maccompaq
Jan 5, 09:08 AM
I don't use AV software on my Windows computers nor will I use it on my Macs.
And believe it or not, I have not had an infection in all the years (many) that I have been on the net.
And believe it or not, I have not had an infection in all the years (many) that I have been on the net.
iMacZealot
Jul 31, 01:50 AM
That is only because CDMA had such a jump on GSM in the USA, and the GSM carriers in the USA are still smaller. Verizon also has a massive analog network that T-Mobile won't touch as their phones are GSM only.
Unfortunately, the free market approach adopted when installing networks in the USA has led to a number of problems, and while you might think Verizon service is good relative to the other US carriers, it cannot compare to the carriers in Europe who use a shared GSM network that was adopted after much deliberation. Like most of the world, we are GSM-only.
That's why I'm switching from VZW to T-Mobile!
Unfortunately, the free market approach adopted when installing networks in the USA has led to a number of problems, and while you might think Verizon service is good relative to the other US carriers, it cannot compare to the carriers in Europe who use a shared GSM network that was adopted after much deliberation. Like most of the world, we are GSM-only.
That's why I'm switching from VZW to T-Mobile!
tbrinkma
Mar 29, 07:05 PM
The plant with mass rates of suicide is in China.
Yep, the plant with the 'mass rates of suicide' (which are lower than both the national rate, and the rate in areas similar to that plant), is in China. (It's amazing how memes stick around and get repeated in spite of the fact that they aren't supported by any data.)
Yep, the plant with the 'mass rates of suicide' (which are lower than both the national rate, and the rate in areas similar to that plant), is in China. (It's amazing how memes stick around and get repeated in spite of the fact that they aren't supported by any data.)
nuckinfutz
May 7, 11:54 AM
Second, I'm not sure what you mean by "We're moving from this era where the expectation should be that Cloud services at a basic level should be incorporated into the product without the vendor resorting to advertisements." If you mean that we should get free Cloud services without ads then I think you're completely wrong and I'm most worried about sites that provide free services and have absolutely nothing but VC cash to pay for it. And if you mean we should have the option of paying for Cloud services to avoid ads, then fine, but you can do that with Gmail, so I don't see why you think MobileMe is any better than Gmail (from the privacy perspective).
Lastly, I wouldn't lump Google and Facebook together when it comes to privacy. Sergey Brin and Larry Page have made very strong statements about their respect for their users and they understand that without the users they'd have no company. Eric has made a lame-brained comment or two, and Google Buzz screwed up, but they fixed it (and at least when you signed into Gmail they had the option to opt out of it).
Facebook is a whole different story. Their whole exec branch seems to disregard privacy and they've been rolling out auto-opt-in feature after feature that removes your privacy.
Eric Schmidt's comments about privacy are disconcerting to me
�If you have something that you don�t want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn�t be doing it in the first place.�
This is after the whole Google Buzz fiasco. There's money in trying to convince people to be open. Facebook and Google data mine consumer behavior to make money and consumers need to act like they got a good education and understand where they are being used.
The assumption that those that want privacy are doing something illegal is asinine.
Zuckerberg (Facebook) on privacy (http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/facebooks_zuckerberg_says_the_age_of_privacy_is_ov.php)
Privacy is a lot like Laws. You give it up it's hard to get back.
Hey it's not a choice for everyone. I'm just at a point in my life where $6 and some change is going to put me out especially when my online data is not being mined for profit. I've been happier than I though I would with my MobileMe account. I'm on the west coast so i'm assuming my data center is in Cali and performance has been fine.
Lastly, I wouldn't lump Google and Facebook together when it comes to privacy. Sergey Brin and Larry Page have made very strong statements about their respect for their users and they understand that without the users they'd have no company. Eric has made a lame-brained comment or two, and Google Buzz screwed up, but they fixed it (and at least when you signed into Gmail they had the option to opt out of it).
Facebook is a whole different story. Their whole exec branch seems to disregard privacy and they've been rolling out auto-opt-in feature after feature that removes your privacy.
Eric Schmidt's comments about privacy are disconcerting to me
�If you have something that you don�t want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn�t be doing it in the first place.�
This is after the whole Google Buzz fiasco. There's money in trying to convince people to be open. Facebook and Google data mine consumer behavior to make money and consumers need to act like they got a good education and understand where they are being used.
The assumption that those that want privacy are doing something illegal is asinine.
Zuckerberg (Facebook) on privacy (http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/facebooks_zuckerberg_says_the_age_of_privacy_is_ov.php)
Privacy is a lot like Laws. You give it up it's hard to get back.
Hey it's not a choice for everyone. I'm just at a point in my life where $6 and some change is going to put me out especially when my online data is not being mined for profit. I've been happier than I though I would with my MobileMe account. I'm on the west coast so i'm assuming my data center is in Cali and performance has been fine.
itcheroni
Apr 15, 01:57 AM
You're also operating from a false premise. Investors would continue to invest in whatever had the best returns. When you raise taxes across the board, all alternatives have the same tax exposure, which means the previously best option will remain the best option.
Unless you're seriously suggesting that a 35% (or higher) tax rate is really going to cause all billionaires to sit on their money and earn a lower return, just to stick it to Uncle Sam.
Sorry to break it to you but it's not me with the false premise. Money is like water, it flows to where there is least resistance. Money can be invested in anything and anywhere around the world. You can invest on Asian exchanges. Why not create a company in Hong Kong and invest through that? You can even invest in American companies because many of them list on several international exchanges. If you were a billionaire, would you invest with an individual account in the U.S. and be subject to a 35% tax, or invest through a corporation in Hong Kong and pay no taxes. In reality, they probably have many investments spread out. Some in the U.S., some internationally. Such a change in tax rules will simply cause them to make the appropriate changes to maximize how much they make.
The real problem is a lack of growth. There's only so much Silicon Valley can offer in location. If we really start taxing at 35% and eliminated a lot of deductions, then what reason is there to start a business in the U.S. over Shanghai or Hong Kong?
It's a sad state but we are already testing the waters for capital controls, trying to keep money in the U.S. It's a big mistake we're progressing towards. No one will want to put money into a country that makes it hard to take money out.
Unless you're seriously suggesting that a 35% (or higher) tax rate is really going to cause all billionaires to sit on their money and earn a lower return, just to stick it to Uncle Sam.
Sorry to break it to you but it's not me with the false premise. Money is like water, it flows to where there is least resistance. Money can be invested in anything and anywhere around the world. You can invest on Asian exchanges. Why not create a company in Hong Kong and invest through that? You can even invest in American companies because many of them list on several international exchanges. If you were a billionaire, would you invest with an individual account in the U.S. and be subject to a 35% tax, or invest through a corporation in Hong Kong and pay no taxes. In reality, they probably have many investments spread out. Some in the U.S., some internationally. Such a change in tax rules will simply cause them to make the appropriate changes to maximize how much they make.
The real problem is a lack of growth. There's only so much Silicon Valley can offer in location. If we really start taxing at 35% and eliminated a lot of deductions, then what reason is there to start a business in the U.S. over Shanghai or Hong Kong?
It's a sad state but we are already testing the waters for capital controls, trying to keep money in the U.S. It's a big mistake we're progressing towards. No one will want to put money into a country that makes it hard to take money out.
davidgrimm
Apr 26, 04:32 PM
Is anybody truly surprised by this? Droid phones are on almost every single carrier and come in every price point (including free). There is essentially one iPhone that comes at a premium price. Its like figuring out that there are far more chevy's on the road than Mercedes. Not a surprise at all.
It would be nice to see the numbers broken out by phone and carrier costs. Those would be meaningful market share numbers.
It would be nice to see the numbers broken out by phone and carrier costs. Those would be meaningful market share numbers.
bep207
Aug 3, 10:45 AM
do you think the macbook pro could get easy to switch hard drives like the macbook has? what are the odds of fitting two hard drives in say a 17" model and allowing people to carry multiple hard drives that can be easily switched via a port. like a bigger expresscard port but for hdd
roland.g
May 4, 02:52 PM
I would get a new iMac now if I knew that Lion would run SL pricing at $29. Otherwise I will wait for a preload. But obviously pricing and a release date won't be forthcoming prior to WWDC at the earliest. Guess we will know more in about 5 weeks.
HiRez
May 4, 07:58 PM
Some people can go grab the disk and be back home much faster than it would take to download all 8 GB. ;)
But likely not if the mood strikes you at 2 AM, or on a holiday.
But likely not if the mood strikes you at 2 AM, or on a holiday.
milo
May 4, 03:11 PM
If I have to DL it from the App Store, I've got to download it 4 times! I don't care about paying for multiple licenses... I do care about blowing out my internet bandwidth downloading the same multi-gigabyte file 4 times.
What makes you so sure you wouldn't be able to copy the installer to your other machines? With the current app store, you don't have to re-download everything, you can copy an app over and then just have to authorize with your apple ID. Or do installs over a network (which is already possible, even wirelessly).
What makes you so sure you wouldn't be able to copy the installer to your other machines? With the current app store, you don't have to re-download everything, you can copy an app over and then just have to authorize with your apple ID. Or do installs over a network (which is already possible, even wirelessly).
callme
Mar 27, 05:28 AM
My thoughts exactly. Our school district (ISD 482) just bought 1,465 iPads for its students, and I can see us getting really mad if Apple were to release a new iPad 6 mos. later.
Why? Will they do less than they did when you bought them?
Why? Will they do less than they did when you bought them?
xionxiox
Apr 26, 02:08 PM
Who cares? I thought this was macrumors not android news...
nidserz
Apr 10, 02:14 AM
You didn't enter it properly then...
Here
280594
The thing about this question is, whats the point of the parentheses..
Here
280594
The thing about this question is, whats the point of the parentheses..
Mechcozmo
Nov 26, 01:21 PM
All of the components would be low-end and 1-2 generations old. Basically, this is a wireless thin-client, but with enough additional resources to act as a low-end laptop.
Like this? Linkety (http://www.oqo.com/)
A bit more expensive than you would like, but otherwise seems to fit pretty well.
Like this? Linkety (http://www.oqo.com/)
A bit more expensive than you would like, but otherwise seems to fit pretty well.
syklee26
Sep 11, 11:14 AM
airport extreme base station has wait time of 1-3 weeks.
new version that streams video might be on the way.
new version that streams video might be on the way.
NebulaClash
Apr 26, 03:35 PM
Oh, let's not get carried away. This will NEVER be PC vs Macs again. That was a unique historical situation that is not being repeated.
1. Apple has never led the phone market in market share. This is not a case of Apple "losing" to Android, since Apple has not lost anything. Both Apple and Android are growing gangbusters. Both are doing well, both will do well.
2. When the iPhone started, Steve Jobs wanted a small percentage of the market in the first year. He got more than that, and now has a percentage none of us would have believed possible back then. Apple is doing great.
3. The phone market is so vast, no one company will ever control it all. If that's your goal, forget it, Napolean, it won't happen. Not for Android, not for Apple, not for anyone.
4. If you are a developer, iOS is where it's at for getting compensation in a non-adware environment.
5. And yes, it is the iOS marketshare that matters to developers, because all those iPod touch owners buy apps too.
1. Apple has never led the phone market in market share. This is not a case of Apple "losing" to Android, since Apple has not lost anything. Both Apple and Android are growing gangbusters. Both are doing well, both will do well.
2. When the iPhone started, Steve Jobs wanted a small percentage of the market in the first year. He got more than that, and now has a percentage none of us would have believed possible back then. Apple is doing great.
3. The phone market is so vast, no one company will ever control it all. If that's your goal, forget it, Napolean, it won't happen. Not for Android, not for Apple, not for anyone.
4. If you are a developer, iOS is where it's at for getting compensation in a non-adware environment.
5. And yes, it is the iOS marketshare that matters to developers, because all those iPod touch owners buy apps too.
regandarcy
Mar 27, 06:52 AM
I'm all for cloud computing as an added feature....but not as a replacement for traditional storage of media and data.
I mean, I hope Apple doesn't force people to be connected to the cloud. I think that would be a mistake. Mainly because it would force you to either have access to a wifi signal, or pay for an expensive data plan just to gain access to your media.
As it is, all the telecom companies are dropping their unlimited plans and switching to tiered pricing. I think this creates a problem for the user to freely use their content without constant fear of exceeding their data plans.
And what of people with iPod touches or wifi only ipads...who are not within range of a wifi signal....and cannot access their content as a result. That would be very frustrating and limiting. It would make their devices nothing more than expensive paper weights.
It also creates a problem for those with 3G ipads or iPhones trying to access large video or media files in their cloud I think. I mean have you ever tried to watch a YouTube video over 3G? It SUCKS! So you'd be using up tons of bandwidth on a tiered data plan for crappy quality. How is that good?
And if the iPhone 5 is the first apple device to use 4G speeds....won't that eat up even more bandwidth? Running an even greater risk of you going over your limit and being charged outrageous fees by your service provider? Be it ATT or Verizon?
I understand that the concept of the cloud is freedom at it's core....the ability to have access to your media across multiple devices without having to store it on just one...but then you become a slave to the telecom companies and their tiered data plans...thus defeating that freedom.
Plus it forces you to chose a 3G iPad or put 3G into iPod touches to make it useful.
So I get it, and I don't get it.
The original concept of the iPod was to be able to carry all your music with you. Total freedom. And that's what helped make it such a huge success. Then came the iPhone and iPad. Both equally cool for music and video. You could store all your data on them and listen or watch them at your leisure on the go.
But if you then force people to store their data on a cloud...and pay for an expensive tiered data plan to access that data...to me it becomes not so free anymore. In fact, it becomes downright restrictive and suffocating IMHO.
As long as Apple doesn't abandon the ability to store your media ON your device, I'm cool with this move. The cloud would just become an added bonus which you could use or not use at your discretion.
I just think having to be connected to the cloud via wifi or 3G to access your data is kind of annoying....not to mention potentially EXPENSIVE!
Once in awhile...ok. But not as ones main means of access. I much rather have the bulk of my music and data actually stored ON my device. Much more convenient if you ask me.
Flash drives are big enough to carry most if not all the music and video you need. Why store it all on apple servers on some big farm in North Carolina that you need to be connected to wifi or an expensive tiered data plan just to access it? Don't see the point.
Is it just me? :-)
I mean, I hope Apple doesn't force people to be connected to the cloud. I think that would be a mistake. Mainly because it would force you to either have access to a wifi signal, or pay for an expensive data plan just to gain access to your media.
As it is, all the telecom companies are dropping their unlimited plans and switching to tiered pricing. I think this creates a problem for the user to freely use their content without constant fear of exceeding their data plans.
And what of people with iPod touches or wifi only ipads...who are not within range of a wifi signal....and cannot access their content as a result. That would be very frustrating and limiting. It would make their devices nothing more than expensive paper weights.
It also creates a problem for those with 3G ipads or iPhones trying to access large video or media files in their cloud I think. I mean have you ever tried to watch a YouTube video over 3G? It SUCKS! So you'd be using up tons of bandwidth on a tiered data plan for crappy quality. How is that good?
And if the iPhone 5 is the first apple device to use 4G speeds....won't that eat up even more bandwidth? Running an even greater risk of you going over your limit and being charged outrageous fees by your service provider? Be it ATT or Verizon?
I understand that the concept of the cloud is freedom at it's core....the ability to have access to your media across multiple devices without having to store it on just one...but then you become a slave to the telecom companies and their tiered data plans...thus defeating that freedom.
Plus it forces you to chose a 3G iPad or put 3G into iPod touches to make it useful.
So I get it, and I don't get it.
The original concept of the iPod was to be able to carry all your music with you. Total freedom. And that's what helped make it such a huge success. Then came the iPhone and iPad. Both equally cool for music and video. You could store all your data on them and listen or watch them at your leisure on the go.
But if you then force people to store their data on a cloud...and pay for an expensive tiered data plan to access that data...to me it becomes not so free anymore. In fact, it becomes downright restrictive and suffocating IMHO.
As long as Apple doesn't abandon the ability to store your media ON your device, I'm cool with this move. The cloud would just become an added bonus which you could use or not use at your discretion.
I just think having to be connected to the cloud via wifi or 3G to access your data is kind of annoying....not to mention potentially EXPENSIVE!
Once in awhile...ok. But not as ones main means of access. I much rather have the bulk of my music and data actually stored ON my device. Much more convenient if you ask me.
Flash drives are big enough to carry most if not all the music and video you need. Why store it all on apple servers on some big farm in North Carolina that you need to be connected to wifi or an expensive tiered data plan just to access it? Don't see the point.
Is it just me? :-)
BruiserBear
Apr 5, 01:31 PM
Jailbreakers are funny.
orbino
Sep 11, 03:26 PM
The assumption is for new Nanos and new 5G videos with more capacity...but nobody has conjectured on the form factors for these. Same thickness? Same sized screens? For what it's worth, we might have some circumstantial evidence in this arena...
Some of you might be familiar with our high-end, form-fitting iPod cases (Orbino (http://www.orbino.com)). Our cases are precisely fit for each model, so every millimeter counts.
Well...a couple weeks ago, the iPod marketing manager for Apple in Europe contacted us requesting samples for a press presentation "long lead time" consumer magazines. They were presenting the top iPod accessories for Christmas-related articles.
She asked us for three leather case models for the presenation: our Cambio case for the current iPod video; and our Sportivo and Cambio models for the iPod Nano. One would assume, therefore, that the form factors will remain virtually the same -- otherwise, why would Apple have asked us for those cases to present to the press for the Christmas season?
But then again with Apple, you never know!
Some of you might be familiar with our high-end, form-fitting iPod cases (Orbino (http://www.orbino.com)). Our cases are precisely fit for each model, so every millimeter counts.
Well...a couple weeks ago, the iPod marketing manager for Apple in Europe contacted us requesting samples for a press presentation "long lead time" consumer magazines. They were presenting the top iPod accessories for Christmas-related articles.
She asked us for three leather case models for the presenation: our Cambio case for the current iPod video; and our Sportivo and Cambio models for the iPod Nano. One would assume, therefore, that the form factors will remain virtually the same -- otherwise, why would Apple have asked us for those cases to present to the press for the Christmas season?
But then again with Apple, you never know!
drakino
Apr 5, 01:55 PM
2010 - Apple Loses #1 Mobile OS spot to Android OS
2011 - Apple pisses off their JB customers and loses 10% more
2012 - Apple loses #2 and #3 spot to Windows Mobile & HP OS
Within 12 months Apple will own the same market share as their computers, 9% ... and it'll have been the same story: rose to glory, abuse the customer and business partners, people get sick of the rulebook and leave for more open pastures.
This is all deja vu from the 80s repeating itself, wow.
I dumped iPhone at xmas, now I'll likely dump iPad 2 if this trend continues. If they really push the washington involvement to stop jailbreaking, I'll get rid of my 3 iMac\MB Air\MB Pro... I don't support companies who attack me. They're here because of me, not the opposite. If they don't get that, adios.
2010 - Wrong. Mobile OS implies iOS, and all the stats ignore the iPad and iPod Touch. Apple is behind Android only in mobile phone side, and not by much when looking at a world view.
2011 - I know a number of people who are in that 10% of jailbreakers, and they would still stick with Apple even if it was closed off. They enjoy the tinkering, but understand that they are hacking into their devices via exploits that Apple has a responsibility to close from a security standpoint.
2012 - Doubtful. Windows Mobile share of the market is still dropping even with WP7. Microsoft is likely to mismanage WP7 just like their other products. WebOS? It's practically dead right now, and would take a lot for it to approach anywhere near iOS next year.
Apple is still very much focused on the consumer. Yes, they control their environment well, but your particular complaint is a no win situation for them. They could ignore jailbreaking, leaving security exploits in the OS, and people would bash them for poor security. But if they close those exploits, people complain their freedom is being taken away, or being attacked. Yes, Apple could allow more customization, and other features jailbreaking brings. But it would require engineering time, and that time is currently being spent on trying to keep the platform advancing to stay competitive. It's all about priorities, and I think we all here can agree a better notification system and other nagging iOS issues are much higher on the list then letting people skin the screen with Scion icons.
2011 - Apple pisses off their JB customers and loses 10% more
2012 - Apple loses #2 and #3 spot to Windows Mobile & HP OS
Within 12 months Apple will own the same market share as their computers, 9% ... and it'll have been the same story: rose to glory, abuse the customer and business partners, people get sick of the rulebook and leave for more open pastures.
This is all deja vu from the 80s repeating itself, wow.
I dumped iPhone at xmas, now I'll likely dump iPad 2 if this trend continues. If they really push the washington involvement to stop jailbreaking, I'll get rid of my 3 iMac\MB Air\MB Pro... I don't support companies who attack me. They're here because of me, not the opposite. If they don't get that, adios.
2010 - Wrong. Mobile OS implies iOS, and all the stats ignore the iPad and iPod Touch. Apple is behind Android only in mobile phone side, and not by much when looking at a world view.
2011 - I know a number of people who are in that 10% of jailbreakers, and they would still stick with Apple even if it was closed off. They enjoy the tinkering, but understand that they are hacking into their devices via exploits that Apple has a responsibility to close from a security standpoint.
2012 - Doubtful. Windows Mobile share of the market is still dropping even with WP7. Microsoft is likely to mismanage WP7 just like their other products. WebOS? It's practically dead right now, and would take a lot for it to approach anywhere near iOS next year.
Apple is still very much focused on the consumer. Yes, they control their environment well, but your particular complaint is a no win situation for them. They could ignore jailbreaking, leaving security exploits in the OS, and people would bash them for poor security. But if they close those exploits, people complain their freedom is being taken away, or being attacked. Yes, Apple could allow more customization, and other features jailbreaking brings. But it would require engineering time, and that time is currently being spent on trying to keep the platform advancing to stay competitive. It's all about priorities, and I think we all here can agree a better notification system and other nagging iOS issues are much higher on the list then letting people skin the screen with Scion icons.
wordoflife
Mar 26, 10:10 PM
How am I suppose to access my music via cloud via 3G? Especially if one has tiered data? :eek:
And, why would they sell iPhone 5 without iOS 5? Thats just ... :confused:
And, why would they sell iPhone 5 without iOS 5? Thats just ... :confused:
linuxcooldude
Apr 21, 02:53 PM
Making the width & height those dimensions, might make the length a lot longer. I could see space requirement problems & how would placement be effected without it being rack mounted?
mduser63
Jul 30, 01:14 AM
I don't think I've hated any company so passionately as I hate Verizon. I have not one positive word to say about them. If/when Apple announces a phone, I'll pay the early termination fee on my Verizon contract and jump to the carrier with Apple's phone. Hopefully that'll be Cingular.
shelterpaw
Aug 7, 08:35 PM
I was fooled by the strange new words and the "you will have heat problems if you buy other ram from other makers that dont have heat sinks!"
TIA
haha sucka!
Just kidding... :p
TIA
haha sucka!
Just kidding... :p