snberk103
Apr 17, 04:43 PM
What security problem?
You know what kills more Americans than terrorism every year? Peanut allergies. Swimming pools. Deer running in front of cars.
Pat downs, body scanners, and TSA in generally are about "security theater." The government puts on a big show so the poor little sheep who are afraid of the big bad muslim wolves feel better.
So how about we all stop letting politicians play on our fears, stop feeding money to the contractors who design useless crap like body scanners and stop giving up constitutional rights all in the name of preventing a "danger" that's significantly less likely to kill you than a lightning strike.
I believe that's faulty logic. Using seat belts has cut the number of fatalities for car passengers by 50% to 75% (depending on the rate of seat belt usage in a jurisdiction - USA/Canada). Because very few people are now killed in car crashes, you are saying we should stop enforcing the seat belt laws?
Or because so many fewer people are now dying due to drunk driving we should stop enforcing those laws?
I'm not sure your logic supports your conclusion.
You know what kills more Americans than terrorism every year? Peanut allergies. Swimming pools. Deer running in front of cars.
Pat downs, body scanners, and TSA in generally are about "security theater." The government puts on a big show so the poor little sheep who are afraid of the big bad muslim wolves feel better.
So how about we all stop letting politicians play on our fears, stop feeding money to the contractors who design useless crap like body scanners and stop giving up constitutional rights all in the name of preventing a "danger" that's significantly less likely to kill you than a lightning strike.
I believe that's faulty logic. Using seat belts has cut the number of fatalities for car passengers by 50% to 75% (depending on the rate of seat belt usage in a jurisdiction - USA/Canada). Because very few people are now killed in car crashes, you are saying we should stop enforcing the seat belt laws?
Or because so many fewer people are now dying due to drunk driving we should stop enforcing those laws?
I'm not sure your logic supports your conclusion.
kalisphoenix
Nov 16, 06:52 PM
*********.
Nekbeth
Apr 28, 09:38 AM
wlh99, let me tell you precisely what I want to achieve, so there is no more confusion.
Two views;
View 1 is the ticker and a button underneath (button start.
View 2 is display (label) with the timer running and a button underneath (button Cancel)
Button Cancel will have two maybe three funtions ( stop the timer, reset it or just reset it at once and call View1 so the user can reuse the timer over again. That's it, I want to add that function to my App for 1.1 or it could be 1.4 if don't get to study now hahaa.
I'll take care of the alarms, sounds and those details if it reaches to zero, that I know already.
By the way, what's with 3rd person reference? the OP? you can call me Nekbeth or Chrystian, it's a lot more polite. Maybe you guys have a way to refer to someone , I don't know.
Two views;
View 1 is the ticker and a button underneath (button start.
View 2 is display (label) with the timer running and a button underneath (button Cancel)
Button Cancel will have two maybe three funtions ( stop the timer, reset it or just reset it at once and call View1 so the user can reuse the timer over again. That's it, I want to add that function to my App for 1.1 or it could be 1.4 if don't get to study now hahaa.
I'll take care of the alarms, sounds and those details if it reaches to zero, that I know already.
By the way, what's with 3rd person reference? the OP? you can call me Nekbeth or Chrystian, it's a lot more polite. Maybe you guys have a way to refer to someone , I don't know.
Mitthrawnuruodo
Aug 2, 07:12 AM
Apple Gets French Support in Music Compatibility Case
By THOMAS CRAMPTON
Published: July 29, 2006
PARIS, July 28 � The French constitutional council, the country�s highest judicial body, has declared major aspects of the so-called iPod law unconstitutional, undermining some controversial aspects of the legislation.
� Apple�s lawyers might want to drink a glass of French Champagne today, but not a whole bottle,� said Dominique Menard, partner at the Lovells law firm and a specialist in intellectual property. �The constitutional council has highlighted fundamental protections for intellectual property in such a way as to put iTunes a little further from risk of the French law.�
Released late Thursday, the council�s 12-page legal finding made frequent reference to the 1789 Declaration on Human Rights and concluded that the law violated the constitutional protections of property.
The decision affects Apple�s market-dominant iTunes Music Store by undermining the government�s original intention, which was to force Apple and others to sell music online that would be playable on any device. Apple�s iPod is the only portable music device that can play music purchased on iTunes, which lead rivals to complain about anti-competitive practices.
Although the ruling could still require companies like Apple to make music sold online to be compatible with other hand-held devices, it said that the companies could not be forced to do so without receiving compensation. The council also eliminated reduced fines for file sharing.
�The constitutional council effectively highlighted the importance of intellectual property rights,� Mr. Menard said, emphasizing that Apple and other companies must be paid for sharing their copy-protection technology.
The law, which had been approved by the French Senate and National Assembly last month, was brought for review at the demand of more than 100 members of the National Assembly. The council�s review of whether the law fits within the French Constitution�s framework is one of the final steps before a law is promulgated. It now could take effect as altered by the council or the government could bring it once more before the Parliament.
The French minister of culture, Renaud Donnedieu de Vabres, advocated enforced interoperability as a way to ensure diverse cultural offerings on the Internet by limiting technical constraints on digital works.
While the constitutional council highlighted the need for compensation, it was not such good news for Apple and other companies that the principle of forced interoperability remained in place, said Jean-Baptiste Soufron, legal director of the Association of Audionautes, a group opposed to copy restrictions.
�It is good news for Apple because they receive monetary compensation, but much bigger bad news if it forces them to license iTunes,� he said. Link (requires login) (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/29/technology/29music.html?_r=4&ref=business&oref=slogin&oref=slogin&oref=login&oref=slogin)
By THOMAS CRAMPTON
Published: July 29, 2006
PARIS, July 28 � The French constitutional council, the country�s highest judicial body, has declared major aspects of the so-called iPod law unconstitutional, undermining some controversial aspects of the legislation.
� Apple�s lawyers might want to drink a glass of French Champagne today, but not a whole bottle,� said Dominique Menard, partner at the Lovells law firm and a specialist in intellectual property. �The constitutional council has highlighted fundamental protections for intellectual property in such a way as to put iTunes a little further from risk of the French law.�
Released late Thursday, the council�s 12-page legal finding made frequent reference to the 1789 Declaration on Human Rights and concluded that the law violated the constitutional protections of property.
The decision affects Apple�s market-dominant iTunes Music Store by undermining the government�s original intention, which was to force Apple and others to sell music online that would be playable on any device. Apple�s iPod is the only portable music device that can play music purchased on iTunes, which lead rivals to complain about anti-competitive practices.
Although the ruling could still require companies like Apple to make music sold online to be compatible with other hand-held devices, it said that the companies could not be forced to do so without receiving compensation. The council also eliminated reduced fines for file sharing.
�The constitutional council effectively highlighted the importance of intellectual property rights,� Mr. Menard said, emphasizing that Apple and other companies must be paid for sharing their copy-protection technology.
The law, which had been approved by the French Senate and National Assembly last month, was brought for review at the demand of more than 100 members of the National Assembly. The council�s review of whether the law fits within the French Constitution�s framework is one of the final steps before a law is promulgated. It now could take effect as altered by the council or the government could bring it once more before the Parliament.
The French minister of culture, Renaud Donnedieu de Vabres, advocated enforced interoperability as a way to ensure diverse cultural offerings on the Internet by limiting technical constraints on digital works.
While the constitutional council highlighted the need for compensation, it was not such good news for Apple and other companies that the principle of forced interoperability remained in place, said Jean-Baptiste Soufron, legal director of the Association of Audionautes, a group opposed to copy restrictions.
�It is good news for Apple because they receive monetary compensation, but much bigger bad news if it forces them to license iTunes,� he said. Link (requires login) (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/29/technology/29music.html?_r=4&ref=business&oref=slogin&oref=slogin&oref=login&oref=slogin)
goober1223
Apr 5, 03:47 PM
I knew there'd be a lot of "wuts" but this makes sense. If you don't like it, don't download it. I'm sure plenty of people will and it only adds value to their advertisers.
Honestly though, some of the ads are really well done. Maybe I just appreciate them more than some others being that I am kind of in the industry.
The bigger problem is that Apple rejected an app that served just this purpose (but was surely less pretty), as was already mentioned. This is a cool app, but they should be giving all of the money they earn from it to those that tried to submit this app long ago. I love Apple and have been converting slowly since my first iPod several years ago, but this is absolutely lame of them, even if it only effected a few people.
Honestly though, some of the ads are really well done. Maybe I just appreciate them more than some others being that I am kind of in the industry.
The bigger problem is that Apple rejected an app that served just this purpose (but was surely less pretty), as was already mentioned. This is a cool app, but they should be giving all of the money they earn from it to those that tried to submit this app long ago. I love Apple and have been converting slowly since my first iPod several years ago, but this is absolutely lame of them, even if it only effected a few people.
mdntcallr
Jan 5, 02:39 PM
it would be great if apple would put up a video feed of the keynote live.
if not that, put it in the local apple stores.
if not that, put it in the local apple stores.
toughboy
Oct 10, 07:07 PM
I'm sorry, but with the release of the "true video" iPod "imminent" for months now, I'm just not going to pay any attention whatsoever until I have one in my hands.
Just like the iPhone, PowerBook G5 (and more recently, Core 2 Duo MacBook Pro, although that release hasn't been "imminent" often enough yet,) etc.
I'm starting to doubt page 1 rumors just as much as I doubt Page 2 rumors. Unless you (MacRumors, not the 'source' website of the rumor,) have credible, reliable, direct sources, it belongs on Page 2. If you don't have direct sources, (as rumors on other websites would be,) it does not belong on page 1. By your own standards.
Just because it's getting a lot of talk, and Engadget claims their sources are good, is no reason to upgrade it to page 1 status. (Heck, the iWalk got a lot of talk back in the day, and SpyMac claimed their sources were good. That didn't make it true.)
+1
Just like the iPhone, PowerBook G5 (and more recently, Core 2 Duo MacBook Pro, although that release hasn't been "imminent" often enough yet,) etc.
I'm starting to doubt page 1 rumors just as much as I doubt Page 2 rumors. Unless you (MacRumors, not the 'source' website of the rumor,) have credible, reliable, direct sources, it belongs on Page 2. If you don't have direct sources, (as rumors on other websites would be,) it does not belong on page 1. By your own standards.
Just because it's getting a lot of talk, and Engadget claims their sources are good, is no reason to upgrade it to page 1 status. (Heck, the iWalk got a lot of talk back in the day, and SpyMac claimed their sources were good. That didn't make it true.)
+1
Slix
Mar 24, 08:26 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8F190 Safari/6533.18.5)
True. :P
I'd like to see more screenshots from earlier OS X too. :D I would boot one up if I had extra old computers laying around right now.
True. :P
I'd like to see more screenshots from earlier OS X too. :D I would boot one up if I had extra old computers laying around right now.
KingCrimson
Apr 21, 09:33 PM
That would be idiotic by Microsoft.
Why? A totally new *nix-based with Metro UI. Are you digging it?
Why? A totally new *nix-based with Metro UI. Are you digging it?
Dagless
Apr 23, 06:12 PM
Oh yay! Another app-store rip off years after the OSX one has debuted.
Don't you mean "Oh yay, another rip off of Steam, XBLA store, Impulse, Gamersgate, PSN, WiiWare or [insert any of the other app download stores that existed years before any of Apple's download stores]."
Hmm?
Don't you mean "Oh yay, another rip off of Steam, XBLA store, Impulse, Gamersgate, PSN, WiiWare or [insert any of the other app download stores that existed years before any of Apple's download stores]."
Hmm?
Lyra
Aug 1, 02:06 PM
I was just flabbergasted by the statement that we scandinavians are supposed to be the happiest people in the world. If my memory serves me correct we also have the highest suicidal rates in the world too... and THAT is before we stood to lose iTMS ;)
See he gets it!!!!
He is one of the few people who (if he lives in Scandinavia, needs to be granted amnesty, and sent to a happier place!) actually understands how it is there...
He is telling the truth, but I didn't want to bring up the suicidal rates in those countries and how the youth is just rotting away... But hey, now that he did...
I am sure they don't spend their money on iPods or iTunes, but rather crack and weed... After all their lives suck... so...
See he gets it!!!!
He is one of the few people who (if he lives in Scandinavia, needs to be granted amnesty, and sent to a happier place!) actually understands how it is there...
He is telling the truth, but I didn't want to bring up the suicidal rates in those countries and how the youth is just rotting away... But hey, now that he did...
I am sure they don't spend their money on iPods or iTunes, but rather crack and weed... After all their lives suck... so...
stoid
Aug 9, 06:54 PM
Would someone who bought what they assume to be the newer
version of this display with improve brightness and contrast
please post part of your serial number.
Mine: 2A6211XXXXX (Xs represents the rest of my number)
date of manufacture: May 2006
Determined from the decoder at:
http://www.chipmunk.nl/klantenservice/applemodel.html
I'm trying to detemine if the one I just bought is in this new batch.
And if it isn't I want to return it quickly.
I have 15 days to return it and exchange if I don't want this display to the store
where I bought it (not from an Apple store).
Mine is 2A6241XXXXX
manufacture date: June 2006
version of this display with improve brightness and contrast
please post part of your serial number.
Mine: 2A6211XXXXX (Xs represents the rest of my number)
date of manufacture: May 2006
Determined from the decoder at:
http://www.chipmunk.nl/klantenservice/applemodel.html
I'm trying to detemine if the one I just bought is in this new batch.
And if it isn't I want to return it quickly.
I have 15 days to return it and exchange if I don't want this display to the store
where I bought it (not from an Apple store).
Mine is 2A6241XXXXX
manufacture date: June 2006
Uragon
Nov 17, 11:23 AM
I think Digitimes always comes out with an exaggerated news to cover-up for something new....ahem.. that is completely different
emw
Aug 9, 12:42 PM
I'd hope that anything purchased online would be new stock, since it lists the new specs at the store.
The only way to really tell would be to test it when you received it, or if someone had a some way to identify new model serial numbers.
The only way to really tell would be to test it when you received it, or if someone had a some way to identify new model serial numbers.
zedsdead
Apr 15, 12:58 PM
It's fake. If Apple chooses to use the ipads design with the next iPhone, then it will have the plastic black bar like the 3G version. The apple logo is not enough for all the antenea, just the wi-fi probably.
Stella
Aug 1, 01:52 PM
If that is the case, you guys must be *********g miserable.
Why?
Believe or not, iTunes is *not*the secret of happiness - it does not make or break a country.
:-\
Why?
Believe or not, iTunes is *not*the secret of happiness - it does not make or break a country.
:-\
Much Ado
Jan 9, 01:39 PM
You think I'd be that harsh?! I'm almost offended :P
Forgive me, i'm getting paranoid :)
Forgive me, i'm getting paranoid :)
tinman0
Apr 16, 02:35 AM
Is the difference that Apple is more willing to talk to and play ball with the content providers? Is it that Google has "changing its demands"? Is it about technical concerns? Are the content provides trying to guess who the winning horse will be?
Haha, got to laugh when Google get a set back. As an executive a few months ago said about Google, "it's like negotiating with someone who is autistic".
At the end of the day, Google have tramped over the copyright of all the companies it's trying to get a deal from (think YouTube), chances are that it's also trying to negotiate better terms than Apple with little things like giving everyone else worse terms than them (think the books deal), and so forth.
And frankly, what do Google have to offer the record companies that Apple and Amazon don't?
So think about the autistic comment, think about the terms they will be looking for, and you have to conclude that there is no reason that to think the record companies want or need Google as a partner.
Google aren't bringing new subscribers so the chances are, Google are trying to bring prices down, which will ultimately cost the record companies money.
Haha, got to laugh when Google get a set back. As an executive a few months ago said about Google, "it's like negotiating with someone who is autistic".
At the end of the day, Google have tramped over the copyright of all the companies it's trying to get a deal from (think YouTube), chances are that it's also trying to negotiate better terms than Apple with little things like giving everyone else worse terms than them (think the books deal), and so forth.
And frankly, what do Google have to offer the record companies that Apple and Amazon don't?
So think about the autistic comment, think about the terms they will be looking for, and you have to conclude that there is no reason that to think the record companies want or need Google as a partner.
Google aren't bringing new subscribers so the chances are, Google are trying to bring prices down, which will ultimately cost the record companies money.
Rooivalk
Jul 24, 02:28 PM
http://www.deadzune.com/ :)
wrldwzrd89
Apr 10, 08:28 AM
Believe it or not, neither Mac OS X nor Windows suits my needs best right now - hence why I've migrated to something altogether different: Ubuntu Linux.
That said, I will continue to use Mac OS X and Windows for development/testing purposes, so I am very much looking forward to both Lion and Windows 8.
That said, I will continue to use Mac OS X and Windows for development/testing purposes, so I am very much looking forward to both Lion and Windows 8.
Markleshark
Sep 12, 08:28 AM
Dont think so...
RobertD63
Apr 27, 06:03 PM
Arn,
May I ask if you feel this feature has been useful so far. I really like the concept of a post rating. But I feel like this doesn't bring any real value to the MR community.
Thanks,
:)
It would be useful if they you reached a certain amount of upvotes you can get into the marketplace too. That'll help with actual contributing users that don't post much. The current system provokes people to just post quick short responses to raise their post count.
May I ask if you feel this feature has been useful so far. I really like the concept of a post rating. But I feel like this doesn't bring any real value to the MR community.
Thanks,
:)
It would be useful if they you reached a certain amount of upvotes you can get into the marketplace too. That'll help with actual contributing users that don't post much. The current system provokes people to just post quick short responses to raise their post count.
NebulaClash
May 4, 08:46 AM
That one thing that I don't see is Google sponsored Android commercials... they are not promoting their own product like MS did with Windows and are leaving each hardware manufacturer to make up their own image. All of this gives the average consumer a confusing, scattered message of the Android OS.
That's a good point. We really don't see many ads from Google in general.
This is speculation, but I remember those stories last summer about how Android is a temporary thing for Google but Chrome is their future. This gets shot down hard any time it gets mentioned around here, but I can certainly see this as a possibility. One thing Google is famous for is starting something only to abandon it once they decide to focus in other areas. And Chrome is at the heart of their corporate mission -- getting people to stay online in the cloud where they can be monetized. Android also gets the ad revenue, so it might indeed stick around for practical reasons, but the app model is the very model Google hates for it gets people offline and perhaps using some service other than what Google provides. With Chrome, Google would have full control. With Android it's a free-for-all.
So perhaps this is why Google doesn't bother advertising Android that much. It's nice to have, but it's not considered the future at Google.
That's a good point. We really don't see many ads from Google in general.
This is speculation, but I remember those stories last summer about how Android is a temporary thing for Google but Chrome is their future. This gets shot down hard any time it gets mentioned around here, but I can certainly see this as a possibility. One thing Google is famous for is starting something only to abandon it once they decide to focus in other areas. And Chrome is at the heart of their corporate mission -- getting people to stay online in the cloud where they can be monetized. Android also gets the ad revenue, so it might indeed stick around for practical reasons, but the app model is the very model Google hates for it gets people offline and perhaps using some service other than what Google provides. With Chrome, Google would have full control. With Android it's a free-for-all.
So perhaps this is why Google doesn't bother advertising Android that much. It's nice to have, but it's not considered the future at Google.
aswitcher
Sep 12, 07:25 AM
Ok iTunes Aus is same.
No comments:
Post a Comment