Analog Kid
Sep 4, 09:35 PM
Interesting... I've been assuming the video store has been holding up the video iPod, but that doesn't appear to be the case...
babyj
Sep 22, 03:21 PM
Your points would mean more if it was a big secret that Walmart bullies their suppliers and sells low quality products.
As it stands, *everyone* knows they abuse their suppliers, *everyone* knows they sell the absolute lowest quality merchandise from various Asian sweatshops and *everyone* knows they aren't very good to their employees.
Yet people happily go there and spend money in droves, because as much as they dislike a large company bullying other companies (and in this case, the competition) and as much as they dislike supporting sweatshops or a bad employer, they dislike wasting their meager paycheck on markups even more.
It's the same Starbucks mentality that fills the world with hypocrisy.
Are Apple any different?
All their product is made in Asia, I'm sure they bully their suppliers to get the best prices and there have been question marks over the working conditions in the factories they use.
Everyone wants lower prices and better quality. A lot of people feel guilty due to the effects this has on other people, but not guilty enough to actually stop shopping at the cheapest shops.
As it stands, *everyone* knows they abuse their suppliers, *everyone* knows they sell the absolute lowest quality merchandise from various Asian sweatshops and *everyone* knows they aren't very good to their employees.
Yet people happily go there and spend money in droves, because as much as they dislike a large company bullying other companies (and in this case, the competition) and as much as they dislike supporting sweatshops or a bad employer, they dislike wasting their meager paycheck on markups even more.
It's the same Starbucks mentality that fills the world with hypocrisy.
Are Apple any different?
All their product is made in Asia, I'm sure they bully their suppliers to get the best prices and there have been question marks over the working conditions in the factories they use.
Everyone wants lower prices and better quality. A lot of people feel guilty due to the effects this has on other people, but not guilty enough to actually stop shopping at the cheapest shops.
ThunderSkunk
May 5, 09:33 AM
Cool. Maybe alongside this magical 3D display technology, they can magically figure out how to put ANOTHER SPEAKER IN IT SO WE CAN HEAR IN GLORIOUS 1950s STEREO!!!
Jasonbot
Nov 8, 08:59 AM
If you plan to upgrade the RAM anyhow - go for the 2.0 model. It has Superdrive (DL), 1 Gig RAM, 4 MB Processor cache (instead of 2MB for the 1.83) and bigger HD.
The 1.83 Model is CRAP
Ya, the only update on the 1.83 is the 64bitness!
The 1.83 Model is CRAP
Ya, the only update on the 1.83 is the 64bitness!
iJawn108
Sep 12, 07:14 PM
I wanted a silver 8GB one. Now I'm torn :(
EDIT: Made up my mind. 4GB silver and the extra �40 in my pocket. Besides, silver'll look better in my Bose SoundDock :)
Same.
Anyone know if the black is... comepletely black? if not I will go Silver 4gig.
EDIT: Made up my mind. 4GB silver and the extra �40 in my pocket. Besides, silver'll look better in my Bose SoundDock :)
Same.
Anyone know if the black is... comepletely black? if not I will go Silver 4gig.
840quadra
Sep 12, 01:36 PM
I love the ipod disk gauge on the bottom of the ipod window!
if you click on it , it toggles through 3 separate information readouts (2 shown).
if you click on it , it toggles through 3 separate information readouts (2 shown).
epitaphic
Sep 12, 04:37 PM
... it's right there on the bottom right
lol! I searched forever for it!
*walks away embarrassed as hell* :o
lol! I searched forever for it!
*walks away embarrassed as hell* :o
Willis
Oct 15, 05:44 PM
"It takes forever. By the time you've gone through all that, the girl's got up and left! You're much better off to take one of your earbuds out and put it in her ear. Then you're connected with about two feet of headphone cable"
Stevie has a valid point. I might have to try that :D
Stevie has a valid point. I might have to try that :D
eleftherios72
Aug 24, 05:36 PM
But who is more specific in serial numbers of ibook 12" ?
Apple ?
https://support.apple.com/ibook_powerbook/batteryexchange/
or U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission ?
Check out this
http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml06/06245.html
Apple ?
https://support.apple.com/ibook_powerbook/batteryexchange/
or U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission ?
Check out this
http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml06/06245.html
Dagless
Apr 10, 06:15 AM
I am shopping for a phone as my contract is up and I am considering iPhone 4 or waiting for the iPhone 5 and I'm also considering waiting for the new Nokia's so I'm looking at this with some interest.
What concerns me with the iPhone camera's isn't the optics and the sensors, it's the horrible post-processing that's automatically done to make their (iPhone) pictures 'seem' better, as in the colour saturation. It makes images seem unreal. (Try taking a picture in Grey Manchester) and you'll see how unrealistic the images look.
Can this be turned off? If not, then the 5 -> 8mp nor if they bump up to Karl Zeiss optics won't have any affect as they are still taking unrealistic representations.
I took some around Christmas time with all the lights on, and it actually suits it. But yeah I do hope they give us the option to remove the gloss. I guess that will go hand in hand with using better optics if they're serious about making a good phone camera.
What concerns me with the iPhone camera's isn't the optics and the sensors, it's the horrible post-processing that's automatically done to make their (iPhone) pictures 'seem' better, as in the colour saturation. It makes images seem unreal. (Try taking a picture in Grey Manchester) and you'll see how unrealistic the images look.
Can this be turned off? If not, then the 5 -> 8mp nor if they bump up to Karl Zeiss optics won't have any affect as they are still taking unrealistic representations.
I took some around Christmas time with all the lights on, and it actually suits it. But yeah I do hope they give us the option to remove the gloss. I guess that will go hand in hand with using better optics if they're serious about making a good phone camera.
Compile 'em all
Nov 12, 05:00 PM
Ironic that FACEBOOK is one of websites that most often CRASHED Safari 4.0.3 OFTEN!
I'm not sure who's to blame for that, Apple or Facebook, but since many other websites don't crash Safari 4.0.3, doesn't this seem like the little stubborn child refusing to do his homework properly?
Btw, I've yet to extensively test Safari 4.0.4 on Facebook, but my past experience was that Facebook has always been buggy on Macs, and every new update to the site always seems to cause a Mac-specific problem.
I have never EVER had Facebook crash Safari. And I use Facebook heavily.
Sounds something is wrong with your setup or you just enjoy spreading FUD.
I'm not sure who's to blame for that, Apple or Facebook, but since many other websites don't crash Safari 4.0.3, doesn't this seem like the little stubborn child refusing to do his homework properly?
Btw, I've yet to extensively test Safari 4.0.4 on Facebook, but my past experience was that Facebook has always been buggy on Macs, and every new update to the site always seems to cause a Mac-specific problem.
I have never EVER had Facebook crash Safari. And I use Facebook heavily.
Sounds something is wrong with your setup or you just enjoy spreading FUD.
sushi
Sep 6, 10:06 AM
An Imac.
What's an Imac? ;) :p :D
FWIW, it's an iMac.
What's an Imac? ;) :p :D
FWIW, it's an iMac.
Case-sensitive
Nov 27, 10:57 AM
I think what is being referenced is what used to be called "ping-pong stereo," the very wide and complete separation of channels -- which in the Beatles catalog is heard mainly on the Rubber Soul and Revolver albums, the two best they ever made IMO. I'm not a huge Beatles fan, but mess with these recordings at your peril!
Indeed this is what i'm talking about.
If some people like it in all it's primitivist glory then fair play.
Indeed this is what i'm talking about.
If some people like it in all it's primitivist glory then fair play.
coder12
Mar 28, 09:29 PM
Sold out in 8 hours??? What on earth is this? A Hannah Montana concert? Dang it, I was gonna go too :cool:
ten-oak-druid
May 5, 12:09 AM
Yeah, Blu Ray players are pretty useless because of the PS3, which is usually cheaper and can play Blu Ray anyway. Of course, my dad got a Blu Ray player before I could say anything :rolleyes:
And I think the digital copy is useless because of Netflix, which can just stream it. The internet is the future for now, not discs.
I don't know about the digital copy being useless. I have netflix and I also add movies to itunes. I see them as complimentary. Some items I do not care to purchase and it is nice to have netflix. On the other hand I like owning movie and TV shows that I really like. Also netflix doesn't have everything I want. And don't forget when traveling, you don't always have good internet.
The Apple TV is nice because it accesses both netflix and my itunes media.
Anyway movies I really like, I tend to buy physical copies anyway and rip them to add to itunes. The digital copy/blu ray is better as I can play the 1080p version once in a while and access it on the computer/ iOS anytime.
I'm looking forward to the release of Lord of the Rings extended edition coming out this summer on blu ray. I believe that has digital copy too.
And I think the digital copy is useless because of Netflix, which can just stream it. The internet is the future for now, not discs.
I don't know about the digital copy being useless. I have netflix and I also add movies to itunes. I see them as complimentary. Some items I do not care to purchase and it is nice to have netflix. On the other hand I like owning movie and TV shows that I really like. Also netflix doesn't have everything I want. And don't forget when traveling, you don't always have good internet.
The Apple TV is nice because it accesses both netflix and my itunes media.
Anyway movies I really like, I tend to buy physical copies anyway and rip them to add to itunes. The digital copy/blu ray is better as I can play the 1080p version once in a while and access it on the computer/ iOS anytime.
I'm looking forward to the release of Lord of the Rings extended edition coming out this summer on blu ray. I believe that has digital copy too.
Tec972
Nov 25, 11:43 AM
I sympathise with lots of your points, but this one doesn't necessarily stand up.
Cost of an external hard disk to back up my entire music library (if I had bought it all from iTunes): Approx �40
Cost of shelving to hold all my CD's: Approx �200
I understand what you are saying and already realized that, like I said, I would love for iTunes to be my one stop shop for music, because it's more convenient. But their pricing is off due to such low overhead, that I shouldn't be able to buy physical media more cheaply.
My argument is has more to do with them not keeping accounts that you can access your purchased stuff from. It is more of the fact that I don't want to back up stuff 2 or 3 times over because if it is lost I wouldn't be able to get it again. Hard drives do fail quite a bit. I know there are circumstance of apple letting people download all their stuff once, but it should be something they would offer anyway.
Most of my original post would pertain to buying something like the Beatles Box set on iTunes. I could buy it on iTunes for $150 in digital format or go to Amazon get the real box set for $130 encode it in better quality if I desired and either throw the box set away, give it away or sell it for lets say $80, if I didn't want it taking up space. So it cost me $50, and I have the same exact thing I would have gotten on iTunes for about one third the cost (depending on what I sold it for). If you still think that buying that set on iTunes is the better value then that's fine. To me it just doesn't compare.
I didn't really mean to write a rant opposed to trying to make people realize that iTunes is not a good deal in many cases and they should not be charging what they do, but people are so blinded, it makes me wonder.
Don't get me wrong, on few occasions I do buy music on iTunes but I still think it is a ripoff because it is an all digital purchase.
Cost of an external hard disk to back up my entire music library (if I had bought it all from iTunes): Approx �40
Cost of shelving to hold all my CD's: Approx �200
I understand what you are saying and already realized that, like I said, I would love for iTunes to be my one stop shop for music, because it's more convenient. But their pricing is off due to such low overhead, that I shouldn't be able to buy physical media more cheaply.
My argument is has more to do with them not keeping accounts that you can access your purchased stuff from. It is more of the fact that I don't want to back up stuff 2 or 3 times over because if it is lost I wouldn't be able to get it again. Hard drives do fail quite a bit. I know there are circumstance of apple letting people download all their stuff once, but it should be something they would offer anyway.
Most of my original post would pertain to buying something like the Beatles Box set on iTunes. I could buy it on iTunes for $150 in digital format or go to Amazon get the real box set for $130 encode it in better quality if I desired and either throw the box set away, give it away or sell it for lets say $80, if I didn't want it taking up space. So it cost me $50, and I have the same exact thing I would have gotten on iTunes for about one third the cost (depending on what I sold it for). If you still think that buying that set on iTunes is the better value then that's fine. To me it just doesn't compare.
I didn't really mean to write a rant opposed to trying to make people realize that iTunes is not a good deal in many cases and they should not be charging what they do, but people are so blinded, it makes me wonder.
Don't get me wrong, on few occasions I do buy music on iTunes but I still think it is a ripoff because it is an all digital purchase.
jessica.
Oct 26, 06:59 AM
I really hope you're being funny. You're a much more active member than I, but it's "fliquo.". Someone even has a sig stating something like, "the screensaver is fliquo, the answer is always fliquo."
:D
Come on. You know jessica. knows. Why reply? In addition, you spelled it wrong. It's: Fliqlo.
JESSICA never jokes!:rolleyes::rolleyes:
You both know in a weird way you kinda love me. :D
That joke doesn't seem to get old.
Nope, never. :D
But really, can't wait to get my ass in gear and get a few finishing touches done on my new office and take pics.
:D
Come on. You know jessica. knows. Why reply? In addition, you spelled it wrong. It's: Fliqlo.
JESSICA never jokes!:rolleyes::rolleyes:
You both know in a weird way you kinda love me. :D
That joke doesn't seem to get old.
Nope, never. :D
But really, can't wait to get my ass in gear and get a few finishing touches done on my new office and take pics.
kingtj
Apr 27, 11:16 AM
I have to jump back in here, thanks to the comment below, though.
I'm of the opinion that "dangerous" is EXACTLY the right word to use! Look, it's GREAT if you've got a successful marriage where both of you can responsibly share one bank account and manage money in such a way where you always approve of what your partner is doing with it. But that's clearly not possible for ALL relationships!
If you ask people what the biggest factors were when they got a divorce, you'd find that besides the "he/she cheated on me" story, the other TOP reason would be financial issues/stresses.
My partner and I will probably always keep our own separate bank accounts, and it seems to me that's far EASIER to manage than if we lumped everything together. What we've been doing lately is using a PayPal account of mine as a place we can both dump money into, as needed, if we want to pay for something together. (For example, our clothes washer just broke and I went out to get a new one. She put some of her last paycheck into PayPal to help pay for it.) Otherwise, I never leave a balance in that account - so it makes it really easy to use it for this purpose. With other things, we just split up the responsibilities of who is going to pay for what. She takes care of the gas bills that come in, for example, and does all of the grocery shopping. I always pay the mortgage payment myself. She pays for her vehicle payment and I pay for mine.
With this arrangement, both of us know that the money we make is all accounted for. (No way I want to deal with the uncertainty of thinking I have X amount in checking to buy something with, but find out after I write a check that we only had Y amount, because she bought things on the debit card that day I wasn't aware of.) We also get to feel like the things that we buy personally are still our personal purchases.
This isn't about "trying to sneak something past the other person". With this arrangement, that doesn't even come up. If you buy it with money in your bank account, then I don't *care* -- so you shouldn't even need to feel like it had to be "snuck past me" in the first place!
"Dangerous" ... this is junk talk. Who have you been listening to that suggests this? My wife and I have been married 12 years and have shared the same bank account that whole time, no separate accounts. (Jesus, what a nightmare to keep track of!) We've never once had a conflict about spending like you suggest we should. Why? because we live as WeegieMac does, the poster you're ripping on. We have respect for each other and our mutual needs as well as our individual desires. And we make sacrifices when we need to - both of us. Most of the responses in here act like marriage is a competition to see who can get what, or who can sneak this or that past their spouse. It's just shameful. What a tiring life that must be.
I'm of the opinion that "dangerous" is EXACTLY the right word to use! Look, it's GREAT if you've got a successful marriage where both of you can responsibly share one bank account and manage money in such a way where you always approve of what your partner is doing with it. But that's clearly not possible for ALL relationships!
If you ask people what the biggest factors were when they got a divorce, you'd find that besides the "he/she cheated on me" story, the other TOP reason would be financial issues/stresses.
My partner and I will probably always keep our own separate bank accounts, and it seems to me that's far EASIER to manage than if we lumped everything together. What we've been doing lately is using a PayPal account of mine as a place we can both dump money into, as needed, if we want to pay for something together. (For example, our clothes washer just broke and I went out to get a new one. She put some of her last paycheck into PayPal to help pay for it.) Otherwise, I never leave a balance in that account - so it makes it really easy to use it for this purpose. With other things, we just split up the responsibilities of who is going to pay for what. She takes care of the gas bills that come in, for example, and does all of the grocery shopping. I always pay the mortgage payment myself. She pays for her vehicle payment and I pay for mine.
With this arrangement, both of us know that the money we make is all accounted for. (No way I want to deal with the uncertainty of thinking I have X amount in checking to buy something with, but find out after I write a check that we only had Y amount, because she bought things on the debit card that day I wasn't aware of.) We also get to feel like the things that we buy personally are still our personal purchases.
This isn't about "trying to sneak something past the other person". With this arrangement, that doesn't even come up. If you buy it with money in your bank account, then I don't *care* -- so you shouldn't even need to feel like it had to be "snuck past me" in the first place!
"Dangerous" ... this is junk talk. Who have you been listening to that suggests this? My wife and I have been married 12 years and have shared the same bank account that whole time, no separate accounts. (Jesus, what a nightmare to keep track of!) We've never once had a conflict about spending like you suggest we should. Why? because we live as WeegieMac does, the poster you're ripping on. We have respect for each other and our mutual needs as well as our individual desires. And we make sacrifices when we need to - both of us. Most of the responses in here act like marriage is a competition to see who can get what, or who can sneak this or that past their spouse. It's just shameful. What a tiring life that must be.
Leoff
Nov 8, 08:07 AM
I was wondering "why did they announce it today instead of Tuesday?" then I remembered the elections. Steve probably didn't want to be totally lost in the media swamp.
gnasher729
May 5, 04:58 AM
Happiness all around about the good news. I look at Microsoft and how they ****ed up lots of customers' Windows 7 phones by over-the-air updates. And since these guys at Microsoft are not nearly as stupid as people on MacRumors would like to believe, it seems that over the air updates just have a huge potential for ***ing up someone's iPhone or iPad as well. Starting with firmware updates that you really, really only should perform when connected to a strong and stable power source. I think Apple wouldn't want a million customers with bricked iPhones or iPads. And if Apple's engineers think they can pull this off without bricking any iPhone, then hopefully their manager asks them "so what makes you think you are smarter than the guys at Microsoft"? The Microsoft guys were quite sure they could do it, and they messed it up, twice.
Now we add that the size of an iOS update is quite big compared to most people's monthly 3G data allowance, and I think this is a pipe dream.
Unless it's an entirely new OS, like iOS 5 for example, it should be able to recognize what version your device is running and download only the essential features of the following update. Having to download the entire OS (which is over 600mb) every single time is a bit ridiculous.
Every time engineers are trying to be clever they run the risk of messing things up. Taking the old iOS, removing it completely, and installing a completely new, fresh iOS is safe and risk free. Trying to be clever and replace only the right things risks messing up things and leaving a very, very, very unhappy customer.
Now we add that the size of an iOS update is quite big compared to most people's monthly 3G data allowance, and I think this is a pipe dream.
Unless it's an entirely new OS, like iOS 5 for example, it should be able to recognize what version your device is running and download only the essential features of the following update. Having to download the entire OS (which is over 600mb) every single time is a bit ridiculous.
Every time engineers are trying to be clever they run the risk of messing things up. Taking the old iOS, removing it completely, and installing a completely new, fresh iOS is safe and risk free. Trying to be clever and replace only the right things risks messing up things and leaving a very, very, very unhappy customer.
bilbo--baggins
Jan 11, 04:49 PM
Maybe they'll announced that they've finally got AirDisk working with the Airport Extreme n, and will apologise for their complete incompetence and track record with this product so far.
If we're REALLY lucky we might even be able to use AirDisk with Time Machine.
Or maybe it will be the smell of ******** when Steve gives some other product the false hype that the Airport Extreme got...
Or maybe a full sized Wireless Keyboard.
If we're REALLY lucky we might even be able to use AirDisk with Time Machine.
Or maybe it will be the smell of ******** when Steve gives some other product the false hype that the Airport Extreme got...
Or maybe a full sized Wireless Keyboard.
student_trap
Nov 8, 08:46 AM
a really nice update methinks, with the 1 gig of ram and higher hard drives, these really are great machines for the home user, i'm sure my folks will buy one, and it will suit their wireless internet needs perfectly
twoodcc
Mar 25, 01:26 PM
i never really noticed any battery issues, but i'll install this anyways
Sydde
Mar 31, 12:51 AM
Here's a few quick ones.
"U.S. wants other nations to pitch in on Libya"
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/us-wants-other-nations-to-pitch-in-on-libya/2011/03/30/AFh2IY6B_story.html
"European countries downsize military, increase social programs"
http://www.theeagleonline.com/news/story/european-countries-downsize-military-increase-social-programs/
"In an effort to decrease European government spending ... They are planning on reducing billions from their military budgets due to budget deficits."
http://propaganda-buster.blogspot.com/2011/02/european-military-hd.html
Quick, yes, but not very substantive. That third one, wtf is that? Sheesh.
"U.S. wants other nations to pitch in on Libya"
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/us-wants-other-nations-to-pitch-in-on-libya/2011/03/30/AFh2IY6B_story.html
"European countries downsize military, increase social programs"
http://www.theeagleonline.com/news/story/european-countries-downsize-military-increase-social-programs/
"In an effort to decrease European government spending ... They are planning on reducing billions from their military budgets due to budget deficits."
http://propaganda-buster.blogspot.com/2011/02/european-military-hd.html
Quick, yes, but not very substantive. That third one, wtf is that? Sheesh.