sonictonic
Jul 21, 11:28 AM
Count me into the group who is sick and tired of hearing about this crap.
I too love my iPhone 4, it being the best phone I have ever owned, and without a doubt having less dropped calls than my 3GS had. I had a handful of drops on the 3GS fairly often and on the 4 I've only had two since launch day. I'm also in a long distance relationship and we stay on the phone all night every night. I'm not kidding. :o
I can demo this "issue" but realistically it is not a problem for me. This phone is the best and I'm only slightly bummed that some people may miss out on a fantastic device due to this media hoopla.
I too love my iPhone 4, it being the best phone I have ever owned, and without a doubt having less dropped calls than my 3GS had. I had a handful of drops on the 3GS fairly often and on the 4 I've only had two since launch day. I'm also in a long distance relationship and we stay on the phone all night every night. I'm not kidding. :o
I can demo this "issue" but realistically it is not a problem for me. This phone is the best and I'm only slightly bummed that some people may miss out on a fantastic device due to this media hoopla.
arn
Sep 12, 12:19 AM
If it's just Disney, then there's not much point. The reason iTMS succeeded from the start was that it was simple and it had the largest library from which you could purchase single songs. If the iTunes Movie store starts with just Disney movies, then it's dead in the water. Let's just hope that ThinkSecret is wrong again, as usual.
It's not just thinksecret that's reporting this.
It's not just thinksecret that's reporting this.
snberk103
Apr 15, 08:03 PM
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.
All we know is that increased security screening is not perfect. Perhaps you can extrapolate the European experience (in this case) to the TSA... but that's as far as you can go.
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.
Do you always start with the insulting tone (see bolding) when the debate isn't going your way? I would argue that both sides are rational actors, though both sides may also employ non-rational players. The higher echelons of terrorist organizations have shown themselves to very worried about being captured by the fact that they are so hard to catch. If they didn't care, they wouldn't be going to a great deal of trouble to avoid it. Therefore, to my mind, they are rational actors. That 50/50 number is one that I threw into the argument as an "for argument's sake". Please don't rely on it for anything factual. The TSA in fact catches more than 50% of their training/testing planted weapons. And yes, I think even if the the number was as low as 50/50 a rational actor would do everything... oh heck... I've already written all that - you've not presented anything else of substance in it's place, so I'll just save my typing finger....
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.
That's the funny thing. I've never actually said that the TSA is the best thing around. All I've said is that the TSA is doing something. That's all - that the TSA is doing something right. Not everything. Just something. Go back and look it up. Even the head of the Israeli security never said they were useless (as in doing nothing right). Just that it wasn't the best use of resources. Oh, and if you know Israelis (and I do), then you'll also know that there is another Israeli who knows just as much as that first fellow, and she thinks the TSA is doing things just fine.
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.
That's the problem with 90% of the decisions Governments make. All they have is correlational connections. Or incomplete causal relationships. Or... basically the best they can do is make an educated guess, and hope for the best.
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.
No, on two counts. 1) You asserted "Our attempts at security are at best as good as Lisa's rock...". I countered your assertion by saying that the TSA must be doing something right, and used the stats on hijackings. I (to paraphrase you) "poked hole in your reasoning". You've presented nothing that counters my evidence, except to try mocking it as simplistic. If it is, then show how it is.... If my argument doesn't convince you. Then say so, and then leave it at that. I have my opinion, you have yours. But if you want me to change my opinion you had better do better. 2) I've forgotten - cr*p.
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.
You are right correlations don't show causation. But they are evidence for it. If you have evidence that shows otherwise, present it.
baby frames clipart border
Worldlabel Border Americana X
$11.01. Ready-to-Use Art
All we know is that increased security screening is not perfect. Perhaps you can extrapolate the European experience (in this case) to the TSA... but that's as far as you can go.
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.
Do you always start with the insulting tone (see bolding) when the debate isn't going your way? I would argue that both sides are rational actors, though both sides may also employ non-rational players. The higher echelons of terrorist organizations have shown themselves to very worried about being captured by the fact that they are so hard to catch. If they didn't care, they wouldn't be going to a great deal of trouble to avoid it. Therefore, to my mind, they are rational actors. That 50/50 number is one that I threw into the argument as an "for argument's sake". Please don't rely on it for anything factual. The TSA in fact catches more than 50% of their training/testing planted weapons. And yes, I think even if the the number was as low as 50/50 a rational actor would do everything... oh heck... I've already written all that - you've not presented anything else of substance in it's place, so I'll just save my typing finger....
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.
That's the funny thing. I've never actually said that the TSA is the best thing around. All I've said is that the TSA is doing something. That's all - that the TSA is doing something right. Not everything. Just something. Go back and look it up. Even the head of the Israeli security never said they were useless (as in doing nothing right). Just that it wasn't the best use of resources. Oh, and if you know Israelis (and I do), then you'll also know that there is another Israeli who knows just as much as that first fellow, and she thinks the TSA is doing things just fine.
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.
That's the problem with 90% of the decisions Governments make. All they have is correlational connections. Or incomplete causal relationships. Or... basically the best they can do is make an educated guess, and hope for the best.
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.
No, on two counts. 1) You asserted "Our attempts at security are at best as good as Lisa's rock...". I countered your assertion by saying that the TSA must be doing something right, and used the stats on hijackings. I (to paraphrase you) "poked hole in your reasoning". You've presented nothing that counters my evidence, except to try mocking it as simplistic. If it is, then show how it is.... If my argument doesn't convince you. Then say so, and then leave it at that. I have my opinion, you have yours. But if you want me to change my opinion you had better do better. 2) I've forgotten - cr*p.
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.
You are right correlations don't show causation. But they are evidence for it. If you have evidence that shows otherwise, present it.
Dunepilot
Nov 17, 08:09 AM
It's the Brit pronunciation - like that extra syllable that they throw into aluminum...
Or rather that we haven't removed a letter 'i' from that word.
http://www.world-aluminium.org/history/language.html
Or rather that we haven't removed a letter 'i' from that word.
http://www.world-aluminium.org/history/language.html
hob
Nov 16, 07:44 AM
The Register reports (http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2006/11/16/apple_amd_laptop_claim/) that Apple may be developing an AMD based solution, although details are very sketchy at this moment in time.
As they say, Core 2 Duo still has the lead, but there is the fact that AMD just bought ATI... Apple may prefer to get more bits from one supplier...
Hob
As they say, Core 2 Duo still has the lead, but there is the fact that AMD just bought ATI... Apple may prefer to get more bits from one supplier...
Hob
arn
Nov 16, 12:32 PM
please no page 1 vs page 2 comments... :)
Clip Art Borders And Frames
Frame Outline clip art
flower clip art borders.
Clipart Borders Frames. clip
clip art borders amp; frames
orders and frames
clip art borders and frames.
Clipart – Beautiful Borders
free clip art borders and
clip art borders and frames free. clip art borders and frames; clip art borders and frames. MacBoobsPro. Jul 20, 08:55 AM. I agree, increasing the number of
school clip art borders and
clip art borders and frames
tvguru
Sep 12, 03:15 AM
no, I wouldn't prefer osx media player, i'm not saying that I would prefer anything different, imedia would make more sense, but there's no way apple would change the name of there most well known software.
I figured you didn't I was just kidding. :o I do agree that if they continue to incorporate more into iTunes it won't have that simple iLife feel. Where you just grab a Mac for the first time and there's no thinking involved on what goes where. I also agree that the name is too significant at this stage for them to change it, a lot of average computer users would be confused the next time they go to upgrade and use the new named version. I'm sure they've thought of something for a full movie download service, but who knows?
I figured you didn't I was just kidding. :o I do agree that if they continue to incorporate more into iTunes it won't have that simple iLife feel. Where you just grab a Mac for the first time and there's no thinking involved on what goes where. I also agree that the name is too significant at this stage for them to change it, a lot of average computer users would be confused the next time they go to upgrade and use the new named version. I'm sure they've thought of something for a full movie download service, but who knows?
iphone3gs16gb
Apr 26, 09:09 AM
If you have nothing to add to the discussion, don't post. Your act is wearing thin.
I did have something to add, my opinion, which I am more than entitled to state just as much as you do.
This guy had arms and legs. He could've at least tried to defend himself, but he chose not too, which I dont understand why...
If I were attacked, my first instinct would be to fight back or run.
I did have something to add, my opinion, which I am more than entitled to state just as much as you do.
This guy had arms and legs. He could've at least tried to defend himself, but he chose not too, which I dont understand why...
If I were attacked, my first instinct would be to fight back or run.
miles01110
Apr 22, 06:13 AM
On IE7 whenever I click either the "up" or "down" arrow I get taken back to the forum index.
Bistroengine
Apr 5, 04:50 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
better than being angry over someone elses opinion.
I'm not angry. There's a difference between being angry and having a civilized argument that DOESN'T involve name calling.
better than being angry over someone elses opinion.
I'm not angry. There's a difference between being angry and having a civilized argument that DOESN'T involve name calling.
ritmomundo
Mar 18, 04:15 PM
Did you even read my original post?
yes. what's your point?
yes. what's your point?
Whistleway
Oct 11, 07:54 PM
I am pretty sure Apple has to refresh its iPod line for holiday sales or it is bye-bye stock prices and holiday sales.
The question is what will or can they do by november 14th. And it is very unlikely that it will be large video iPod. Heck, Zune has the same resolution as the iPod and i am not sure what the big deal is. It is not like adding 1" or 2" will make it all the better.
The question is what will or can they do by november 14th. And it is very unlikely that it will be large video iPod. Heck, Zune has the same resolution as the iPod and i am not sure what the big deal is. It is not like adding 1" or 2" will make it all the better.
Mac-Mariachi
Apr 15, 11:17 PM
Why didn�t they post photos of the front side of the shell?
dalvin200
Sep 12, 04:42 AM
would be but were on BST (GMT+1) matey.
its a 5PM GMT start
so using your formula above 5PM + 1 = 6PM BST :)
its a 5PM GMT start
so using your formula above 5PM + 1 = 6PM BST :)
Edge100
Oct 23, 12:26 PM
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.
I'm not so sure that Apple needs to re-invent the wheel all the time. It seems to me that Apple is (historically) pretty good at introducing new features, long before other PC manufacturers.
While I agree that a dedicated research arm could, in the long term, create a lot of great, innovative products and technologies, I think they have the possibility, if not properly run, to become cash cows that produce little or nothing of any profit-making value. Researchers have a way of remaining focused on research, not profits.
I still think that buying up other small, but influential companies such as Digidesign would be a great thing for Apple. Think of all the products that Apple currently sells that were bought, rather than developed in-house:
iTunes
Final Cut Pro
Shake
Logic (and, by extension, Garageband)
LiveType
Heck, even MacOS X was, in many ways, 'bought' rather than developed by Apple.
I'm not so sure that Apple needs to re-invent the wheel all the time. It seems to me that Apple is (historically) pretty good at introducing new features, long before other PC manufacturers.
While I agree that a dedicated research arm could, in the long term, create a lot of great, innovative products and technologies, I think they have the possibility, if not properly run, to become cash cows that produce little or nothing of any profit-making value. Researchers have a way of remaining focused on research, not profits.
I still think that buying up other small, but influential companies such as Digidesign would be a great thing for Apple. Think of all the products that Apple currently sells that were bought, rather than developed in-house:
iTunes
Final Cut Pro
Shake
Logic (and, by extension, Garageband)
LiveType
Heck, even MacOS X was, in many ways, 'bought' rather than developed by Apple.
MOFS
Mar 13, 10:58 AM
Tablets don't even redefine computing at all anyway. It's all the same it's always been. A device that takes input, processes it according to a set of instructions, and outputs a result or provides storage.
That's the basic definition of a computer. iPad, iPhone, Macbook, Xserve, Mac Pro, they are all computers. You use them to input data, process it, store it or output it to an output device (printer, screen).
To think there's some kind of paradigm-shift going is simply having your head in the clouds.
For programmers, nothing has changed, we're doing the same thing with the devices people in the 1970s were doing, albeit, with more refined output capabilities and different input devices.
For server admins nothing has changed. These thin/fat clients are still needing server architectures to drive them and still use the very core Client/Server model for most of their servers. Heck, moving things "into the cloud", just means more power on the server backend and less in the client. That means more infrastructure to manage for us server guys. :D "Cloud computer" is just another way of saying "Client/Server" model and the 60s called about that, they want us to quit renaming their concept.
For "desktop support" people, nothing has changed. Devices have to be imaged with the software the customer needs, it needs to be configured and that configuration needs to be managed. It needs to get hardware service when broken. It needs software support for when things don't really work right or for when the user needs a live person "manual" to reference.
Heck, I'd go so far as to argue even for users, what really changed ? iPad is a big e-mail, web, facebook, gaming device. PCs/Laptops have been this for these people for the last 10 or 15 years. They are doing the same thing on tablets that they were on laptops. There's no paradigm shift at all, just a different format. It would be like calling laptops a paradigm shift when they came out.
I think there will be a change in computing, and tablets are the future of it. I do think servers/ power machines will remain, but I can see them becoming specialised (such as in power stations etc). I can see Linux filling that whole perfectly. I do feel that tablets/ touch based computers are the future, but I think they need voice recognition software to truly come into play for text input. If the iPad had a killer voice recognition software, then MS Word for iPad might truly become a game changer. As good as any touchscreen is, typing 2,000 words on a touchscreen would be a bit of a push.
That's the basic definition of a computer. iPad, iPhone, Macbook, Xserve, Mac Pro, they are all computers. You use them to input data, process it, store it or output it to an output device (printer, screen).
To think there's some kind of paradigm-shift going is simply having your head in the clouds.
For programmers, nothing has changed, we're doing the same thing with the devices people in the 1970s were doing, albeit, with more refined output capabilities and different input devices.
For server admins nothing has changed. These thin/fat clients are still needing server architectures to drive them and still use the very core Client/Server model for most of their servers. Heck, moving things "into the cloud", just means more power on the server backend and less in the client. That means more infrastructure to manage for us server guys. :D "Cloud computer" is just another way of saying "Client/Server" model and the 60s called about that, they want us to quit renaming their concept.
For "desktop support" people, nothing has changed. Devices have to be imaged with the software the customer needs, it needs to be configured and that configuration needs to be managed. It needs to get hardware service when broken. It needs software support for when things don't really work right or for when the user needs a live person "manual" to reference.
Heck, I'd go so far as to argue even for users, what really changed ? iPad is a big e-mail, web, facebook, gaming device. PCs/Laptops have been this for these people for the last 10 or 15 years. They are doing the same thing on tablets that they were on laptops. There's no paradigm shift at all, just a different format. It would be like calling laptops a paradigm shift when they came out.
I think there will be a change in computing, and tablets are the future of it. I do think servers/ power machines will remain, but I can see them becoming specialised (such as in power stations etc). I can see Linux filling that whole perfectly. I do feel that tablets/ touch based computers are the future, but I think they need voice recognition software to truly come into play for text input. If the iPad had a killer voice recognition software, then MS Word for iPad might truly become a game changer. As good as any touchscreen is, typing 2,000 words on a touchscreen would be a bit of a push.
Erwin-Br
May 4, 04:51 PM
But by not signing you ARE doing something about it: Hitting the provider's bottom line and that, possibly more than anything else, will lead them to make changes.
And they will know exactly what to change by reading your mind?
You have to open your mouth to be heard, sir.
And they will know exactly what to change by reading your mind?
You have to open your mouth to be heard, sir.
dsnort
Aug 1, 11:29 AM
dsnort, meet OpenDocument (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opendocument)... ;)
school clip art borders and
eah2119
Mar 26, 01:46 PM
Have they thought about including a USB stick in the box as well, for the Macbook Air? I sure would hate to have to buy an external CD drive just to get the new OS on my computer. Will they allow it to be downloaded over the internet?
Saerd
Aug 4, 08:44 AM
It would be sad if they'd decide to close them. :(
baryon
Sep 29, 07:45 AM
This is exactly the kind of dream house I'd want! Quite big but not too big to loose control over it. Everything makes sense in it and there's nothing unnecessary. I wonder what it would look like on the inside, colors, tables, walls, floor, lights and all that.
D*I*S_Frontman
Jan 12, 06:28 PM
Look, people--
There is nothing amazingly new or innovative technology-wise in the iPhone. Everything in it has been done before, and it does not even employ some of the latest (3G) features that its competition does.
Niether did the original iPod. Grasshopper, go and learn from Thread #500. People thought that product was "crippled" by high price and no new technology ("An overpriced HDD-based mp3 player with a B&W LCD display? Who cares?").
I predict that Apple will have 20% of the entire cell phone market and 50+% of the high-end communication device within three years of its June release. That will mean 150-200 million units.
In the intervening six months before formal release, or shortly thereafter, some of the smaller issues will be attended to (like the ability to at least open and review MS files, sync'ing issues, interfacing w/iTunes Store, what have you). The rest won't matter.
Apple does not sell products, people. They sell personal productivity, great user experiences, wow and chic. This phone phone meets all of those criteria. For consumer devices like these, a streamlined and intuitive user experience is like money in the bank. The only thing innovative about the iPod is the stupid click-wheel, and yet 75% of the ENTIRE aac/mp3 player market is controlled by ONE COMPANY. The one with the click-wheel.
So it is with this product. If the final build quality of the unit proves durable, reliable, and cosmetically superior, and the unit functions as billed, it will not only make a huge forray into that giant market, but essentially create a new one.
Right now, the "smartphone" is really a piece of business equipment. Apple just invented the quintessential "consumer" version of the same product. It doesn't matter that it is expensive or lacks some high-end features. If is actually works as effortlessly and seamlessly as billed, it will become another cultural icon. Apple marketing will see to it that everyone on the planet is aware of how "cool" this device is.
I'm glad to be on record here. I hope that when this thread is reviewed three years from now, everyone is talking about the foolish naysayers of Thread #3245138 (or whatever this one is).
There is nothing amazingly new or innovative technology-wise in the iPhone. Everything in it has been done before, and it does not even employ some of the latest (3G) features that its competition does.
Niether did the original iPod. Grasshopper, go and learn from Thread #500. People thought that product was "crippled" by high price and no new technology ("An overpriced HDD-based mp3 player with a B&W LCD display? Who cares?").
I predict that Apple will have 20% of the entire cell phone market and 50+% of the high-end communication device within three years of its June release. That will mean 150-200 million units.
In the intervening six months before formal release, or shortly thereafter, some of the smaller issues will be attended to (like the ability to at least open and review MS files, sync'ing issues, interfacing w/iTunes Store, what have you). The rest won't matter.
Apple does not sell products, people. They sell personal productivity, great user experiences, wow and chic. This phone phone meets all of those criteria. For consumer devices like these, a streamlined and intuitive user experience is like money in the bank. The only thing innovative about the iPod is the stupid click-wheel, and yet 75% of the ENTIRE aac/mp3 player market is controlled by ONE COMPANY. The one with the click-wheel.
So it is with this product. If the final build quality of the unit proves durable, reliable, and cosmetically superior, and the unit functions as billed, it will not only make a huge forray into that giant market, but essentially create a new one.
Right now, the "smartphone" is really a piece of business equipment. Apple just invented the quintessential "consumer" version of the same product. It doesn't matter that it is expensive or lacks some high-end features. If is actually works as effortlessly and seamlessly as billed, it will become another cultural icon. Apple marketing will see to it that everyone on the planet is aware of how "cool" this device is.
I'm glad to be on record here. I hope that when this thread is reviewed three years from now, everyone is talking about the foolish naysayers of Thread #3245138 (or whatever this one is).
Knox
Jan 5, 03:44 PM
I don't think expense is the issue here.
It was more the logistics of serving hundreds of thousands of clients I was thinking of, although expense could be a factor - I would suspect that the vast majority of people who would bother to watch a live keynote stream will find out what's said anyway via another method, so little financial benefit doing a live stream.
Technically a live stream to the stores would be far more likely, but then you have human management issues - how busy the stores get etc.
It was more the logistics of serving hundreds of thousands of clients I was thinking of, although expense could be a factor - I would suspect that the vast majority of people who would bother to watch a live keynote stream will find out what's said anyway via another method, so little financial benefit doing a live stream.
Technically a live stream to the stores would be far more likely, but then you have human management issues - how busy the stores get etc.
azentropy
Jan 9, 12:18 PM
What I want:
Ultra Portable MacBook: < 2.5lbs, 11.1" LCD, 10+ hours battery, a SSD option, starting at < $1500
Consumer Expandable mini-tower using DESKTOP processors, starting at <$1200.
What I predict:
That I won't be happy
:(
Ultra Portable MacBook: < 2.5lbs, 11.1" LCD, 10+ hours battery, a SSD option, starting at < $1500
Consumer Expandable mini-tower using DESKTOP processors, starting at <$1200.
What I predict:
That I won't be happy
:(
Suscribirse a:
Enviar comentarios (Atom)
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario