steadysignal
Apr 20, 12:04 PM
Not good. I need an explanation. time to do research?
if you are not doing anything wrong, what is there to worry about?
if you are not doing anything wrong, what is there to worry about?
Stella
Mar 30, 12:18 PM
See, that's really the point. Apple was the first to use this term.
No they weren't. This has been discussed time and time again here. The word "App" has been used for decades to describe a software Application.
For example "Killer App", or more recently, "Web App" ( Java )
No they weren't. This has been discussed time and time again here. The word "App" has been used for decades to describe a software Application.
For example "Killer App", or more recently, "Web App" ( Java )
scott523
Apr 22, 11:25 AM
This might be a attractive buy for me. I hope it Kuo is right on track... now if he could just refine his iPhone 5 predictions..
EspressoLove
Apr 22, 07:08 PM
This may have been asked and answered before, but is the common belief that USB and Firewire will be completely gone soon? For example, my Macbook Air has room for only two ports - a mini-display drive, and a USB drive. Is the idea that the Thunderbolt drive will replace the USB, and that purchasers of the new Air will use an adapter of some sort for "old" USB peripherals moving forward?
If Apple has this expectation, they had better at least sell an appropriate adapter/hub. I've long thought a thin, form-matching hub that connects to all of the ports on one side of an Apple portable would be a great idea. If Apple can make a 2- or even 3-port USB hub off of the Thunderbolt port (especially if a Mini Display-Port is also available) for ~$50, that would be golden for this type of MBA plan.
You both think into it too much:
- FireWire was gone from Apple's "future of notebooks" since the beginning of time (2008:rolleyes:)
- Thunderbolt is not replacing USBs, it's a supplement to DisplayPort (and can connect to both display and peripherals simultaneously)
If Apple has this expectation, they had better at least sell an appropriate adapter/hub. I've long thought a thin, form-matching hub that connects to all of the ports on one side of an Apple portable would be a great idea. If Apple can make a 2- or even 3-port USB hub off of the Thunderbolt port (especially if a Mini Display-Port is also available) for ~$50, that would be golden for this type of MBA plan.
You both think into it too much:
- FireWire was gone from Apple's "future of notebooks" since the beginning of time (2008:rolleyes:)
- Thunderbolt is not replacing USBs, it's a supplement to DisplayPort (and can connect to both display and peripherals simultaneously)
HiRez
Sep 19, 10:48 PM
Considering that they sold "010101010's", I think an extra $50M is extraordinary. Apple ripped 75 DVDs, made a few web pages and boom... $1M in 7 days! I don't know what you're talking about... you're thinking small... $50M/YR is JUST THE BEGINNING.I agree, consider that the Disney's cut of the $50 million is almost pure profit for them (very little overhead). They don't even have to pay bandwidth and infrastructure costs out of that, Apple does. More available movies and more people using the service can only mean bigger numbers. I've got some major issues with Apple's movie download service, and for now I won't be using it, but nonetheless I think the numbers will be even larger than Disney is projecting.
If somebody tells you "I'm going to start sending you some extra cash every month, you don't need to do anything to get it, just cash the checks", are you going to complain whether the amount is $50 million or $500 million?
If somebody tells you "I'm going to start sending you some extra cash every month, you don't need to do anything to get it, just cash the checks", are you going to complain whether the amount is $50 million or $500 million?
sciwizam
Apr 19, 01:16 PM
Not sure if everyone's already seen it but this is a great read from Nilay Patel: http://thisismynext.com/2011/04/19/apple-sues-samsung-analysis/
From Nilay's post:
Hardware and software trade dress claims
world cup semi final match
World Cup Final Match
icc world cup final match
2010 World Cup final match
Rajini In 2011 World Cup Final
at World Cup final Match
World Cup 2011 Final Match
the World Cup final match
the World Cup final soccer
Watch Live Semi Final Match
World Cup final match
world cup 2011 india vs
MATCH | CRICKET WORLD CUP
From Nilay's post:
Hardware and software trade dress claims
musiclover137
Aug 23, 10:17 PM
there goes all those iTunes sales:rolleyes:
I hope you're joking about that. iTunes is not about making money for apple
I hope you're joking about that. iTunes is not about making money for apple
displaced
Sep 26, 11:06 AM
Wonderful... why would Apple choose the carrier with the worst coverage and customer service (well, besides Sprint)??? T-Mobile or Verizon would be better choices...
You know, if Cingular didn't spend the $$$ to get all of the cool phones first, I think they would be out of business by now... If someone has had a different experience with Cingular, please let me know ;)
I still think Apple should go the Mobile Virtual Network Operator route ala Virgin Mobile, Helio, Amp'd, mobile ESPN, etc.
Wow... by the sounds of it, there's no single network in the US that actually works for everyone everywhere. Nasty. So perhaps exclusivity's a strange strategy - I hope it's only a short term plan for you guys' sake.
I take it Verizon = CDMA? There's no way Apple would consider a CDMA model since it'd be a serious disadvantage in the global market.
[edit] Also, setting up as a MVNO in each country in which they want to operate would cost a fortune. Besides, they've also then got to market and sell a network - establish a reputation in the mobile phone market as a carrier, and not just as a brand of phone.
You know, if Cingular didn't spend the $$$ to get all of the cool phones first, I think they would be out of business by now... If someone has had a different experience with Cingular, please let me know ;)
I still think Apple should go the Mobile Virtual Network Operator route ala Virgin Mobile, Helio, Amp'd, mobile ESPN, etc.
Wow... by the sounds of it, there's no single network in the US that actually works for everyone everywhere. Nasty. So perhaps exclusivity's a strange strategy - I hope it's only a short term plan for you guys' sake.
I take it Verizon = CDMA? There's no way Apple would consider a CDMA model since it'd be a serious disadvantage in the global market.
[edit] Also, setting up as a MVNO in each country in which they want to operate would cost a fortune. Besides, they've also then got to market and sell a network - establish a reputation in the mobile phone market as a carrier, and not just as a brand of phone.
Half Glass
Aug 29, 06:23 AM
After looking around the apple website this morning.. I don't believe that we are getting the new chips until AFTER the iPod rebate offer.. and here is why.
The only legal way Apple could offer the new processor would be to offer it ONLY to out-of-education persons. If you read the fine print of the Apple iPod offer, it ONLY lists the current models (and G4) as acceptable units to use when filing a rebate.... if they were to place the new chip models on the store, it would invalidate the rebate, should someone have the old rebate forms, and a new machine. Just a thought.
As stated earlier in this thread, this is absolutely not true. The MacPros are included in the rebate and they were NOT available when the promotion started. They were added as elgible purchases after release.
Its almost 7:30 EST, and the store is still up. Not a good sign for action today.
--HG
The only legal way Apple could offer the new processor would be to offer it ONLY to out-of-education persons. If you read the fine print of the Apple iPod offer, it ONLY lists the current models (and G4) as acceptable units to use when filing a rebate.... if they were to place the new chip models on the store, it would invalidate the rebate, should someone have the old rebate forms, and a new machine. Just a thought.
As stated earlier in this thread, this is absolutely not true. The MacPros are included in the rebate and they were NOT available when the promotion started. They were added as elgible purchases after release.
Its almost 7:30 EST, and the store is still up. Not a good sign for action today.
--HG
pink-pony115
Sep 4, 08:01 PM
Holiday season fast approaching...there's no way they will enter shopping season without a new iPod lineup. Period.
If they do, I'm dumping my stock.:p
And Appleinsider is sandbagging - hedging their bets that at least a portion of what they are reporting is true.
Well said iGary. I bought apple stock right before the iPod got hot. My friends are kicking themselves because they didn't buy apple. :rolleyes:
If they do, I'm dumping my stock.:p
And Appleinsider is sandbagging - hedging their bets that at least a portion of what they are reporting is true.
Well said iGary. I bought apple stock right before the iPod got hot. My friends are kicking themselves because they didn't buy apple. :rolleyes:
Dagless
May 3, 11:00 AM
Gotta say, the option to get a touchpad instead of a mouse is a huge step forward. I was eyeing up one of those just for fun but the price turned me away (esp. after spending �400 on a Wacom). And since I already have a really good Razer mouse... it's win win! No second mouse to clutter up my drawer.
twostep665
Apr 4, 12:21 PM
Interesting how a security guard is allowed to have a gun. Interesting to see what happens to him.
He is gonna get a medal for bravery and service.
He is gonna get a medal for bravery and service.
munkery
Mar 23, 04:20 PM
http://www.macforensicslab.com/ProductsAndServices/index.php?main_page=document_general_info&products_id=174
Much of the information in the PDF (http://www.macforensicslab.com/Malware_on_Mac_OS_X.pdf) associated with this article (http://www.macforensicslab.com/ProductsAndServices/index.php?main_page=document_general_info&products_id=174) is incorrect. For example:
Page 26
It refers to the bundle architecture as insecure. The argument presented would be true if security sensitive apps were not owned by system. Given that they are owned by system, malware cannot modify the bundle of an app owned by system without authentication when the app is run with user privileges in an admin or standard account.
For example, show package contents of iTunes, Safari, or Mail and try to create a folder in the bundle. In relation to the example in the article, try renaming iTunes. The argument in the article relies on actions that can not be completed in an OS X admin account; these type of changes are even more restricted in a standard account.
Apps not owned by system are vulnerable but without privilege escalation can not install rootkits or keyloggers. Even apps owned by system run with user privileges and require privilege escalation to install dangerous payloads.
Mac OS X does not prompt for authentication if you install apps in the proper location for that user account type. When installed in the proper location, apps are sandboxed from the system level of Mac OS X by the Unix DAC model used within Mac OS X.
Windows is less secure because most apps (Chrome only exception I can recall) install their associated files in levels of the system that require authentication regardless of user account type (unless Admin in Windows XP because running as superuser - no authentication required to install with elevated privileges - very dangerous). It is easier to trick Windows users to install a trojan with elevated privileges given that almost all apps ask for authentication to install and the user can not distinguish the intent of that authentication.
Page 30
The claim that the Application folder is unprotected is false. Security sensitive apps within the Application folder are owned by system.
Also, security sensitive system binaries are still stored in /bin and /sbin in Mac OS X.
Page 31
The ability to read the contacts stored in Address Book could be used by a worm to propagate. But, malware that uses this to spread is not likely to appear in the wild if the malware is not profitable. It is unlikely that malware will be profitable without being able to hook (this is a specific function) into apps owned by system.
Page 33
Starts off talking about trojans, trojans are easily avoided with user knowledge in Mac OS X because most apps do not require authentication to install if installed in the appropriate location where the Unix DAC model protects the system.
Viruses using the model shown in the article will not be successful without privilege escalation. This is the reason why Mac OS X malware is not successful in the wild.
By default, very few server side services are exposed in Mac OS X and those that are exposed are sandboxed. Vectors for worm propagation are limited to client side. Client side worms require authentication to install and spread if do not include privilege escalation via exploitation because of the Unix DAC model used in Mac OS X. Trojans used to trick users to authenticate are less likely to be successful in Mac OS X as stated above.
Much of the information in the PDF (http://www.macforensicslab.com/Malware_on_Mac_OS_X.pdf) associated with this article (http://www.macforensicslab.com/ProductsAndServices/index.php?main_page=document_general_info&products_id=174) is incorrect. For example:
Page 26
It refers to the bundle architecture as insecure. The argument presented would be true if security sensitive apps were not owned by system. Given that they are owned by system, malware cannot modify the bundle of an app owned by system without authentication when the app is run with user privileges in an admin or standard account.
For example, show package contents of iTunes, Safari, or Mail and try to create a folder in the bundle. In relation to the example in the article, try renaming iTunes. The argument in the article relies on actions that can not be completed in an OS X admin account; these type of changes are even more restricted in a standard account.
Apps not owned by system are vulnerable but without privilege escalation can not install rootkits or keyloggers. Even apps owned by system run with user privileges and require privilege escalation to install dangerous payloads.
Mac OS X does not prompt for authentication if you install apps in the proper location for that user account type. When installed in the proper location, apps are sandboxed from the system level of Mac OS X by the Unix DAC model used within Mac OS X.
Windows is less secure because most apps (Chrome only exception I can recall) install their associated files in levels of the system that require authentication regardless of user account type (unless Admin in Windows XP because running as superuser - no authentication required to install with elevated privileges - very dangerous). It is easier to trick Windows users to install a trojan with elevated privileges given that almost all apps ask for authentication to install and the user can not distinguish the intent of that authentication.
Page 30
The claim that the Application folder is unprotected is false. Security sensitive apps within the Application folder are owned by system.
Also, security sensitive system binaries are still stored in /bin and /sbin in Mac OS X.
Page 31
The ability to read the contacts stored in Address Book could be used by a worm to propagate. But, malware that uses this to spread is not likely to appear in the wild if the malware is not profitable. It is unlikely that malware will be profitable without being able to hook (this is a specific function) into apps owned by system.
Page 33
Starts off talking about trojans, trojans are easily avoided with user knowledge in Mac OS X because most apps do not require authentication to install if installed in the appropriate location where the Unix DAC model protects the system.
Viruses using the model shown in the article will not be successful without privilege escalation. This is the reason why Mac OS X malware is not successful in the wild.
By default, very few server side services are exposed in Mac OS X and those that are exposed are sandboxed. Vectors for worm propagation are limited to client side. Client side worms require authentication to install and spread if do not include privilege escalation via exploitation because of the Unix DAC model used in Mac OS X. Trojans used to trick users to authenticate are less likely to be successful in Mac OS X as stated above.
1984
Sep 14, 04:51 AM
My wife busted her phone today, and called me for a recommendation. All she wants as a Mom is a phone with a long battery life and great reception.
She left the Cingular store with a crappy phone with a million features she will never use.
It's too bad the Motorola MOTOFONE (http://www.motorola.com/motoinfo/product/details.jsp?globalObjectId=164) isn't available yet. It would have been perfect. A phone where battery life, reception and ease of use are the main features? Finally some gets it.
She left the Cingular store with a crappy phone with a million features she will never use.
It's too bad the Motorola MOTOFONE (http://www.motorola.com/motoinfo/product/details.jsp?globalObjectId=164) isn't available yet. It would have been perfect. A phone where battery life, reception and ease of use are the main features? Finally some gets it.
roland.g
Apr 25, 01:44 PM
Could it finally be? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7H0K1k54t6A)
MacVault
Sep 19, 03:57 PM
This is great news, however, I still have a hard time talking myself into paying $10 to $15 for a DRM-"infected" movie file.
1) I cannot sell it or give it away as a gift.
2) I can't share it with a friend.
3) Video quality is not that great.
4) It has no special bonus features as does a DVD.
5) etc.
I think there needs to be a big price drop AND/OR some type of subscription model for this movie download stuff. Why pay that much $$ for something I'll watch only once or twice???!!!
1) I cannot sell it or give it away as a gift.
2) I can't share it with a friend.
3) Video quality is not that great.
4) It has no special bonus features as does a DVD.
5) etc.
I think there needs to be a big price drop AND/OR some type of subscription model for this movie download stuff. Why pay that much $$ for something I'll watch only once or twice???!!!
AidenShaw
Mar 23, 09:54 PM
So its only SSD to SSD where you get the performance? For example, if I have a regular HD 7200 WD in my Imac and an externall Lacie SSD, I wont see the speeds posted? I needs to be SSD to SSD?
Even SSD to SSD you won't see the 10 Gbps wire speed - if for nothing else than the fastest SATA standard is 6 Gbps. (Assuming that the internal SSD isn't a RAID-0 pair on 6 Gbps SATA controller in a PCIe x8 slot.)
On the other hand, it *will* be faster than USB 2.0 or any shipping flavor of 1394 - so it's a good thing. An external ThunderPort drive will be as fast as an internal drive in the same configuration - because as far as the PCIe bus is concerned it *is* an internal drive.
Apples will finally have the same speeds that eSATA has been giving "the rest of us" for a long time - but there will be a very limited selection of products and most likely a much higher price unless ThunderPort breaks into the high volume mainstream. My guess is that ThunderPort will have a niche market for high-end and special-purpose peripherals (RAID arrays, video/audio professional gear, docking stations), but you won't find USB/1394/ThunderPort disks on sale at Costco. Just due to the butt-pain of daisy-chaining you won't see consumer-priced disks.
I'd buy a ThunderPort to 8 port eSATA hub in a microsecond if it had port-multiplier support, though. (Or, more truthfully, a microsecond after my non-Apple system could support ThunderPort.)
Even SSD to SSD you won't see the 10 Gbps wire speed - if for nothing else than the fastest SATA standard is 6 Gbps. (Assuming that the internal SSD isn't a RAID-0 pair on 6 Gbps SATA controller in a PCIe x8 slot.)
On the other hand, it *will* be faster than USB 2.0 or any shipping flavor of 1394 - so it's a good thing. An external ThunderPort drive will be as fast as an internal drive in the same configuration - because as far as the PCIe bus is concerned it *is* an internal drive.
Apples will finally have the same speeds that eSATA has been giving "the rest of us" for a long time - but there will be a very limited selection of products and most likely a much higher price unless ThunderPort breaks into the high volume mainstream. My guess is that ThunderPort will have a niche market for high-end and special-purpose peripherals (RAID arrays, video/audio professional gear, docking stations), but you won't find USB/1394/ThunderPort disks on sale at Costco. Just due to the butt-pain of daisy-chaining you won't see consumer-priced disks.
I'd buy a ThunderPort to 8 port eSATA hub in a microsecond if it had port-multiplier support, though. (Or, more truthfully, a microsecond after my non-Apple system could support ThunderPort.)
LightSpeed1
Apr 25, 01:35 PM
Could just be me, but I think the design is perfect. Apple is still way ahead of the competition with the unibody design. How much better can it get?
LarryC
Apr 22, 03:06 PM
Sounds great!
Maybe we'll see a new Mini with Thunderbolt and an SSD option during the same time frame!
One can hope...
I thought that the biggest benefit of the mini was its low price. Stick an SSD in there and that will be gone.
Maybe we'll see a new Mini with Thunderbolt and an SSD option during the same time frame!
One can hope...
I thought that the biggest benefit of the mini was its low price. Stick an SSD in there and that will be gone.
JGowan
Aug 23, 08:36 PM
You have to wonder how tenuous Apple's position was considering that they have settled so early (in huge lawsuit time). 100 million dollars is a lot of money to spend to get Creative off their back.Well, it wasn't just this lawsuit. Five lawsuits were settled @ $20M a suit + no distractions of dragging this out... Plus they now are paid up FOREVER to use this license + they could recoup some money if Licenses are granted to others... doesn't sound as drastic as $100M is suddenly down the toilet. There's some value there for Apple.
Eduardo1971
Sep 12, 02:45 PM
As of now, If I rip my Pink Floyd Dark Side of the Moon Album onto iTunes and put it in my iPOD, there are little gaps in between songs. If you listen to the album on CD, the tracks change, but there are no gaps, one song goes into the next.
The same could be said for other music, classical music that is multiple movements, but THROUGH composed might have track changes, but lead from one section to the next.
Kind of a small thing, but a good thing none the less.
Hooray!!!
Will the new iPod's handle "gapless playback" automatically from song's in one iTunes library?
The same could be said for other music, classical music that is multiple movements, but THROUGH composed might have track changes, but lead from one section to the next.
Kind of a small thing, but a good thing none the less.
Hooray!!!
Will the new iPod's handle "gapless playback" automatically from song's in one iTunes library?
nagromme
Oct 12, 03:00 PM
I'm all for AIDS prevention, but there's not a single aspect of this story that doesn't strike me as crass and exploitative.
Agreed. Apple should stop being so exploitative and give nothing! :o
Apple's not the first in the RED program. Maybe the program HAS done some good and thus is continuing?
Here's a challenge. How about everyone here who has an iPod gives $10 or equivalent to this charity?
Hmmm.... a matching program would be cool--it could all be done electronically, like when Apple has had disaster charity giving built right into iTMS.
So when you buy a Red iPod, you pick the price :) If you pay more than normal, Apple will match your donation, and will pay a minimum of 10% regardless.
Agreed. Apple should stop being so exploitative and give nothing! :o
Apple's not the first in the RED program. Maybe the program HAS done some good and thus is continuing?
Here's a challenge. How about everyone here who has an iPod gives $10 or equivalent to this charity?
Hmmm.... a matching program would be cool--it could all be done electronically, like when Apple has had disaster charity giving built right into iTMS.
So when you buy a Red iPod, you pick the price :) If you pay more than normal, Apple will match your donation, and will pay a minimum of 10% regardless.
bitfactory
Oct 27, 09:45 AM
As I said, fewer and fewer spaces where public debate can take place. Shopping malls are the same - 'public spaces' that aren't. Soon streets that have been public for years will start to be be privatised to provide 'better value for taxpayers' and the takeover will continue.
Then where can free debate take place? Some postage-stamp size bit of turf you call home?
Huh? Here, this might help. (http://www.macupdate.com/info.php/id/12293)
... and who thought shopping malls were public places? WTH? Honestly.
Then where can free debate take place? Some postage-stamp size bit of turf you call home?
Huh? Here, this might help. (http://www.macupdate.com/info.php/id/12293)
... and who thought shopping malls were public places? WTH? Honestly.
cube
Mar 29, 12:22 PM
Seems believable...all those people that bought Nokia phones obviously did not care that Symbian was outdated. Why will they not buy Nokia with a much modern OS under the hood?
I bought a Symbian Nokia because I wanted a cheap 3G phone which was open and with an acceptable OS.
Obviously, that's going to be my first and last Nokia now.
I want a phone with real Java, so my most likely candidate next time is QNX, if RIM makes a good inexpensive smartphone.
I bought a Symbian Nokia because I wanted a cheap 3G phone which was open and with an acceptable OS.
Obviously, that's going to be my first and last Nokia now.
I want a phone with real Java, so my most likely candidate next time is QNX, if RIM makes a good inexpensive smartphone.
No comments:
Post a Comment