jonnymo5
Mar 29, 12:57 PM
Hmmm looks like the analyst just took the current Symbian market share and gave it to Windows7 for 2015. I think that is very naive. I think that many more people will move to Android, iPhone and WebOS in the time it takes Nokia to ramp up the Windows phones.
fetchmebeers
Sep 12, 03:51 PM
Doesn't matter if it has been opened. I bought an iMac right before the new ones came out, it was bto with the upc cut out and sent in for the free iPod offer. They gave a FULL refund with no restocking fee, even I made sure they knew it was opened with the upc cut off. This policy is different than their normal return policy.
are you sure whether or not the same goes for ipod products?
are you sure whether or not the same goes for ipod products?
nwcs
Apr 4, 12:25 PM
Interesting how a security guard is allowed to have a gun. Interesting to see what happens to him.
Most likely nothing. Read the article.
Most likely nothing. Read the article.
Evangelion
Sep 5, 08:40 AM
Maybe Apple wants to be ahead of the rumors. :)
http://images.apple.com/r/store/backsoon/title_backsoon.gif
Finnish store is still up. As is UK. Only US store seems to be down.
http://images.apple.com/r/store/backsoon/title_backsoon.gif
Finnish store is still up. As is UK. Only US store seems to be down.
chrono1081
Mar 23, 04:57 PM
No one likes drunk drivers. No one. Period. That being said, Apple should not pull the App. Speed trap apps will be next (Trapster)... Keep the app store open to everything thats legal. This is no different than a friend calling you telling you to avoid a check point. Neither is illegal.
+1 I highly doubt anyone who is drunk is going to dig out their phone to look where the traps are.
+1 I highly doubt anyone who is drunk is going to dig out their phone to look where the traps are.
shelterpaw
Oct 27, 11:27 AM
I'm all for people making others take notice of environmental problems. It's a good thing. I do my share by recycling, conserving gas, and buying organic foods when possible. However, I don't agree when they step over the line and cause damage or put people in harms way. When ELF burned all those vehicles, that's going way over the line. Passing flyers outside of your booth isn't way over the line IMO, but if they broke the rules then they're subject to the consequences.
If activists do things in a mature respectable fashion, they'll get so much further than screaming in people's ear. Throwing paint on people whom wear fur coats is only going to make people hate activits. The best way is to educate and make people aware of what they're doing. Appeal to their emotions and you'll go much father.
If activists do things in a mature respectable fashion, they'll get so much further than screaming in people's ear. Throwing paint on people whom wear fur coats is only going to make people hate activits. The best way is to educate and make people aware of what they're doing. Appeal to their emotions and you'll go much father.
Warbrain
Apr 20, 10:13 AM
Section 4b of the software license agreement explains it all:
http://images.apple.com/legal/sla/docs/iphone.pdf
http://images.apple.com/legal/sla/docs/iphone.pdf
0815
Apr 20, 01:58 PM
You're not getting it. You are looking at a sunny-sky situation where nothing bad ever happens. Let's look at it from my perspective, a real-world perspective: my Macbook, which was used to sync my iPhone and my wife's iPhone, was stolen last fall. So who has all of this supposedly "safe" data now? Whoever has that Macbook. Probably nothing will ever happen, but now I have that little thing in the back of my mind thinking, "Hmm, if that guy happens to read about this and happens to still have it, he could theoretically track our normal daily movements." In other words, he'd know our daily routine - you know, most people have a routine and stick to it and don't think a second thing about it. Conceivably, he could come back and strike again because he has a good feel of when we're not there. I'd say the likelihood of this happening is extremely low. But it could happen because of this. (And we know the Macbook was used for a long, long time because of Zumocast - had it on our iPhones and her computer and saw him logged in all the time, starting a couple days after he stole it. Was actually able to recover some family videos that way, actually.)
That's what you don't get. People shouldn't even have to worry about this. That kind of data shouldn't be available, period. PERIOD. And don't tell me to encrypt my iPhone backups, that's water under the bridge. Why doesn't iTunes encrypt them automatically, hmm? There's no need for any of this.
Finally some sensible example where this might cause a problem .... time for the 'remote erase' feature for MacBooks.
That's what you don't get. People shouldn't even have to worry about this. That kind of data shouldn't be available, period. PERIOD. And don't tell me to encrypt my iPhone backups, that's water under the bridge. Why doesn't iTunes encrypt them automatically, hmm? There's no need for any of this.
Finally some sensible example where this might cause a problem .... time for the 'remote erase' feature for MacBooks.
steviem
Apr 11, 03:47 PM
How many pints to a league does your car do?
JAT
Mar 30, 12:16 PM
Just seen on Mashable that Apple is now releasing a new iPod touch aimed at children. Now the Catholic church is suing Apple because they are naming this new device iTouch Kids. :eek:
Does stupidity really improve people's day? I don't get it.
"I felt like **** yesterday, but then I said something that lowered my IQ 10 points and just cheered myself up!" Ok.
Does stupidity really improve people's day? I don't get it.
"I felt like **** yesterday, but then I said something that lowered my IQ 10 points and just cheered myself up!" Ok.
MrFirework
Oct 27, 12:24 PM
...Uh, Internet law 2001-B... because he's the international scapegoat of this decade. He must be blamed for all unfortunate and tragic events, no matter when, where, how or why they occured. Including and not limited to natural disasters, "acts of God", actions by foreign powers and anything else that blame could possibly (no matter how illogically) be assigned to. Because, dammit, if there were anyone else sitting in that oval office, the world would have progressed into a virtual utopia by now. :rolleyes:
My predictions for the next presidency: A variation of the same old ****, completely different guy.
Well spoken.
P.S. Where's all the news stories about how G.W.B. STOPPED the influx of hurricaines he CAUSED last year?
My predictions for the next presidency: A variation of the same old ****, completely different guy.
Well spoken.
P.S. Where's all the news stories about how G.W.B. STOPPED the influx of hurricaines he CAUSED last year?
jwp1964
Sep 14, 08:51 AM
:eek: I just literally finished ordering a new battery and 1gb memory upgrade so my ibook would last a little longer. If they release a tablet (which is what I'm holding on for) I'll cry!
I updated my battery and added a 1gig stick a month ago...hoping for that iTablet!!!!!!!!!!!!:D
I updated my battery and added a 1gig stick a month ago...hoping for that iTablet!!!!!!!!!!!!:D
cmaier
Nov 13, 05:18 PM
So why can't you use an official Apple API on the iPhone? That's crazy.
He's taking the fact that Apple has the legal right to object and extrapolating that it somehow makes sense for them to do so.
He's taking the fact that Apple has the legal right to object and extrapolating that it somehow makes sense for them to do so.
AppleScruff1
Apr 29, 03:23 AM
Microsoft doesn't sell hardware. Apple does and mobile devices make up a large part of Apple's sales and revenue. They are a tiny blip on the radar percentage wise as far as pc's are concerned, no matter how you spin the numbers. 90% >4.6%. And yes, Apple makes a tremendous amount of money on the products they sell, far more than anyone else, and I realize that most of you take a tremendous amount of personal pride in the money Apple makes. And as a consumer, I find that absolutely bizarre. But that's just me.
NY Guitarist
Apr 30, 05:52 PM
To those clamoring for a matte option I feel your pain but our time is long gone. I bought a Mac Pro just so I could use matte screen because my underdeveloped eyes couldn't get used to "looking past reflections" on the new iMac (which I sold in less than a year)
Perhaps not though. Apple dropped the matte display on the Macbook Pro only to bring it back again.
I know more than a few people who find the reflection issue horrendous, and in my opinion it goes against the PRO "user-experience" in exchange for the consumer "user-experience" Apple is so proud of, meaning brighter, more saturated colors.
Apple even puts fake reflections in their ads.
Perhaps not though. Apple dropped the matte display on the Macbook Pro only to bring it back again.
I know more than a few people who find the reflection issue horrendous, and in my opinion it goes against the PRO "user-experience" in exchange for the consumer "user-experience" Apple is so proud of, meaning brighter, more saturated colors.
Apple even puts fake reflections in their ads.
QCassidy352
Sep 13, 09:02 PM
arn very rarely posts info from his own sources. When he does, that info is always correct. I'd bet a good deal of my savings that the iphone will look very similar to that pic.
Benjamins
Mar 29, 12:49 PM
Ask Nokia customers how important profit is.
lol better yet, ask Lehman Brothers' customers :rolleyes:
lol better yet, ask Lehman Brothers' customers :rolleyes:
jessica.
Apr 25, 08:49 AM
Why do I feel like you are one of the people who purposely try to slow people down because you need to be on some higher moral ground and make sure the entire world does the speed you believe is safe?Higher moral ground? Read your posts ... pot meet kettle. :rolleyes:
Because I am going to. I'm a completely safe driver (even when doing 90 or above) until I run into some dunderhead who has to enforce the speed limit themselves. Had that woman just moved like everyone else did, I would have never had to cut her off in order to punish her. And yes I did have to punish her, because she needed to be taught her dang place on the road.I believe it is you who believes he holds some higher moral ground here. I believe that it is you who feels the need to punish someone. Everything you say about her and what she did to you is exactly what you're doing to her. Honking, flashing your lights, tailgating, and break checking her is punishing her for traveling at a safe speed. Just because you're a child in a car that is too much for you to handle and too expensive for a punk 16 year old doesn't make you a ****ing law. You're going 90, I am glad she didn't move and glad that it has you so worked up that you came here to cry about it.
EDIT: @adk - yes I am 16, however in this situation my mother was in the car and actually encouraged me to cut the idiot off. So it's not just an age based thing.
-DonParenting, no license required ... clearly. I think I'll keep an eye on the news in your area so I can see just when and how you kill yourself or worse yet (and much worse yet) someone else because of your awesome driving skills.
I personally love how I get the bad rap, when the woman was the one going under the speed limit and attempted to breakcheck me first. She got what was coming to her. Had she just had some common courtesy and moved over, nothing would of happened. Instead she decided that she had to play traffic cop.
You people are all laughable.
-DonYou're 16 going 20 mph over the speed limit. You are not a COMPLETELY safe driver, not even a little. Your mother supposedly allowing you to do this is equally disgusting. The driver was likely not trying to enforce the speed limit. Just because you're speeding and people are getting out of your way, doesn't mean that her unwillingness to let you by is her way of enforcing anything. Newsflash, just because you're doing 90 in a 70 doesn't mean people HAVE to move. Most move because they fear for their own lives. I also call BS, I bet she wasn't doing 65. You're no more a safe driver than you are honest. Your first post you already concluded that you would have lied about some animal in the road. Doing 90, chances are you wouldn't even see the animal. You are laughable at best. It is not common courtsey to move out of the way of some guy honking, tailgating, and flashing his brights at you. You speak of courtsey and yet you have none.
When someone like you comes knocking on my ass you get to stay behind me while I chill on cruise control. Keep in mind, all those people who moved are witnesses. Should something have happened, at least one would be there. The so-called law and your so-called awesome family member who can supposedly get you out of all of this are powerless when it comes to you touching metal. Rear-ending someone may be 100% the fault of the person behind you until a witness comes forward and explains how the accident came to be. Animal or not, you're screwed.
Because I am going to. I'm a completely safe driver (even when doing 90 or above) until I run into some dunderhead who has to enforce the speed limit themselves. Had that woman just moved like everyone else did, I would have never had to cut her off in order to punish her. And yes I did have to punish her, because she needed to be taught her dang place on the road.I believe it is you who believes he holds some higher moral ground here. I believe that it is you who feels the need to punish someone. Everything you say about her and what she did to you is exactly what you're doing to her. Honking, flashing your lights, tailgating, and break checking her is punishing her for traveling at a safe speed. Just because you're a child in a car that is too much for you to handle and too expensive for a punk 16 year old doesn't make you a ****ing law. You're going 90, I am glad she didn't move and glad that it has you so worked up that you came here to cry about it.
EDIT: @adk - yes I am 16, however in this situation my mother was in the car and actually encouraged me to cut the idiot off. So it's not just an age based thing.
-DonParenting, no license required ... clearly. I think I'll keep an eye on the news in your area so I can see just when and how you kill yourself or worse yet (and much worse yet) someone else because of your awesome driving skills.
I personally love how I get the bad rap, when the woman was the one going under the speed limit and attempted to breakcheck me first. She got what was coming to her. Had she just had some common courtesy and moved over, nothing would of happened. Instead she decided that she had to play traffic cop.
You people are all laughable.
-DonYou're 16 going 20 mph over the speed limit. You are not a COMPLETELY safe driver, not even a little. Your mother supposedly allowing you to do this is equally disgusting. The driver was likely not trying to enforce the speed limit. Just because you're speeding and people are getting out of your way, doesn't mean that her unwillingness to let you by is her way of enforcing anything. Newsflash, just because you're doing 90 in a 70 doesn't mean people HAVE to move. Most move because they fear for their own lives. I also call BS, I bet she wasn't doing 65. You're no more a safe driver than you are honest. Your first post you already concluded that you would have lied about some animal in the road. Doing 90, chances are you wouldn't even see the animal. You are laughable at best. It is not common courtsey to move out of the way of some guy honking, tailgating, and flashing his brights at you. You speak of courtsey and yet you have none.
When someone like you comes knocking on my ass you get to stay behind me while I chill on cruise control. Keep in mind, all those people who moved are witnesses. Should something have happened, at least one would be there. The so-called law and your so-called awesome family member who can supposedly get you out of all of this are powerless when it comes to you touching metal. Rear-ending someone may be 100% the fault of the person behind you until a witness comes forward and explains how the accident came to be. Animal or not, you're screwed.
Vegasman
Apr 19, 09:11 AM
This doesn't look like an iPhone 3GS? :confused:
http://www.parallelimported.co.nz/media/catalog/product/cache/1/thumbnail/9df78eab33525d08d6e5fb8d27136e95/s/a/samsung_galaxy_tab_white_back.jpg
Mmmm... It looks like a Galaxy Tab. Look at the big logo in the middle. ;)
http://www.parallelimported.co.nz/media/catalog/product/cache/1/thumbnail/9df78eab33525d08d6e5fb8d27136e95/s/a/samsung_galaxy_tab_white_back.jpg
Mmmm... It looks like a Galaxy Tab. Look at the big logo in the middle. ;)
vitaboy
Aug 24, 12:01 PM
No, but they lost in every other sense that matters. I am really failing to understand why some people are having such a tough time comprehending this. Apple capitulated on the patent challenge, Apple paid a huge sum of money to Creative so Apple could continue business as usual. Apple lost. That's all, folks.
Sorry, but I think you are taking the settlement at face value and making just a surface interpretation.
There are already several industry analysts who have now gone on record saying this is a win for Apple.
$100 million may be a big load of money for you, me and Creative, but it's chump change when we're talking about the fact that iPod makes $6+ BILLION PER YEAR (and growing) for Apple.
It's like Creative accused Apple of stealing the goose that lays golden eggs. In return, Apple gives Creative one of the eggs and Creative goes, "Wow! Thanks! You can keep the goose!"
The face-value interpretation says that Creative won because it was a pauper who now has a golden egg that's worth a lot of money. The deep interpretation is that Apple still has the goose and Creative just gave up all claims of ownership over it.
What's so hard to understand about that?
BTW, some months ago, Research in Motion coughed up $450 million to settle a patent dispute with NTP over the popular Blackberry devices. RIM made a total of $2 billion in fiscal 2006. NTP basically had RIM by the throat with its patents and extracted a heavy licensing fee as a result.
You're telling me Creative supposedly had Apple by the throat, and extracted 1/4 the licensing for a product that generates 4X the revenue of Blackberry? Riiiiiight....
To put it another way, $450 million was about 25% of RIM's entire annual revenue. $100 million is less than 1% of Apple's, and in fact, is less money than Apple makes on interest each year on its cash horde.
Sorry, but I think you are taking the settlement at face value and making just a surface interpretation.
There are already several industry analysts who have now gone on record saying this is a win for Apple.
$100 million may be a big load of money for you, me and Creative, but it's chump change when we're talking about the fact that iPod makes $6+ BILLION PER YEAR (and growing) for Apple.
It's like Creative accused Apple of stealing the goose that lays golden eggs. In return, Apple gives Creative one of the eggs and Creative goes, "Wow! Thanks! You can keep the goose!"
The face-value interpretation says that Creative won because it was a pauper who now has a golden egg that's worth a lot of money. The deep interpretation is that Apple still has the goose and Creative just gave up all claims of ownership over it.
What's so hard to understand about that?
BTW, some months ago, Research in Motion coughed up $450 million to settle a patent dispute with NTP over the popular Blackberry devices. RIM made a total of $2 billion in fiscal 2006. NTP basically had RIM by the throat with its patents and extracted a heavy licensing fee as a result.
You're telling me Creative supposedly had Apple by the throat, and extracted 1/4 the licensing for a product that generates 4X the revenue of Blackberry? Riiiiiight....
To put it another way, $450 million was about 25% of RIM's entire annual revenue. $100 million is less than 1% of Apple's, and in fact, is less money than Apple makes on interest each year on its cash horde.
DVK916
Jul 19, 03:21 PM
Allendale is not faster than Merom. Benchmarks show it is slower.
Thunderhawks
Mar 22, 02:56 PM
I don't know if they can make the iMacs look better, IMO. They look really nice. hardware improvements would be the best way to keep these machines alive. unless ofcourse they pull of something amazing like they always do lol.
To each their own, but in all reality, these are the best looking "all-in-ones" that i have ever seen.
How about folding a 27" in the middle?
54 inch screen , sweet:-)
To each their own, but in all reality, these are the best looking "all-in-ones" that i have ever seen.
How about folding a 27" in the middle?
54 inch screen , sweet:-)
dernhelm
Sep 8, 02:01 PM
I think Core Duo aren't 64-bit processors or whatever. That might be where the confusion came in.
Right. You won't get the full 64 bit native benfits of Leopard without either a G5 or a Core 2 Duo processor.
It'll still run on a G4 just fine.
Right. You won't get the full 64 bit native benfits of Leopard without either a G5 or a Core 2 Duo processor.
It'll still run on a G4 just fine.
GGJstudios
Mar 8, 12:13 PM
Safari!
False.
How would Safari be able to install that stuff? Forgive me for not knowing, but I haven't seen anything that allowed you to install software, or any executable code, from iOS Safari. Not with Apple's model. Maybe jailbroken, but that's a different story.
The other poster doesn't know what they're talking about.
False.
How would Safari be able to install that stuff? Forgive me for not knowing, but I haven't seen anything that allowed you to install software, or any executable code, from iOS Safari. Not with Apple's model. Maybe jailbroken, but that's a different story.
The other poster doesn't know what they're talking about.