shurcooL
Apr 24, 12:01 AM
If the coming soon refreshed 13" MBA gets a 13" 2880x1800 HiDPI/Retina display, Sandy Bridge and Lion preinstalled... It will be so win. And PC guys will be stuck with their legacy 1280x800 haha.
marksman
Apr 25, 11:07 AM
It seems to me that the media and those sending steve email don't understand what it means when they say "Apple is tracking me".
bloodycape
Apr 18, 04:47 PM
A bit OT but didn't BlackBerry successfully sue(or at least come to a large monetary agreement) Palm for copying the look and feel of their keyboard? If so, Apple could get pretty far with is.
dante@sisna.com
Aug 7, 06:37 PM
Not really significantly faster than the G5 Quad. Maybe 50% faster at best. As owner of a Quad G5 my motivation would be more about the 6 bays and the FW 800 and extra USB 2 port on the front than the speed. :) Not worth the extra money to go 3GHz - 33% more money for 12% more speed doesn't make economic sense. Need 8 cores inside.
Agreed!
The next 2 releases of the MacPro are the ones I'll buy.
I am very happy I purchased my PowerMac Quad -- It has made me a lot of money in production multitasking. Fantastic Machine with NATIVE software that works NOW, with few minor bugs which I am sure will surface with the MacPros.
DJO
Agreed!
The next 2 releases of the MacPro are the ones I'll buy.
I am very happy I purchased my PowerMac Quad -- It has made me a lot of money in production multitasking. Fantastic Machine with NATIVE software that works NOW, with few minor bugs which I am sure will surface with the MacPros.
DJO
Bradley W
Sep 10, 11:16 PM
_
aldejesus
Mar 30, 10:38 PM
I don't know why but my MBP 13 i7 2011 is showing "Intel HD Graphics 3000 512 MB graphics" on the About this mac screen on Display tab.:eek:
BTW I'm using an External Display.
BTW I'm using an External Display.
zoran
Aug 2, 04:01 PM
??
Machead III
Sep 16, 11:50 AM
C2D MB by Thanksgiving :D
Too late for me :(
*sheads a tear*
Too late for me :(
*sheads a tear*
RandiC
Apr 25, 10:32 AM
Maybe you could shed some light on this for me before I switch to a Droid. They don't track me.
Switch to Droid they don't track me...... The most stupid comment I ever heard!!! Almost
Switch to Droid they don't track me...... The most stupid comment I ever heard!!! Almost
nuckinfutz
May 7, 10:53 AM
We all remember the internal meeting Jobs held discussing how Google was in effect 'declaring war on Apple' by invading their "mobile" turf; what if this is Apple reciprocating. Offering similar options to Gmail for free and attempting to complement MobileMe with iAds in an attempt to unthrone Google. With the high hopes Apple has for iAds (as suggested by the rumors regarding the high developer pricing of iAds) it does make sense, and in the very least, try to hurt Google. Another intriguing question is: would Apple loyalists prefer Apple service over another as long as the quality is acceptable (perhaps even if the quality was less than the options, at first).
Apple has been doing this stuff since .mac so they've been on the turf for a while. iAds is not gonna be a part of the equation. Apple's building a huge datacenter in NC and with free Mobileme it gives developers a "no brainer" incentive to use Mobileme for their OTA sync. Wifi sync does nothing but irritate the user IMO.
This isn't about hurting Google this is about taking the next leap forward in computing by melding cloud services with mobile and desktop computing
Why not just make it a $20 product instead of giving it away for no profit?
Because Free always has better uptake as witnessed by the legions of people that let Google scrape their emails and other data to provide targeted ads. These people actually perceive this as being "Free" when in fact you're letting Google profit handsomely off your data.
Apple has been doing this stuff since .mac so they've been on the turf for a while. iAds is not gonna be a part of the equation. Apple's building a huge datacenter in NC and with free Mobileme it gives developers a "no brainer" incentive to use Mobileme for their OTA sync. Wifi sync does nothing but irritate the user IMO.
This isn't about hurting Google this is about taking the next leap forward in computing by melding cloud services with mobile and desktop computing
Why not just make it a $20 product instead of giving it away for no profit?
Because Free always has better uptake as witnessed by the legions of people that let Google scrape their emails and other data to provide targeted ads. These people actually perceive this as being "Free" when in fact you're letting Google profit handsomely off your data.
0815
Apr 25, 10:57 AM
For all those being scared about the location tracking that are posting here:
WARNING: posting here will reveal your current location to certain individuals. You transmit your IP address which is than stored in the web log and can be used to track your location. If you don't like your location being tracked, you should stop posting.
WARNING: posting here will reveal your current location to certain individuals. You transmit your IP address which is than stored in the web log and can be used to track your location. If you don't like your location being tracked, you should stop posting.
BRLawyer
May 7, 12:02 PM
While I agree, MobileMe is still in my eyes the best of the bunch. That's how they get away with charging $99/year. However, if it became free, they could really talk up how great owning a Mac is because of MobileMe.
It makes sense to turn it into a free service, considering that Apple now benefits from enough network effects to have MobileMe much more as a "driver" of content and interoperability between its devices than a standalone cash cow...it will probably happen soon.
It makes sense to turn it into a free service, considering that Apple now benefits from enough network effects to have MobileMe much more as a "driver" of content and interoperability between its devices than a standalone cash cow...it will probably happen soon.
Don't panic
May 4, 10:50 AM
The other downside is we have half our health and action points. I'm not sure how big of a trap we can see early in a game, but if it has 3 or more that wipes out a whole team possibly.
if we explore, we automatically disable any traps, no matter how big, so there is no damage sustained by us.
but if the group that goes ahead in the room encounters a monster, then you are right: our AP are split so it would be harder to kill the monster, and all the damage would be only sustained by the entering party.
on the other hand i don't see any risk to the party that follows.
that's why i had proposed an asymmetric split, with a stronger party going in the other room (to face a possible monster) and one or two people remaining behind to explore, including you who are likely an essential asset (for now ;)), so we need to avoid that you become damaged goods.
right now this is moot, though, as i have already communicated turn 1 officially, and we are all searching this darned room.
so get back to exploring your side! i don't care about the spider. as far as i am concerned they are just another form of proteins!
well? did anyone find anything interesting?
if we explore, we automatically disable any traps, no matter how big, so there is no damage sustained by us.
but if the group that goes ahead in the room encounters a monster, then you are right: our AP are split so it would be harder to kill the monster, and all the damage would be only sustained by the entering party.
on the other hand i don't see any risk to the party that follows.
that's why i had proposed an asymmetric split, with a stronger party going in the other room (to face a possible monster) and one or two people remaining behind to explore, including you who are likely an essential asset (for now ;)), so we need to avoid that you become damaged goods.
right now this is moot, though, as i have already communicated turn 1 officially, and we are all searching this darned room.
so get back to exploring your side! i don't care about the spider. as far as i am concerned they are just another form of proteins!
well? did anyone find anything interesting?
glitch44
Aug 11, 09:57 AM
question: are the CPUs in the macbook socketed or soldered?
could i buy my own Core 2 Duo chip and drop it in there at a later date?
i don't really care about the mhz increase, but the Core 2 Duo line does seem to be a little cooler at idle...
could i buy my own Core 2 Duo chip and drop it in there at a later date?
i don't really care about the mhz increase, but the Core 2 Duo line does seem to be a little cooler at idle...
McBeats
Apr 5, 04:46 PM
compared to sony, apple is damn near supporting the jailbreak community
totally agreed...
------
Anyway it's ********** ugly!
EXACTLY. Sorry Toyota, but it's pretty rough.
totally agreed...
------
Anyway it's ********** ugly!
EXACTLY. Sorry Toyota, but it's pretty rough.
Erasmus
Aug 4, 06:48 PM
New iMacs next Tuesday. I'll take one if it comes with a Conroe, Apple, thank you. But of course, if that's too hot, a Merom would do fine, too. Unless it will still use that dull 667MHz FSB, of course. At least put in an X1800 in it. Oh, and 1GB of RAM. And, while you're at it, throw in a 24" display too. And get rid of the lower bevel of the 'display design'. All that, and I'm buying straight away. If it will come pre-loaded with Leopard and will have a universal BlueRay/HD DVD-burner built-in, that is.
:rolleyes:
But seriously, I'm soooo ready for a new iMac. This 800MHz G4 iMac is getting old. It works like a charm, still, and is plenty fast for most stuff, but it just doesn't feel right anymore. Also, I never had quite the relationship with it as with my old 233MHz G3 iMac. I WANT A NEW iMAC! AND I WANT IT NOW!
Sounds like someone wants an iMac Ultra! (Really final Propaganda)
We Apple customers want an iMac with at LEAST (preferrably >>) 2.4 Conroe, at least an X1800 with 512 MB (Which should be quite likely if the PMs (sorry MPs) get SLI), a 23" screen, which Apple should have plenty of from their Cinema D's, and more RAM slots than you can polk a 2Gb RAM stick at (Meaning >=4), with most of them filled.
All for under AU$4 Grand.
That should take care of all gamers, any professionals who require a reasonably portable Desktop with awesome power, and in fact, anyone else.
--------------------
MBPs do use Lithium Polymer batteries. It says so on the Apple MBP website. I'm sure the MBs do too.
--------------------
As an aside, is anyone else here as happy as I am that we will never see one of those evil "Pentium" chips in our precious Macs? Hooray, there will be no Pentium 5! (Unless they call the Conroe line Pentium, like they keep calling Core Duo "Centrino Duo", to my utmost annoyance. Isn't Centrino the "Budget" brand name?)
Death (Or severe overheating and frying) to all Pentiums!
--------------------
Anyone else here interested in an iMac Ultra?
Anyone else have an extreme and probably unwarranted hatred of the Pentium moniker?
:rolleyes:
But seriously, I'm soooo ready for a new iMac. This 800MHz G4 iMac is getting old. It works like a charm, still, and is plenty fast for most stuff, but it just doesn't feel right anymore. Also, I never had quite the relationship with it as with my old 233MHz G3 iMac. I WANT A NEW iMAC! AND I WANT IT NOW!
Sounds like someone wants an iMac Ultra! (Really final Propaganda)
We Apple customers want an iMac with at LEAST (preferrably >>) 2.4 Conroe, at least an X1800 with 512 MB (Which should be quite likely if the PMs (sorry MPs) get SLI), a 23" screen, which Apple should have plenty of from their Cinema D's, and more RAM slots than you can polk a 2Gb RAM stick at (Meaning >=4), with most of them filled.
All for under AU$4 Grand.
That should take care of all gamers, any professionals who require a reasonably portable Desktop with awesome power, and in fact, anyone else.
--------------------
MBPs do use Lithium Polymer batteries. It says so on the Apple MBP website. I'm sure the MBs do too.
--------------------
As an aside, is anyone else here as happy as I am that we will never see one of those evil "Pentium" chips in our precious Macs? Hooray, there will be no Pentium 5! (Unless they call the Conroe line Pentium, like they keep calling Core Duo "Centrino Duo", to my utmost annoyance. Isn't Centrino the "Budget" brand name?)
Death (Or severe overheating and frying) to all Pentiums!
--------------------
Anyone else here interested in an iMac Ultra?
Anyone else have an extreme and probably unwarranted hatred of the Pentium moniker?
SirHaakon
Mar 30, 12:25 AM
I really do like the concept of having an enormous amount of online storage, immediately accessible from anywhere.. but ultimately I see this as an issue of me having to pay someone else for granting access to things I already own.
So that storage unit you have filled with couches and tennis rackets and old baseball cards... that should be free as well?
Let's be reasonable here. They have to buy drives (multiple drives, because clearly they need redundancy and backup) to put your music on and they have to pay for the bandwidth to pipe it out to you. I hardly think $1 for 20 gigabytes of available anywhere storage is very unreasonable.
Do you like paying a fee to your bank when you take out YOUR OWN MONEY from the bank?
No, of course not... but that's different. They aren't storing physical cash somewhere anymore, it's all just a line of electronic code that states what your balance is. Why should anyone have to pay for that? And before you tell me that digital music is just 1s and 0s too, you're right - and that's why Amazon gives you 5 gigs free. If you want more, obviously there's a cost involved. They can't support millions of customers each wanting a terabyte of storage for nothing.
Remember when television was free? We just had to put up with advertisements, and for that, we got free TV. Now many people pay 79 bucks a month or more to get cable or satellite TV.
Nothing has changed. Over-the-air broadcasts are still available for free. It's called an antenna. They may seem quaint, but Best Buy still sells them. If you want premium content, you pay for it.
Of course companies like Amazon and Apple are not in it for your convenience, they're in it because if everyone eventually has all their files stored online in the cloud, there's TONS and TONS of money to be made- for ever. If I have a computer, phone or music listening device with ample amounts of storage space, these companies don't make any money off of me after I purchase that music from itunes or wherever. (And if I have cds or blu ray movies, they don't make any money on me at all). This cloud concept provides some convenience, but more importantly guarantees a steady flow of income for these companies for many years to come.
Well first of all, if you buy a Blu-ray disc from Amazon, they're still taking their cut. So saying they make "no money at all" from that is inaccurate. But again, they are offering you physical storage space that is available 24/7 from wherever you are. Why would you expect that to be free? That's just a ridiculous mentality. The prices they're asking aren't very expensive, either. How much do you spend on your cable bill every month? Your phone bill? People just think it's ridiculous to spend money on music because avenues have popped up where you can get it for free. (Why buy the CD when I can just watch it on YouTube?). Just because something is available somewhere for free doesn't mean it's worthless. Amazon is providing a service. That service comes with a fee. If you don't think it's worth it, don't buy it... but I think your expectations are pretty misplaced.
Flash memory storage capacities are growing yearly.. and prices are continuing to drop. Now companies are starting to ship secure digital cards with capacities of a staggering 128 GB on a tiny compact flash card! Ultimately I think most people will be able to have enormous amounts of files locally on their own phone or portable computer.
Sure they can. That isn't the point of this, though. I have 2 computers at home, a laptop, a phone that has storage, a DVR, even my Xbox can store music files. But what a pain in the ass it is to share between them all. Do I want to use up 80 gigs of my laptop's internal drive just to take all of my music with me when I travel? Do I want duplicate copies of everything I own on all of these different devices just to make sure the one thing I'm looking for at any particular moment is there no matter what? Good grief, no. Yes of course I will keep A backup of all of my files on a local system - I'm not trusting anything ONLY to the cloud - but now there's a way to access my music (or any other kind of file, for that matter) wherever I go, quickly and easily. Sure, it's not much different than dropbox except that it's cheaper and less complicated. How nice to be able to visit my parents, or go on vacation, or be at a friend's house, log on to their computer, and have my entire music library instantly available at my fingertips. It makes a lot of sense to me.
So that storage unit you have filled with couches and tennis rackets and old baseball cards... that should be free as well?
Let's be reasonable here. They have to buy drives (multiple drives, because clearly they need redundancy and backup) to put your music on and they have to pay for the bandwidth to pipe it out to you. I hardly think $1 for 20 gigabytes of available anywhere storage is very unreasonable.
Do you like paying a fee to your bank when you take out YOUR OWN MONEY from the bank?
No, of course not... but that's different. They aren't storing physical cash somewhere anymore, it's all just a line of electronic code that states what your balance is. Why should anyone have to pay for that? And before you tell me that digital music is just 1s and 0s too, you're right - and that's why Amazon gives you 5 gigs free. If you want more, obviously there's a cost involved. They can't support millions of customers each wanting a terabyte of storage for nothing.
Remember when television was free? We just had to put up with advertisements, and for that, we got free TV. Now many people pay 79 bucks a month or more to get cable or satellite TV.
Nothing has changed. Over-the-air broadcasts are still available for free. It's called an antenna. They may seem quaint, but Best Buy still sells them. If you want premium content, you pay for it.
Of course companies like Amazon and Apple are not in it for your convenience, they're in it because if everyone eventually has all their files stored online in the cloud, there's TONS and TONS of money to be made- for ever. If I have a computer, phone or music listening device with ample amounts of storage space, these companies don't make any money off of me after I purchase that music from itunes or wherever. (And if I have cds or blu ray movies, they don't make any money on me at all). This cloud concept provides some convenience, but more importantly guarantees a steady flow of income for these companies for many years to come.
Well first of all, if you buy a Blu-ray disc from Amazon, they're still taking their cut. So saying they make "no money at all" from that is inaccurate. But again, they are offering you physical storage space that is available 24/7 from wherever you are. Why would you expect that to be free? That's just a ridiculous mentality. The prices they're asking aren't very expensive, either. How much do you spend on your cable bill every month? Your phone bill? People just think it's ridiculous to spend money on music because avenues have popped up where you can get it for free. (Why buy the CD when I can just watch it on YouTube?). Just because something is available somewhere for free doesn't mean it's worthless. Amazon is providing a service. That service comes with a fee. If you don't think it's worth it, don't buy it... but I think your expectations are pretty misplaced.
Flash memory storage capacities are growing yearly.. and prices are continuing to drop. Now companies are starting to ship secure digital cards with capacities of a staggering 128 GB on a tiny compact flash card! Ultimately I think most people will be able to have enormous amounts of files locally on their own phone or portable computer.
Sure they can. That isn't the point of this, though. I have 2 computers at home, a laptop, a phone that has storage, a DVR, even my Xbox can store music files. But what a pain in the ass it is to share between them all. Do I want to use up 80 gigs of my laptop's internal drive just to take all of my music with me when I travel? Do I want duplicate copies of everything I own on all of these different devices just to make sure the one thing I'm looking for at any particular moment is there no matter what? Good grief, no. Yes of course I will keep A backup of all of my files on a local system - I'm not trusting anything ONLY to the cloud - but now there's a way to access my music (or any other kind of file, for that matter) wherever I go, quickly and easily. Sure, it's not much different than dropbox except that it's cheaper and less complicated. How nice to be able to visit my parents, or go on vacation, or be at a friend's house, log on to their computer, and have my entire music library instantly available at my fingertips. It makes a lot of sense to me.
toddybody
Apr 7, 01:11 PM
People keep saying this like if they say it enough it will make it true.
The iPad and iPad 2 were designed, created, released and supported with ZERO Competition.
Apple creates products and experiences for their customers. I know it is hard to believe that everyone is just not as lazy as they need to be, and only do something if someone else pushes them but it is possible.
What people don't seem to realize is APPLE is the COMPETITION that pushes the others, not the other way around. Apple destroyed the MP3 player market made with sucky products. They destroyed the smartphone market made with sucky products, they created the tablet market. They don't need competition, but all these other companies need Apple to steamroll them I guess.
Sorry, I think youre inferring that Im in agreement with the idea that Apple purposefully stuck it to other panel customers...Im not. Im saying that whatever the reasons are, its not a good thing for other tablet manufactures. Stay well!
The iPad and iPad 2 were designed, created, released and supported with ZERO Competition.
Apple creates products and experiences for their customers. I know it is hard to believe that everyone is just not as lazy as they need to be, and only do something if someone else pushes them but it is possible.
What people don't seem to realize is APPLE is the COMPETITION that pushes the others, not the other way around. Apple destroyed the MP3 player market made with sucky products. They destroyed the smartphone market made with sucky products, they created the tablet market. They don't need competition, but all these other companies need Apple to steamroll them I guess.
Sorry, I think youre inferring that Im in agreement with the idea that Apple purposefully stuck it to other panel customers...Im not. Im saying that whatever the reasons are, its not a good thing for other tablet manufactures. Stay well!
Sylo
Mar 28, 09:44 AM
I hope :apple: release the iPhone 5 in Jume because my contract is up for a renewal in that month!!
Benjy91
Apr 25, 09:55 AM
And remarkably inaccurate when I looked myself up. It has a bit of correct information on my parents. I'm actually surprised at how wrong they were since I have a fairly large internet footprint (of course, these guys probably don't have Google's database since they're just skimming).
It's inaccurate because it doesn't track YOUR location, just the location of your nearest Cell Tower.
It's inaccurate because it doesn't track YOUR location, just the location of your nearest Cell Tower.
McGiord
Apr 9, 07:23 PM
The two polls in reference are showing 2 as the right answer.
Mac OS X cannot be wrong.
Google is showing you a result that will drive more traffic for their Ads.
A 68020 will always kill a 68000 anywhere doing math calculations.
Mac OS X cannot be wrong.
Google is showing you a result that will drive more traffic for their Ads.
A 68020 will always kill a 68000 anywhere doing math calculations.
JAT
Apr 25, 11:16 AM
Where do people get the idea that Google collects location data regardless of whether or not you selected Agree on the popup?
Probably because their gps features work on their phones. And the fact they can make phone calls. :rolleyes:
But keep in mind that the data might be wrong. I typed in my real name and it came up with me . . . but with details oddly wrong. Multiple accounts that could be me, but in each case with wrong data. I clearly have messed up some databases along the way (good).
According to that site, there are 7 people in my family. I'm going to start counting that many on my tax return! The extra cash could buy me a MBP every year.
It's funny how people are panicking about this, but not the Geo-Map feature on any photo taken with an iPhone. Which can be pinpointed to 50m of where you took the photo.
Or any good "real" camera, too.
Wow, I just realised I've been on this forum for quite a while.
Pffftt! Newbie, you're not even in the first 6000 to sign up! ;)
You're holding it wrong. Non-Issue.
Technically, that was an opinion. The issue today sounded more like he was stating facts. So, let's actually look at them...
Looks factual to me. See bold.
[Caveat: this is an old copy, it's from last year sometime]
Information about nearby cell towers and Wi-Fi access points is collected and sent to
Apple with the GPS coordinates of the device, if available: (1) when a customer requests current
location information and (2) automatically, in some cases, to update and maintain databases with
known location information. In both cases, the device collects the following anonymous
information:
Cell Tower Information: Apple collects information about nearby cell towers,
such as the location of the tower(s), Cell IDS, and data about the strength of the
signal transmitted from the towers. A Cell ID refers to the unique number
assigned by a cellular provider to a cell, a defined geographic area covered by a
cell tower in a mobile network. Cell IDS do not provide any personal information
about mobile phone users located in the cell. Location, Cell ID, and signal
strength information is available to anyone with certain commercially available
software.
Wi-Fi Access Point Information: Apple colIects information about nearby Wi-Fi
access points, such as the location of the access point(s), Media Access Control
(MAC) addresses, and data about the strength and speed of the signal transmitted
by the access point(s). A MAC address (a term that does not refer to Apple
products) is a unique number assigned by a manufacturer to a network adapter or
network interface card ("NIC"). The address provides the means by which a
computer or mobile device is able to connect to the Internet. MAC addresses do
not provide any personal information about the owner of the network adapter or
NIC. Anyone with a wireless network adapter or NIC can identify the MAC
address of a Wi-Fi access point. Apple does not collect the user-assigned name of
the Wi-Fi access point (known as the "SSID," or service set identifier) or data
being transmitted over the Wi-Fi network (known as "payload data").
So, the only way for this data to become "personal", is for a cop/hacker to actually take it from YOUR device/computer. Apple's copy has no personal data.
Probably because their gps features work on their phones. And the fact they can make phone calls. :rolleyes:
But keep in mind that the data might be wrong. I typed in my real name and it came up with me . . . but with details oddly wrong. Multiple accounts that could be me, but in each case with wrong data. I clearly have messed up some databases along the way (good).
According to that site, there are 7 people in my family. I'm going to start counting that many on my tax return! The extra cash could buy me a MBP every year.
It's funny how people are panicking about this, but not the Geo-Map feature on any photo taken with an iPhone. Which can be pinpointed to 50m of where you took the photo.
Or any good "real" camera, too.
Wow, I just realised I've been on this forum for quite a while.
Pffftt! Newbie, you're not even in the first 6000 to sign up! ;)
You're holding it wrong. Non-Issue.
Technically, that was an opinion. The issue today sounded more like he was stating facts. So, let's actually look at them...
Looks factual to me. See bold.
[Caveat: this is an old copy, it's from last year sometime]
Information about nearby cell towers and Wi-Fi access points is collected and sent to
Apple with the GPS coordinates of the device, if available: (1) when a customer requests current
location information and (2) automatically, in some cases, to update and maintain databases with
known location information. In both cases, the device collects the following anonymous
information:
Cell Tower Information: Apple collects information about nearby cell towers,
such as the location of the tower(s), Cell IDS, and data about the strength of the
signal transmitted from the towers. A Cell ID refers to the unique number
assigned by a cellular provider to a cell, a defined geographic area covered by a
cell tower in a mobile network. Cell IDS do not provide any personal information
about mobile phone users located in the cell. Location, Cell ID, and signal
strength information is available to anyone with certain commercially available
software.
Wi-Fi Access Point Information: Apple colIects information about nearby Wi-Fi
access points, such as the location of the access point(s), Media Access Control
(MAC) addresses, and data about the strength and speed of the signal transmitted
by the access point(s). A MAC address (a term that does not refer to Apple
products) is a unique number assigned by a manufacturer to a network adapter or
network interface card ("NIC"). The address provides the means by which a
computer or mobile device is able to connect to the Internet. MAC addresses do
not provide any personal information about the owner of the network adapter or
NIC. Anyone with a wireless network adapter or NIC can identify the MAC
address of a Wi-Fi access point. Apple does not collect the user-assigned name of
the Wi-Fi access point (known as the "SSID," or service set identifier) or data
being transmitted over the Wi-Fi network (known as "payload data").
So, the only way for this data to become "personal", is for a cop/hacker to actually take it from YOUR device/computer. Apple's copy has no personal data.
trrosen
May 7, 11:48 AM
Free services are worth every cent you pay.
For those that whine about the price just try to get a legitimate IMAP email service for under $100 a year. Gmail and hotmail don't count, as by legitimate I mean that your address doesn't automatically make people think of SPAM. Free email equals source of SPAM.
Added all up and mix in its integration with Mac, Iphone and iApps Mobile me is a steal at less than $6 a month.
Oh and a two letter email address is priceless.
Now if they just made syncing and find my iPhone free with the full service as an paid upgrade. sort of a freemium model. that could work.
For those that whine about the price just try to get a legitimate IMAP email service for under $100 a year. Gmail and hotmail don't count, as by legitimate I mean that your address doesn't automatically make people think of SPAM. Free email equals source of SPAM.
Added all up and mix in its integration with Mac, Iphone and iApps Mobile me is a steal at less than $6 a month.
Oh and a two letter email address is priceless.
Now if they just made syncing and find my iPhone free with the full service as an paid upgrade. sort of a freemium model. that could work.
appleguy123
May 4, 08:38 PM
It's all good, I guess. I don't think I would have ever understood the mechanics of this game anyway.
If we keep playing this format, I don't think it should go under the WW moniker because I don't see any similarities at all, and would like to play WW games while (and if) this format goes on in the future.
If we keep playing this format, I don't think it should go under the WW moniker because I don't see any similarities at all, and would like to play WW games while (and if) this format goes on in the future.