Much Ado
Oct 29, 06:50 AM
"If they Hardware worked with any software, it would not be so easy to use"
"It would also not work so well"
Sorry, but that doesn't really make sense.
love wallpapers with love
sad emo photosemo love
sad emo love pictures. Love Emo, Love Sad, Emo Sad; Love Emo, Love Sad, Emo Sad. MyRomeo. Mar 25, 02:06 PM. Does iPad wifi and iPad 3G use the same update
Emo Love Sad Quotes. sad emo quotes tagalog. sad; sad emo quotes tagalog. sad. turbobass. Mar 7, 07:35 PM
sad emo love wallpaper. sad emo love wallpaper. emo; sad emo love wallpaper. emo. skunk. Mar 16, 02:09 PM
sad emo love wallpaper. emo. DeathChill. Apr 20, 08:53 PM. Also try physical keyboards, NFC, OLED screens, WiMax etc. As far as making it through the day is
emo love quotes backgrounds.
Emo Love Sad Quotes. sad emo
Sad Emo Love Wallpaper
sad emo love wallpaper. karan
emo love wallpaper
Sad Emo Love Quotes And
Sad Emo Love Quotes And
sad emo love wallpaper. sad emo love wallpaper. emo; sad emo love wallpaper. emo. The Beatles. Apr 9, 01:07 PM. Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U;
sad emo love wallpaper. sad
sad emo love pictures. Emo quotes sad love quotes emo
.jpg "sad emo love wallpaper. sad")
sad emo love wallpaper. sad
sad emo love pictures. emo
"It would also not work so well"
Sorry, but that doesn't really make sense.
Anthony T
Apr 15, 04:41 PM
I was all for having an aluminum design, but not if it looks like that. That thing is just ugly. I like this concept the most, just without the circle around the Apple logo, and none of those ugly colors like the pink, blue, green, etc.
http://cdn.erictric.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/iphone-4g-concept-3-march-4.jpg
http://cdn.erictric.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/iphone-4g-concept-3-march-4.jpg
linked.account
Apr 29, 04:28 PM
Please also replace those crappy black white icons with colored ones.What is wrong with colors? Is lion color-alergic??
nate13
Apr 25, 11:55 AM
Fake. Display looks like paper / printed.
agreed. Even though with the white one, I'd expect a 64GB available. Just makes sense; they used to have an ipod nano that only came in black in the largest size, if memory serves...
agreed. Even though with the white one, I'd expect a 64GB available. Just makes sense; they used to have an ipod nano that only came in black in the largest size, if memory serves...
daneoni
Aug 9, 09:02 AM
Im quite torn. The 20" Cinema Display is cheaper than the dell BUT the limited adjustability is turning me off plus the fact that the UK specs are still yet to be updated. The Dell is an obvious better buy but it just doesn't look as good as the Cinema Display and its resale value won't be close to that of the Cinema Display.
I dont know why apple made the adjustibilty so limited. Even steve tends to bend his head at times to see the display he uses properly.
Sigh i dunno......
I dont know why apple made the adjustibilty so limited. Even steve tends to bend his head at times to see the display he uses properly.
Sigh i dunno......
BBA
Nov 24, 07:32 PM
apple's canada store is also down...
It is up now. I just ordered 2 iPod nano's off of it.
It is up now. I just ordered 2 iPod nano's off of it.
sanford
Jan 11, 08:50 PM
not me. the video was sooo hilarious. CES = the most prominent electronics show in the world with the MOST HIGH TECH tech you can find. and they allow for a 14.99 POS hack to ruin almost every booth.
HILARIOUS. i actually laughed out loud almost the whole video. childish yes. hilarious yes.
eye opening? yes. next year you can imagine there will be a few more companies that disable IR ports in public displays.
I'm sure you're not a journalism professional. I don't think the point of this should be whether it was funny or not. Fine, you found it funny, others didn't, that's the nature of jokes. The point is: the press observes. One cannot observe something without influencing it or changing it in some, at least, small way. But it is not the business of the press *to set about to* change or influence that which they observe.
HILARIOUS. i actually laughed out loud almost the whole video. childish yes. hilarious yes.
eye opening? yes. next year you can imagine there will be a few more companies that disable IR ports in public displays.
I'm sure you're not a journalism professional. I don't think the point of this should be whether it was funny or not. Fine, you found it funny, others didn't, that's the nature of jokes. The point is: the press observes. One cannot observe something without influencing it or changing it in some, at least, small way. But it is not the business of the press *to set about to* change or influence that which they observe.
MacGeek13
Jan 10, 08:12 PM
It would be great if the price went down. There should also be some updates, but concentrating on a lower price, as PCs that are the same speed are much less.
maclaptop
Apr 29, 07:58 PM
Apple has sprung open a box of snakes.
Mixing elements of iOS & OS X, is a no win proposition. It's the golly gee whiz kids, vs. the professionals.
The kids love the look of iOS, FART Apps, and all that nonsense. Its all fun & games on mommy & daddies money.
The grown ups who use their Macs to get things done, find some of these changes far from amusing. For us its about productivity & efficiency. It's about computing.
Mixing elements of iOS & OS X, is a no win proposition. It's the golly gee whiz kids, vs. the professionals.
The kids love the look of iOS, FART Apps, and all that nonsense. Its all fun & games on mommy & daddies money.
The grown ups who use their Macs to get things done, find some of these changes far from amusing. For us its about productivity & efficiency. It's about computing.
skellener
Mar 24, 06:24 PM
Happy Birthday NeXTSTEP!!! ;)
CalBoy
Apr 14, 10:50 PM
I understand the point you are trying to make (re: enhanced security measures] but technically those two incidents had nothing to do with the TSA since they both flew from non-USA airports - that is, the TSA didn't screen them at all.
While this is true, we can't allow that technicality to wipe the slate clean. Our security as a whole is deficient, even if the TSA on its own might not be responsible for these two particular failures. Our tax dollars are still going to the our mutual safety so we should expect more.
I guess that depends on how you define "not much trouble". We can't know the actual number, since we will never know many actually get through. But they are catching over half the weapons that their own agents try to smuggle through on test/training runs. So that counts as being "some trouble". How much "trouble" is enough? Read my post above about how much risk a "bad person" organization is willing to take on 50/50 odds. My late father made his career "gaming" situations, so I have a bit of a passing knowledge of it. I am certain that the TSA has "gamed" the odds, and the TSA believe that they have reached a reasonable balance between costing the public time, money, and indignities - and - ensuring a reasonable level of safety for the flying public. They may be wrong.... but I would bet money that, to the best of their ability, they believe they have reached a balance.
Well when a fanatic is willing to commit suicide because he believes that he'll be rewarded in heaven, 50/50 odds don't seem to be all that much of a deterrent. What's worse is that we've only achieved that with a lot of our personal dignity, time, and money. I don't think we can tolerate much more. We should be expecting more for the time, money, and humiliation we're putting ourselves (and our 6 year-old children) through.
If this is the TSA's best effort and what it believes is the best balance, I want a new TSA.
OK, then why are hijackings down? I have my working hypothesis. I cited some evidence to support it. If you don't agree, then it is up to you to state an alternative one that is supported by more than unsupported statements.
I am not saying the TSA (or in my case CATSA) is perfect or haven't mucked things up sometimes. I'm just saying that I believe that they have been mostly responsible for a dramatic drop in airline hijackings. I cited some statistics. Now it's your turn.....
Your statistics don't unequivocally prove the efficacy of the TSA though. They only show that the TSA employs a cost-benefit method to determine what measures to take.
Since you believe in the efficacy of the TSA so much, the burden is yours to make a clear and convincing case, not mine. I can provide alternative hypotheses, but I am in no way saying that these are provable at the current moment in time. I'm only saying that they are rational objections to your theory.
My hypothesis is essentially the same as Lisa's: the protection is coming from our circumstances rather than our deliberative efforts.
Terrorism is a complex thing. My bet is that as we waged wars in multiple nations, it became more advantageous for fanatics to strike where our military forces were. Without having to gain entry into the country, get past airport security (no matter what odds were), or hijack a plane, terrorists were able to kill over 4,000 Americans in Iraq and nearly 1,500 in Afghanistan. That's almost twice as many as were killed on 9/11.
If I were the leader of a group intent on killing Americans and Westerners in general, I certainly would go down that route rather than hijack planes.
ps there is no proof that it wasn't Lisa's rock. There are some very weird causal relationships in the world. Like shooting wolves causes the Aspen to die off in Wyoming. Or .... overfishing the Salmon in the Pacific changes the mix of trees along the rivers of the BC coast.....
It's pretty clear that it was not the rock. Ecosystems are constantly finding new equilibriums; killing off an herbivore's primary predator should cause a decline in vegetation. That is not surprising, nor is it difficult to prove (you can track all three populations simultaneously). There is also a causal mechanism at work that can explain the effect without the need for new assumptions (Occam's Razor).
The efficacy of the TSA and our security measures, on the other hand, are quite complex and are affected by numerous causes. Changes in travel patterns, other nations' actions, and an enemey's changing strategy all play a big role. You can't ignore all of these and pronounce our security gimmicks (and really, that's what patting down a 6 year-old is) to be so masterfully effective.
While this is true, we can't allow that technicality to wipe the slate clean. Our security as a whole is deficient, even if the TSA on its own might not be responsible for these two particular failures. Our tax dollars are still going to the our mutual safety so we should expect more.
I guess that depends on how you define "not much trouble". We can't know the actual number, since we will never know many actually get through. But they are catching over half the weapons that their own agents try to smuggle through on test/training runs. So that counts as being "some trouble". How much "trouble" is enough? Read my post above about how much risk a "bad person" organization is willing to take on 50/50 odds. My late father made his career "gaming" situations, so I have a bit of a passing knowledge of it. I am certain that the TSA has "gamed" the odds, and the TSA believe that they have reached a reasonable balance between costing the public time, money, and indignities - and - ensuring a reasonable level of safety for the flying public. They may be wrong.... but I would bet money that, to the best of their ability, they believe they have reached a balance.
Well when a fanatic is willing to commit suicide because he believes that he'll be rewarded in heaven, 50/50 odds don't seem to be all that much of a deterrent. What's worse is that we've only achieved that with a lot of our personal dignity, time, and money. I don't think we can tolerate much more. We should be expecting more for the time, money, and humiliation we're putting ourselves (and our 6 year-old children) through.
If this is the TSA's best effort and what it believes is the best balance, I want a new TSA.
OK, then why are hijackings down? I have my working hypothesis. I cited some evidence to support it. If you don't agree, then it is up to you to state an alternative one that is supported by more than unsupported statements.
I am not saying the TSA (or in my case CATSA) is perfect or haven't mucked things up sometimes. I'm just saying that I believe that they have been mostly responsible for a dramatic drop in airline hijackings. I cited some statistics. Now it's your turn.....
Your statistics don't unequivocally prove the efficacy of the TSA though. They only show that the TSA employs a cost-benefit method to determine what measures to take.
Since you believe in the efficacy of the TSA so much, the burden is yours to make a clear and convincing case, not mine. I can provide alternative hypotheses, but I am in no way saying that these are provable at the current moment in time. I'm only saying that they are rational objections to your theory.
My hypothesis is essentially the same as Lisa's: the protection is coming from our circumstances rather than our deliberative efforts.
Terrorism is a complex thing. My bet is that as we waged wars in multiple nations, it became more advantageous for fanatics to strike where our military forces were. Without having to gain entry into the country, get past airport security (no matter what odds were), or hijack a plane, terrorists were able to kill over 4,000 Americans in Iraq and nearly 1,500 in Afghanistan. That's almost twice as many as were killed on 9/11.
If I were the leader of a group intent on killing Americans and Westerners in general, I certainly would go down that route rather than hijack planes.
ps there is no proof that it wasn't Lisa's rock. There are some very weird causal relationships in the world. Like shooting wolves causes the Aspen to die off in Wyoming. Or .... overfishing the Salmon in the Pacific changes the mix of trees along the rivers of the BC coast.....
It's pretty clear that it was not the rock. Ecosystems are constantly finding new equilibriums; killing off an herbivore's primary predator should cause a decline in vegetation. That is not surprising, nor is it difficult to prove (you can track all three populations simultaneously). There is also a causal mechanism at work that can explain the effect without the need for new assumptions (Occam's Razor).
The efficacy of the TSA and our security measures, on the other hand, are quite complex and are affected by numerous causes. Changes in travel patterns, other nations' actions, and an enemey's changing strategy all play a big role. You can't ignore all of these and pronounce our security gimmicks (and really, that's what patting down a 6 year-old is) to be so masterfully effective.
MattSepeta
Apr 27, 01:41 PM
I appreciate that, I still disagree.
The medical and legal community still is not on your side
My birth certificate, my medical notes, and all my documentation is noted down as female, in medical terms I'm classed as a transsexual female, that's how we're referred to in scientific papers and similarly that's how I'm classified legally, bar the transsexual part as it has no legal significance.
There are many kinds of female/male, as I pointed out, your oversimplified view is simply not applicable to the reality we live in. Everyone has female/male aspects, picking the ones you think "count" is as I've said a few times, naive.
Ok, I'll agree with you on all counts. Still not sure where the argument is?
Never did I say that no one should "count" as you have mysteriously attributed to me...
The medical and legal community still is not on your side
My birth certificate, my medical notes, and all my documentation is noted down as female, in medical terms I'm classed as a transsexual female, that's how we're referred to in scientific papers and similarly that's how I'm classified legally, bar the transsexual part as it has no legal significance.
There are many kinds of female/male, as I pointed out, your oversimplified view is simply not applicable to the reality we live in. Everyone has female/male aspects, picking the ones you think "count" is as I've said a few times, naive.
Ok, I'll agree with you on all counts. Still not sure where the argument is?
Never did I say that no one should "count" as you have mysteriously attributed to me...
63dot
Mar 4, 11:40 AM
When I talk to most people in my liberal town, they agree with me and say, "Those states are crazy and it's the state of today's republican party". That's what I think and what many posters are saying on these forums. It appears most of us, from what I gather, support unions.
So when I talk to my 28 year old son in law school, it becomes a different issue. He's a 3L in the thick of things seeing "both" sides of everything, without any moral consideration, and his conservative leanings tend to buy the myth that unions and "liberals" are anti-business. He can talk the liberal argument, because he may have to one day, but his conservative bias is hard to break. I wish him all the best, always, but God help us should he ever make the bench anywhere. ;)
Anytime I take a liberal point of view, he brings back the conservative argument, or platform, but then uses his great skills of persuasion to actually make his side sound correct. But come on, we are in the 21st century, and yes there were mafia thugs in the early union history, but to equate that "thuggishness" to today is trying to rewrite history. The unions are not that "Jack Nicholson and Danny DeVito" movie but conservatives will want to push that ridiculous stereotype. His undergrad was history (from a liberal school, oddly enough) and mine was labor law/employment law (also ironically from a very conservative school) and if anything, he should know better. Neither of us were swayed by our professors and school leanings, but at least I try and take a middle ground where he won't. I try and see the good in both sides, but conservatives I talk to, whether it's him, or posters on Macrumors, are glacial in their ability to change. And political leanings, if gone unchecked, can wipe out a lot of great education, however expensive it was. "But I studied under so and so and they have Nobels!" and my school is tops he declares, where I answer back and say, "But they left your school to work for Clinton's administration". :)
The unions are now legitimate organizations and while not perfect, they are a pillar of our society which we can't live without (regardless of what 18th century politicians believed unions to be back in the day).
So when I talk to my 28 year old son in law school, it becomes a different issue. He's a 3L in the thick of things seeing "both" sides of everything, without any moral consideration, and his conservative leanings tend to buy the myth that unions and "liberals" are anti-business. He can talk the liberal argument, because he may have to one day, but his conservative bias is hard to break. I wish him all the best, always, but God help us should he ever make the bench anywhere. ;)
Anytime I take a liberal point of view, he brings back the conservative argument, or platform, but then uses his great skills of persuasion to actually make his side sound correct. But come on, we are in the 21st century, and yes there were mafia thugs in the early union history, but to equate that "thuggishness" to today is trying to rewrite history. The unions are not that "Jack Nicholson and Danny DeVito" movie but conservatives will want to push that ridiculous stereotype. His undergrad was history (from a liberal school, oddly enough) and mine was labor law/employment law (also ironically from a very conservative school) and if anything, he should know better. Neither of us were swayed by our professors and school leanings, but at least I try and take a middle ground where he won't. I try and see the good in both sides, but conservatives I talk to, whether it's him, or posters on Macrumors, are glacial in their ability to change. And political leanings, if gone unchecked, can wipe out a lot of great education, however expensive it was. "But I studied under so and so and they have Nobels!" and my school is tops he declares, where I answer back and say, "But they left your school to work for Clinton's administration". :)
The unions are now legitimate organizations and while not perfect, they are a pillar of our society which we can't live without (regardless of what 18th century politicians believed unions to be back in the day).
Flowbee
Oct 10, 07:16 PM
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.)
I think you're looking for MacFacts.com... better known as Apple.com.
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.)
I think you're looking for MacFacts.com... better known as Apple.com.
batitombo
Mar 25, 01:10 AM
Hmm, Happy B-day OS X
Quick shout out to NeXTSTEP the very father of OS X
Quick shout out to NeXTSTEP the very father of OS X
Evoken
Apr 6, 11:30 PM
Considering that we haven't had any substantial update since Leopard (as Snow Leopard was more an under the hood thing), which launched 4 years ago, the same year the original iPhone launched; the list of features that are being shown for Lion are downright underwhelming.
- The Mac App Store
This is not a part of the OS itself and I can use it right now. This is also hardly an innovation.
- Launchpad
This is just a slightly different take on the stacks concept, borrowing from the way it is handled in the iPad.
- Full-screen apps
Hmmm....ok...how is this a big deal again?
- Mission Control
Just a tweak on the present expose concept. I find it looks a bit cumbersome/clunky.
- Auto save
Hmmm....ok...how is this a big deal again?
- Versions
Hmmm....ok, useful.
- Resume
This one is good.
- Mail 5
Now with conversations, something Gmail has had for a long while already.
- AirDrop
Interesting but I think not all that different from using Bonjour to transfer files.
And...that's very much it...
Don't get me wrong, I am a fan of Apple as much as the next guy but this feature set is hardly impressive. I remember back when Apple released 10.4, I was actually excited about the new features and couldn't wait to update my computer. But now? I feel very much indifferent about Lion, don't see anything innovative or exciting at all, specially when one considers that the last update to include additional features as opposed to under the hood improvements (10.5) was released four years ago.
- The Mac App Store
This is not a part of the OS itself and I can use it right now. This is also hardly an innovation.
- Launchpad
This is just a slightly different take on the stacks concept, borrowing from the way it is handled in the iPad.
- Full-screen apps
Hmmm....ok...how is this a big deal again?
- Mission Control
Just a tweak on the present expose concept. I find it looks a bit cumbersome/clunky.
- Auto save
Hmmm....ok...how is this a big deal again?
- Versions
Hmmm....ok, useful.
- Resume
This one is good.
- Mail 5
Now with conversations, something Gmail has had for a long while already.
- AirDrop
Interesting but I think not all that different from using Bonjour to transfer files.
And...that's very much it...
Don't get me wrong, I am a fan of Apple as much as the next guy but this feature set is hardly impressive. I remember back when Apple released 10.4, I was actually excited about the new features and couldn't wait to update my computer. But now? I feel very much indifferent about Lion, don't see anything innovative or exciting at all, specially when one considers that the last update to include additional features as opposed to under the hood improvements (10.5) was released four years ago.
Chef Medeski
Nov 25, 05:57 PM
$100 off MacBook. I wish I had bought.
SMM
Jan 12, 07:11 PM
ok, now, Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, who is lesser evil?
trust me, they are both evil, businesslike.
At least Bill have the biggest charity foundation.
No, Texas is evil. These are just businessmen.
trust me, they are both evil, businesslike.
At least Bill have the biggest charity foundation.
No, Texas is evil. These are just businessmen.
twoodcc
Oct 28, 02:46 PM
well i really don't blame Apple on this. with the piracy around and all
tktaylor1
Apr 11, 02:54 PM
New glasses. I have to pick up another pair in 2 weeks.
Corndog5595
Nov 14, 07:31 PM
I like the game a lot. I am too lazy at the moment to make a list of the things I like and dislike, but just let me say that I like the game more than MW2.
One thing I really like is Wager Matches, but my television is living on borrowed time thanks to them :(.
One thing I really like is Wager Matches, but my television is living on borrowed time thanks to them :(.
mdntcallr
Oct 10, 11:58 PM
At this point, ill believe it when it happens
MorphingDragon
May 4, 05:33 AM
But yes, at least the ads are great and really work the "magic". The only problem is that you won't stay in Wonderland with your iPad, and in the real world, it's just a nice toy for a couple of minutes but not really good for anything.
Thats what people said about the Kinect. Now look at what its doing when, especially when Academia got a hold of it. Just because you can't think of any uses doesn't make it a toy.
Thats what people said about the Kinect. Now look at what its doing when, especially when Academia got a hold of it. Just because you can't think of any uses doesn't make it a toy.
axual
Apr 30, 10:26 AM
They could have actually done both ... making the active perspective a sunken button (darker) with a slight raised frame around it and kept the inactive perspective raised (lighter). You could still push or slide depending on your whim.