slicecom
Mar 28, 10:10 AM
Damn it! This means the lineups will be twice as long for the 2012 iPhone (when I'm due to upgrade)!
The Monkey
Apr 7, 10:17 AM
I see the short sighted Apple pom-pom shakers are once again giddy with excitement. The juvenile remarks are embarrassing.
For some strange reason you think monopolies are good for consumers.
^This.
Unfortunately, most posters here think Apple always acts in the best interests of its customers. Kind of cute, actually.
For some strange reason you think monopolies are good for consumers.
^This.
Unfortunately, most posters here think Apple always acts in the best interests of its customers. Kind of cute, actually.
flipperfeet
Apr 26, 03:58 PM
And yet the entire Android platform generates less revenue in a year than iTunes does in a single quarter.
The iPhone and iOS have never been lost leaders used to gain market share so Apple could have more eye-balls looking at search ads. Android is a trojan horse to expand PPC revenues as rapidly as possible; the public potshots about "open" and "curated" are just a distraction while Google fosters an increasingly fragmented ecosystem that encourages users to treat Android phones like disposables to be replaced with the newest shinny bobble from HTC, Motorolla, Nokia, Samsung every 8 months. The only winners in the Android hardware/OS race are the carriers and the manufacturers who can count on the vast majority of Android users to upgrade two or three times more often than iOS users, each replacement extending their contract and extracting revenue on non upgradable, but incrementally better handsets.
The iPhone and iOS have never been lost leaders used to gain market share so Apple could have more eye-balls looking at search ads. Android is a trojan horse to expand PPC revenues as rapidly as possible; the public potshots about "open" and "curated" are just a distraction while Google fosters an increasingly fragmented ecosystem that encourages users to treat Android phones like disposables to be replaced with the newest shinny bobble from HTC, Motorolla, Nokia, Samsung every 8 months. The only winners in the Android hardware/OS race are the carriers and the manufacturers who can count on the vast majority of Android users to upgrade two or three times more often than iOS users, each replacement extending their contract and extracting revenue on non upgradable, but incrementally better handsets.
H&Kie
Nov 2, 02:46 PM
As I said in other email, I stopped using it only because I lost my free "employees" license when I left the company that I had bought it for and couldn't justify the �100 + to buy a home license. I'm afraid I found everything else I tried (Norton, McAfee etc) to be very poor alternatives. Eventually settling on ESET NOD32, which while still taking more resources than Sophos, and only having daily updates rather than the minute by minute updates from Sophos, it was still the best of the ones I tried.
I'm still running Sophos AV using an employees license at this moment. Although it never detected any Mac malware, it does find Windows malware from time to time. And it's nice to have this malware removed before I send files to friends, collegues or customers.
It runs smooth on the background and does a decent job. It might not be to crucial on a Mac, but still it's a nice idea my files are protected.
I'm still running Sophos AV using an employees license at this moment. Although it never detected any Mac malware, it does find Windows malware from time to time. And it's nice to have this malware removed before I send files to friends, collegues or customers.
It runs smooth on the background and does a decent job. It might not be to crucial on a Mac, but still it's a nice idea my files are protected.
Savor
Apr 1, 12:34 PM
The idea of 20 GB per year for $.99 or less for an album just can't be beat.
It is practically FREE for us when Amazon does their $2 music giftcard promo every year since some entire albums can cost less than $2. If you use Swagbucks, redeem $5 Amazon cards at 450 SB and the balance never expires like it does with the Amazon $2 promo.
Amazon + Swagbucks kick ass together! FREE music and cloud storage.
It is practically FREE for us when Amazon does their $2 music giftcard promo every year since some entire albums can cost less than $2. If you use Swagbucks, redeem $5 Amazon cards at 450 SB and the balance never expires like it does with the Amazon $2 promo.
Amazon + Swagbucks kick ass together! FREE music and cloud storage.
cybrscot
Apr 6, 02:38 AM
Interesting indeed!
Apple OC
Apr 20, 12:22 AM
this seems very likely .... looking forward
fxtech
Apr 26, 02:56 PM
iPhones are still better.
What exactly makes them "better"? In your opinion.
What exactly makes them "better"? In your opinion.
err404
Apr 5, 04:30 PM
Android is still open... They are just going to be much more tighter on what Products qualify to get the google Logo and the android name.
I mostly agree. The design philosophy will leave it more open then iOS, but the reality for most users is that their subsidized handsets are compromised in openness. Without rooting, functions like tethering or updated ROMs require carrier approval. At the same time rooting itself is discouraged or prevented by most manufactures (rather, they are trying to prevent). Even Google themselves require specific standards be met for access to critical closed apps like the Market Place. Android isn't very compelling w/o Google's closed source apps like Nav.
It's more then the logo and name. The core Android experience all but requires manufactures sacrificing control to Google.
I mostly agree. The design philosophy will leave it more open then iOS, but the reality for most users is that their subsidized handsets are compromised in openness. Without rooting, functions like tethering or updated ROMs require carrier approval. At the same time rooting itself is discouraged or prevented by most manufactures (rather, they are trying to prevent). Even Google themselves require specific standards be met for access to critical closed apps like the Market Place. Android isn't very compelling w/o Google's closed source apps like Nav.
It's more then the logo and name. The core Android experience all but requires manufactures sacrificing control to Google.
Eldiablojoe
May 6, 01:56 PM
I would prefer not to be separated from my beloved wife. I don't really trust some of you who possess less than honorable intentions.
Phil A.
Apr 18, 03:11 PM
Have you seen Windows GUI? It's also almost identical - rows of icons and task bar at the bottom. Did Microsoft sue Apple? No.
That's a hell of a stretch - there's far more similarity between iOS and OS X (not surprisingly) than between Windows and iOS. Apart from that, Microsoft and Apple have extensive cross licensing agreements in place after the events of the early '90s.
If you decided to release a new OS that looked just like Windows 7, or a UI that was a copy of Windows Mobile 7, you'd have Microsoft's lawyers on your back in the blink of an eye...
That's a hell of a stretch - there's far more similarity between iOS and OS X (not surprisingly) than between Windows and iOS. Apart from that, Microsoft and Apple have extensive cross licensing agreements in place after the events of the early '90s.
If you decided to release a new OS that looked just like Windows 7, or a UI that was a copy of Windows Mobile 7, you'd have Microsoft's lawyers on your back in the blink of an eye...
ryanw
Jul 29, 10:07 PM
Ha! Verizon will NEVER carry it.
I'm pretty happy with VZW service. Their phones are lousy and crippled, but after trying every other provider, VZW was the only one who had almost perfect service in NYC, and I need reliable service more than I need a shiny phone.
I would be with verizon today if they didn't disable bluetooth syncing with the phone. I can't believe they actually make their phone providers jack with bluetooth so you can't sync contacts. FLIPPIN NUTTY! Idiots.
I'm pretty happy with VZW service. Their phones are lousy and crippled, but after trying every other provider, VZW was the only one who had almost perfect service in NYC, and I need reliable service more than I need a shiny phone.
I would be with verizon today if they didn't disable bluetooth syncing with the phone. I can't believe they actually make their phone providers jack with bluetooth so you can't sync contacts. FLIPPIN NUTTY! Idiots.
DaveN
Apr 23, 09:53 PM
It always amazes me that no matter what the news, there are always a few negative votes. A story could come out that new Macs will be a million times more powerful than anything else out there at the same price as PCs and some twerps would mark that as a negative. I guess you could call those people Apple anti-fan boys.
Stella
Apr 18, 04:24 PM
NO It's not, are you crazy. That looks horrid. iOS icons have unique look to them, placement is not patented. The look is.
The lawsuit goes after Samsung trying to replicate and confuse customers into thinking that it's an iPhone.
I said *conceptually* they are the same, they both share the same common properties and looks - i.e., grid, shortcuts, status bar etc ( as I pointed out ), yes, the placement it different - but that is irrelevent?
It doesn't matter if it looks 'horrid', thats an opinion - by today's standards OS9 looks 'horrid' - IMO.
The lawsuit goes after Samsung trying to replicate and confuse customers into thinking that it's an iPhone.
I said *conceptually* they are the same, they both share the same common properties and looks - i.e., grid, shortcuts, status bar etc ( as I pointed out ), yes, the placement it different - but that is irrelevent?
It doesn't matter if it looks 'horrid', thats an opinion - by today's standards OS9 looks 'horrid' - IMO.
rand()
Aug 2, 12:14 PM
You got it wrong. If you can't have cameras.. you CAN'T HAVE CAMERAS even if they're NOT being used.
I don't think that's what the OP meant... it could be though. I think what he meant was don't use the new Apple displays, get a different brand without one built in. And at least with a desktop, you have that option.
My father-in-law can't buy one of the new Intel MacBook/MBP's simply because of the camera. He does government work occasionally, and they'll stop him at the door with anything that can behave as a camera, camphones & camlaptops included.
Maybe if they had some kind of lock-able latch that he could cover the camera and give the key to the door man... I've seen covers, but not lockable ones. That way, the agency/company can be secure knowing that the cameras have been rendered non-functional. I guess he could also simply shatter the lens, although that seems a bit extreme :-).
-rand()
I don't think that's what the OP meant... it could be though. I think what he meant was don't use the new Apple displays, get a different brand without one built in. And at least with a desktop, you have that option.
My father-in-law can't buy one of the new Intel MacBook/MBP's simply because of the camera. He does government work occasionally, and they'll stop him at the door with anything that can behave as a camera, camphones & camlaptops included.
Maybe if they had some kind of lock-able latch that he could cover the camera and give the key to the door man... I've seen covers, but not lockable ones. That way, the agency/company can be secure knowing that the cameras have been rendered non-functional. I guess he could also simply shatter the lens, although that seems a bit extreme :-).
-rand()
kalsta
May 3, 08:57 PM
You missed my point; it isn't progress because it's an enormous step backward. It's not the "learning something new" part, it's the "throwing away everything you already know."
Semantics. Your argument boils down to the pain of change.
I would see your point if switching everything to metric would actually make things more efficient, but it wouldn't. People who use Imperial units are already comfortable with it - the system already works, and isn't broken.
Again, the real crux of your argument is that people are 'comfortable' with what they already know. If you were to put that aside and judge between the two systems objectively, I can't see how anyone would actually choose imperial over metric. Metric is the future. No, check that — it's actually the present. You're living in the past Tomorrow.
Semantics. Your argument boils down to the pain of change.
I would see your point if switching everything to metric would actually make things more efficient, but it wouldn't. People who use Imperial units are already comfortable with it - the system already works, and isn't broken.
Again, the real crux of your argument is that people are 'comfortable' with what they already know. If you were to put that aside and judge between the two systems objectively, I can't see how anyone would actually choose imperial over metric. Metric is the future. No, check that — it's actually the present. You're living in the past Tomorrow.
r0bert99
Sep 15, 04:58 PM
MacShrine? Who?
What's their record?
they're alright. they had exclusive pictures of mac os x 10.3 and 10.4 before wwdc, and got lots of iPod things right (like dropping the gold mini, size bumps...) as well as as Mac updates such as Xserves, iMacs and iBooks. the only real fiasco they've had was that whole ipod video thing in march, but to be fair everyone fell for that, even thinksecret and appleinsider, macshrine were just the first to publish them.
i'm psyched about the updates, i want a magnetic latch!
What's their record?
they're alright. they had exclusive pictures of mac os x 10.3 and 10.4 before wwdc, and got lots of iPod things right (like dropping the gold mini, size bumps...) as well as as Mac updates such as Xserves, iMacs and iBooks. the only real fiasco they've had was that whole ipod video thing in march, but to be fair everyone fell for that, even thinksecret and appleinsider, macshrine were just the first to publish them.
i'm psyched about the updates, i want a magnetic latch!
aswitcher
Jul 30, 07:14 AM
i dont think this will be a dream feature phone but it will work wonderfully with iSync and .Mac, iTunes, iPhoto, Frontrow (BT controller), Mail, iCal, AddressBook etc
I hope it has a 2 megapixel camera and at least half a gig of ram.
I hope it has a 2 megapixel camera and at least half a gig of ram.
CalBoy
May 3, 03:39 PM
I see no reason why 99, 99.5, and 100 are easier to track than 37.2, 37.5, and 37.7. As you said, we accept body temp to be 98.6 and 37.0 in Celsius. If decimals are difficult to remember, then clearly we should pick the scale that represents normal body temp as an integer, right? ;)
It doesn't matter what normal body temperature is because that's not what people are looking for when they take a temperature; they're looking for what's not normal. If it can be helped, the number one is seeking should be as flat as possible.
There is a distinctive quality about 100 that is special. It represents an additional place value and is a line of demarcation for most people. For a scientist or professional, the numbers seem the same (each with 3 digits ending in the tenths place), but to the lay user they are very different. The average person doesn't know what significant digits are or when rounding is appropriate. It's far more likely that someone will falsely remember "37.2" as "37" than they will "99" as "98.6." Even if they do make an error and think of 98.6 as 99, it is an error on the side of caution (because presumably they will take their child to the doctor or at least call in).
I realize this makes me seem like I put people in low regard, but the fact is that most things designed for common use are meant to be idiot-proof. Redundancies and warnings are hard to miss in such designs, and on a temperature scale, one that makes 100 "dangerous" is very practical and effective. You have to keep in mind that this scale is going to be used by the illiterate, functionally illiterate, the negligent, the careless, the sloppy, and the hurried.
The importance of additional digits finds its way into many facets of life, including advertising and pricing. It essentially the only reason why everything is sold at intervals of "xx.99" instead of a flat price point. Marketers have long determined that if they were to round up to the nearest whole number, it would make the price seem disproportionately larger. The same "trick" is being used by the Fahrenheit scale; the presence of the additional digit makes people more alarmed at the appropriate time.
Perhaps your set of measuring cups is the additional piece of equipment. Indeed you wouldn't need them. For a recipe in SI, the only items you would need are an electronic balance, graduating measuring "cup," and a graduated cylinder. No series of cups or spoons required (although, they do of course come in metric for those so inclined).
Of course any amateur baker has at least a few cups of both wet and dry so they can keep ingredients separated but measured when they need to be added in a precise order. It just isn't practical to bake with 3 measuring devices and a scale (which, let's be real here, would cost 5 times as much as a set of measuring cups).
This also relies on having recipes with written weights as opposed to volumes. It would also be problematic because you'd make people relearn common measurements for the metric beaker because they couldn't have their cups (ie I know 1 egg is half a cup, so it's easy to put half an egg in a recipe-I would have to do milimeter devision to figure this out for a metric recipe even though there's a perfectly good standard device for it).
It might seem that way to you, but the majority of the world uses weight to measure dry ingredients. For them it's just as easy.
Sure when you have a commercial quantity (which is also how companies bake in bulk-by weight), but not when you're making a dozen muffins or cupcakes. The smaller the quantity, the worse off you are with weighing each ingredient in terms of efficiency.
Why would you need alternative names? A recipe would call for "30ml" of any given liquid. There's no need to call it anything else.
So what would you call 500ml of beer at a bar? Would everyone refer to the spoon at the dinner table as "the 30?" The naming convention isn't going to disappear just because measurements are given in metric. Or are you saying that the naming convention should disappear and numbers used exclusively in their stead?
Well, no one would ask for a 237ml vessel because that's an arbitrary number based on a different system of units. But if you wanted, yes, you could measure that amount in a graduated measuring cup (or weigh it on your balance).
In that case, what would I call 1 cup of a drink? Even if it is made flat at 200, 250, or 300ml, what would be the name? I think by and large it would still be called a cup. In that case you aren't really accomplishing much because people are going to refer to it as they will and the metric quantity wouldn't really do anything because it's not something that people usually divide or multiply by 10 very often in daily life.
I suspect people would call it a "quarter liter," much like I would say "quarter gallon."
No, that would be 1/4 of a liter, not 4 liters. I'm assuming that without gallons, the most closely analogous metric quantity would be 4 liters. What would be the marketing term for this? The shorthand name that would allow people to express a quantity without referring to another number?
And no, you wouldn't call 500ml a "pint" because, well, why would you? :confused:
Well I'm assuming that beer would have to be served in metric quantities, and a pint is known the world over as a beer. You can't really expect the name to go out of use just because the quantity has changed by a factor of about 25ml.
...But countries using SI do call 500ml a demi-liter ("demi" meaning "half").
Somehow I don't see that becoming popular pub lingo...
This is the case with Si units as well. 500, 250, 125, 75, etc. Though SI units can also be divided by any number you wish. Want to make 1/5 of the recipe? ...Just divide all the numbers by five.
Except you can't divide the servings people usually take for themselves very easily by 2, 4, 8, or 16. An eighth of 300ml (a hypothetical metric cup), for example, is a decimal. It's not very probable that if someone was to describe how much cream they added to their coffee they'd describe it as "37.5ml." It's more likely that they'll say "1/4 of x" or "2 of y." This is how the standard system was born; people took everyday quantities (often times as random as fists, feet, and gulps) and over time standardized them.
Every standard unit conforms to a value we are likely to see to this day (a man's foot is still about 12 inches, a tablespoon is about one bite, etc). Granted it's not scientific, but it's not meant to be. It's meant to be practical to describe everyday units, much like "lion" is not the full scientific name for panthera leo. One naming scheme makes sense for one application and another makes sense for a very different application. I whole heartedly agree that for scientific, industrial, and official uses metric is the way to go, but it is not the way to go for lay people. People are not scientists. They should use the measuring schemes that are practical for the things in their lives.
Not that OS X Panthera Leo doesn't have a nice ring to it, of course. ;)
No, but it is onerous for kids to learn SI units, which is a mandatory skill in this global world. Like I said, why teach kids two units of measure if one will suffice?
It's onerous to learn how to multiply and divide by 10 + 3 root words? :confused: Besides, so many things in our daily lives have both unit scales. My ruler has inches and cm and mm. Bathroom scales have pounds and kg. Even measuring cups have ml written on them.
You could be right for international commerce where values have to be recalculated just for the US, but like I said, I think those things should be converted. I don't really care if I buy a 25 gram candy bar as opposed to a 1 ounce candy bar or a 350ml can of soda.
Perhaps true, but just because you switch to metric, doesn't mean you need to stop using tablespoons and teaspoons for measurements. It's all an approximation anyway, since there are far more than 2 different spoon sizes, and many of them look like they're pretty much equal in size to a tablespoon.
I'm sorry, but which tablespoons do you use that aren't tablespoons? The measuring spoons most people have at home for baking are very precise and have the fractions clearly marked on them.
Other than that, there's a teaspoon, tablespoon, and serving spoon (which you wouldn't use as a measurement). The sizes are very different for each of those and I don't think anyone who saw them side by side could confuse them.
So if you're cooking, do what everyone else does with their spoons; if you need a tablespoon, grab the big-ish one and estimate. If you needed more precision than that, why wouldn't you use ml? :confused:
Because it's a heck of a lot easier to think, "I need one xspoon of secret ingredient" than it is to think, "I need xml of secret ingredient." You think like a scientist (because you are one). Most people aren't. That's who the teaspoons and tablespoons are for.
It doesn't matter what normal body temperature is because that's not what people are looking for when they take a temperature; they're looking for what's not normal. If it can be helped, the number one is seeking should be as flat as possible.
There is a distinctive quality about 100 that is special. It represents an additional place value and is a line of demarcation for most people. For a scientist or professional, the numbers seem the same (each with 3 digits ending in the tenths place), but to the lay user they are very different. The average person doesn't know what significant digits are or when rounding is appropriate. It's far more likely that someone will falsely remember "37.2" as "37" than they will "99" as "98.6." Even if they do make an error and think of 98.6 as 99, it is an error on the side of caution (because presumably they will take their child to the doctor or at least call in).
I realize this makes me seem like I put people in low regard, but the fact is that most things designed for common use are meant to be idiot-proof. Redundancies and warnings are hard to miss in such designs, and on a temperature scale, one that makes 100 "dangerous" is very practical and effective. You have to keep in mind that this scale is going to be used by the illiterate, functionally illiterate, the negligent, the careless, the sloppy, and the hurried.
The importance of additional digits finds its way into many facets of life, including advertising and pricing. It essentially the only reason why everything is sold at intervals of "xx.99" instead of a flat price point. Marketers have long determined that if they were to round up to the nearest whole number, it would make the price seem disproportionately larger. The same "trick" is being used by the Fahrenheit scale; the presence of the additional digit makes people more alarmed at the appropriate time.
Perhaps your set of measuring cups is the additional piece of equipment. Indeed you wouldn't need them. For a recipe in SI, the only items you would need are an electronic balance, graduating measuring "cup," and a graduated cylinder. No series of cups or spoons required (although, they do of course come in metric for those so inclined).
Of course any amateur baker has at least a few cups of both wet and dry so they can keep ingredients separated but measured when they need to be added in a precise order. It just isn't practical to bake with 3 measuring devices and a scale (which, let's be real here, would cost 5 times as much as a set of measuring cups).
This also relies on having recipes with written weights as opposed to volumes. It would also be problematic because you'd make people relearn common measurements for the metric beaker because they couldn't have their cups (ie I know 1 egg is half a cup, so it's easy to put half an egg in a recipe-I would have to do milimeter devision to figure this out for a metric recipe even though there's a perfectly good standard device for it).
It might seem that way to you, but the majority of the world uses weight to measure dry ingredients. For them it's just as easy.
Sure when you have a commercial quantity (which is also how companies bake in bulk-by weight), but not when you're making a dozen muffins or cupcakes. The smaller the quantity, the worse off you are with weighing each ingredient in terms of efficiency.
Why would you need alternative names? A recipe would call for "30ml" of any given liquid. There's no need to call it anything else.
So what would you call 500ml of beer at a bar? Would everyone refer to the spoon at the dinner table as "the 30?" The naming convention isn't going to disappear just because measurements are given in metric. Or are you saying that the naming convention should disappear and numbers used exclusively in their stead?
Well, no one would ask for a 237ml vessel because that's an arbitrary number based on a different system of units. But if you wanted, yes, you could measure that amount in a graduated measuring cup (or weigh it on your balance).
In that case, what would I call 1 cup of a drink? Even if it is made flat at 200, 250, or 300ml, what would be the name? I think by and large it would still be called a cup. In that case you aren't really accomplishing much because people are going to refer to it as they will and the metric quantity wouldn't really do anything because it's not something that people usually divide or multiply by 10 very often in daily life.
I suspect people would call it a "quarter liter," much like I would say "quarter gallon."
No, that would be 1/4 of a liter, not 4 liters. I'm assuming that without gallons, the most closely analogous metric quantity would be 4 liters. What would be the marketing term for this? The shorthand name that would allow people to express a quantity without referring to another number?
And no, you wouldn't call 500ml a "pint" because, well, why would you? :confused:
Well I'm assuming that beer would have to be served in metric quantities, and a pint is known the world over as a beer. You can't really expect the name to go out of use just because the quantity has changed by a factor of about 25ml.
...But countries using SI do call 500ml a demi-liter ("demi" meaning "half").
Somehow I don't see that becoming popular pub lingo...
This is the case with Si units as well. 500, 250, 125, 75, etc. Though SI units can also be divided by any number you wish. Want to make 1/5 of the recipe? ...Just divide all the numbers by five.
Except you can't divide the servings people usually take for themselves very easily by 2, 4, 8, or 16. An eighth of 300ml (a hypothetical metric cup), for example, is a decimal. It's not very probable that if someone was to describe how much cream they added to their coffee they'd describe it as "37.5ml." It's more likely that they'll say "1/4 of x" or "2 of y." This is how the standard system was born; people took everyday quantities (often times as random as fists, feet, and gulps) and over time standardized them.
Every standard unit conforms to a value we are likely to see to this day (a man's foot is still about 12 inches, a tablespoon is about one bite, etc). Granted it's not scientific, but it's not meant to be. It's meant to be practical to describe everyday units, much like "lion" is not the full scientific name for panthera leo. One naming scheme makes sense for one application and another makes sense for a very different application. I whole heartedly agree that for scientific, industrial, and official uses metric is the way to go, but it is not the way to go for lay people. People are not scientists. They should use the measuring schemes that are practical for the things in their lives.
Not that OS X Panthera Leo doesn't have a nice ring to it, of course. ;)
No, but it is onerous for kids to learn SI units, which is a mandatory skill in this global world. Like I said, why teach kids two units of measure if one will suffice?
It's onerous to learn how to multiply and divide by 10 + 3 root words? :confused: Besides, so many things in our daily lives have both unit scales. My ruler has inches and cm and mm. Bathroom scales have pounds and kg. Even measuring cups have ml written on them.
You could be right for international commerce where values have to be recalculated just for the US, but like I said, I think those things should be converted. I don't really care if I buy a 25 gram candy bar as opposed to a 1 ounce candy bar or a 350ml can of soda.
Perhaps true, but just because you switch to metric, doesn't mean you need to stop using tablespoons and teaspoons for measurements. It's all an approximation anyway, since there are far more than 2 different spoon sizes, and many of them look like they're pretty much equal in size to a tablespoon.
I'm sorry, but which tablespoons do you use that aren't tablespoons? The measuring spoons most people have at home for baking are very precise and have the fractions clearly marked on them.
Other than that, there's a teaspoon, tablespoon, and serving spoon (which you wouldn't use as a measurement). The sizes are very different for each of those and I don't think anyone who saw them side by side could confuse them.
So if you're cooking, do what everyone else does with their spoons; if you need a tablespoon, grab the big-ish one and estimate. If you needed more precision than that, why wouldn't you use ml? :confused:
Because it's a heck of a lot easier to think, "I need one xspoon of secret ingredient" than it is to think, "I need xml of secret ingredient." You think like a scientist (because you are one). Most people aren't. That's who the teaspoons and tablespoons are for.
firestarter
Mar 29, 08:41 AM
Seems strange that they're not rolling this out to iDevices. I can't see them having to hand over 30% of the revenue to Apple - this looks like more of a Dropbox competitor.
Possibly Apple's launch of a competitor is imminent, and Amazon just doesn't think that they can compete on Apple's home turf?
I hope this is true. Could be quite useful.
Possibly Apple's launch of a competitor is imminent, and Amazon just doesn't think that they can compete on Apple's home turf?
I hope this is true. Could be quite useful.
ghostlyorb
Mar 30, 09:14 PM
No no no, we want useful UI improvements not iOS fluff.
Don't get me wrong.. I'm excited for Lion. But I don't want a ton of iOS in my Mac OS.
Don't get me wrong.. I'm excited for Lion. But I don't want a ton of iOS in my Mac OS.
rorschach
Apr 25, 09:49 AM
BREAKING NEWS!
The iPhone backup file also stores: your contacts, Safari autofill data, calendars, call history, photos, Maps searches and bookmarks, notes, bookmarks, web history, tex messages, and voice memos!
If someone gets access to your computer they could read the backup file using any one of dozens of free programs and get all that information! :eek:
Seriously, the only "issue" here is that if someone has access to your computer, they could get the file. Duh! If someone is on your computer, they can access a whole lot more, too. Just like they've always been able to.
Lesson: Encrypt your iOS backups and password protect your devices and computer -- like you should have been doing all along.
The iPhone backup file also stores: your contacts, Safari autofill data, calendars, call history, photos, Maps searches and bookmarks, notes, bookmarks, web history, tex messages, and voice memos!
If someone gets access to your computer they could read the backup file using any one of dozens of free programs and get all that information! :eek:
Seriously, the only "issue" here is that if someone has access to your computer, they could get the file. Duh! If someone is on your computer, they can access a whole lot more, too. Just like they've always been able to.
Lesson: Encrypt your iOS backups and password protect your devices and computer -- like you should have been doing all along.
Starbuckfsd
Apr 25, 08:23 AM
Image (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/23/apple-including-ultra-high-resolution-artwork-in-lion-for-possible-retina-displays/)
Image (http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/23/171415-background.jpg)
A finding earlier this month (http://osxdaily.com/2011/04/02/new-mt-fuji-wallpaper-in-mac-os-x-lion-developer-preview-2/) by OSXDaily has generated some speculation about Apple's plans for "Retina" display Macs. The Mac OS X Lion Developer Preview 2 released in late March (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/03/30/apple-releases-mac-os-x-lion-developer-preview-2/) included an ultra-high resolution version of the background desktop image at a resolution of 3200x2000. A few observers noted (http://punchingin.com/chasing-the-6-4-megapixel-unicorn/) that this is higher than any Apple display has ever supported, generating speculation (http://theelaborated.net/blog/2011/4/13/consider-the-retina-display.html) that Apple is preparing for "Retina" display Macs in the near future.
We had previously reported (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/02/24/mac-os-x-lion-building-in-support-for-super-high-resolution-retina-monitors/) that Mac OS X Lion has made some under-the-hood changes opening the door to such super-high resolution displays. Now, MacMagazine.com.br has found (http://macmagazine.com.br/2011/04/23/macs-com-telas-retina-nao-sao-duvida-quando-eles-chegarao-sim-ainda-e-uma-incognita/) that Apple is already starting to include other super high resolution artwork in Lion. They found several icons stored as 1024x1024 sizes, up from a previous maximum of 512x512.
Image (http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/23/171147-23-lion_appstore.png)
Click for full-size
Of course, this support for super high resolution displays is only the first step, but suggests Apple is planning ahead when the hardware becomes available.
Article Link: Apple Including Ultra High Resolution Artwork in Lion for Possible Retina Displays? (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/23/apple-including-ultra-high-resolution-artwork-in-lion-for-possible-retina-displays/)
Oh please. Give me a break! Do you nitwits HONESTLY think there will be retina display Macs in the near future? It's total BS. If they did, the cost of said Macs would be prohibitive to the general public. Why do you think there aren't retina display iPads? IT'S TOO DAMN EXPENSIVE! C'mon guys...you're beginning to sound like CNET
Image (http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/23/171415-background.jpg)
A finding earlier this month (http://osxdaily.com/2011/04/02/new-mt-fuji-wallpaper-in-mac-os-x-lion-developer-preview-2/) by OSXDaily has generated some speculation about Apple's plans for "Retina" display Macs. The Mac OS X Lion Developer Preview 2 released in late March (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/03/30/apple-releases-mac-os-x-lion-developer-preview-2/) included an ultra-high resolution version of the background desktop image at a resolution of 3200x2000. A few observers noted (http://punchingin.com/chasing-the-6-4-megapixel-unicorn/) that this is higher than any Apple display has ever supported, generating speculation (http://theelaborated.net/blog/2011/4/13/consider-the-retina-display.html) that Apple is preparing for "Retina" display Macs in the near future.
We had previously reported (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/02/24/mac-os-x-lion-building-in-support-for-super-high-resolution-retina-monitors/) that Mac OS X Lion has made some under-the-hood changes opening the door to such super-high resolution displays. Now, MacMagazine.com.br has found (http://macmagazine.com.br/2011/04/23/macs-com-telas-retina-nao-sao-duvida-quando-eles-chegarao-sim-ainda-e-uma-incognita/) that Apple is already starting to include other super high resolution artwork in Lion. They found several icons stored as 1024x1024 sizes, up from a previous maximum of 512x512.
Image (http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/23/171147-23-lion_appstore.png)
Click for full-size
Of course, this support for super high resolution displays is only the first step, but suggests Apple is planning ahead when the hardware becomes available.
Article Link: Apple Including Ultra High Resolution Artwork in Lion for Possible Retina Displays? (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/23/apple-including-ultra-high-resolution-artwork-in-lion-for-possible-retina-displays/)
Oh please. Give me a break! Do you nitwits HONESTLY think there will be retina display Macs in the near future? It's total BS. If they did, the cost of said Macs would be prohibitive to the general public. Why do you think there aren't retina display iPads? IT'S TOO DAMN EXPENSIVE! C'mon guys...you're beginning to sound like CNET
dba7dba
Apr 26, 03:15 PM
They can activate it in the store for you and do a personal setup if you want. setup your email etc..
You do not need a computer to own the phone. (updates going forward i believe require a computer but over the air updates are on the horizon)
My iPad i haven't yet synced with my computer as an example. walked out of the store smart cover on and my email already setup.
what about future updates? what if you can't go to a local apple store? i can but what about others who don't have one nearby? something apple should think about.
You do not need a computer to own the phone. (updates going forward i believe require a computer but over the air updates are on the horizon)
My iPad i haven't yet synced with my computer as an example. walked out of the store smart cover on and my email already setup.
what about future updates? what if you can't go to a local apple store? i can but what about others who don't have one nearby? something apple should think about.