PlipPlop
Apr 18, 06:19 AM
If they are uninstallable, how'd they get loaded in there?
Jesus did it.
Jesus did it.
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).
mab920
Apr 5, 03:20 PM
orrrrrrrr maybe this is a good way for those looking to develop iAds to look at some of the ways other companies are using this new platform for marketing.
dalvin200
Sep 12, 07:42 AM
I just opened iTunes and it ask me if I wanted to update...
and did you?
and did you?
tdhurst
Jan 12, 05:28 PM
Obviously.:rolleyes: I was responding to the idea that is was somehow ironic (and funny) that such a low-tech device could disrupt such a high-tech show. There are many other low-tech ways to cause problems for exhibitors. You can't have an open, accessible show floor and protect against everyone's idea of a "prank." Exhibitors have to be able to trust that attendees, especially press credentialed attendees, won't make them look foolish in order to drive traffic to their blogs.
Anyway, I hope you took notice of the real point of my comment:
That's nothing to laugh about.
This is more about the prank being done by a Gizmodo employee than the prank itself. If some Joe Blow attendee had done this, the blowback wouldn't have been as bad.
Credentialed people are held to a higher standard. They are trusted to cover the event, not affect the outcome of it. Any blogger or press member should be embarrassed by this kind of behavior. As a writer and an event planner, I'm pissed in every way imaginable.
Anyway, I hope you took notice of the real point of my comment:
That's nothing to laugh about.
This is more about the prank being done by a Gizmodo employee than the prank itself. If some Joe Blow attendee had done this, the blowback wouldn't have been as bad.
Credentialed people are held to a higher standard. They are trusted to cover the event, not affect the outcome of it. Any blogger or press member should be embarrassed by this kind of behavior. As a writer and an event planner, I'm pissed in every way imaginable.
Evangelion
Nov 17, 11:22 AM
AMD doesn't have a competitive notebook CPU and can't deliver in the scale Apple needs.
yes they could. We are not talking about zillion CPU's here. AMD could satisfy Apple's demands just fine.
yes they could. We are not talking about zillion CPU's here. AMD could satisfy Apple's demands just fine.
John Purple
Jan 9, 04:20 AM
New user interface:
WYThIWYG (What you think is what you get) :D:D:D:D
WYThIWYG (What you think is what you get) :D:D:D:D
wlh99
Apr 26, 08:59 PM
After that I implement a Cancel method pointing to sender (button)
So, my goal is to use 1 start button and 1 cancel button.. and just do their actions. I have set up a the start button to start both timers, obviously both start their countdown at the same time which is not good.
I want to tell one timer to start and if I press cancel, invalidate it. Then If I press start again, call the second timer. (I do this because I read that you can't reuse a timer after you invalidate it).
Some people have suggested to use Booleans like true or false, or conditions. What do you think?
What if after pressing the start button, you create a timer and start it. Then pressing the cancel button invalidates and releases it. Then pressing the start button would create another timer, using the same pointer.
Totally untested and probably broken code below, but should demonstrate the idea:
-(IBAction)startButton:(id) sender {
// myTimer is declared in header file ...
if (myTimer!=nil) { // if the pointer already points to a timer, you don't want to create a second one without stoping and destroying the first
[myTimer invalidate];
[myTimer release];
}
// Now that we know myTimer doesn't point to a timer already..
myTimer = [NSTimer scheduledTimerWithTimeInterval:aTimeInterval target:self selector:@selector(echoIt:) userInfo:myDict repeats:YES];
[myTimer retain];
}
-(IBAction)cancelIt:(id) sender {
[myTimer invalidate];
[myTimer release]; // This timer is now gone, and you won't reuse it.
}
So, my goal is to use 1 start button and 1 cancel button.. and just do their actions. I have set up a the start button to start both timers, obviously both start their countdown at the same time which is not good.
I want to tell one timer to start and if I press cancel, invalidate it. Then If I press start again, call the second timer. (I do this because I read that you can't reuse a timer after you invalidate it).
Some people have suggested to use Booleans like true or false, or conditions. What do you think?
What if after pressing the start button, you create a timer and start it. Then pressing the cancel button invalidates and releases it. Then pressing the start button would create another timer, using the same pointer.
Totally untested and probably broken code below, but should demonstrate the idea:
-(IBAction)startButton:(id) sender {
// myTimer is declared in header file ...
if (myTimer!=nil) { // if the pointer already points to a timer, you don't want to create a second one without stoping and destroying the first
[myTimer invalidate];
[myTimer release];
}
// Now that we know myTimer doesn't point to a timer already..
myTimer = [NSTimer scheduledTimerWithTimeInterval:aTimeInterval target:self selector:@selector(echoIt:) userInfo:myDict repeats:YES];
[myTimer retain];
}
-(IBAction)cancelIt:(id) sender {
[myTimer invalidate];
[myTimer release]; // This timer is now gone, and you won't reuse it.
}
toddybody
Apr 5, 03:45 PM
Ha ha ha ha ha! What a joke:D
wmmk
Nov 24, 05:53 AM
ok, about to leave for the apple store! i'm psyched!
vincenz
Oct 5, 05:10 PM
Wonder if he'll let me crash on his sofa!
Superken7
May 3, 02:42 PM
First: I thought this was called macrumors.com ... oh well :)
Second: Android supports sideloading, no rooting or any hacking required on 99.99% of all phones. You can just DL and install that app. (for now, wait until the modified ROM disables that, like the HTC something by ATT... frickin carrieres!! :/)
Second: Android supports sideloading, no rooting or any hacking required on 99.99% of all phones. You can just DL and install that app. (for now, wait until the modified ROM disables that, like the HTC something by ATT... frickin carrieres!! :/)
Small White Car
Oct 17, 08:59 AM
I'm not sure about what you're saying here, because content producers will still be having to supply the same film in two different formats.
They'll likely drop the less popular format, and thus, we'll have a winner.
life family-quotes-love.
They'll likely drop the less popular format, and thus, we'll have a winner.
maclaptop
Apr 16, 06:26 AM
Let us not compare Apples to turds.
Quotes About Family Love.
quotes about family love. quotes about love and family; quotes about love and family. peharri. Sep 21, 02:58 PM
i love my family quotes or
I love this particular
quotes about family love. quotes about family love. quotes about family love. aegisdesign. Sep 20, 05:57 AM
payup
Jul 21, 10:33 PM
At 0:42 he changes his grip to hold the phone to holding it with just his fingers and the signal rises again. It looks like his fingertips are touching the lower left of the phone. If you do this on the iPhone 4 and bridge the antenna gap, you don't regain signal.
Looks to me like they're trying to pass off the problem of bridging the antenna gap on the iPhone as the same as blocking the antenna with your whole hand on all phones. All phones have the latter problem... But that's not the issue here.
This is exactly what they're doing. All phones will drop bars if held certain way yes. But there's no phones that will drop a call if touched with a single finger in a certain spot. I love everything else about the phone, but phone part of it is impossible to use, I dropped at least 10 calls today!
Looks to me like they're trying to pass off the problem of bridging the antenna gap on the iPhone as the same as blocking the antenna with your whole hand on all phones. All phones have the latter problem... But that's not the issue here.
This is exactly what they're doing. All phones will drop bars if held certain way yes. But there's no phones that will drop a call if touched with a single finger in a certain spot. I love everything else about the phone, but phone part of it is impossible to use, I dropped at least 10 calls today!
SkippyThorson
Oct 6, 10:50 AM
Finally, a Verizon commercial that I like!
+1
Clever on their part. Perhaps AT&T will get a clue, or perhaps Verizon is just asking to get the iPhone handed to them. ;)
+1
Clever on their part. Perhaps AT&T will get a clue, or perhaps Verizon is just asking to get the iPhone handed to them. ;)
demallien
Oct 5, 04:58 AM
Essentially, the FairPlay system is one that implies a certain amount of trust. Once you authorize a machine all of the purchased tracks from that account on the machines can be decrypted. Even if they are not on the machine at the time of the authorization and the machine is not on the network at the time (I have played back encrypted videos on DVD-R on my iBook while it was not on the 'net.)
I'm pretty sure that that's not how FairPlay works. I think it goes something like this...
When iTunes tries to play a protected media file, it asks for an ID of the device that it is trying to play on (serial number, or something like that). Each media file contains a list of devices for which it has been authorised. If the current device is not in this list, iTunes offers the possibility to add the device to the list of devices authorised for this media file. There is a limit of five devices for any given media file.
In principle, you could put an encrypted file onto a service like [website name removed], and it could be used by millions of people. Of course, you would have to be an idiot to do so, because your ID is embedded in the file, allowing the legal eagles to nab you. And of course, anyone USING the file runs the risk of iTunes calling home to notify Apple if it detects a known pirated file...
Apple gives you the option to clear the list of authorised devices for all files in an iTunes library once a year.
I'm pretty sure that that's not how FairPlay works. I think it goes something like this...
When iTunes tries to play a protected media file, it asks for an ID of the device that it is trying to play on (serial number, or something like that). Each media file contains a list of devices for which it has been authorised. If the current device is not in this list, iTunes offers the possibility to add the device to the list of devices authorised for this media file. There is a limit of five devices for any given media file.
In principle, you could put an encrypted file onto a service like [website name removed], and it could be used by millions of people. Of course, you would have to be an idiot to do so, because your ID is embedded in the file, allowing the legal eagles to nab you. And of course, anyone USING the file runs the risk of iTunes calling home to notify Apple if it detects a known pirated file...
Apple gives you the option to clear the list of authorised devices for all files in an iTunes library once a year.
maclaptop
Apr 29, 10:41 PM
This may be off-topic, but does anyone know if the recently purchased Mac products are "grandfathered in" for a Lion release? In other words, I just bought a new MacBook Pro yesterday... am I going to need to pay to upgrade to Lion?
It would, of course, be nice if the upgrade was free for recent purchasers similar to what MS did with the release of Win 7, but I'm assuming that since I can't find anything out about it, there's probably nothing to be hopeful about.
Based on past practices I expect this will cost us over one hundred dollars.
It would, of course, be nice if the upgrade was free for recent purchasers similar to what MS did with the release of Win 7, but I'm assuming that since I can't find anything out about it, there's probably nothing to be hopeful about.
Based on past practices I expect this will cost us over one hundred dollars.
twoodcc
Jul 13, 10:02 PM
farout man, thats BS. is it ADSL?
it's cable internet. the company is mediacom. it's the only cable company out here. but i guess i might have to go dsl if they don't fix it
it's cable internet. the company is mediacom. it's the only cable company out here. but i guess i might have to go dsl if they don't fix it
LightSpeed1
Apr 11, 01:23 AM
Street Kings
I think my favorite thing about this movie is it's soundtrack... prob in top 10
http://img849.imageshack.us/img849/2485/streetkingsbluray.jpgthat movie was pretty good.
I think my favorite thing about this movie is it's soundtrack... prob in top 10
http://img849.imageshack.us/img849/2485/streetkingsbluray.jpgthat movie was pretty good.
ChrisA
Sep 26, 11:52 AM
Ignore me if you wish, but I'm pretty sad about not getting the machine promised by the rumour mill. I'm happy for y'all with your updated photo software, but wouldn't you have liked it to be true that we'd get a nice new C2D MBP to use it on?
a C2D MBP would give you what? Maybe a 20% speed bump. I doubt you'd notice except if you used a stop watch. For photographers and Videographers I doubt C2D would bing even a 20% boost as their main bottleneck is the speed of the disk.
Try this experiment: Bring up Activity Monitor and see if the CPU is as 100% if it is not a faster CPU will do nothing for you. On a Mac the CPU is at 100% mostly when transcoding or redering, those tasks will go faster after the speed bump
My gues is that the code re-work inside Aperture will speed things up MUCH more than a C2D could.
a C2D MBP would give you what? Maybe a 20% speed bump. I doubt you'd notice except if you used a stop watch. For photographers and Videographers I doubt C2D would bing even a 20% boost as their main bottleneck is the speed of the disk.
Try this experiment: Bring up Activity Monitor and see if the CPU is as 100% if it is not a faster CPU will do nothing for you. On a Mac the CPU is at 100% mostly when transcoding or redering, those tasks will go faster after the speed bump
My gues is that the code re-work inside Aperture will speed things up MUCH more than a C2D could.
Lennholm
Apr 16, 08:53 AM
I dislike it when people keep saying that line over and over. Does competition really make products better? Where's the truth in that? If it's truly the case, why do we still see half-baked consumer products for the end user?
If anything, I feel that there seldom really is a better product for us because of competition. A competing product with better specs does not necessarily result in a better product. And frankly, judging by the gadget industry, Apple's been releasing consumer-satisfied products left and right despite better (in specs) products being released by their competitors.
Okay. So did competition [from other manufacturers] make Apple release a better product? No. Because from how the Internet reacts, every other manufacturer outspecs Apple and Apple "overcharges for something you can get with much more for much less"
But Apple does release products to get with the times, however, I feel that Apple products don't need high-end specs to provide consumer satisfaction.
Besides, the iOS today looks the same as the iOS from the iPhone 1 but with upgrades. Did competition spur Apple into doing the upgrades? I doubt it. They seem to have their own idea of where to direct their OS. Honeycomb on the other hand looks and functions very differently from Froyo. That [design decision] instead seems to be driven by competition.
It's hard to know what features Apple wouldn't have included in the latest gen of a product if it hadn't been for competition. Maybe iPad 2 wouldn't have had the improved GPU if it had zero competing products.
One thing I'm certain of, iOS would still not have had personal hot spot if it hadn't been for the competition from Android.
If anything, I feel that there seldom really is a better product for us because of competition. A competing product with better specs does not necessarily result in a better product. And frankly, judging by the gadget industry, Apple's been releasing consumer-satisfied products left and right despite better (in specs) products being released by their competitors.
Okay. So did competition [from other manufacturers] make Apple release a better product? No. Because from how the Internet reacts, every other manufacturer outspecs Apple and Apple "overcharges for something you can get with much more for much less"
But Apple does release products to get with the times, however, I feel that Apple products don't need high-end specs to provide consumer satisfaction.
Besides, the iOS today looks the same as the iOS from the iPhone 1 but with upgrades. Did competition spur Apple into doing the upgrades? I doubt it. They seem to have their own idea of where to direct their OS. Honeycomb on the other hand looks and functions very differently from Froyo. That [design decision] instead seems to be driven by competition.
It's hard to know what features Apple wouldn't have included in the latest gen of a product if it hadn't been for competition. Maybe iPad 2 wouldn't have had the improved GPU if it had zero competing products.
One thing I'm certain of, iOS would still not have had personal hot spot if it hadn't been for the competition from Android.
Luph67
Mar 28, 02:46 PM
What did you think they would do, rummage through all the non-app store apps on the Mac platform? Lol, some people are ridiculous.
MorphingDragon
Apr 30, 12:24 AM
Hey knock it off with all the off topic Windows drivel. Winrumors forums would be a better place to dispute these matters.
Slight UI tweaks aren't a big topic pool to draw from.
Slight UI tweaks aren't a big topic pool to draw from.