody posted the complete working code despite being able to make a timer in less than 3 minutes. (yes, I know it's because you think it would not help me and I understand)
I still don't think you understand the give and take of being a full participant in a forum like this.
It's your choice alone whether to add to the general knowledge pool or not. That's very different than responding to an ill-defined request for code.
For example, here's a thread I started earlier this month: http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1133446 I was playing with some code from various tutorials that was no longer functional, found a way to fix it and chose to give that solution back to the 'net and it was immediately useful for another user.
B
Maybe now you can go back and realize that you could have saved yourself and the rest of us a lot of time and effort by adhering to the recommendations from the links I posted. (Seriously, read them.)
Be specific. Be complete. Post complete, compilable code that demonstrates your problem. (If you need to, make a separate toy app, divide and conquer).
This is part of the "step back" that everyone was telling you to do early on, and is a basic skill for all kinds of troubleshooting. By breaking down the problem and explaining it to someone else you will often get an epiphany of your own. Like:
If I see the code now it seems a bit obvious why the timer never stopped before.
If the solution was handed to you it wouldn't (a) be that obvious [because you wouldn't understand it] and (b) wouldn't be exactly what you want.
For obvious reasons I'm not posting it and if some of you wonder why, it's for same reasons nobody posted the complete working code despite being able to make a timer in less than 3 minutes. (yes, I know it's because you think it would not help me and I understand)
I still don't think you understand the give and take of being a full participant in a forum like this.
It's your choice alone whether to add to the general knowledge pool or not. That's very different than responding to an ill-defined request for code.
For example, here's a thread I started earlier this month: http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1133446 I was playing with some code from various tutorials that was no longer functional, found a way to fix it and chose to give that solution back to the 'net and it was immediately useful for another user.
B
DoFoT9
May 12, 09:08 PM
true, but if it crashes then there's nothing i can do. and usually if it crashes or restarts, to fix the problem i have to get into the BIOS. but remote login would be good if the power flickers (like today)
argh that makes it hard then. change BIOS settings? what on earth is wrong with your computers lol! they should just restart after a blackout (with correct settings of course) - then away it goes.
thanks. all of those have 4 real cores, 8 logical. same as your iMac. the difference is mine are all overclocked.
you should disable HT - you would get more performance, which = more units! :D
(edit: as stated in the other folding thread - my rate has gone down to 13.9x folding speed with 4 core (whatever that means), before with 8threads it was ~16x. )
hey it wouldn't hurt to download the gpu client and see if it works with that card. it might
thats on my OSX 10.5.7 hackintosh - is that possible do you think?
argh that makes it hard then. change BIOS settings? what on earth is wrong with your computers lol! they should just restart after a blackout (with correct settings of course) - then away it goes.
thanks. all of those have 4 real cores, 8 logical. same as your iMac. the difference is mine are all overclocked.
you should disable HT - you would get more performance, which = more units! :D
(edit: as stated in the other folding thread - my rate has gone down to 13.9x folding speed with 4 core (whatever that means), before with 8threads it was ~16x. )
hey it wouldn't hurt to download the gpu client and see if it works with that card. it might
thats on my OSX 10.5.7 hackintosh - is that possible do you think?
xUKHCx
Apr 21, 12:11 PM
I clicked on a post rated 0 and it went to -2. I clicked on another post rated 0, and it went to -2. I clicked - again and it went to -1.
Are you doing it in this thread? because I suspect that lots of people are voting on every post to try stuff out. Go and find a dormant post to test it on.
Are you doing it in this thread? because I suspect that lots of people are voting on every post to try stuff out. Go and find a dormant post to test it on.
AhmedFaisal
Apr 13, 07:40 AM
Yeah, because you have access to all of the intellegence reports. :rolleyes: You try again...
The official 9/11 commission report speaks for itself.
As for the TSA not making air travel any safer you literally have nothing to go on other than making a blind assumption. It is simply another security layer and that in itself will deter some from giving it a try. That being said, if someone wants to kill people bad enough they will and people like you will constantly blame it on others. :rolleyes:
Linky (http://www.usatoday.com/travel/columnist/mcgee/2008-02-27-state-of-airline-security_N.htm)
So much about that. Even when you read biased **** like the recent RAND Corp report the findings are astounding. What baffles me even more is their conclusion that international airtravel is the threat and domestic security should be reduced again. Nevermind that the 9/11 flights were all domestic flights and the 9/11 gang would have most likely been caught had they tried this stunt on an international flight with the pre 9/11 security measures of international travel. There is so much misinformation and ******** being propagated in this arena my trust in the competence of anyone involved in this business is absolute zero.
The official 9/11 commission report speaks for itself.
As for the TSA not making air travel any safer you literally have nothing to go on other than making a blind assumption. It is simply another security layer and that in itself will deter some from giving it a try. That being said, if someone wants to kill people bad enough they will and people like you will constantly blame it on others. :rolleyes:
Linky (http://www.usatoday.com/travel/columnist/mcgee/2008-02-27-state-of-airline-security_N.htm)
So much about that. Even when you read biased **** like the recent RAND Corp report the findings are astounding. What baffles me even more is their conclusion that international airtravel is the threat and domestic security should be reduced again. Nevermind that the 9/11 flights were all domestic flights and the 9/11 gang would have most likely been caught had they tried this stunt on an international flight with the pre 9/11 security measures of international travel. There is so much misinformation and ******** being propagated in this arena my trust in the competence of anyone involved in this business is absolute zero.
Kashchei
Jan 15, 04:58 PM
Can somebody tell me why there was no update or price drop on ACD? Why is the PRO market left to the most critical point and then updated? Mac Pro is the best example. Its a brilliant machine now but 2 weeks ago? Some of the parts were 2 years old and they still charged the same amount of money for it. Dell, HP etc. are releasing new and updated displays whilst Apple ...........sleeps?
Quite right! I've been worried since the switch to Intel. Now that Apple is competing head to head with other PC makers, they need to update their product lines at a faster rate (ideally at the same rate as their competitors). Instead, they seem to have taken a step backwards and have decided to update less frequently, which makes little to no sense to me. AAArgh!!!!!
Quite right! I've been worried since the switch to Intel. Now that Apple is competing head to head with other PC makers, they need to update their product lines at a faster rate (ideally at the same rate as their competitors). Instead, they seem to have taken a step backwards and have decided to update less frequently, which makes little to no sense to me. AAArgh!!!!!
syc23
Apr 16, 04:18 AM
Record companies should count themselves lucky that there's an iTunes, Spotify and others offering paid services - otherwise 99.999999999% would be pirating all music and they wouldn't make a dime.
Gone are the days where they can charge �14 for a CD album and filling it with 12 crap songs and 1 decent song. People see through the BS and choose to bypass physical music buying and just cherry pick the tunes that they like.
Gone are the days where they can charge �14 for a CD album and filling it with 12 crap songs and 1 decent song. People see through the BS and choose to bypass physical music buying and just cherry pick the tunes that they like.
PodHead
Nov 26, 07:00 AM
Bought my new Macbook early on Friday. I still haven't gotten a confirm e-mail?! Are they slow about shipping:confused:
lmalave
Oct 19, 01:14 PM
Check out this to boost Mac OS X market share:
http://news.zdnet.co.uk/business/0,39020645,39284186,00.htm
If Apple does it, Windows (read M$) will be out of business in three years!
I can't believe a team full of idiots at Gartner, probably all making six figures plus, came up with such garbage. They really need to go to business school or just get some common sense. Apple is not a commodity computer maker. Apple is an innovation-based company. Apple is largely insulated from price pressures. It's *DELL* that should be worried. They compete on price and eventually some Taiwanese or Chinese company is going to start crushing them. U.S. companies are eventually going to have to exit the commodity PC market just as U.S. companies had to exit the memory chip market and largely exit the steel and textile manufacturing industries in earlier generations.
So since Apple is not competing on price, they will eventually be limited to probably no more than 10 to 15 percent of the market. But they should be able to remain stable at that level, just as luxury car brands are able to maintain a certain market share.
And as Jobs and others at Apple have pointed out *many* times, their advantage is in controlling both the software *and* the hardware. THAT'S their advantage. Not just the software. It applies not only to Macs but also to the iPod. Compare the Mac experience to a PC experience. Or compare the iPod experience to other MP3 players. The Apple products "just work" because Apple is able to control the hardware that the software runs on. If Apple gives up the hardware/software integration advantage, that will be the beginning of the end...
http://news.zdnet.co.uk/business/0,39020645,39284186,00.htm
If Apple does it, Windows (read M$) will be out of business in three years!
I can't believe a team full of idiots at Gartner, probably all making six figures plus, came up with such garbage. They really need to go to business school or just get some common sense. Apple is not a commodity computer maker. Apple is an innovation-based company. Apple is largely insulated from price pressures. It's *DELL* that should be worried. They compete on price and eventually some Taiwanese or Chinese company is going to start crushing them. U.S. companies are eventually going to have to exit the commodity PC market just as U.S. companies had to exit the memory chip market and largely exit the steel and textile manufacturing industries in earlier generations.
So since Apple is not competing on price, they will eventually be limited to probably no more than 10 to 15 percent of the market. But they should be able to remain stable at that level, just as luxury car brands are able to maintain a certain market share.
And as Jobs and others at Apple have pointed out *many* times, their advantage is in controlling both the software *and* the hardware. THAT'S their advantage. Not just the software. It applies not only to Macs but also to the iPod. Compare the Mac experience to a PC experience. Or compare the iPod experience to other MP3 players. The Apple products "just work" because Apple is able to control the hardware that the software runs on. If Apple gives up the hardware/software integration advantage, that will be the beginning of the end...
TheChillPill
Jan 6, 04:03 AM
I would love to do this, but I'm put off by the whole 'unusable stream' thing that is inevitable for the first day or so.
It's a shame Apple don't use the same tech used for their movie trailers - at least that way I can wait until it's half loaded before I start watching. That way it can be watched without any stutters or pauses.
Even better, a full download via bittorrent would be ideal - and no doubt save them a packet on bandwidth.
That said, am I correct in thinking that you can save the completed file with QT Pro? Perhaps someone could do that and make a torrent from it?
It's a shame Apple don't use the same tech used for their movie trailers - at least that way I can wait until it's half loaded before I start watching. That way it can be watched without any stutters or pauses.
Even better, a full download via bittorrent would be ideal - and no doubt save them a packet on bandwidth.
That said, am I correct in thinking that you can save the completed file with QT Pro? Perhaps someone could do that and make a torrent from it?
Fredou51
Sep 12, 07:53 AM
Canada iTunes music store shows "It's Showtime. The iTunes Store is being updated." as well!!
Fred
Fred
ajiuo
Apr 9, 06:41 PM
One thing that bothers me about mac os is that iTunes and apple tv (both great products) are almost becoming a conflict of intrest..
It seems like mac os has been moving backwards in the multimedia department. QuickTime was hacked to death in snow leopard... Now they are getting rid of front row... And no one is even mentioning Blu-ray support.
I'll be honest front row doesn't surpize me... I was actualy expecting apple to make a software version of apple tv for mac... Something they can charge for... But no word.
Digital media may eventually kill blu-ray... But it isn't happening yet... Apple is not going to be able to move people away from optical media the way that they did with the floppy... If you stop putting floppy disk drives on macs... Mac users will have no use for the floppy disk.... But there are millions of Blu-ray and DVD players in use... It's not going away that easy... Building devices like the apple tv might help change the market... But holding out on standard features that windows users enjoy is not.
It seems like mac os has been moving backwards in the multimedia department. QuickTime was hacked to death in snow leopard... Now they are getting rid of front row... And no one is even mentioning Blu-ray support.
I'll be honest front row doesn't surpize me... I was actualy expecting apple to make a software version of apple tv for mac... Something they can charge for... But no word.
Digital media may eventually kill blu-ray... But it isn't happening yet... Apple is not going to be able to move people away from optical media the way that they did with the floppy... If you stop putting floppy disk drives on macs... Mac users will have no use for the floppy disk.... But there are millions of Blu-ray and DVD players in use... It's not going away that easy... Building devices like the apple tv might help change the market... But holding out on standard features that windows users enjoy is not.
thisisahughes
Mar 29, 12:58 AM
Could they... award themselves?
FaceTime or Xcode?
FaceTime or Xcode?
avkills
Sep 12, 06:58 AM
Apple would be stupid to make a branded portable projector. That market is already saturated by Epson, Eiki, InFocus, NEC, Sony, Panasonic, need I go on...
I think the wireless video streaming device makes more sense. Make the wireless part interchangeable for future upgrades. 720p H.264 could easily stream over 10mbit connections. Better include a HDMI connector, component video out, s-video out and optical/analog audio. If not, it is dead in the water.
-mark
I think the wireless video streaming device makes more sense. Make the wireless part interchangeable for future upgrades. 720p H.264 could easily stream over 10mbit connections. Better include a HDMI connector, component video out, s-video out and optical/analog audio. If not, it is dead in the water.
-mark
twoodcc
Sep 28, 12:41 PM
what sucks is that academic ve4rsions are not allowed this free update.
what bs. considering i just bought the freakin app not more than 3 weeks ago.
man that does stink. i'm disappointed in apple
what bs. considering i just bought the freakin app not more than 3 weeks ago.
man that does stink. i'm disappointed in apple
cal6n
May 2, 10:31 AM
<snip>
The database at Apple was 'crowd sourced' and you opted in to that when you clicked on 'Accept' in the SLA, but that was a twice-per-day, anonymous, encrypted data packet sent back to HQ.
</snip>
Not quite. The data collection dialog was separate from the EULA agreement and was a voluntary opt-in. Whether you chose to opt-in or not did not affect how your device operated.
Personally, I opted-in. I have no problem helping Apple to maintain their location database.
The database at Apple was 'crowd sourced' and you opted in to that when you clicked on 'Accept' in the SLA, but that was a twice-per-day, anonymous, encrypted data packet sent back to HQ.
</snip>
Not quite. The data collection dialog was separate from the EULA agreement and was a voluntary opt-in. Whether you chose to opt-in or not did not affect how your device operated.
Personally, I opted-in. I have no problem helping Apple to maintain their location database.
Surely
Apr 21, 11:21 AM
That isn't it, because I can change the scores up or down (by TWO points) at will.
Yeah, I see what you're saying. I was able to change the vote on your post back and forth from 1 to -1 with one click.
On a side note, before I start a new thread about it, is anyone having issues with the ability to view PMs? I'm getting a "fatal error".
Yeah, I see what you're saying. I was able to change the vote on your post back and forth from 1 to -1 with one click.
On a side note, before I start a new thread about it, is anyone having issues with the ability to view PMs? I'm getting a "fatal error".
0 comments:
Post a Comment