fsudaft
Mar 29, 12:23 AM
New Updates: The 360 is connecting to the internet. This can be seen through certain services. Our local police force have a few tricks up their sleeves, its just a matter of them being around when its connected. Based on the times that the system is on and connected it can be deduced that children are behind it. (Think about when you did bad things as a kid, you prolly did them at night. And by bad i don't mean theivery, i mean other stuff). And if its kids i'm a little miffed that their parents haven't noticed anything new around the house.
croooow
Apr 8, 01:26 PM
Why would you run a promotion on something that sells out the moment they come into inventory?...
It's not to promote the iPad 2, it's to promote BestBuy (get people into the stores and try to get them to buy other stuff. iPad accessories or maybe some of the other rubbish they have in there)
It's not to promote the iPad 2, it's to promote BestBuy (get people into the stores and try to get them to buy other stuff. iPad accessories or maybe some of the other rubbish they have in there)
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.
Love Emo Quotes And Sayings.
more...
Quotes And Sayings
emo quotes and sayings.
more...
cute emo quotes and sayings.
cute emo quotes and sayings.
more...
emo love quotes and sayings
Emo Quotes And Sayings
more...
emo quotes and sayings
Emo Quotes, Emo Sayings, Emo
more...
emo love quotes and
emo quotes and sayings. emo
more...
emo quotes and sayings. emo
emo quotes and sayings. emo
more...
emo quotes and sayings tagalog
Emo Quotes
Emo Love Quotes And Sayings
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.
Schmoe0013
Jan 15, 05:11 PM
Time capsule is worth looking into.
I think apple is going to make a LOT of money on the renting of movies, and i really like the idea!
iphone update is very nice, google maps wins again!
macbook air... i could see getting it if i had a decked out mac pro with dual 30 inch..
for a stand alone laptop with no other computer... hard to convince me to buy it.
I think apple is going to make a LOT of money on the renting of movies, and i really like the idea!
iphone update is very nice, google maps wins again!
macbook air... i could see getting it if i had a decked out mac pro with dual 30 inch..
for a stand alone laptop with no other computer... hard to convince me to buy it.
more...
hob
Jan 9, 04:14 PM
Sorry. I put my foot in it. Twice. Please accept my deepest apologies. I really didn't mean to ruin this for anyone. Sorry.
samcraig
May 2, 12:07 PM
Oh the conspiracies!!!!
As a software developer, the explanation that Apple gave seems far more plausible than "they are tracking your every move".
It makes total sense to keep a cache of cell tower positions to speed up positioning through trilateration (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trilateration). It also makes sense for Apple to maintain this as a crowd-sourced database and download part of it to your phone. Further, it makes sense for a developer to make an arbitrary decision to say "let's make the cache size 2MB -- that's smaller than a single song". Finally, it makes sense for QA to miss this since the file is not readily visible through the user interface. A very good article on this is here (http://www.macworld.com/article/159528/2011/04/how_iphone_location_works.html).
Oooh. You're a software developer. That makes you an expert.
Except - as someone who is surround by IT professionals - many of which create systems that are governed by strict compliance issues - ALL of them have stated that 2MB is ridiculous for a cache of the intended purpose. And that QA could have missed this - but the fact that they did is really bad.
Look - defend Apple all you want. Don't really care. At the end of the day - a switch that is supposed to turn something off should turn something off. I know it. You know it. And Apple knows it - which is why they are (for WHATEVER reason) making the switch work correctly. End of story.
P.S. - Since Apple does great marketing and pr spin (my profession) - while I don't buy all the conspiracy theories at all - but neither do I "trust" Apple's altruism nor their rhetoric just because "they say so."
As a software developer, the explanation that Apple gave seems far more plausible than "they are tracking your every move".
It makes total sense to keep a cache of cell tower positions to speed up positioning through trilateration (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trilateration). It also makes sense for Apple to maintain this as a crowd-sourced database and download part of it to your phone. Further, it makes sense for a developer to make an arbitrary decision to say "let's make the cache size 2MB -- that's smaller than a single song". Finally, it makes sense for QA to miss this since the file is not readily visible through the user interface. A very good article on this is here (http://www.macworld.com/article/159528/2011/04/how_iphone_location_works.html).
Oooh. You're a software developer. That makes you an expert.
Except - as someone who is surround by IT professionals - many of which create systems that are governed by strict compliance issues - ALL of them have stated that 2MB is ridiculous for a cache of the intended purpose. And that QA could have missed this - but the fact that they did is really bad.
Look - defend Apple all you want. Don't really care. At the end of the day - a switch that is supposed to turn something off should turn something off. I know it. You know it. And Apple knows it - which is why they are (for WHATEVER reason) making the switch work correctly. End of story.
P.S. - Since Apple does great marketing and pr spin (my profession) - while I don't buy all the conspiracy theories at all - but neither do I "trust" Apple's altruism nor their rhetoric just because "they say so."
more...
Mac'nCheese
Apr 25, 03:40 PM
my question is what would you have McDonalds employees do.
You are asking teenagers to get involved in a fight and try to break it up.
Not really something you expect the average person of the street to do why should teenagers working and McDonalds be any different.
Heck most of the time betting/ fights are over before the brain finishes processing "Is that really happening?" followed by "Should I do anything?" Most of the time they get stuck in an endless loop of not sure what to do and the fight or flight responses takes over.
While the people doing the beating deserve to rot in jail at the same time I would not expect the employees to do anything other than really call the cops. This is one would you expect a person of the street to do something other than really call the cops and it is still over by the time the above loop is completed.
oh and btw the link you provided is to your mail inbox. We can not read it.
as an adult yes but you are telling random Teenagers who are in shock seeing something. Different story there.
Also remember most work places (Retail) tell there employees not to get involved really for fear of the employee getting hurt.
The filming it on a cell phone and not doing anything bothers me but at the same token what do you expect them to do.
Like I said the human brain is going to get stuck in the loop "What is that really happening?" and the "Should I do something?" That going to hold them in place for quite a while. After the fact yes you can look back on it but during the fact you have that endless loop you have to break out of that is very hard to do.
In something like that first thing I would of done is called 911. Response time for something like that should be 1-2 mins tops the nearest cop should be there.
I remember calling the cops on a domestic fight and from 911 to the cop showing up it was under 2 mins and on that one the cop was not going no come in sirens a blazing for they want to use the shock of lights be shown on them to break it up. This is something they would come in with sirens on.
You expect employees who make minimum wage to break up a fight? They should call the cops, but for sure not break up a fight.
What would we have them do? They didn't have time to do anything? According to the report: "These employees can be heard on the video shouting words of encouragement to the attackers." Sounds like they had more then enough time to figure out what was going on and acted on it. Do you like what they chose to do?
You are asking teenagers to get involved in a fight and try to break it up.
Not really something you expect the average person of the street to do why should teenagers working and McDonalds be any different.
Heck most of the time betting/ fights are over before the brain finishes processing "Is that really happening?" followed by "Should I do anything?" Most of the time they get stuck in an endless loop of not sure what to do and the fight or flight responses takes over.
While the people doing the beating deserve to rot in jail at the same time I would not expect the employees to do anything other than really call the cops. This is one would you expect a person of the street to do something other than really call the cops and it is still over by the time the above loop is completed.
oh and btw the link you provided is to your mail inbox. We can not read it.
as an adult yes but you are telling random Teenagers who are in shock seeing something. Different story there.
Also remember most work places (Retail) tell there employees not to get involved really for fear of the employee getting hurt.
The filming it on a cell phone and not doing anything bothers me but at the same token what do you expect them to do.
Like I said the human brain is going to get stuck in the loop "What is that really happening?" and the "Should I do something?" That going to hold them in place for quite a while. After the fact yes you can look back on it but during the fact you have that endless loop you have to break out of that is very hard to do.
In something like that first thing I would of done is called 911. Response time for something like that should be 1-2 mins tops the nearest cop should be there.
I remember calling the cops on a domestic fight and from 911 to the cop showing up it was under 2 mins and on that one the cop was not going no come in sirens a blazing for they want to use the shock of lights be shown on them to break it up. This is something they would come in with sirens on.
You expect employees who make minimum wage to break up a fight? They should call the cops, but for sure not break up a fight.
What would we have them do? They didn't have time to do anything? According to the report: "These employees can be heard on the video shouting words of encouragement to the attackers." Sounds like they had more then enough time to figure out what was going on and acted on it. Do you like what they chose to do?
likemyorbs
Apr 15, 03:24 PM
Did you ever see that Man Show video when the guys set up a table and tried to get women to sign a petition to end women's suffrage? A lot of them did, too!
Haven't seen it but that hilarious. I find it funny how many people have no idea what suffrage means, most assume it means "suffering". :D
Haven't seen it but that hilarious. I find it funny how many people have no idea what suffrage means, most assume it means "suffering". :D
more...
AlBDamned
Nov 10, 07:39 PM
FFA was the only multiplayer mode worth playing in MW2. The rest sucked. Honestly Infinity Ward lost the plot after CoD 2 since then they have been well below par.
I guess we'll have to agree to disagree... The objective games in MW2 are great IMHO. Black Ops looks and feels ***** in comparison.
I guess we'll have to agree to disagree... The objective games in MW2 are great IMHO. Black Ops looks and feels ***** in comparison.
wmmk
Aug 14, 02:40 PM
the world sucks
the world sucks because good things cost more than not quite as good things? as economically left as i am, i struggle to see your reasoning. in capitalism, there are free markets. in free markets, manufacturers price their own merchandise to be competitive with other manufacturers.
the world sucks because good things cost more than not quite as good things? as economically left as i am, i struggle to see your reasoning. in capitalism, there are free markets. in free markets, manufacturers price their own merchandise to be competitive with other manufacturers.
more...
goober1223
Apr 6, 11:21 AM
With respect, you clearly don't work in advertising. You pay to put ads in front of the right people, not just anyone. Especially not competing advertisers and agencies. Why do you think Google (a) makes so much advertising revenue and (b) collects so much data about its users? Coincidence?
Secondly individuals are just as greedy as corporations, and generally get to operate outside of the spotlight. Apple has a lot to lose if its iAd platform is seen to be poorly targeting users, but an App developer has a lot to gain from indiscriminate iAd spamming. So in this case, yes, for the sake of self interest I'd expect Apple to reimburse advertisers for clicks inside their iAd app, and I'd expect an independent developer of a similar app to laugh all the way to the bank.
I never said btw I'd expect Apple to reimburse developers for their time on rejected apps. Or if I did I didn't mean it.
I know you didn't say that. I was just explaining my original statement that said that they should.
And no, I don't work in advertising (electrical engineer), so you certainly bring a different view, which I appreciate.
As far as a comparison between corporations and individuals, and in this case Apple, I still see no proof that they aren't charging advertisers for displaying these ads. Certainly, they are more capable than a 3rd party in reimbursing such money, but I also see no proof that there is an exorbitant amount of money to be made here. It's a cool gimmick that will not spend much time in actual use, especially if the ads don't change very often, and if there is no additional content to the application.
Besides, pertaining to your best point, how well are iAds targeted at this point? Considering how few big advertising partners there are, I have a hard time understanding how well they are able to advertise when these ads also aren't included in general browsing, but specifically-purposed apps.
Certainly, Apple wants to get there with iAds, but the first step seems to be to take the premium off of the price. The infrastructure may cost a lot, but they have tons of cash to drain on this project if they want to make it a true competition with google and operate similarly. For instance, if I'm playing "Doodle Bowling", the odds that I will get an iAd for anything relevant to bowling is zero. I also associate bowling with greasy bowling alley food, too, but the odds of having any food advertised (on purpose) appears to be zero, as well. The odds of getting an advertisement for a local bowling alley? Again, zero. If I go online and search "doodle bowling" they have tons of options to select from in targeting my search: past search history (and whatever else they know about me), they know that my search is related to bowling, mobile applications, cartoonish games, etc.
The point is, the differences are innumerous. iAds is absolutely primitive in its targeting capability simply by virtue of how many advertising partners it has, and it should not be any different (at this point) how those ad impressions are received.
Secondly individuals are just as greedy as corporations, and generally get to operate outside of the spotlight. Apple has a lot to lose if its iAd platform is seen to be poorly targeting users, but an App developer has a lot to gain from indiscriminate iAd spamming. So in this case, yes, for the sake of self interest I'd expect Apple to reimburse advertisers for clicks inside their iAd app, and I'd expect an independent developer of a similar app to laugh all the way to the bank.
I never said btw I'd expect Apple to reimburse developers for their time on rejected apps. Or if I did I didn't mean it.
I know you didn't say that. I was just explaining my original statement that said that they should.
And no, I don't work in advertising (electrical engineer), so you certainly bring a different view, which I appreciate.
As far as a comparison between corporations and individuals, and in this case Apple, I still see no proof that they aren't charging advertisers for displaying these ads. Certainly, they are more capable than a 3rd party in reimbursing such money, but I also see no proof that there is an exorbitant amount of money to be made here. It's a cool gimmick that will not spend much time in actual use, especially if the ads don't change very often, and if there is no additional content to the application.
Besides, pertaining to your best point, how well are iAds targeted at this point? Considering how few big advertising partners there are, I have a hard time understanding how well they are able to advertise when these ads also aren't included in general browsing, but specifically-purposed apps.
Certainly, Apple wants to get there with iAds, but the first step seems to be to take the premium off of the price. The infrastructure may cost a lot, but they have tons of cash to drain on this project if they want to make it a true competition with google and operate similarly. For instance, if I'm playing "Doodle Bowling", the odds that I will get an iAd for anything relevant to bowling is zero. I also associate bowling with greasy bowling alley food, too, but the odds of having any food advertised (on purpose) appears to be zero, as well. The odds of getting an advertisement for a local bowling alley? Again, zero. If I go online and search "doodle bowling" they have tons of options to select from in targeting my search: past search history (and whatever else they know about me), they know that my search is related to bowling, mobile applications, cartoonish games, etc.
The point is, the differences are innumerous. iAds is absolutely primitive in its targeting capability simply by virtue of how many advertising partners it has, and it should not be any different (at this point) how those ad impressions are received.
X2468
Mar 28, 02:35 PM
Just give Apple & Stevie boy an award for the most tech headlines. Assure him ego boosting daily publicity to fill the insatiable need for attention, just like any 2 year old kid :)
more...
KingCrimson
Apr 21, 09:33 PM
That would be idiotic by Microsoft.
Why? A totally new *nix-based with Metro UI. Are you digging it?
Why? A totally new *nix-based with Metro UI. Are you digging it?
Much Ado
Jan 9, 01:39 PM
You think I'd be that harsh?! I'm almost offended :P
Forgive me, i'm getting paranoid :)
Forgive me, i'm getting paranoid :)
more...
Doctor Q
Jan 5, 08:35 PM
Although the data transferred may be the same or more with on-demand streams, when it's live there will be much higher simultaneous usage. With high-end hosting in general, simultaneous usage is the killer and not really total bandwidth usage. With the popularity of Apple these days the number of simultaneous streams could be extremely high (I mean, if MacRumors gets 100,000 visitors simultaneously think what Apple would get themselves).If they tried to offer a live audio stream, would that produce the same simultaneous usage problem, even though the bandwidth would be reduced?
MacRumors
Oct 17, 08:48 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
ThinkSecret claims to have uncovered documents that indicate that Apple may support both the Blu-ray and HD-DVD next-generation high definition DVD formats (http://www.thinksecret.com/news/0610brieflyhddvd.html). Apple joined Blu-ray's board of directors (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2005/03/20050310144840.shtml) on March 10, and has been expected to include the technology in future Mac Pros (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/07/20060713232130.shtml), however the ongoing changes in the HD-DVD / Blu-ray market war may be changing Apple's plans.
Blu-ray has seen stiff competition from HD-DVD, which beat the product to market and has consistently undercut Blu-ray's price point. Another point of interest is that Intel has supported HD-DVD since September of 2005 (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2005/09/20050927122309.shtml). While ThinkSecret points out that neither format has yet to claim any clear market lead, some still view Blu-ray's trump card as the upcoming Playstation 3.
Blu-ray had initially gained a lot of studio support, but recently Universal Studios has decided to drop initial support for Blu-ray (http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,2017527,00.asp). Warner Brothers, who has not yet officially sanctioned a format, has recently filed for a patent for a Blu-ray / HD-DVD / DVD hybrid disk (http://www.technewsworld.com/story/L1B9NP7BTiA278/Warner-Bros-Seeks-Patent-for-Hybrid-High-Def-DVD.xhtml).
In Steve Jobs went on record siding with content creators (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2004/06/20040614144108.shtml) on the topic of high definition DVD burners and the timing of their inclusion in computer hardware.
As the CEO of Pixar [ed note: now part of Disney], Jobs is taking sides with content creators, suggesting that studios not release movies in the high-definition DVD format until adequate copy protection methods are in place. Jobs even suggests that HD DVD burners not be bundled with computers at all, but admits this is an "extreme" scenario.
ThinkSecret claims to have uncovered documents that indicate that Apple may support both the Blu-ray and HD-DVD next-generation high definition DVD formats (http://www.thinksecret.com/news/0610brieflyhddvd.html). Apple joined Blu-ray's board of directors (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2005/03/20050310144840.shtml) on March 10, and has been expected to include the technology in future Mac Pros (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/07/20060713232130.shtml), however the ongoing changes in the HD-DVD / Blu-ray market war may be changing Apple's plans.
Blu-ray has seen stiff competition from HD-DVD, which beat the product to market and has consistently undercut Blu-ray's price point. Another point of interest is that Intel has supported HD-DVD since September of 2005 (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2005/09/20050927122309.shtml). While ThinkSecret points out that neither format has yet to claim any clear market lead, some still view Blu-ray's trump card as the upcoming Playstation 3.
Blu-ray had initially gained a lot of studio support, but recently Universal Studios has decided to drop initial support for Blu-ray (http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,2017527,00.asp). Warner Brothers, who has not yet officially sanctioned a format, has recently filed for a patent for a Blu-ray / HD-DVD / DVD hybrid disk (http://www.technewsworld.com/story/L1B9NP7BTiA278/Warner-Bros-Seeks-Patent-for-Hybrid-High-Def-DVD.xhtml).
In Steve Jobs went on record siding with content creators (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2004/06/20040614144108.shtml) on the topic of high definition DVD burners and the timing of their inclusion in computer hardware.
As the CEO of Pixar [ed note: now part of Disney], Jobs is taking sides with content creators, suggesting that studios not release movies in the high-definition DVD format until adequate copy protection methods are in place. Jobs even suggests that HD DVD burners not be bundled with computers at all, but admits this is an "extreme" scenario.
more...
gugy
Nov 16, 12:39 PM
this is totally bull. Apple is in no position to stab Intel in their back at this time. Plus, Intel is being very reliable delivering on schedule the chips Apple needs. Maybe in few years if their relationship deteriorate I might consider seeing Apple moving into AMD. But it is not happening anytime soon.
lbartley
Apr 4, 02:27 PM
it seem's like you are getting the run around from MS cause they want you to buy another 360 to make them more money. this looks bad on MS part in not doing anything in helping to track down the stolen 360. i thought that is why the unique ID was given to each system just for that case. and the fact they are using the live account, they can also be buying games with it which is like stealing your credit card.
That's a horribly selfish view of the situation. Would you really want MS to give out personally identifiable information about a customer to any Joe Crazyface that calls in?
You need to look at this from their perspective as well. I'm sure the prospect of $50 profit is pretty minor when weighed against the idea of giving personal information on a customer to some guy who just called in. Even if they wanted to, you're not going to get it from the standard customer service department, especially not after their recent "hacking".
That's a horribly selfish view of the situation. Would you really want MS to give out personally identifiable information about a customer to any Joe Crazyface that calls in?
You need to look at this from their perspective as well. I'm sure the prospect of $50 profit is pretty minor when weighed against the idea of giving personal information on a customer to some guy who just called in. Even if they wanted to, you're not going to get it from the standard customer service department, especially not after their recent "hacking".
iJohnHenry
Apr 13, 05:16 PM
It was so obvious that the little girl was carrying a weapon of mass destruction.
Yes, she slayed me with cute.
Poor child. Now she'll need counselling.
Yes, she slayed me with cute.
Poor child. Now she'll need counselling.
Eric S.
Mar 30, 10:43 AM
So the next will be:
OS Xi
... little i being key.
Yes, it's already here; it's called iOS.
OS Xi
... little i being key.
Yes, it's already here; it's called iOS.
stoid
Aug 7, 07:05 PM
Hmm..I wonder if this means that we wont see the issues plaguing the 23"s (poor color, banding, etc etc etc)
If so, time to make an upgrade!
I called my local Apple Store and the guy I talked to didn't even know that there were 'new' monitors. So I ordered mine online, pronto!
If so, time to make an upgrade!
I called my local Apple Store and the guy I talked to didn't even know that there were 'new' monitors. So I ordered mine online, pronto!
LightSpeed1
Apr 13, 02:17 AM
New monitor: U2311H
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5188/5615061018_009d1a415f_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/trekkie604/5615061018)Hey I just got a 24" myself.
EDIT: Also had to pick up a Mini DisplayPort to DVI adapter.
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5188/5615061018_009d1a415f_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/trekkie604/5615061018)Hey I just got a 24" myself.
EDIT: Also had to pick up a Mini DisplayPort to DVI adapter.
63dot
Mar 4, 11:40 AM
When I talk to most people in my liberal town, they agree with me and say, "Those states are crazy and it's the state of today's republican party". That's what I think and what many posters are saying on these forums. It appears most of us, from what I gather, support unions.
So when I talk to my 28 year old son in law school, it becomes a different issue. He's a 3L in the thick of things seeing "both" sides of everything, without any moral consideration, and his conservative leanings tend to buy the myth that unions and "liberals" are anti-business. He can talk the liberal argument, because he may have to one day, but his conservative bias is hard to break. I wish him all the best, always, but God help us should he ever make the bench anywhere. ;)
Anytime I take a liberal point of view, he brings back the conservative argument, or platform, but then uses his great skills of persuasion to actually make his side sound correct. But come on, we are in the 21st century, and yes there were mafia thugs in the early union history, but to equate that "thuggishness" to today is trying to rewrite history. The unions are not that "Jack Nicholson and Danny DeVito" movie but conservatives will want to push that ridiculous stereotype. His undergrad was history (from a liberal school, oddly enough) and mine was labor law/employment law (also ironically from a very conservative school) and if anything, he should know better. Neither of us were swayed by our professors and school leanings, but at least I try and take a middle ground where he won't. I try and see the good in both sides, but conservatives I talk to, whether it's him, or posters on Macrumors, are glacial in their ability to change. And political leanings, if gone unchecked, can wipe out a lot of great education, however expensive it was. "But I studied under so and so and they have Nobels!" and my school is tops he declares, where I answer back and say, "But they left your school to work for Clinton's administration". :)
The unions are now legitimate organizations and while not perfect, they are a pillar of our society which we can't live without (regardless of what 18th century politicians believed unions to be back in the day).
So when I talk to my 28 year old son in law school, it becomes a different issue. He's a 3L in the thick of things seeing "both" sides of everything, without any moral consideration, and his conservative leanings tend to buy the myth that unions and "liberals" are anti-business. He can talk the liberal argument, because he may have to one day, but his conservative bias is hard to break. I wish him all the best, always, but God help us should he ever make the bench anywhere. ;)
Anytime I take a liberal point of view, he brings back the conservative argument, or platform, but then uses his great skills of persuasion to actually make his side sound correct. But come on, we are in the 21st century, and yes there were mafia thugs in the early union history, but to equate that "thuggishness" to today is trying to rewrite history. The unions are not that "Jack Nicholson and Danny DeVito" movie but conservatives will want to push that ridiculous stereotype. His undergrad was history (from a liberal school, oddly enough) and mine was labor law/employment law (also ironically from a very conservative school) and if anything, he should know better. Neither of us were swayed by our professors and school leanings, but at least I try and take a middle ground where he won't. I try and see the good in both sides, but conservatives I talk to, whether it's him, or posters on Macrumors, are glacial in their ability to change. And political leanings, if gone unchecked, can wipe out a lot of great education, however expensive it was. "But I studied under so and so and they have Nobels!" and my school is tops he declares, where I answer back and say, "But they left your school to work for Clinton's administration". :)
The unions are now legitimate organizations and while not perfect, they are a pillar of our society which we can't live without (regardless of what 18th century politicians believed unions to be back in the day).
likemyorbs
Apr 15, 03:16 PM
It bothers me a little when gay suffrage is pitted against something like slavery. Just not the same, IMO.
Gay suffrage? Wow i never knew gays were denied the right to vote! :eek:
Gay suffrage? Wow i never knew gays were denied the right to vote! :eek:
0 comments:
Post a Comment