justaregularjoe
Feb 28, 03:17 PM
Wow. I have never, ever in my life been so tempted to troll a MacRumors thread, nor have I ever been so infuriated by the use of a set of double quotation marks.
Gay marriage is not "marriage." Gay marriage is marriage.
Gay people are not "gay." They are gay.
So a few things:
1) Deal with it.
2) Gays are going to keep on getting married. Whether that means that they have to leave your ass-backwards country to come to a real civilization to do so, or write their own damn marriage contract and hire a rational person to perform the ceremony, they will.
3) As Lee said, what two consenting adults do in the privacy of their own homes (hell, anywhere, in fact) is their own damn business.
4) The claim by Bill McEnaney that gay people living together "should have purely platonic, nonsexual relationships with one another" is outrageous. (NB that this person had just said they must live "as siblings" which is weird, given that platonic love is only reservation from physical romance, not emotional romance...)
5) If you are going to pull the "protect the sanctity of marriage" card on me, think very hard about the institutions of divorce and annulment.
6) Many people (and many of the small number who claim to anyway) do not share your beliefs. Catholics have sex. In and out of marriage. *See Point One.*
7) Please try to be just a smidgen more cultured in your attitudes, and a little less abrasive in sharing them. Though I try to reserve judgment, I am currently not alone in thinking that you are completely insane just by your posts in this thread.
I feel better now. :)
Gay marriage is not "marriage." Gay marriage is marriage.
Gay people are not "gay." They are gay.
So a few things:
1) Deal with it.
2) Gays are going to keep on getting married. Whether that means that they have to leave your ass-backwards country to come to a real civilization to do so, or write their own damn marriage contract and hire a rational person to perform the ceremony, they will.
3) As Lee said, what two consenting adults do in the privacy of their own homes (hell, anywhere, in fact) is their own damn business.
4) The claim by Bill McEnaney that gay people living together "should have purely platonic, nonsexual relationships with one another" is outrageous. (NB that this person had just said they must live "as siblings" which is weird, given that platonic love is only reservation from physical romance, not emotional romance...)
5) If you are going to pull the "protect the sanctity of marriage" card on me, think very hard about the institutions of divorce and annulment.
6) Many people (and many of the small number who claim to anyway) do not share your beliefs. Catholics have sex. In and out of marriage. *See Point One.*
7) Please try to be just a smidgen more cultured in your attitudes, and a little less abrasive in sharing them. Though I try to reserve judgment, I am currently not alone in thinking that you are completely insane just by your posts in this thread.
I feel better now. :)
Kane.Elson
Jul 28, 03:57 AM
You might want to make that til Tuesday September 12 when the Paris Apple Expo opens with an Apple keynote.
Yeah, I meant around that time. I'm not going to order it on midnight august 31st :P
It's just painfull thinking about all the goodies coming out soon.
Yeah, I meant around that time. I'm not going to order it on midnight august 31st :P
It's just painfull thinking about all the goodies coming out soon.
Evangelion
Aug 12, 03:51 AM
Is it possible for Apple to release a phone sold in their stores that would work on all networks? Or have several versions of the phone that will work for Verizon, Cingular...
I'll never be ceased at just how retarded the phone-system is outside Finland (or Scandinavia). I just buy a phone, and I get a SIM-card, and boom, it just works. I can replace the SIM at will, and it will just work. No hassle, no worries that "but this phone wotn work with that operator!". Unsatisfied with your current operator? It takes maybe ten minutes to get a new operator, and you get to keep your old number, AND your phone (it is YOUR phone, after all!).
I think that the scheme where the phones are tied to certain operator is just plain retarded. This is a perfect example as to why that is so. And I'm REALLY surprised that you folks (the rest of the world that is) hasn't seen the light on this issue. You just happily accept a scheme that limits choice and competition.
I'll never be ceased at just how retarded the phone-system is outside Finland (or Scandinavia). I just buy a phone, and I get a SIM-card, and boom, it just works. I can replace the SIM at will, and it will just work. No hassle, no worries that "but this phone wotn work with that operator!". Unsatisfied with your current operator? It takes maybe ten minutes to get a new operator, and you get to keep your old number, AND your phone (it is YOUR phone, after all!).
I think that the scheme where the phones are tied to certain operator is just plain retarded. This is a perfect example as to why that is so. And I'm REALLY surprised that you folks (the rest of the world that is) hasn't seen the light on this issue. You just happily accept a scheme that limits choice and competition.
agmaster
Apr 25, 03:35 PM
Wow, more people just trying to get money out of a successful company. Almost every phone tracks your location no matter what brand it is. I don't have an iPhone but there must be an option to turn off location tracking, but even if you did many great Apps out there wouldn't work if you did turn off location tracking.
samcraig
Apr 27, 09:55 AM
And once again the Apple fans will turn out to have been correct.
Really? The posters on here that say there was no issue are correct?
I guess Apple fixing certain bugs related to this is whimtime.
I guess it's all a matter of what part of the issue you deem important. The tracking, the retention or the ability to opt out
Really? The posters on here that say there was no issue are correct?
I guess Apple fixing certain bugs related to this is whimtime.
I guess it's all a matter of what part of the issue you deem important. The tracking, the retention or the ability to opt out
k2k koos
Nov 28, 07:11 PM
What on earth are these people at music studio's thinking!!! Did they get royalties for every stereo sold? NO, so neither should they get anything for iPod or any hardware sales. Only for the products THEY supply, should they get money, being the music and movies/ video's, in other words the content.
This is typical behaviour of music studio's and I sincerely hope that Apple will not budge, nor should any other company. Of course MS is eager to pay as they need their Zune to succeed, and Universal is riding along for a slice of the pie, but who will loose out in the end is the consumer, as these royalties are eventually going to get calculated such that we will pay them......
We should all start protesting all record companies to clean up their act, in the mean time, the general consumer should to, copying of music is stealing, the prices on iTunes are fair and reasonable, so lets be nice and buy them properly, and the record companies can then make sure there is more for us to buy (some real refreshing new music would be nice, instead of all this "X factor, American idol, etc etc manufactured stuff....) , and not just fill their pockets as they are trying to do all the time
This is typical behaviour of music studio's and I sincerely hope that Apple will not budge, nor should any other company. Of course MS is eager to pay as they need their Zune to succeed, and Universal is riding along for a slice of the pie, but who will loose out in the end is the consumer, as these royalties are eventually going to get calculated such that we will pay them......
We should all start protesting all record companies to clean up their act, in the mean time, the general consumer should to, copying of music is stealing, the prices on iTunes are fair and reasonable, so lets be nice and buy them properly, and the record companies can then make sure there is more for us to buy (some real refreshing new music would be nice, instead of all this "X factor, American idol, etc etc manufactured stuff....) , and not just fill their pockets as they are trying to do all the time
Keebler
Apr 6, 08:36 AM
Let me be clear - FCS needs a robust blu-ray authoring feature. We don't live in a wireless world where you can transmit video free over the air. We still put disks in a player to watch and also preserve our video memories.
Not having a good blu-ray authoring feature is a huge problem for Final Cut Studio. Not only does it impact professional wedding video-graphers, but ordinary people who want to put their video on a disk to send to people. I can't just put my video on netflix to have a friend watch it on his ROKU.
I agree. For myself, I'm about to buy an HD camcorder now that my digital8 tape has stopped working. 2 issues confront me: 1. storage space for which I have an 8 TB raid set up and 2. delivery - ATV or iphone/ipod touch/ipad files and/or blu ray for archiving (being a physical copy).
That's fine for me - but what about my clients? What are the normal joe blows out there doing for HD footage? I transfer home movies for folks so having an easier BR workflow within FCS would be nice.
Not having a good blu-ray authoring feature is a huge problem for Final Cut Studio. Not only does it impact professional wedding video-graphers, but ordinary people who want to put their video on a disk to send to people. I can't just put my video on netflix to have a friend watch it on his ROKU.
I agree. For myself, I'm about to buy an HD camcorder now that my digital8 tape has stopped working. 2 issues confront me: 1. storage space for which I have an 8 TB raid set up and 2. delivery - ATV or iphone/ipod touch/ipad files and/or blu ray for archiving (being a physical copy).
That's fine for me - but what about my clients? What are the normal joe blows out there doing for HD footage? I transfer home movies for folks so having an easier BR workflow within FCS would be nice.
mylios101
Apr 6, 11:11 AM
http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=54619&processor=i5-2537M&spec-codes=SR03W
Hope this is useful.
Hope this is useful.
mobilehavoc
Apr 6, 02:00 PM
Nice...I'm glad to have a more rare piece of hardware. I love mine and have no issues, it'll only get better over time.Reminds me of the days of the RAZR, that's what the iPhone and iPad have become.
Honda sells a TON more cars than BMW by a huge factor...I'd rather drive a BMW, I guess you're all happy with the Hondas :)
Honda sells a TON more cars than BMW by a huge factor...I'd rather drive a BMW, I guess you're all happy with the Hondas :)
Benjamins
Mar 31, 02:43 PM
You could say the same thing about Apple though. The Apple fad will go away and the extremely closed ecosystem which seems to not be really developing much in terms of UI or having an actual roadmap could end iOS.
I don't understand why people can't just see the pros and cons of both and accept both are great platforms. Its always a WAR with Apple fans. Apple against EVERYONE!
If Apple FAD goes away, where will Google copy from next?
You are delusional if you think Google is not building upon the Apple FAD.
I don't understand why people can't just see the pros and cons of both and accept both are great platforms. Its always a WAR with Apple fans. Apple against EVERYONE!
If Apple FAD goes away, where will Google copy from next?
You are delusional if you think Google is not building upon the Apple FAD.
Reach9
Apr 11, 03:47 PM
No I am not kidding. You seem to be a spec whore. If those are the best phones in the market why do multiple iPhone and Blackberry devices outsell the best android phone ALWAYS?
People keep wanting to point to these android spec whore of the month models, but they don't offer a superior experience... It is just silly.
Like I said,t he iPhone 4 is stil the best smartphone out there.
The thunderbolt doesn't even come close to outselling the iPhone just on Verizon.
I seem to be a spec whore? That's a degrading word, do you rinse your dirty mouth? or I guess your vocabulary is too limited to use other words?
But no i'm not "spec-centralized", i'm not talking about outselling. But if you want to talk about outselling.. The Thunderbolt is outselling the iPhone 4 on Verizon: http://iphone.tmcnet.com/topics/iphone/articles/160082-htc-thunderbolt-outselling-iphone-4-verizon-wireless.htm
But i could care less what outsells. i'm talking about a user experience as a smartphone, and the iPhone does not deliver, where as Android OS does.
"Like I said, the iPhone 4 is still the best smartphone out there" -- That is your opinion, and i frankly disagree. There are much better smartphones out there.
Can you explain why you think the iPhone 4 is the best smartphone out there?
Currently, the best combination looks like Android OS phone + iPod Touch.
It sounds like you're a true fanboy!
So a 50" SD tv is better than a 42" High Def tv?
Wow, way to generalize. We're talking about phones. There's a huge difference between a 4" and a 3.5". Personally, Apple should have increased the screen size and then increased the resolution.
People keep wanting to point to these android spec whore of the month models, but they don't offer a superior experience... It is just silly.
Like I said,t he iPhone 4 is stil the best smartphone out there.
The thunderbolt doesn't even come close to outselling the iPhone just on Verizon.
I seem to be a spec whore? That's a degrading word, do you rinse your dirty mouth? or I guess your vocabulary is too limited to use other words?
But no i'm not "spec-centralized", i'm not talking about outselling. But if you want to talk about outselling.. The Thunderbolt is outselling the iPhone 4 on Verizon: http://iphone.tmcnet.com/topics/iphone/articles/160082-htc-thunderbolt-outselling-iphone-4-verizon-wireless.htm
But i could care less what outsells. i'm talking about a user experience as a smartphone, and the iPhone does not deliver, where as Android OS does.
"Like I said, the iPhone 4 is still the best smartphone out there" -- That is your opinion, and i frankly disagree. There are much better smartphones out there.
Can you explain why you think the iPhone 4 is the best smartphone out there?
Currently, the best combination looks like Android OS phone + iPod Touch.
It sounds like you're a true fanboy!
So a 50" SD tv is better than a 42" High Def tv?
Wow, way to generalize. We're talking about phones. There's a huge difference between a 4" and a 3.5". Personally, Apple should have increased the screen size and then increased the resolution.
ugp
Jun 11, 12:22 PM
Anyone know if I place a preorder on the 19th what the chances are I'll be able to make a reservation for the 24th?
I would Pre-Order ASAP. The longer you wait the less your chances get. Being their are 4 Retailers confirmed to launch I am sure Apple has a big Inventory on these but how much will each Company be receiving is the question. I can see Wal-Mart getting the least from anyone.
I would Pre-Order ASAP. The longer you wait the less your chances get. Being their are 4 Retailers confirmed to launch I am sure Apple has a big Inventory on these but how much will each Company be receiving is the question. I can see Wal-Mart getting the least from anyone.
dethmaShine
Apr 19, 02:37 PM
WRONG! They weren't invented at Apple's Cupertino HQ, they were invented back in Palo Alto (Xerox PARC).
Secondly, your source is a pro-Apple website. Thats a problem right there.
I'll give you a proper source, the NYTimes, which wrote an article on Xerox vs Apple back in 1989, untarnished, in its raw form. Your 'source' was cherry picking data.
Here is one excerpt.
Then Apple CEO John Sculley stated:
^^ thats a GLARING admission, by the CEO of Apple, don't you think? Nevertheless, Xerox ended up losing that lawsuit, with some saying that by the time they filed that lawsuit it was too late. The lawsuit wasn't thrown out because they didn't have a strong case against Apple, but because of how the lawsuit was presented as is at the time.
I'm not saying that Apple stole IP from Xerox, but what I am is that its quite disappointing to see Apple fanboys trying to distort the past into making it seem as though Apple created the first GUI, when that is CLEARLY not the case. The GUI had its roots in Xerox PARC. That, is a FACT.
Who said Apple created the first GUI.
Jobs himself credits Xerox for their GUI. :rolleyes:
Secondly, your source is a pro-Apple website. Thats a problem right there.
I'll give you a proper source, the NYTimes, which wrote an article on Xerox vs Apple back in 1989, untarnished, in its raw form. Your 'source' was cherry picking data.
Here is one excerpt.
Then Apple CEO John Sculley stated:
^^ thats a GLARING admission, by the CEO of Apple, don't you think? Nevertheless, Xerox ended up losing that lawsuit, with some saying that by the time they filed that lawsuit it was too late. The lawsuit wasn't thrown out because they didn't have a strong case against Apple, but because of how the lawsuit was presented as is at the time.
I'm not saying that Apple stole IP from Xerox, but what I am is that its quite disappointing to see Apple fanboys trying to distort the past into making it seem as though Apple created the first GUI, when that is CLEARLY not the case. The GUI had its roots in Xerox PARC. That, is a FACT.
Who said Apple created the first GUI.
Jobs himself credits Xerox for their GUI. :rolleyes:
jmbear
Nov 29, 12:39 PM
See, that's the catch-22 for new artists. The labels are the ones that get tunes played on the radio. In the 50's and 60's they would strong-arm their stuff in, but I'm sure even nowadays they provide incentives (read: bribes) to get new stuff on the air. Especially if they think the band is really good and will make it in the long run. And don't fool yourself into thinking a new band can get huge without radio.
The internet can become the new radio. I am quite fond of looking for pre-made playlists, I will get the songs on LimeWire, listen to them, the ones I like, I buy legally, the ones I don�t I delete them. You don�t get commercials, just music. I am not saying that radio is going to dissapear completely. TV didn�t kill it. But its importance will diminish.
The problem is that the labels get the artists by the balls when they sign them up to ridiculous contracts. Your 1-4 examples look pretty good on paper, but in order to sell any significant number of copies of their music, anyone wanting it (but doesn't know it yet) has to wade through tons of (what that persons sees as) crap just to get any exposure to something they'll consider good. I'm sure there's a lot of music in the indie catalog that I would just love, but I don't have the time to wade through it all to find it. Instead, I'll listen to the radio and when I hear something I like, I'll try to pay attention to who it is. I may or may not end up buying it, or checking out what else they do, but without radio exposure, most good indie bands don't have a chance in hell of selling to anyone except those that happen to be in the bar where they're playing one weekend..
iTMS could potentially change this. There are some people that will do all the research for you (as in what is good music), then ratings will allow you to get the good songs! It�s similar (and somebody will flame me for saying this) to researching a product on Amazon or CNET, you usually look for a LCD screen, all the results pop, and you will go for the ones with the highest ratings, read the comments and eventually make up your mind. Some day you will look up for electronic music (which I love), all the DJ�s will pop, you will pick the highest rated songs or playlists (because most people like a song because other people like it), listen to their songs for free (yeah, just like radio), and then buy them if you want.
Now, if you take a look at already established and popular bands, that's a different story. Someone mentioned huge bands like Pink Floyd. Their last couple of CDs didn't need a big label to sell. People were going to buy it if they like Floyd no matter what. And in a case of that kind of popularity, the radio stations were going to play them with or without a major label. The same could be applied to other huge (classic) rock bands, as well as established artists in other music styles (country, rap, R&B, blues, etc...). Another example would be someone like Eric Clapton. He could put one out on "Clapton Records" and would sell nearly, if not exactly, the same number of CDs as he will on a major label..
I agree record labels + good music = superstars like Calpton, Floyd, U2 etc... But these bands became popular in a different time (before the internet). Internet is changing the record labels� business model, and that is what they afraid of. The new wait of creating bands and distributing their music is not as profitable for them as it used to.
Unfortunately, the number of artists (of any type of music) that could dismiss the labels and still sell as many CDs and get the same radio exposure are limited. And any new band is going to go nowhere without radio (or MTV/VH1) exposure.
Internet is offering them exposure. Right now MTV and VH1 are still popular. But YouTube, Yahoo!, MSN could become the new MTV and VH1.
Not really relevant, but interesting to think about is that most of you have probably seen the video of the ruma ruma guy (I can�t link it because I am at work and the proxie does not allow me to visit YouTube). But how many have actually seen the video for the song? YouTube made that fat kid a star, and most people probably know his face better than the guys that sing the song. Exposure.
In the end, I don't see the labels going away totally any time soon. They're in cahoots with the big FM music stations and in general, they do a good job of promoting new good bands that sign up. It's just a shame that there's really nothing to keep them from raping the artists. If there were just some way for new bands to get exposure to the masses without having to sell their souls to the labels then things would be better. Unfortunately, the Internet can only go so far in helping a new band with this.
I agree, they won�t go away anytime soon, but change is coming, and change will be good for artists and consumers, not for the record labels.
Sorry for my weird grammar or mispells, I am not a native english speaker, I don�t have a spell checker on this computer (in english at least) and I am too lazy to proof read what I wrote lol :)
The internet can become the new radio. I am quite fond of looking for pre-made playlists, I will get the songs on LimeWire, listen to them, the ones I like, I buy legally, the ones I don�t I delete them. You don�t get commercials, just music. I am not saying that radio is going to dissapear completely. TV didn�t kill it. But its importance will diminish.
The problem is that the labels get the artists by the balls when they sign them up to ridiculous contracts. Your 1-4 examples look pretty good on paper, but in order to sell any significant number of copies of their music, anyone wanting it (but doesn't know it yet) has to wade through tons of (what that persons sees as) crap just to get any exposure to something they'll consider good. I'm sure there's a lot of music in the indie catalog that I would just love, but I don't have the time to wade through it all to find it. Instead, I'll listen to the radio and when I hear something I like, I'll try to pay attention to who it is. I may or may not end up buying it, or checking out what else they do, but without radio exposure, most good indie bands don't have a chance in hell of selling to anyone except those that happen to be in the bar where they're playing one weekend..
iTMS could potentially change this. There are some people that will do all the research for you (as in what is good music), then ratings will allow you to get the good songs! It�s similar (and somebody will flame me for saying this) to researching a product on Amazon or CNET, you usually look for a LCD screen, all the results pop, and you will go for the ones with the highest ratings, read the comments and eventually make up your mind. Some day you will look up for electronic music (which I love), all the DJ�s will pop, you will pick the highest rated songs or playlists (because most people like a song because other people like it), listen to their songs for free (yeah, just like radio), and then buy them if you want.
Now, if you take a look at already established and popular bands, that's a different story. Someone mentioned huge bands like Pink Floyd. Their last couple of CDs didn't need a big label to sell. People were going to buy it if they like Floyd no matter what. And in a case of that kind of popularity, the radio stations were going to play them with or without a major label. The same could be applied to other huge (classic) rock bands, as well as established artists in other music styles (country, rap, R&B, blues, etc...). Another example would be someone like Eric Clapton. He could put one out on "Clapton Records" and would sell nearly, if not exactly, the same number of CDs as he will on a major label..
I agree record labels + good music = superstars like Calpton, Floyd, U2 etc... But these bands became popular in a different time (before the internet). Internet is changing the record labels� business model, and that is what they afraid of. The new wait of creating bands and distributing their music is not as profitable for them as it used to.
Unfortunately, the number of artists (of any type of music) that could dismiss the labels and still sell as many CDs and get the same radio exposure are limited. And any new band is going to go nowhere without radio (or MTV/VH1) exposure.
Internet is offering them exposure. Right now MTV and VH1 are still popular. But YouTube, Yahoo!, MSN could become the new MTV and VH1.
Not really relevant, but interesting to think about is that most of you have probably seen the video of the ruma ruma guy (I can�t link it because I am at work and the proxie does not allow me to visit YouTube). But how many have actually seen the video for the song? YouTube made that fat kid a star, and most people probably know his face better than the guys that sing the song. Exposure.
In the end, I don't see the labels going away totally any time soon. They're in cahoots with the big FM music stations and in general, they do a good job of promoting new good bands that sign up. It's just a shame that there's really nothing to keep them from raping the artists. If there were just some way for new bands to get exposure to the masses without having to sell their souls to the labels then things would be better. Unfortunately, the Internet can only go so far in helping a new band with this.
I agree, they won�t go away anytime soon, but change is coming, and change will be good for artists and consumers, not for the record labels.
Sorry for my weird grammar or mispells, I am not a native english speaker, I don�t have a spell checker on this computer (in english at least) and I am too lazy to proof read what I wrote lol :)
Eraserhead
Mar 1, 05:30 PM
Link, please.
Probably:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1325635/Christian-couple-doomed-foster-carers-homosexuality-views.html
Probably:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1325635/Christian-couple-doomed-foster-carers-homosexuality-views.html
briansolomon
Jul 14, 05:26 PM
It's about time. For a company that prides itself on innovations, features, and ease of use this is something that should not just be coming to fruition now...and should have never been eliminated from the G5 during the change from G4 <<<weird wording but I think you all will get the idea
rovex
Apr 11, 02:30 PM
Does Arn write every single article on this forum?
epitaphic
Sep 13, 12:14 PM
I'd be happy to divert a whole core just to frickin WindowServer. :D
going out on a limb here and assuming you have a heavily cluttered desktop
going out on a limb here and assuming you have a heavily cluttered desktop
hayesk
Mar 26, 02:36 PM
I tested Lion, and removed it after a month. Not buying it. I'll use Snow Leopard, it's the best OS so far. I'll see the one after Lion, maybe there will be something interesting.
This is the problem of non-developers getting access to software that is not intended for the public. People install it, expecting it to have all the stability and features of the final version and get disappointed when it doesn't. And people wonder why Apple is all about secrecy and NDAs.
You shouldn't have installed it in the first place. Look at it when it is released and make your decision.
This is the problem of non-developers getting access to software that is not intended for the public. People install it, expecting it to have all the stability and features of the final version and get disappointed when it doesn't. And people wonder why Apple is all about secrecy and NDAs.
You shouldn't have installed it in the first place. Look at it when it is released and make your decision.
REDolution
Apr 12, 05:05 PM
For me personally, as a proud Red One owner, I really hope that the new FCP has native RED support without Log and Transfer and can also utilise our RED Rocket.
ezekielrage_99
Aug 27, 06:59 PM
i like the powerbook g5 jokes and have been around for a long time if that helps
I like them as well, but I think it's been replaced with Merom next tuesday, G6 Video iPod next next tuesday and the good old iPhone next tuesday rumors.
Still good for a laugh ;)
I like them as well, but I think it's been replaced with Merom next tuesday, G6 Video iPod next next tuesday and the good old iPhone next tuesday rumors.
Still good for a laugh ;)
Stella
Mar 31, 04:01 PM
Android is a good OS, and even better when the phone it comes in is offered for free.
Free phones are usually hard to beat. I'm sure the iOS would win if the iPhone came free with contract.
In come countries it is possible to get an iPhone free on contract... for example, Vodaphone in UK.
http://www.vodafone.co.uk/brands/iphone/pay-monthly-iphone/index.htm
Free phones are usually hard to beat. I'm sure the iOS would win if the iPhone came free with contract.
In come countries it is possible to get an iPhone free on contract... for example, Vodaphone in UK.
http://www.vodafone.co.uk/brands/iphone/pay-monthly-iphone/index.htm
mccldwll
Apr 27, 08:50 AM
No it's not.
And I think MOST people aren't blowing anything out of proportion. Being concerned about tracking information/privacy issues is important. Most people (stop generalizing just because some on this board are) are NOT over-reacting but were calling for deeper investigation into the issue.
Yes, it is. It's hardly tracking if distant towers are also logged. It's a minor issue. Logs need to be deleted after a short period of time. It will be done.
And I think MOST people aren't blowing anything out of proportion. Being concerned about tracking information/privacy issues is important. Most people (stop generalizing just because some on this board are) are NOT over-reacting but were calling for deeper investigation into the issue.
Yes, it is. It's hardly tracking if distant towers are also logged. It's a minor issue. Logs need to be deleted after a short period of time. It will be done.
AidenShaw
Jul 14, 11:22 PM
top heavy is just idiotic.
Has anyone noticed that three or four disk drives actually weigh a lot more than a power supply?
Especially a modern power supply! (Those Apple IIfx supplies had a lot of iron - but today a 600watt supply is pretty light.)
Get a life (and an IEC 90° cord) and forget whining about power supply top or bottom.
Worrying about "Top heavy" is simply nonsense - I have top PS systems and bottom PS systems, and "top heaviness" has never been an issue - the centre of gravity of my systems is usually determined by the number, capacity, and location of the disks.
Has anyone noticed that three or four disk drives actually weigh a lot more than a power supply?
Especially a modern power supply! (Those Apple IIfx supplies had a lot of iron - but today a 600watt supply is pretty light.)
Get a life (and an IEC 90° cord) and forget whining about power supply top or bottom.
Worrying about "Top heavy" is simply nonsense - I have top PS systems and bottom PS systems, and "top heaviness" has never been an issue - the centre of gravity of my systems is usually determined by the number, capacity, and location of the disks.
0 comments:
Post a Comment