manu chao
Apr 27, 08:53 AM
No it isn't. They say they are not logging your location. This is correct. If it were incorrect, they would be keeping a database of your phone's exact GPS location. Instead, as they state, they are keeping a cache of the cell towers and wifi hotspots in order to aid the A-GPS system. So, no, they are not logging your (and by your, I mean an identifiable log) exact locations and beaming it home to watch you like big brother.
They are instructing your iPhone to log your approximate location. And I am sure anybody in this thread (ie, those really knowing about the details) knows the difference between 'Apple is logging your location on its servers' and 'Apple is instructing your iPhone to log your location on your iPhone and computer'.
They are instructing your iPhone to log your approximate location. And I am sure anybody in this thread (ie, those really knowing about the details) knows the difference between 'Apple is logging your location on its servers' and 'Apple is instructing your iPhone to log your location on your iPhone and computer'.
triceretops
Apr 27, 08:59 AM
I wonder if this is why I can no longer get more than a days charge on my iPhone 4 with minimal use since it seems like it's an always on thing.
If you are having battery issues and you have Apple Care on the phone, you can take it to a store and have them replace the battery.
If you are having battery issues and you have Apple Care on the phone, you can take it to a store and have them replace the battery.
ifjake
Nov 29, 12:25 AM
here's my 2� without reading the rest of the thread:
maybe if they set aside the funds for cultivating new, compellingly good music from upandcoming artists. kinda like how the big movie studios own independent-esque branches. something nice. something a little more risky than your usual cookie-cutter pop-hit. i dunno maybe that's already there sort of. maybe.
maybe if they set aside the funds for cultivating new, compellingly good music from upandcoming artists. kinda like how the big movie studios own independent-esque branches. something nice. something a little more risky than your usual cookie-cutter pop-hit. i dunno maybe that's already there sort of. maybe.
notabadname
Mar 22, 04:06 PM
It's simple: Apple is always behind hardware-wise because they like to priorize esthetics and appearance
Android phones are selling more than iPhone.
I've only bought the first iPad because there were no competitors at that time (and I hate netbooks), but now things are different. To be honest, A LOT different.
1st point: It's factually inaccurate to make your first statement, as evidenced by your last statement. Kind of funny, don't you think?
In your second statement, you are comparing all Android software-running phones to a single model/product line, the iPhone. The iPhone (each generation) has out sold any single phone model (generation) over it's life than that of any offered by any other hardware manufacturer.
Your comparison is like saying Toyota has sold more cars than Ford has sold F-150s. That may be true, but the F-150 is still the number one selling truck in the US, even though it does not outsell the sum total of all other trucks by all other manufacturers.
You should compare a single phone model, say Motorola Droid or HTC Incredible. You are simply talking software. Apple is primarily a hardware company that happens to make the software for its hardware. (yes, I know about FCP and other software) They do not license the iOS software to other manufacturers, so comparison to Google's OS and number of DIFFERENT phones it runs on is really irrelevant to whether any hardware manufacturer has had a more successful phone than the iPhone.
Android phones are selling more than iPhone.
I've only bought the first iPad because there were no competitors at that time (and I hate netbooks), but now things are different. To be honest, A LOT different.
1st point: It's factually inaccurate to make your first statement, as evidenced by your last statement. Kind of funny, don't you think?
In your second statement, you are comparing all Android software-running phones to a single model/product line, the iPhone. The iPhone (each generation) has out sold any single phone model (generation) over it's life than that of any offered by any other hardware manufacturer.
Your comparison is like saying Toyota has sold more cars than Ford has sold F-150s. That may be true, but the F-150 is still the number one selling truck in the US, even though it does not outsell the sum total of all other trucks by all other manufacturers.
You should compare a single phone model, say Motorola Droid or HTC Incredible. You are simply talking software. Apple is primarily a hardware company that happens to make the software for its hardware. (yes, I know about FCP and other software) They do not license the iOS software to other manufacturers, so comparison to Google's OS and number of DIFFERENT phones it runs on is really irrelevant to whether any hardware manufacturer has had a more successful phone than the iPhone.
cjoy
Apr 25, 03:01 PM
Brings to mind:
If you outlaw guns, only the outlaws will have guns.
statistics show that distribution of firearms mainly lead to more homocides and also suicides using firearms.
if guns are outlawed, their distribution is greatly limited, making it a lot harder for outlaws to obtain them.
the more you spread guns, the greater is the risk of them being used in illegal activities.
..oh wait... this forum is about apple and computers, right? :rolleyes:
If you outlaw guns, only the outlaws will have guns.
statistics show that distribution of firearms mainly lead to more homocides and also suicides using firearms.
if guns are outlawed, their distribution is greatly limited, making it a lot harder for outlaws to obtain them.
the more you spread guns, the greater is the risk of them being used in illegal activities.
..oh wait... this forum is about apple and computers, right? :rolleyes:
NoNothing
Mar 31, 04:07 PM
How is it biting them in the ass? Android is the fastest growing OS with a larger share than IOS. I think it's been a very succesfull strategy.
Only if you do not add products like the iPad and the iPod Touch. In other words, if you throw out 50% of the iOS products.
Only if you do not add products like the iPad and the iPod Touch. In other words, if you throw out 50% of the iOS products.
Viggy
Aug 27, 07:07 PM
HI!
Anyone knows if jointly with this rumor is the rumor of the upgrade of graphic cards on MacBook (not Pro) to Intel GMA 965 (I think is this the reference...)?
Thanks!
Anyone knows if jointly with this rumor is the rumor of the upgrade of graphic cards on MacBook (not Pro) to Intel GMA 965 (I think is this the reference...)?
Thanks!
ghostlyorb
Apr 8, 08:17 AM
How many times does it need to be said, "don't screw around with Apple"?
Macnoviz
Apr 12, 10:57 AM
So the presentation should be in about 10 hours?
Has any one heard of live coverage? A livestream will probably be too much to ask, but maybe one of the tech blogs is doing a text/photo update.
Has any one heard of live coverage? A livestream will probably be too much to ask, but maybe one of the tech blogs is doing a text/photo update.
bamerican
Apr 25, 03:19 PM
"Federal Marshals need a warrant. . . . . "
Duh, the police always have to jump over a higher bar . . . I, personally, can come into your home, take your bag of cocaine, and go give it to the police and it will be admissible, even though the cops need a warrant. (I can be sued for breaking and entering, etc., but the drugs are still admissible.
You are absolutely right. This lawyer is a complete idiot. The reason that federal marshals or any other goverment actor needs a warrant is because they are government actors. The Fourth Amendment protects people from the government, not private parties. Purely private searches are not protected by the Fourth Amendment.
Apple is not a government actor and, unless they are acting in coordination or on behalf of the government, under the Fourth Amendment they don't require a warrant for a damn thing.
Did this guy miss the day they taught law in law school?
Duh, the police always have to jump over a higher bar . . . I, personally, can come into your home, take your bag of cocaine, and go give it to the police and it will be admissible, even though the cops need a warrant. (I can be sued for breaking and entering, etc., but the drugs are still admissible.
You are absolutely right. This lawyer is a complete idiot. The reason that federal marshals or any other goverment actor needs a warrant is because they are government actors. The Fourth Amendment protects people from the government, not private parties. Purely private searches are not protected by the Fourth Amendment.
Apple is not a government actor and, unless they are acting in coordination or on behalf of the government, under the Fourth Amendment they don't require a warrant for a damn thing.
Did this guy miss the day they taught law in law school?
Chupa Chupa
Apr 5, 07:00 PM
4GB download with in-app purchases for content would be my guess.
4GB? Do you realize how many DVDs FCS is? Unless Apple is going to severely cut up the package and de-studio it, no way is 4GB nearly enough space. Aperture is fine as a download b/c it's a relatively small program. FCS is a monster. It needs to be on media. I can't hog up my bandwidth to d/l a 16+GB suite.
4GB? Do you realize how many DVDs FCS is? Unless Apple is going to severely cut up the package and de-studio it, no way is 4GB nearly enough space. Aperture is fine as a download b/c it's a relatively small program. FCS is a monster. It needs to be on media. I can't hog up my bandwidth to d/l a 16+GB suite.
iJohnHenry
Apr 27, 10:29 AM
More like arguing about where the dessert forks and soup spoons go in the place settings. I don't think lifeboats have even entered into the conversation.
I believe the 'long form' is rearranging the deck chairs. :)
I believe the 'long form' is rearranging the deck chairs. :)
Roessnakhan
Mar 22, 12:57 PM
I agree.
But who in their right minds would want to own something called a Playbook? :o
The iPad isn't exactly a name to write home about either. Then, neither is TouchPad, Xoom, or Galaxy Tab.
But who in their right minds would want to own something called a Playbook? :o
The iPad isn't exactly a name to write home about either. Then, neither is TouchPad, Xoom, or Galaxy Tab.
generik
Sep 19, 01:17 AM
However, I am willing to pay more for Apples reliability, ease of use, and lack of numerous viruses. But, not too much more.
Apple's reliability? Care to elaborate more specifically? Good high quality well designed never dying logic boards that run at 40-ish degrees Celsius for one? :p
Apple's reliability? Care to elaborate more specifically? Good high quality well designed never dying logic boards that run at 40-ish degrees Celsius for one? :p
opinioncircle
Mar 20, 07:56 AM
Until we have publicly funded campaigns, there will be no change. As long as it costs millions to get elected, business will continue to set policy, maintain the farce of two different parties and basically run the country, a situation I think the OP of this thread is in favour of.
Agreed. The 2012 race seems to be one for the books as far as campaign contributions are concerned.
This should all go public.
Agreed. The 2012 race seems to be one for the books as far as campaign contributions are concerned.
This should all go public.
carmenodie
Mar 31, 05:53 PM
Let me tell you the real deal behind this.
Google gave away the Android OS for free because they wanted Android on as many cell phones as possible so they could capitalize on that whole click an ad sh** that generates Google so much money in the phone space. And of curse the cell phone makers happily got on the bandwagon b/c they didn't have to spend millions making their own effing OS. As long as they followed the licensing agreement they were fine.
Now Google has pulled the rug from under them. Google knows that hundreds of millions have been spent by the cell makers in their commitment to Android devices. Advertising, new models etc. A whole lot of cash. Now Google wants tighter control as if they OWN these cell phone makers.And who ever doesn't want to play ball can go to hell as far as Google is concerned.
Right now HTC, LG, Sammy and Moto look like bi***!
Ha ha! But not Apple.
Ain't it awesome to row your own damn boat.
Google gave away the Android OS for free because they wanted Android on as many cell phones as possible so they could capitalize on that whole click an ad sh** that generates Google so much money in the phone space. And of curse the cell phone makers happily got on the bandwagon b/c they didn't have to spend millions making their own effing OS. As long as they followed the licensing agreement they were fine.
Now Google has pulled the rug from under them. Google knows that hundreds of millions have been spent by the cell makers in their commitment to Android devices. Advertising, new models etc. A whole lot of cash. Now Google wants tighter control as if they OWN these cell phone makers.And who ever doesn't want to play ball can go to hell as far as Google is concerned.
Right now HTC, LG, Sammy and Moto look like bi***!
Ha ha! But not Apple.
Ain't it awesome to row your own damn boat.
baeder
Jul 15, 01:19 AM
Is it possible that the lower end models (rumored to be single processor) will be upgradeable by BTO or later on by the user by putting in another processor?
Bradley W
Aug 7, 10:24 PM
_
Multimedia
Aug 18, 09:13 PM
From the time the Apple logo is displayed. There is a pause before that starts, I'd say only 10 seconds or so.So You are saying 10 seconds from OFF to the Grey Apple then 5 more seconds to the desktop? With 3 GB of New Egg + 2GB RAM? That's still very fast. Quad G5 is almost as fast as that though.
marksman
Mar 31, 09:04 PM
As an Apple fanboy, I'm disappointed to post this, but Android will continue to win despite the huge fragmentation problem.
Unlike Windoze based computers, cell phone users expect to replace their phones minimally every two years. So for the most part these users just don't care whether the manufacturers bother to upgrade the OS or whether the few apps they've found need to be repurchased.
When they go shopping and see a brand new Android phone running a better OS with more apps than they had before, they will simply buy it. Especially since there will continue to be two for one offers and lots of competition.
Like Apple computers, iPhones will be superbly engineered, but that hasn't mattered in the computer arena and it won't matter in the cell phone arena.
BTW, I expect Apple to eventually command 20% of the world's computer, cell phone, and tablet market with 50% (or more) of the profits, so it's not like Apple won't be successful. It's like combining all of the luxury cars together under one manufacturer.
I disagree because Smartphones have become essentially computers for people, and people much more than ever want to maintain their existence when they upgrade or move on. With the iPhone this is simply easy to just get a new model of iphone and continue on. Crossing from one manufacturer of android to another with a new OS and everything else, I can't believe it is anywhere near as seamless or effortless.
I think mostly what we are seeing in the marketplace now is the android is for people who can't afford an iPhone. Other people mentioned the two for one deals and other things. It is just a marketplace where android based phones are more affordable and accessible to people who don't have as much to spend on a smartphone.
The whole android handset is crazy. Manufacturers make up new models every 3 weeks, Google renames each version of the Android operating system with some silly name... There is no cohesion or continuity in that at all. I think consumers look more for that than ever.
Android has barely been out long enough for most of the normal consumers to be on an upgrade path already and to have to cycle into a new device. Time will tell.
I think people will see a new android handset (although aqain it is confusing with 25 different makers), and expect to be able to just take it home and upgrade it.. But is that how it happens? Because it is like 2 clicks for an iPhone.
Unlike Windoze based computers, cell phone users expect to replace their phones minimally every two years. So for the most part these users just don't care whether the manufacturers bother to upgrade the OS or whether the few apps they've found need to be repurchased.
When they go shopping and see a brand new Android phone running a better OS with more apps than they had before, they will simply buy it. Especially since there will continue to be two for one offers and lots of competition.
Like Apple computers, iPhones will be superbly engineered, but that hasn't mattered in the computer arena and it won't matter in the cell phone arena.
BTW, I expect Apple to eventually command 20% of the world's computer, cell phone, and tablet market with 50% (or more) of the profits, so it's not like Apple won't be successful. It's like combining all of the luxury cars together under one manufacturer.
I disagree because Smartphones have become essentially computers for people, and people much more than ever want to maintain their existence when they upgrade or move on. With the iPhone this is simply easy to just get a new model of iphone and continue on. Crossing from one manufacturer of android to another with a new OS and everything else, I can't believe it is anywhere near as seamless or effortless.
I think mostly what we are seeing in the marketplace now is the android is for people who can't afford an iPhone. Other people mentioned the two for one deals and other things. It is just a marketplace where android based phones are more affordable and accessible to people who don't have as much to spend on a smartphone.
The whole android handset is crazy. Manufacturers make up new models every 3 weeks, Google renames each version of the Android operating system with some silly name... There is no cohesion or continuity in that at all. I think consumers look more for that than ever.
Android has barely been out long enough for most of the normal consumers to be on an upgrade path already and to have to cycle into a new device. Time will tell.
I think people will see a new android handset (although aqain it is confusing with 25 different makers), and expect to be able to just take it home and upgrade it.. But is that how it happens? Because it is like 2 clicks for an iPhone.
cmaier
Apr 19, 06:16 PM
After reading some of the lawsuit, I had to post this..
Proof that Samsung ripped off Apple's rip off of Delicious Library?
Proof that Samsung ripped off Apple's rip off of Delicious Library?
steadysignal
Apr 8, 07:16 AM
Screwing around is how they lost Macs in the first place. They wanted to only sell certain iMac Colors and Apple said you can sell what we send or not at all, that's why Apple left them in the first place years ago. Then they cam back with the "store in a store" concept.
new information for me. did not know that BB sold :apple: product in the past. i had thought the store in a store thing was BBs first foray.
i don't understand why apple would have issues with BB - isn't more exposure good? or is this just a matter of any attention (good or bad) is good?
new information for me. did not know that BB sold :apple: product in the past. i had thought the store in a store thing was BBs first foray.
i don't understand why apple would have issues with BB - isn't more exposure good? or is this just a matter of any attention (good or bad) is good?
Bill McEnaney
Apr 27, 12:39 PM
I now know that the certificate is a copy, and no, I don't trust President Obama.
dethmaShine
Apr 19, 02:35 PM
Wrong. Just because a company released one phone that has a similar look as the iPhone doesn't mean their current offerings are a progression of that phone. It's a true testament as to who browses this forum if you honestly think that. The F700 didn't run an advanced OS, so it probably ran Symbian or used BREW. That means all Samsung did was create a theme. How does a theme they made 3 years prior to the Galaxy S mean it's a progression on the coding and UI they built? It doesn't. Here's a list of every Samsung phone: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Samsung_mobile_phones Now, pick out one of those and say it inspired all of their new devices 3 years later.
The F700 was an iPhone clone with a keyboard. It's depressing that people are saying that the iPhone copied its own clone.
Just look at his post history and you'll understand that you are arguing in vain.
The F700 was an iPhone clone with a keyboard. It's depressing that people are saying that the iPhone copied its own clone.
Just look at his post history and you'll understand that you are arguing in vain.
No comments:
Post a Comment