iphones4evry1
Oct 6, 07:49 PM
Good !
I'm getting sick and tired of AT&T's decline in coverage and spotty coverage. When I had my RAZR phone, I used to have great coverage everywhere on AT&T, but over the past year AT&T's coverage and quality of coverage has declined BIG TIME. I'm sick and tired of it! I hope Verizon launches a HUGE campaign showing all the spots on the map where AT&T has lousy coverage and it motivates AT&T to get off their laurels and DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT!!!!!!!!!!! :mad::mad::mad:
I'm getting sick and tired of AT&T's decline in coverage and spotty coverage. When I had my RAZR phone, I used to have great coverage everywhere on AT&T, but over the past year AT&T's coverage and quality of coverage has declined BIG TIME. I'm sick and tired of it! I hope Verizon launches a HUGE campaign showing all the spots on the map where AT&T has lousy coverage and it motivates AT&T to get off their laurels and DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT!!!!!!!!!!! :mad::mad::mad:
aswitcher
Sep 12, 07:25 AM
Ok iTunes Aus is same.
ziggyonice
May 3, 11:54 PM
I got chills.
Nice work, Apple! Now do the same thing to your iPhone ads.
(And Mac ads, for that matter.)
Nice work, Apple! Now do the same thing to your iPhone ads.
(And Mac ads, for that matter.)
bikertwin
Sep 25, 11:12 AM
Why are people rating this news as negative? It seems like a decent update to a good program, and it's free for existing Aperture users. What were you expecting?
Yeah, it leaves me scratching my head. Huh? How could any of these features--which people have been screaming for--be bad news?
Or is that the MacBookPro weenies whining that there was no update? Losers.
Yeah, it leaves me scratching my head. Huh? How could any of these features--which people have been screaming for--be bad news?
Or is that the MacBookPro weenies whining that there was no update? Losers.
more...
firsttube
Sep 12, 07:47 AM
Does anyone else think selling/running video in iTUNES is a little counter-intuitive?
Yep. Personally, I hate having video in itunes, such a pain, and i have yet to find a way for videos to not appear in the main library, but only in the video directory. am i missing something there?
Yep. Personally, I hate having video in itunes, such a pain, and i have yet to find a way for videos to not appear in the main library, but only in the video directory. am i missing something there?
slughead
Oct 3, 10:34 AM
Jobs apparently warned that while Apple was not a litigious company
HAHAH tell that to think secret :X
Good luck Jon.
HAHAH tell that to think secret :X
Good luck Jon.
more...
Obi-Wan Kubrick
Mar 24, 05:05 PM
I remember playing around with OS X 10.3 on an iMac G4 at CompUSA. I also remember waiting for the launch of 10.4 and then the iMac G5 to make my purchase. I'm still happy with 10.4, although it is a drag that most new web browsers etc, require 10.5 and Intel. Maybe, I'll upgrade when Lion comes out.
georgethomas
Apr 16, 11:56 AM
i guess everyone wants a piece of the pie
wouldn't be surprised to see competitors are going after it
the law of big number suggests that a small fraction of the number can lead to a big sales. that is my opinion
wouldn't be surprised to see competitors are going after it
the law of big number suggests that a small fraction of the number can lead to a big sales. that is my opinion
more...
asphalt-proof
Jan 10, 07:09 PM
I go to Gizmodo's site regularly and saw where they had admitted to their prank. I really didn't think much of it and even thought it was funny. However, i never read past the headlines so i didn't know they screwed with someone's presentation. That's just bad form and extremely inconsiderate. These presentors put a lot of time and energy preparing for that 10 miinutes or so that they have to spotlight. Yes, some are very lame, stupid, whatever. But for the most part, these people work very hard to do the best job they can. Not to mention that their job may be put in jeopardy if their presentation tanks.
I imagine that the Gizmodo staff were seriously CES-fatigued, over-stimulated by the flashy lights and loud, continuous noise, and slightly drunk. Fine. Most of the other bloggers were in the same state of mind. But none of them (at least as far as we know) didn't ******* with someone's presentation. I think they should be banned from CES next year as a punishment. Macworld? Not so much. It didn't happen there. Well, it didn't happen there. But I think that Apple would very carefully interview Gizmodo before giving them a press pass then make them sweat. Maybe even frisk them in public, before they entered the convention center. THat would make a lot of bloggers and vendors smile. Really make them sweat. But let them in anyways. Gizmodo is a very popular tech blog and for the most part, a very well done blog. Their coverage is important to Macworld. This way, Apple can ensure they get coverage but also get some karma points from other bloggers and vendors when they see how Apple deals with Gizmodo.
I imagine that the Gizmodo staff were seriously CES-fatigued, over-stimulated by the flashy lights and loud, continuous noise, and slightly drunk. Fine. Most of the other bloggers were in the same state of mind. But none of them (at least as far as we know) didn't ******* with someone's presentation. I think they should be banned from CES next year as a punishment. Macworld? Not so much. It didn't happen there. Well, it didn't happen there. But I think that Apple would very carefully interview Gizmodo before giving them a press pass then make them sweat. Maybe even frisk them in public, before they entered the convention center. THat would make a lot of bloggers and vendors smile. Really make them sweat. But let them in anyways. Gizmodo is a very popular tech blog and for the most part, a very well done blog. Their coverage is important to Macworld. This way, Apple can ensure they get coverage but also get some karma points from other bloggers and vendors when they see how Apple deals with Gizmodo.
NebulaClash
May 2, 08:10 AM
WTF is so great about 'gestures'? There's nothing quite so miserable as barely bumping the fraking trackpad while typing and causing the text cursor to go flying off somewhere else or any other way of accidentally activating some of these gestures (the more you have the more likely you'll accidentally activate them at some point unintentionally). And while Apple trackpads feel better than many out there, nothing beats a mouse for certain operations, IMO. I'd take a mouse any day over a trackpad. Old fashioned? That's like saying a '65 Mustang with a 4-speed on the floor is old fashioned next to a modern Mitsubishi Lancer with paddle shifters. I'll take the Mustang ANY DAY over that.
Here is why gestures are great and will win out over mouse and keyboard use for almost all uses: they are a direct action and not an indirect action. We are born with an innate sense of using our fingers to manipulate objects. We have to learn the abstraction concept of a mouse and keyboard, items that come between us and our end product (we put up with it because it is effective and productive for certain purposes, but it's a learned behavior and not innate).
90% of what we use a mouse for can be better done with gestures. Those uses will absolutely dominate over the next decade, leaving mouse usage for specialized applications only. You cannot bet against anything that works with human ability instead of something that creates an extra abstracted metaphor ("see this device? It controls the pointer on the screen. As you move that device, the pointer will move accordingly") for human ability.
All you have to do is see how someone reacts once they get used to gestures and then face a system that does not support them. They get frustrated that they have to insert an extra layer of manipulation when all they want to do is point directly with their fingers.
Here is why gestures are great and will win out over mouse and keyboard use for almost all uses: they are a direct action and not an indirect action. We are born with an innate sense of using our fingers to manipulate objects. We have to learn the abstraction concept of a mouse and keyboard, items that come between us and our end product (we put up with it because it is effective and productive for certain purposes, but it's a learned behavior and not innate).
90% of what we use a mouse for can be better done with gestures. Those uses will absolutely dominate over the next decade, leaving mouse usage for specialized applications only. You cannot bet against anything that works with human ability instead of something that creates an extra abstracted metaphor ("see this device? It controls the pointer on the screen. As you move that device, the pointer will move accordingly") for human ability.
All you have to do is see how someone reacts once they get used to gestures and then face a system that does not support them. They get frustrated that they have to insert an extra layer of manipulation when all they want to do is point directly with their fingers.
more...
Steve Mobs
Mar 28, 02:24 PM
Could they... award themselves?
mr.steevo
Oct 3, 04:15 PM
Not going to happen. You realise that Apple doesn't give a crap about the 100 nerds out there that want to be able to upgrade their graphics cards?
hi,
The people I have spoken to who use PC's are not nerds or power users, however, they do have monitors that work perfectly fine and want to use them. Why would someone purchase a 20" iMac when they already have sitting on their desk a 12 month old 19" LCD? They may not all need expandability (or really understand what that means) but they are of the mind set that they must have the option. These people are simply not considering Apple computers because of the lack of an upgradeable computer that is under $1500 (the mini is not easily upgradeable unless you happen to be one of those nerds you are refering to). The gap between the mini and the Mac Pro is enormous in both power and price yet there is nothing in the middle price/power range. Simply dismissing this catagory of people will not convince them to buy an iMac. Further, saying the operating system will convince them to switch is a moot point if they never buy the computer in the first place.
My friends, family, and co-workers are all interested in this "OS X thing" but get turned off at the price of the Pro, the lack of power of the mini, and the all in one of the iMac. This is what I am seeing, and Apple is losing sales because of it.
s.
hi,
The people I have spoken to who use PC's are not nerds or power users, however, they do have monitors that work perfectly fine and want to use them. Why would someone purchase a 20" iMac when they already have sitting on their desk a 12 month old 19" LCD? They may not all need expandability (or really understand what that means) but they are of the mind set that they must have the option. These people are simply not considering Apple computers because of the lack of an upgradeable computer that is under $1500 (the mini is not easily upgradeable unless you happen to be one of those nerds you are refering to). The gap between the mini and the Mac Pro is enormous in both power and price yet there is nothing in the middle price/power range. Simply dismissing this catagory of people will not convince them to buy an iMac. Further, saying the operating system will convince them to switch is a moot point if they never buy the computer in the first place.
My friends, family, and co-workers are all interested in this "OS X thing" but get turned off at the price of the Pro, the lack of power of the mini, and the all in one of the iMac. This is what I am seeing, and Apple is losing sales because of it.
s.
more...
twoodcc
Apr 4, 09:41 PM
That's too bad, yeah heat is bad.
Yeah. I guess it's heat. I have two gtx 260's going and an i7 over clocked to 3.5 ghz. But it was working great 2 months ago
Yeah. I guess it's heat. I have two gtx 260's going and an i7 over clocked to 3.5 ghz. But it was working great 2 months ago
Optimus Frag
May 4, 06:44 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
I've no real need for an iPad and as such, no need for a tablet. But having had a go with the 'competitor's' including the so called iPad killer, Xoom, I think Apple have already won. These iPad ads are just confirming that to the public.
I've no real need for an iPad and as such, no need for a tablet. But having had a go with the 'competitor's' including the so called iPad killer, Xoom, I think Apple have already won. These iPad ads are just confirming that to the public.
more...
blahblah100
Oct 7, 06:34 PM
Except Verizon does that too!!!!
About 2 months ago I paid an early termination fee and gave up my iPhone because of the dropped calls. I have a Blackberry on Verizon, and consume about 800 minutes a month (peak times, not nights and weekends) and close to 200MB of bandwidth.
I have not had a single dropped call. I can also finally browse the web without Safari crashing all the time.
About 2 months ago I paid an early termination fee and gave up my iPhone because of the dropped calls. I have a Blackberry on Verizon, and consume about 800 minutes a month (peak times, not nights and weekends) and close to 200MB of bandwidth.
I have not had a single dropped call. I can also finally browse the web without Safari crashing all the time.
nxent
Apr 25, 01:14 PM
this can't happen soon enough as my 3gs is slowly dying... my volume button(s) are gone and the bottom 1/2" of the screen no longer recognizes touch input.
more...
WildCowboy
Jan 5, 08:38 AM
I would just keep checking that second URL to see if it's been posted. Possibly have an occasional look at the first URL just in case they decide to change their directory structure, but I highly doubt they would at this point.
CalBoy
Apr 15, 04:21 PM
As I said, I understood the point you were trying to make. But.... you can't take two non-TSA incidents and use those to make a case against the TSA specifically. All you can do is say that increased security, similar to what the TSA does, can be shown to not catch everything. I could just as easily argue that because the two incidents (shoe and underwear bombers) did not occur from TSA screenings then that is proof the TSA methods work. I could, but I won't because we don't really know that is true. Too small a sample to judge.
Well actually we know the TSA methods don't work because both of the incidents were from European airports that mirror what the TSA does. Added to the number of weapons that make it through TSA checkpoints, it's easy to see that the TSA does in fact not work to the extent that it is expected to.
Did you not read my post above? Or did you not understand it? Or did I not write clearly? I'll assume the 3rd. Past history is that bombs are not put on planes by lone wolf fanatics. They are placed there by a whole operation involving a number of people... perhaps a dozen, maybe? The person carrying the bomb may be a brainwashed fool (though, surprisingly - often educated) - but the support team likely aren't fools. The team includes dedicated individuals who have specialized training and experience that are needed to mount further operations. The bomb makers, the money people, the people who nurture the bomb carrier and ensure that they are fit (mentally) to go through with a suicide attack. These people, the support crew, are not going to like 50/50 odds.
I understood your rather simplistic attempt at game theory just fine. The problem remains that one side is not a rational actor. The command portion of terrorists have virtually nothing to lose with a botched attempt, and neither does the fanatic patsy. A 50/50 ratio isn't good enough for our security because the downside for both command and patsy are much smaller than the upside (from their perspective). The chances of failure need to be much higher in order to effectively deter terrorists.
You are right. There has been a cost to dignity, time and money. Most of life is. People are constantly balancing personal and societal security/safety against personal freedoms. In this case what you think is only part of the balance between society and security. You feel it's too far. I can't argue. I don't fly anymore unless I have to. But, I also think that what the TSA (and CATSA, & the European equivalents) are doing is working. I just don't have to like going through it.
Sacrificing these things is appropriate when there is a tangible gain. There hasn't been much of a tangible gain with TSA, and this is coming from the head of Israeli Security. We're paying a lot and getting almost nothing in return. Every year there's a new "standard" put out there to make it seem like TSA is doing something, but time and again security experts have lambasted TSA and its efforts as a dog and pony show.
Your own opinion of flying should be an example of how ridiculous things have gotten. If people now become disgruntled and irritated every time they fly, for perhaps marginal gains in security, then our methods have failed.
Give the man/woman/boy a cigar! There is no way to prove it, other than setting controlled experiments in which make some airports security free, and others with varying levels of security. And in some cases you don't tell the travelling public which airports have what level (if any) of security - but you do tell the bad guys/gals.
It is difficult to prove, but you can make an educated guess about what the cause is. Other than the correlational evidence, there is no other good data to suggest that TSA has actually been effective. In no field is correlation enough to establish anything but correlation.
I cited a sharp drop-off in hijackings at a particular moment in history. Within the limits of a Mac Rumours Forum, that is as far as I'm going to go. If you an alternative hypothesis, you have to at least back it up with something. My something trumps your alternative hypothesis - even if my something is merely a pair of deuces - until you provide something to back up your AH.
No, that's not how it works. If you want to assert your idea as correct, the burden is on you to show that it is correct. I am going to try to poke holes in your reasoning, and it's up to you to show that my criticisms are invalid on the bases of logic and evidence.
So far you've only cited correlation, which is not sufficient evidence for causation. You ignored my criticism based on military intervention, changing travel patterns, etc, and only want to trumpet your belief that correlation is enough. It's not. If you don't want to do more on Mac Rumors, then don't post anymore on this topic concerning this line of discussion.
dirty blonde hair highlights.
Well actually we know the TSA methods don't work because both of the incidents were from European airports that mirror what the TSA does. Added to the number of weapons that make it through TSA checkpoints, it's easy to see that the TSA does in fact not work to the extent that it is expected to.
Did you not read my post above? Or did you not understand it? Or did I not write clearly? I'll assume the 3rd. Past history is that bombs are not put on planes by lone wolf fanatics. They are placed there by a whole operation involving a number of people... perhaps a dozen, maybe? The person carrying the bomb may be a brainwashed fool (though, surprisingly - often educated) - but the support team likely aren't fools. The team includes dedicated individuals who have specialized training and experience that are needed to mount further operations. The bomb makers, the money people, the people who nurture the bomb carrier and ensure that they are fit (mentally) to go through with a suicide attack. These people, the support crew, are not going to like 50/50 odds.
I understood your rather simplistic attempt at game theory just fine. The problem remains that one side is not a rational actor. The command portion of terrorists have virtually nothing to lose with a botched attempt, and neither does the fanatic patsy. A 50/50 ratio isn't good enough for our security because the downside for both command and patsy are much smaller than the upside (from their perspective). The chances of failure need to be much higher in order to effectively deter terrorists.
You are right. There has been a cost to dignity, time and money. Most of life is. People are constantly balancing personal and societal security/safety against personal freedoms. In this case what you think is only part of the balance between society and security. You feel it's too far. I can't argue. I don't fly anymore unless I have to. But, I also think that what the TSA (and CATSA, & the European equivalents) are doing is working. I just don't have to like going through it.
Sacrificing these things is appropriate when there is a tangible gain. There hasn't been much of a tangible gain with TSA, and this is coming from the head of Israeli Security. We're paying a lot and getting almost nothing in return. Every year there's a new "standard" put out there to make it seem like TSA is doing something, but time and again security experts have lambasted TSA and its efforts as a dog and pony show.
Your own opinion of flying should be an example of how ridiculous things have gotten. If people now become disgruntled and irritated every time they fly, for perhaps marginal gains in security, then our methods have failed.
Give the man/woman/boy a cigar! There is no way to prove it, other than setting controlled experiments in which make some airports security free, and others with varying levels of security. And in some cases you don't tell the travelling public which airports have what level (if any) of security - but you do tell the bad guys/gals.
It is difficult to prove, but you can make an educated guess about what the cause is. Other than the correlational evidence, there is no other good data to suggest that TSA has actually been effective. In no field is correlation enough to establish anything but correlation.
I cited a sharp drop-off in hijackings at a particular moment in history. Within the limits of a Mac Rumours Forum, that is as far as I'm going to go. If you an alternative hypothesis, you have to at least back it up with something. My something trumps your alternative hypothesis - even if my something is merely a pair of deuces - until you provide something to back up your AH.
No, that's not how it works. If you want to assert your idea as correct, the burden is on you to show that it is correct. I am going to try to poke holes in your reasoning, and it's up to you to show that my criticisms are invalid on the bases of logic and evidence.
So far you've only cited correlation, which is not sufficient evidence for causation. You ignored my criticism based on military intervention, changing travel patterns, etc, and only want to trumpet your belief that correlation is enough. It's not. If you don't want to do more on Mac Rumors, then don't post anymore on this topic concerning this line of discussion.
Rocketman
Nov 16, 05:50 PM
If you recall, at the 1-06 unveiling of the intel Macs (or maybe it was the conference call Q&A), Steve stated AMD made really good server chips, but Apple makes consumer products.
Perhaps Apple is doing an AMD based blade, or iTV, or some "appliance" product.
The rumour is unlikely to be true however.
Rocketman
Perhaps Apple is doing an AMD based blade, or iTV, or some "appliance" product.
The rumour is unlikely to be true however.
Rocketman
MattZani
Apr 6, 05:36 PM
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjup7A3DyMTNsKV0BcoTlxcvOBcR0Eg00Kl04gCcBrXfB-D_MbDUFq0BTlIzQhLh-3u5uOLKXDYw53l355iN6YrJsIG7tcPlygug2fTM8qFFRUX3K3t4a0VPFVIuj0EDdd1m_3VFO6yAN0/s1600/Source-Code-Movie-Poster.jpg
2 tickets to see Source Code, brilliant.
2 tickets to see Source Code, brilliant.
JSchwage
Jan 10, 05:02 PM
All I know is that if I were running Macworld, Gizmodo would be on my banned list.
TheMacBookPro
Mar 18, 09:01 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPad; U; CPU OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
Thats some pretty narrow minded thinking there buddy.
Not your buddy, tyvm.
I'm just posting about some harassment I've been experiencing because of the phone I've purchased and was wondering if other iPhone owners have experienced it, and by judging from the responses a lot have.
You should've searched before creating a new thread. This forum gets one of these 'omg what's wrong with people who prefer their own phone' and 'the iPhone is the best WTF is wrong with android users' every few days.
I already feel great about my purchase, and I haven't been here long enough to know if the users are fanboys. Judging from the responses I'd say these guys seem pretty fair. Pretty judgemental and silly post in my opinion.
Because they're agreeing with you (surprise, surprise). I'd say people are fair too if they blindly agreed to everything I say.
And my post is silly? Pot, kettle if I ever seen it ;)
I couldn't exactly call myself an Apple 'fanboy' either. If HTC made a better phone I'd gladly go pick it up, but I'm simply posting my experiences.
Fair enough. Most people on here refuse to think that anyone other than Apple can make a good phone.
Just curious now- what HTC phone was your friend using to play angry birds @2fps? I had no idea that HTC made a worse android phone (compared to the original G1).
Thats some pretty narrow minded thinking there buddy.
Not your buddy, tyvm.
I'm just posting about some harassment I've been experiencing because of the phone I've purchased and was wondering if other iPhone owners have experienced it, and by judging from the responses a lot have.
You should've searched before creating a new thread. This forum gets one of these 'omg what's wrong with people who prefer their own phone' and 'the iPhone is the best WTF is wrong with android users' every few days.
I already feel great about my purchase, and I haven't been here long enough to know if the users are fanboys. Judging from the responses I'd say these guys seem pretty fair. Pretty judgemental and silly post in my opinion.
Because they're agreeing with you (surprise, surprise). I'd say people are fair too if they blindly agreed to everything I say.
And my post is silly? Pot, kettle if I ever seen it ;)
I couldn't exactly call myself an Apple 'fanboy' either. If HTC made a better phone I'd gladly go pick it up, but I'm simply posting my experiences.
Fair enough. Most people on here refuse to think that anyone other than Apple can make a good phone.
Just curious now- what HTC phone was your friend using to play angry birds @2fps? I had no idea that HTC made a worse android phone (compared to the original G1).
err404
May 2, 11:59 AM
It's taking a lot on trust to just click 'Accept' and most of the time it's OK... But check out the South Park episode for how it could go wrong..! :)
The location collection opt-in is NOT simply tied to agreeing to your TOS/EULA. It's a fairly clear and concise dialog and entirely optional:
http://www.f-secure.com/weblog/archives/itunes_location.png
The location collection opt-in is NOT simply tied to agreeing to your TOS/EULA. It's a fairly clear and concise dialog and entirely optional:
http://www.f-secure.com/weblog/archives/itunes_location.png
Drag'nGT
Oct 6, 12:08 PM
Isn't Verizon's 4G network going to be GSM?
on another note if it is wouldn't their coverage also be spotty?
Verizon bought many different CDMA companies that didn't take off during the early years of cell phones. Because of that, they have infrastructure that can be upgraded. In other words, they have towers in those areas that shaded red. CDMA or GSM doesn't matter so much as having a tower in the area to put equipment on. So no, the upgrade to 4G will not cause spotty coverage.
on another note if it is wouldn't their coverage also be spotty?
Verizon bought many different CDMA companies that didn't take off during the early years of cell phones. Because of that, they have infrastructure that can be upgraded. In other words, they have towers in those areas that shaded red. CDMA or GSM doesn't matter so much as having a tower in the area to put equipment on. So no, the upgrade to 4G will not cause spotty coverage.
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar