marksman
Apr 21, 02:46 PM
Does anyone else really just not care about this? I could care less. It's not like the info is going to end up in China.
And what if it did end up in china? Is china going to pre-emptively place cheap toys where they predict me to go next?
This whole thing is massively overblown. There is no evidence this information is ending up anywhere... The information is there for a reason and serves a specific purpose. I am fine with it.
For someone to access it they would have to steal your phone. As others have mentioned if that was the case, for most people the information about cell tower locations you might have been near is the absolute least of your worries.
People have to realize this information is not private in the first place. Your location as you move from public place to public place is not some kind of protected right to privacy. Sometimes I wish it was, but it is not. We have no right or expectation of privacy as we move around the public world.
There are a myriad of ways our public movements are tracked hundreds of times every day as we move about. I really do wish people would spend more time investigating and understanding these issues then just knee jerk flipping out and "demanding" answers. Especially since they don't even understand the question, so how can they expect to understand the answer?
If this were Google or M$ you apologists would be foaming at the mouth. Nice fallacious argument - just because we can be tracked in our cars with traffic cams, or GPS devices, etc, doesn't mean this, or those instances are legal.
This is clearly in violation of EU law, for those of you who are interested:
http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/information_society/l14012_en.htm
We should at least be given the choice to opt-out, and the purposes and disclosure policies should be clearly stated, not buried in a 30-page ToS.
Europe has a law against a device you own tracking your movements from one public place to another? That must be tough not to be able to have any GPS devices.
Do you understand privacy? Do you understand what is actually happening with the iPhone and this information? Do you understand the European law you cited?
It seems you do not understand any of those three.
And what if it did end up in china? Is china going to pre-emptively place cheap toys where they predict me to go next?
This whole thing is massively overblown. There is no evidence this information is ending up anywhere... The information is there for a reason and serves a specific purpose. I am fine with it.
For someone to access it they would have to steal your phone. As others have mentioned if that was the case, for most people the information about cell tower locations you might have been near is the absolute least of your worries.
People have to realize this information is not private in the first place. Your location as you move from public place to public place is not some kind of protected right to privacy. Sometimes I wish it was, but it is not. We have no right or expectation of privacy as we move around the public world.
There are a myriad of ways our public movements are tracked hundreds of times every day as we move about. I really do wish people would spend more time investigating and understanding these issues then just knee jerk flipping out and "demanding" answers. Especially since they don't even understand the question, so how can they expect to understand the answer?
If this were Google or M$ you apologists would be foaming at the mouth. Nice fallacious argument - just because we can be tracked in our cars with traffic cams, or GPS devices, etc, doesn't mean this, or those instances are legal.
This is clearly in violation of EU law, for those of you who are interested:
http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/information_society/l14012_en.htm
We should at least be given the choice to opt-out, and the purposes and disclosure policies should be clearly stated, not buried in a 30-page ToS.
Europe has a law against a device you own tracking your movements from one public place to another? That must be tough not to be able to have any GPS devices.
Do you understand privacy? Do you understand what is actually happening with the iPhone and this information? Do you understand the European law you cited?
It seems you do not understand any of those three.
lOUDsCREAMEr
Jul 19, 05:40 PM
I'm about ready to buy a 20" iMac but I want the new OS. How long do I have to wait?
around six months or less
around six months or less
maclaptop
Apr 10, 01:59 PM
Although in sports cars, sequential gearboxes are best.
When I move to the US though, I will probably be driving an Automatic, it will be simply something to get me from A to B. Rather than over here when I drive around lovely B (country) roads to get to places and a manual gearboxes are just more fun on twisty roads.
Yes in terms of quick shifting a sequential gearbox is it.
and selena gomez break up,
justin bieber bulge pictures
justin bieber and selena gomez
Selena Gomez amp;amp; The Scene
and selena gomez break up
pictures of justin bieber in
and selena gomez break up,
and selena gomez break up
me justin wed,selena gomez
justin bieber and selena gomez
When I move to the US though, I will probably be driving an Automatic, it will be simply something to get me from A to B. Rather than over here when I drive around lovely B (country) roads to get to places and a manual gearboxes are just more fun on twisty roads.
Yes in terms of quick shifting a sequential gearbox is it.
Charlie Sheen
Mar 24, 01:13 PM
*Children Screaming in background
Im no snob against AMD GPUS...but their CPU's are nearly 2 generations behind intel. I dont think Bulldozer is going to match the 1155 SB, much less the upcoming 2011 socket chips.
What I want to see is a 27inch iMac with an HD 6970 2GB...Whoa whoa wee wow:eek:
i also prefer intel over amd but i think the cheaper models may run on amd in some time
Im no snob against AMD GPUS...but their CPU's are nearly 2 generations behind intel. I dont think Bulldozer is going to match the 1155 SB, much less the upcoming 2011 socket chips.
What I want to see is a 27inch iMac with an HD 6970 2GB...Whoa whoa wee wow:eek:
i also prefer intel over amd but i think the cheaper models may run on amd in some time
peapody
Nov 28, 08:19 AM
first pair of decent headphones.
grado sr60i
http://www.opticaudio.co.uk/images/Grado%20SR60I-2.jpg
Oh damn just looking at these make me really miss them. Dammit.
Just listed my macbook air 11" on ebay, and picking up this UL20ft from the bay.
12.1-inch 720p (1366x768) display with LED backlighting
Windows 7 Home Premium (64-bit)
Intel Core i3-330UM (1.20GHz)
Intel Graphics Media Accelerator HD integrated graphics
2GB DDR3 RAM 1066MHz
320GB 5400RPM hard drive
802.11b/g/n wireless and Bluetooth
6-cell Li-ion battery (4400mAh, 47Whr)
Weight: 3.3 lbs
Dimensions: 11.8 x 8.4 x 1 inches
Price $450!!!
Will be upgrading the ram to 4gb and the hdd to ssd with stuff I have laying around the house. Should make a great on the go computer alternative to the $1500 "ultimate" 11.6" air.
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4110/5214035919_fffb1d5fc0.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/heyjuliette/5214035919/)
grado sr60i
http://www.opticaudio.co.uk/images/Grado%20SR60I-2.jpg
Oh damn just looking at these make me really miss them. Dammit.
Just listed my macbook air 11" on ebay, and picking up this UL20ft from the bay.
12.1-inch 720p (1366x768) display with LED backlighting
Windows 7 Home Premium (64-bit)
Intel Core i3-330UM (1.20GHz)
Intel Graphics Media Accelerator HD integrated graphics
2GB DDR3 RAM 1066MHz
320GB 5400RPM hard drive
802.11b/g/n wireless and Bluetooth
6-cell Li-ion battery (4400mAh, 47Whr)
Weight: 3.3 lbs
Dimensions: 11.8 x 8.4 x 1 inches
Price $450!!!
Will be upgrading the ram to 4gb and the hdd to ssd with stuff I have laying around the house. Should make a great on the go computer alternative to the $1500 "ultimate" 11.6" air.
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4110/5214035919_fffb1d5fc0.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/heyjuliette/5214035919/)
poppe
Jul 14, 11:39 AM
Can I purchase a Holographic disc?
Nope not at my local BestBuy, I guess that makes it pretty hard to include. Wait... does anyone have a holographic disc.... nope ... no manufacturer.... not even researchers.... so I guess that means the timeframe for the device... is slated release with Vista or about 10 yrs from now.... which means it doesn't have a greater potential within a timeframe.
Can I get a Dual Layer BR? No. When can I get that? Probably around the same time Holographic is released. End of the year or beggining of 2007
Acctually as stated before Holographic is supposed to be released at the end of the year.
The true problem with Hologrpahic is we don't have big ole sony or the HD-DVD companies backing it up. Its just one company... so from what I've read they said they will wait and perfect it for the pros first and later come at the consumer.
On potential... Beta had all the Potential and was a better player. I can't remember how that worked out? would you explain?
Nope not at my local BestBuy, I guess that makes it pretty hard to include. Wait... does anyone have a holographic disc.... nope ... no manufacturer.... not even researchers.... so I guess that means the timeframe for the device... is slated release with Vista or about 10 yrs from now.... which means it doesn't have a greater potential within a timeframe.
Can I get a Dual Layer BR? No. When can I get that? Probably around the same time Holographic is released. End of the year or beggining of 2007
Acctually as stated before Holographic is supposed to be released at the end of the year.
The true problem with Hologrpahic is we don't have big ole sony or the HD-DVD companies backing it up. Its just one company... so from what I've read they said they will wait and perfect it for the pros first and later come at the consumer.
On potential... Beta had all the Potential and was a better player. I can't remember how that worked out? would you explain?
poppe
Sep 1, 01:33 PM
Of course computer lines overlap. Check the other online stores, and not the apple online store every 5 minutes and you would know this. Think about it, they almost have to! How many different models does Dell or HP sell at any given moment? How many choices does one need to narrow down? You can customize something like 11-12 machines on other sites, that are all very comparable, IMO
Yeah I know that was my point. I was being sarcastic.
Yeah I know that was my point. I was being sarcastic.
bloogersnigen
Aug 16, 02:00 PM
That way, I can stream my music from iPod to Airport Express directly.
I would rather have it the other way around a cheap 512 mb iPod with a screen that can use my music on my mac via wifi. that would be sweet. I have over 100gb of music and want to have access to all of it from everywhere in my house. now a 30 gb or so iPod with wifi would be sweet. load all your favorite music for car rides and stuff and still listen to the rest at home.
Ben
I would rather have it the other way around a cheap 512 mb iPod with a screen that can use my music on my mac via wifi. that would be sweet. I have over 100gb of music and want to have access to all of it from everywhere in my house. now a 30 gb or so iPod with wifi would be sweet. load all your favorite music for car rides and stuff and still listen to the rest at home.
Ben
cwerdna
Dec 6, 12:39 PM
It was also to get MS to continue making Office for the Mac. The deal also included that Apple put IE on every Mac they sold (I could be wrong on that, correct me if I am.).
You can rewatch the announcement of that at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxOp5mBY9IY.
You can rewatch the announcement of that at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxOp5mBY9IY.
macgeek18
Feb 18, 12:37 AM
Nice setup! It has a little bit of everything in it!
Thank you! I like it a lot and it's about 2 years in progress for everything so far.
Thank you! I like it a lot and it's about 2 years in progress for everything so far.
BlizzardBomb
Aug 29, 09:11 AM
Why is everyone so hung up on Merom?
I never expected the mini to go that way this year. Remember, the entire point of the mini is to be LOW COST.
The switch to Intel caused the price of the mini to jump $100. I would much rather see its processor lag behind a little bit if they can get that price back to $499.
Same thing with the Macbook, I'd rather see a $999 Macbook with the current chips than a $1,099 Macbook that keeps up with the Macbook Pro's chips.
Of course, there's nothing saying Apple will lower the prices but IF they do then I would be very happy to see the "old" Intel chips stay in those machines another 6 months. The first core chips are still VERY fast chips, it's the rest of the system (video card) that's holding things up now. I wonder how much extra benefit you'd even get from a Merom chip in a mini.
To cut the price of the Mini by $100, Apple better hope Intel are doing a "Half Price" cut which is extremely unlikely. How much would it hurt Apple to just double the height of the Mini and put a 1.83 GHz Conroe (Allendale) in there and a 3.5" Hard Drive? I'm pretty sure no-one would be whining about that. It would also get the price back down to $499 easy!
I never expected the mini to go that way this year. Remember, the entire point of the mini is to be LOW COST.
The switch to Intel caused the price of the mini to jump $100. I would much rather see its processor lag behind a little bit if they can get that price back to $499.
Same thing with the Macbook, I'd rather see a $999 Macbook with the current chips than a $1,099 Macbook that keeps up with the Macbook Pro's chips.
Of course, there's nothing saying Apple will lower the prices but IF they do then I would be very happy to see the "old" Intel chips stay in those machines another 6 months. The first core chips are still VERY fast chips, it's the rest of the system (video card) that's holding things up now. I wonder how much extra benefit you'd even get from a Merom chip in a mini.
To cut the price of the Mini by $100, Apple better hope Intel are doing a "Half Price" cut which is extremely unlikely. How much would it hurt Apple to just double the height of the Mini and put a 1.83 GHz Conroe (Allendale) in there and a 3.5" Hard Drive? I'm pretty sure no-one would be whining about that. It would also get the price back down to $499 easy!
BornAgainMac
Sep 6, 09:14 AM
These new Mac Mini's don't seem like a great deal anymore. I think it was done on purpose to get people to upscale to a higher model.
aibo82
May 2, 07:46 PM
The furture of apple:
No macbooks.
Hybrid mac iOS tablets
justin bieber bulge pictures
justin bieber and selena gomez
Selena Gomez and Justin Bieber
and+selena+gomez+reak+up+
justin bieber bulge pictures
Justin+ieber+and+selena+
No macbooks.
Hybrid mac iOS tablets
RITZFit
Jan 6, 03:49 PM
My teggy
zoran
Nov 21, 10:10 AM
This rumor seems to be only a rumor! Its Nov 21st today, when will octos come? Next year i guess... damn it!:mad:
nsayer
Nov 15, 12:13 PM
Seems to me this might be a way not for Apple to release an 8 core machine, but perhaps to release a one-chip, 4 core Mac Pro. That might result in slightly lower manufacturing and/or parts costs.
pointandclick
Mar 1, 10:03 PM
Yep all of them are hard drives, i have 2TB in each one and then a RAID-0 with 2x2TB.
How are they connected? I've never bothered with external drives. NAS is where it's at. ;) I don't even like to think about trying to transfer terabytes of data over usb. Plus being able to use the storage from multiple machines without having to plug/unplug.
Just rebuilt mine with 3x2tb in raidz.
How are they connected? I've never bothered with external drives. NAS is where it's at. ;) I don't even like to think about trying to transfer terabytes of data over usb. Plus being able to use the storage from multiple machines without having to plug/unplug.
Just rebuilt mine with 3x2tb in raidz.
chrismacguy
Feb 26, 03:09 PM
Wrong. The earlier widescreen acrylic models are also called Cinema Displays :) @Lifeinhd is correct, the display shown in the previous post cannot be a first gen cinema display.
The rule is actually very simple as far as the LCD ones go:
LCD <20" = Studio Display (15" and 17")
Any LCD 20" or larger = Cinema Display (Watch the G4 Sawtooth intro on youtube, and you see the very first 22" DVI-D (Pre ADC) Cinema Display which was a BTO option on the 450 and 500Mhz PowerMac G4s in 1999. That was the first gen. The Aluminium ones are about the 4th I believe (22" DVI-D, 22" ADC, 20 and 23" ADC/Acryllic, then the 20" Aluminium ones).
The rule is actually very simple as far as the LCD ones go:
LCD <20" = Studio Display (15" and 17")
Any LCD 20" or larger = Cinema Display (Watch the G4 Sawtooth intro on youtube, and you see the very first 22" DVI-D (Pre ADC) Cinema Display which was a BTO option on the 450 and 500Mhz PowerMac G4s in 1999. That was the first gen. The Aluminium ones are about the 4th I believe (22" DVI-D, 22" ADC, 20 and 23" ADC/Acryllic, then the 20" Aluminium ones).
skunk
Mar 27, 04:57 AM
Well, the US controls the AWACSThe AWACS involved are owned and operated by NATO. There may not even be US personnel on board.
Sbrocket
Jan 11, 05:20 PM
i highly highly doubt they are calling it the "macbook air." that's borderline laughable. i am willing to bet the phase "there's something in the air" is referring to the soon to be announced rental service, not a piece of hardware. apple is making an obvious attempt to eliminate physical mediums altogether, first cds with mp3s and now dvds with downloadable vids (both via the itunes music store). everything will be available "in the air" or "up in the cloud," if you will. i'll be damned if they name their next product the "macbook air." c'mon people...
You may want to retract that...
Why do you assume that the information was based off the posters, rather than simple coincidence or MR waiting for some corroboration? That's a bad assumption if I had to say so.
You may want to retract that...
Why do you assume that the information was based off the posters, rather than simple coincidence or MR waiting for some corroboration? That's a bad assumption if I had to say so.
Spica
Sep 7, 09:55 AM
I just bought a brand new core solo from a reseller 4 days ago!!! Is there any remedy for me?
This sucks.
This sucks.
afrowq
Apr 20, 10:15 PM
I think that's one of the reasons why Apple has held off with the iMac upgrade. They wanted the MacBook Pro to be ahead for a few months because it's a "pro" model line.
When I don't see hipsters, students, and soccer moms using Macbook "Pros" at Starbucks, then I'll believe that it's a "Pro" model
When I don't see hipsters, students, and soccer moms using Macbook "Pros" at Starbucks, then I'll believe that it's a "Pro" model
bigpics
Mar 24, 12:57 PM
Dude, I'm sorry to inform you that what you're saying is an outright lie, and there are guys from the Lossless Compression Clan, called "Apple Lossless codec", "FLAC", and "APE", standing with heavy cluebats in their hands, ready to perform a painful reality sync on anyone thinking compression ALWAYS degrades quality.
Because it doesn't, full stop.You're (very probably) right. My comments were aimed at those who were saying the Classic is overkill because who could ever "need" anything more than 128 or even 256 kbps AAC's or mp3's. (Nobody even mentioned 320, at which many of my fave songs are ripped.)
So as for the "lossless" CODECs, my reach exceeds my grasp. When it comes to photo files I pretty much understand the principles of ZFW lossless compression in TIFF files and have thousands of 'em. And in case anyone doesn't know, if you work on JPEG's and do multiple editing sessions on a photo, you do introduce new compression artifacts every time you re-save even at the highest settings. I've done tests for kicks and giggles - repeatedly opening and saving .jpg's and you reach a point where the image looks like a (very) bad xerox copy.
Back to audio, I've plowed through a few articles on formats - years ago - and I've seen slightly differing conclusions about Apple Lossless and FLAC ('tho all felt that these were alternatives worth considering for at least the great majority of people serious about sound), but, frankly, I lack the chops to have an informed opinion of my own, and know nada about APE.
And, no, while I can appreciate friends' systems that are tricked out with vacuum tube amps, "reference" speakers and high-end vinyl pressings, I'm hardly one of the hard-core audiophiles in practice. My files are mostly 256 and 320 kbps, my home speaker placements are wrong and I use preset ambiance settings that totally mess with the sound to produce surround effects from AAC's.
Worse, the great majority of my listening is on the mid-level rig in my car at freeway speeds or in city traffic, meaning I and millions of others are constantly fighting like, what, 20-30 db of non-music noise that totally overwhelms delicate nuances in sound. And worst, some of my earliest pre-iPod rips (back when I had a massive 20 GB HDD) were done in RealPlayer at 96 or even 64 kbps - before I sold or traded those CDs - and yeah, in the car, some of those still sound "pretty good" to me (tho' some clearly don't).
Add the (lack of) quality of most ear buds and headsets used by most people, and there's probably less than 5% of music listeners experiencing "true high-fidelity." To turn around an old ad campaign, no, our music listening today is "not live - it's Memorex."
But my point was and is that there's no reason to champion lossy compression per se other than for the economies of storage space it provides, and for fungible uses like topical podcasts.
As long as we have the space, "data fidelity" is desirable so that the files we produce which will be around for many years - and get spread to many people - don't discard signal for no real gain. No one would put up with "lossy" word processing compression that occasionally turned "i's" into "l's" after all.
And those audio files will still be around in a future of better DAC's, speakers, active systems which routinely monitor and cancel out things like apartment, road and car noise (in quieter electric cars with better road noise supression in the first place), better mainstream headsets and who knows what other improvements.
Compatibility between players (software or hardware) used to be another reason to choose, say, mp3's, but there's really no meaningful competition to Apple's portable sound wonders any more.
So please keep those "cluebats" holstered! No offense intended. ;)
Because it doesn't, full stop.You're (very probably) right. My comments were aimed at those who were saying the Classic is overkill because who could ever "need" anything more than 128 or even 256 kbps AAC's or mp3's. (Nobody even mentioned 320, at which many of my fave songs are ripped.)
So as for the "lossless" CODECs, my reach exceeds my grasp. When it comes to photo files I pretty much understand the principles of ZFW lossless compression in TIFF files and have thousands of 'em. And in case anyone doesn't know, if you work on JPEG's and do multiple editing sessions on a photo, you do introduce new compression artifacts every time you re-save even at the highest settings. I've done tests for kicks and giggles - repeatedly opening and saving .jpg's and you reach a point where the image looks like a (very) bad xerox copy.
Back to audio, I've plowed through a few articles on formats - years ago - and I've seen slightly differing conclusions about Apple Lossless and FLAC ('tho all felt that these were alternatives worth considering for at least the great majority of people serious about sound), but, frankly, I lack the chops to have an informed opinion of my own, and know nada about APE.
And, no, while I can appreciate friends' systems that are tricked out with vacuum tube amps, "reference" speakers and high-end vinyl pressings, I'm hardly one of the hard-core audiophiles in practice. My files are mostly 256 and 320 kbps, my home speaker placements are wrong and I use preset ambiance settings that totally mess with the sound to produce surround effects from AAC's.
Worse, the great majority of my listening is on the mid-level rig in my car at freeway speeds or in city traffic, meaning I and millions of others are constantly fighting like, what, 20-30 db of non-music noise that totally overwhelms delicate nuances in sound. And worst, some of my earliest pre-iPod rips (back when I had a massive 20 GB HDD) were done in RealPlayer at 96 or even 64 kbps - before I sold or traded those CDs - and yeah, in the car, some of those still sound "pretty good" to me (tho' some clearly don't).
Add the (lack of) quality of most ear buds and headsets used by most people, and there's probably less than 5% of music listeners experiencing "true high-fidelity." To turn around an old ad campaign, no, our music listening today is "not live - it's Memorex."
But my point was and is that there's no reason to champion lossy compression per se other than for the economies of storage space it provides, and for fungible uses like topical podcasts.
As long as we have the space, "data fidelity" is desirable so that the files we produce which will be around for many years - and get spread to many people - don't discard signal for no real gain. No one would put up with "lossy" word processing compression that occasionally turned "i's" into "l's" after all.
And those audio files will still be around in a future of better DAC's, speakers, active systems which routinely monitor and cancel out things like apartment, road and car noise (in quieter electric cars with better road noise supression in the first place), better mainstream headsets and who knows what other improvements.
Compatibility between players (software or hardware) used to be another reason to choose, say, mp3's, but there's really no meaningful competition to Apple's portable sound wonders any more.
So please keep those "cluebats" holstered! No offense intended. ;)
imac_japan
Apr 15, 07:01 PM
yes, iPod out sold CPU's this quarter... But they still don't make as much money, as they are cheaper. the 807 thousand ipods sold this quarter count for only 15% of Apple's profit, whereas the 779000 (around that) (up 5% from this quarter last year) count for more then 45% of thier profit
45% of their profit ! Its alittle dangerous for Apple to be relying on the Ipod to push sales. Why not sell Macs with ipods ??? eg: Buy an Emac and get an 10gb Ipod for $100 or Buy a G5 Powermac and get a 10gb Ipod for $50 !
That would drive sales up and up.
45% of their profit ! Its alittle dangerous for Apple to be relying on the Ipod to push sales. Why not sell Macs with ipods ??? eg: Buy an Emac and get an 10gb Ipod for $100 or Buy a G5 Powermac and get a 10gb Ipod for $50 !
That would drive sales up and up.
No comments:
Post a Comment