Chaszmyr
Aug 15, 11:39 AM
That photoshop test is insane!
tk421
Nov 28, 09:34 PM
I'll just say what I said here (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=3036851#post3036851) again:
“It’s a major change for the industry,” David Geffen told N.Y. Times reporter Jeff Leeds, who broke the story. “Each of these devices is used to store unpaid-for material. This way, on top of the material people do pay for, the record companies are getting paid on the devices storing the copied music.”
"This agreement with Microsoft around Zune is a significant milestone for our company and our artists," said Morris in a statement. “This move demonstrates there can be a win-win situation where consumers have a great experience while labels and artists are also fairly compensated. We applaud Microsoft for its innovative and consumer-friendly Zune store and device."
Microsoft Corporate VP of Entertainment & Devices Bryan Lee chimed in: "This is an industry in transition, and we at Zune feel that artists should be paid fairly. The agreement we are announcing today is one of many innovations we plan on introducing to the entertainment industry with our partners and highlights our commitment to growing the digital music space. We believe that the music consumer will appreciate knowing that when they buy a Zune device, they are helping their favorite artists get paid."
It sounds to me like they are saying anyone that buys a digital music player is a thief. They are broadly accusing each of us of stealing from artists. I don't appreciate that, and I think we should all voice our disapproval.
Universal Music Group:
USA (212) 841 8000
France +33 1 44 41 91 91
UK +44 0 20 77 47 4000
feedback_fr@vivendi.com
Phone calls are more effective than email, but feel free to do either.
Do we really want the music labels getting a cut of our hardware purchases?!?
“It’s a major change for the industry,” David Geffen told N.Y. Times reporter Jeff Leeds, who broke the story. “Each of these devices is used to store unpaid-for material. This way, on top of the material people do pay for, the record companies are getting paid on the devices storing the copied music.”
"This agreement with Microsoft around Zune is a significant milestone for our company and our artists," said Morris in a statement. “This move demonstrates there can be a win-win situation where consumers have a great experience while labels and artists are also fairly compensated. We applaud Microsoft for its innovative and consumer-friendly Zune store and device."
Microsoft Corporate VP of Entertainment & Devices Bryan Lee chimed in: "This is an industry in transition, and we at Zune feel that artists should be paid fairly. The agreement we are announcing today is one of many innovations we plan on introducing to the entertainment industry with our partners and highlights our commitment to growing the digital music space. We believe that the music consumer will appreciate knowing that when they buy a Zune device, they are helping their favorite artists get paid."
It sounds to me like they are saying anyone that buys a digital music player is a thief. They are broadly accusing each of us of stealing from artists. I don't appreciate that, and I think we should all voice our disapproval.
Universal Music Group:
USA (212) 841 8000
France +33 1 44 41 91 91
UK +44 0 20 77 47 4000
feedback_fr@vivendi.com
Phone calls are more effective than email, but feel free to do either.
Do we really want the music labels getting a cut of our hardware purchases?!?
rovex
Mar 22, 01:40 PM
Yeah a 50% smaller screen for the same price and less battery life is certainly going to crush the iPad2.
The screen is not 50% smaller. Nice way of making yourself look stupid.
Playbook has that elusive flash support out of the box which every apple fanboy wants to hide under the rug.
OS is more eloquent than iOS.
The screen is not 50% smaller. Nice way of making yourself look stupid.
Playbook has that elusive flash support out of the box which every apple fanboy wants to hide under the rug.
OS is more eloquent than iOS.
Enigmac
Aug 7, 03:31 PM
Not a glimpse of the Finder...! :eek:
*cough* TOP SECRET *cough* :rolleyes:
*cough* TOP SECRET *cough* :rolleyes:
JAT
Mar 22, 06:40 PM
i believe samsung manufactures a lot of their own hardware.. from the display panels to the chips. don't they provide apple with parts for the ipad too? i think this is how samsung is able to price match apple here
That doesn't change the accounting. Cost is still the same, and they are pricing theirs very low. The first Tab came out at what, $800, and then dropped immediately on entrance to Costco and other retailers. Last I saw it was $400, I haven't been paying close attention, though.
That doesn't change the accounting. Cost is still the same, and they are pricing theirs very low. The first Tab came out at what, $800, and then dropped immediately on entrance to Costco and other retailers. Last I saw it was $400, I haven't been paying close attention, though.
Voltes V
Sep 14, 09:24 PM
:eek: :eek:
What's planned after that? 16 cores on a chip? Seriously?? :confused: :confused:
yeah, who would've thought we're having quad core 4 years ago.
What's planned after that? 16 cores on a chip? Seriously?? :confused: :confused:
yeah, who would've thought we're having quad core 4 years ago.
Vegasman
Apr 27, 09:27 AM
For those of us who regularly travel for work between locations but stay away for more than a week, it will be a hit in performance. I just hope there is a setting that allows a larger data file to be kept.
Wow. Was your iPhone really THAT slow the first time you used it. I don't recall those complaints hitting the news (yet).
Wow. Was your iPhone really THAT slow the first time you used it. I don't recall those complaints hitting the news (yet).
amccune
Apr 12, 09:13 AM
I think the User's Group meeting isn't until 4:30, so we are in for a wait...
Sky Blue
Mar 26, 11:02 AM
what $500 product?
OS X Server
OS X Server
Markov
Jun 8, 08:47 PM
Do they? I thought they phased them out, along with most of the other electronic hobbyist items that they alone used to carry.
Some stores do, the one I work in does.
That's me!
Nearest Apple Store is 90 minutes away. Nearest Authorized AT&T store that would carry the iPhone is like 60. Radio shack is just 10 minutes.
I'm wondering though, what would be the advantages/disadvantages to buying it at Radio Shack vs AT&T vs The Apple Store? Once I have the item purchased, will I notice any sort of difference what-so-ever?
Cheers.
Uh... no. It's the same iPhone 4. Why would there be a difference?
I used to work at radioshack too and the resources there suck. Activation will take longer than usual and they can mess up your account/credit. I hated activating phones cause it was a hassle since we were not connected directly with carriers.
Wrong. They've changed that. We get to customers faster, upgrades typically take 5 minutes if ATT isn't slow or down.
I would rather just order it online if I didn't want to drive to an Apple Store.
Seriously, RadioShack needs to die.
Seriously? You mean, your not joking? Why should RadioShack die? The other stores need the competition. And why would you be against going to RadioShack?
Some stores do, the one I work in does.
That's me!
Nearest Apple Store is 90 minutes away. Nearest Authorized AT&T store that would carry the iPhone is like 60. Radio shack is just 10 minutes.
I'm wondering though, what would be the advantages/disadvantages to buying it at Radio Shack vs AT&T vs The Apple Store? Once I have the item purchased, will I notice any sort of difference what-so-ever?
Cheers.
Uh... no. It's the same iPhone 4. Why would there be a difference?
I used to work at radioshack too and the resources there suck. Activation will take longer than usual and they can mess up your account/credit. I hated activating phones cause it was a hassle since we were not connected directly with carriers.
Wrong. They've changed that. We get to customers faster, upgrades typically take 5 minutes if ATT isn't slow or down.
I would rather just order it online if I didn't want to drive to an Apple Store.
Seriously, RadioShack needs to die.
Seriously? You mean, your not joking? Why should RadioShack die? The other stores need the competition. And why would you be against going to RadioShack?
twoodcc
Aug 14, 05:54 PM
well to my understanding, there should be a lot of change between GT5 prologue and the full release. we won't know til it comes out, but i sure hope that it is much better.
i personally like all the cars and graphics. i like how it keeps up with how many miles you have on each car, and that you need to change the oil and everything. but maybe that's just me. its cheaper for me to play the game instead of actually buying a nice sports car.
i personally like all the cars and graphics. i like how it keeps up with how many miles you have on each car, and that you need to change the oil and everything. but maybe that's just me. its cheaper for me to play the game instead of actually buying a nice sports car.
digitalbiker
Aug 7, 08:17 PM
Give me a fracking break. Intel has NOTHING to do with this. NOTHING.
Well I wouldn't say "Nothing" as obviously it required a lot of programmer time to move the OS to Intel, create the new XCode compiler, create & debug rosetta, re-write all of the iLife, and Pro-Apps offered by Apple, etc. etc.
But it didn't have anything to do with stifling innovation. I think Apple is just running out of innovative ideas. It happens companies go through dry spells.
Really, I haven't seen much innovation out of Apple since the move from OS 9 to OS X. That was a major leap. Automator actually has a lot of potential but so far I think it is being under used. As far as the GUI is concerned, I think there are a lot of things that could be revamped to improve that area.
By the way has anybody tried Quiksilver for OS X. It is spectacular. I recently downloaded it, freeware, and have been loving this addition to the OS. Not only does it replace launchbar, spotlight, and others but has a nice verb feature that lets you quickly do all sorts of things and have access to OS X services under the hood.
Well I wouldn't say "Nothing" as obviously it required a lot of programmer time to move the OS to Intel, create the new XCode compiler, create & debug rosetta, re-write all of the iLife, and Pro-Apps offered by Apple, etc. etc.
But it didn't have anything to do with stifling innovation. I think Apple is just running out of innovative ideas. It happens companies go through dry spells.
Really, I haven't seen much innovation out of Apple since the move from OS 9 to OS X. That was a major leap. Automator actually has a lot of potential but so far I think it is being under used. As far as the GUI is concerned, I think there are a lot of things that could be revamped to improve that area.
By the way has anybody tried Quiksilver for OS X. It is spectacular. I recently downloaded it, freeware, and have been loving this addition to the OS. Not only does it replace launchbar, spotlight, and others but has a nice verb feature that lets you quickly do all sorts of things and have access to OS X services under the hood.
Val-kyrie
Jul 30, 01:27 PM
Gee, talk about getting ahead of yourself.
Core 3 will be out before Vista is. I'm going to call it now.
Everybody, be my witness, Core 3 (any processor that goes beyond Core 2 because I don't know if they'll call it "Core 3") will be out before a consumer version of Vista is shipped.
You don't think Vista will be out before the revision to the Core 2 Duo due in Q1 2007 with the Santa Rosa chipset??? I bet Vista will ship by the time the Santa Rosa chipset is ready, especially because MS is suggesting Vista systems use harddrives or Mobos with flash RAM to speed up the boot process.
Core 3 will be out before Vista is. I'm going to call it now.
Everybody, be my witness, Core 3 (any processor that goes beyond Core 2 because I don't know if they'll call it "Core 3") will be out before a consumer version of Vista is shipped.
You don't think Vista will be out before the revision to the Core 2 Duo due in Q1 2007 with the Santa Rosa chipset??? I bet Vista will ship by the time the Santa Rosa chipset is ready, especially because MS is suggesting Vista systems use harddrives or Mobos with flash RAM to speed up the boot process.
NJRonbo
Jun 14, 06:04 PM
Wait a sec...
Had to read that again...
If I get a PIN tomorrow at 1pm EST I am guaranteed
a phone on launch day? I don't have to stand in line
that morning?
They told me differently when I called the store citing
NO RESERVATIONS.
Had to read that again...
If I get a PIN tomorrow at 1pm EST I am guaranteed
a phone on launch day? I don't have to stand in line
that morning?
They told me differently when I called the store citing
NO RESERVATIONS.
Chundles
Jul 20, 09:44 AM
Just stating 'I knew that' I just used it as an example. Chundles gets confused easily so I have to make things simple. Hi Chundles :D
You'll keep...:p
You'll keep...:p
ergle2
Sep 15, 12:50 PM
More pedantic details for those who are interested... :)
NT actually started as OS/2 3.0. Its lead architect was OS guru Dave Cutler, who is famous for architecting VMS for DEC, and naturally its design influenced NT. And the N-10 (Where "NT" comes from, "N" "T"en) Intel RISC processor was never intended to be a mainstream product; Dave Cutler insisted on the development team NOT using an X86 processor to make sure they would have no excuse to fall back on legacy code or thought. In fact, the N-10 build that was the default work environment for the team was never intended to leave the Microsoft campus. NT over its life has run on X86, DEC Alpha, MIPS, PowerPC, Itanium, and x64.
IBM and Microsoft worked together on OS/2 1.0 from 1985-1989. Much maligned, it did suck because it was targeted for the 286 not the 386, but it did break new ground -- preemptive multitasking and an advanced GUI (Presentation Manager). By 1989 they wanted to move on to something that would take advantage of the 386's 32-bit architecture, flat memory model, and virtual machine support. Simultaneously they started OS/2 2.0 (extend the current 16-bit code to a 16-32-bit hybrid) and OS/2 3.0 (a ground up, platform independent version). When Windows 3.0 took off in 1990, Microsoft had second thoughts and eventually broke with IBM. OS/2 3.0 became Windows NT -- in the first days of the split, NT still had OS/2 Presentation Manager APIs for it's GUI. They ripped it out and created Win32 APIs. That's also why to this day NT/2K/XP supported OS/2 command line applications, and there was also a little known GUI pack that would support OS/2 1.x GUI applications.
All very true, but beyond that -- if you've ever looked closely VMS and at NT, you'll notice, it's a lot more than just "influenced". The core design was pretty much identical -- the way I/O worked, its interrupt handling, the scheduler, and so on -- they're all practically carbon copies. Some of the names changed, but how things work under the hood hadn't. Since then it's evolved, of course, but you'd expect that.
Quite amusing, really... how a heavyweight enterprise-class OS of the 80's became the desktop of the 00's :)
Those that were around in the dim and distant will recall that VMS and Unix were two of the main competitors in many marketplaces in the 80's and early 90's... and today we have OS X, Linux, FreeBSD, Solaris, etc. vs XP, W2K3 Server and (soon) Vista -- kind of ironic, dontcha think? :)
Of course, there's a lot still running VMS to this very day. I don't think HP wants them to tho' -- they just sent all the support to India, apparently, to a team with relatively little experience...
NT actually started as OS/2 3.0. Its lead architect was OS guru Dave Cutler, who is famous for architecting VMS for DEC, and naturally its design influenced NT. And the N-10 (Where "NT" comes from, "N" "T"en) Intel RISC processor was never intended to be a mainstream product; Dave Cutler insisted on the development team NOT using an X86 processor to make sure they would have no excuse to fall back on legacy code or thought. In fact, the N-10 build that was the default work environment for the team was never intended to leave the Microsoft campus. NT over its life has run on X86, DEC Alpha, MIPS, PowerPC, Itanium, and x64.
IBM and Microsoft worked together on OS/2 1.0 from 1985-1989. Much maligned, it did suck because it was targeted for the 286 not the 386, but it did break new ground -- preemptive multitasking and an advanced GUI (Presentation Manager). By 1989 they wanted to move on to something that would take advantage of the 386's 32-bit architecture, flat memory model, and virtual machine support. Simultaneously they started OS/2 2.0 (extend the current 16-bit code to a 16-32-bit hybrid) and OS/2 3.0 (a ground up, platform independent version). When Windows 3.0 took off in 1990, Microsoft had second thoughts and eventually broke with IBM. OS/2 3.0 became Windows NT -- in the first days of the split, NT still had OS/2 Presentation Manager APIs for it's GUI. They ripped it out and created Win32 APIs. That's also why to this day NT/2K/XP supported OS/2 command line applications, and there was also a little known GUI pack that would support OS/2 1.x GUI applications.
All very true, but beyond that -- if you've ever looked closely VMS and at NT, you'll notice, it's a lot more than just "influenced". The core design was pretty much identical -- the way I/O worked, its interrupt handling, the scheduler, and so on -- they're all practically carbon copies. Some of the names changed, but how things work under the hood hadn't. Since then it's evolved, of course, but you'd expect that.
Quite amusing, really... how a heavyweight enterprise-class OS of the 80's became the desktop of the 00's :)
Those that were around in the dim and distant will recall that VMS and Unix were two of the main competitors in many marketplaces in the 80's and early 90's... and today we have OS X, Linux, FreeBSD, Solaris, etc. vs XP, W2K3 Server and (soon) Vista -- kind of ironic, dontcha think? :)
Of course, there's a lot still running VMS to this very day. I don't think HP wants them to tho' -- they just sent all the support to India, apparently, to a team with relatively little experience...
Iconoclysm
Apr 19, 08:24 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 (http://www.nytimes.com/1989/12/20/business/xerox-vs-apple-standard-dashboard-is-at-issue.html), 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 saying 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.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/78/Rank_Xerox_8010%2B40_brochure_front.jpg
Actually, you're WRONG!!!! to say he's wrong. You're trying to say that every GUI element was created at Xerox? EVERY one of them? Sorry, but your argument here is akin to something Fox News would air.
Secondly, your source is a pro-Apple website. Thats a problem right there.
I'll give you a proper source, the NYTimes (http://www.nytimes.com/1989/12/20/business/xerox-vs-apple-standard-dashboard-is-at-issue.html), 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 saying 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.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/78/Rank_Xerox_8010%2B40_brochure_front.jpg
Actually, you're WRONG!!!! to say he's wrong. You're trying to say that every GUI element was created at Xerox? EVERY one of them? Sorry, but your argument here is akin to something Fox News would air.
cmaier
Apr 20, 11:58 AM
According to the analysis, it is in the suit, as part of the trade dress claims.
Not as a separate thing. It's the grid IN COMBINATION with the other things that constitutes the trade dress.
Not as a separate thing. It's the grid IN COMBINATION with the other things that constitutes the trade dress.
skunk
Mar 22, 08:27 AM
Sometimes silence speaks more than words. Your avoidance of the central issue, and irrelevant or at least less relevant focus on the size, and militarism of coalition countries indicates a lack of understanding or a willful avoidance of the issue I brought up... the 'anti-change' Obama really stands for and the hypocrisy of those on the left and the American media in general when it comes to wartime actions of Dem and Repub presidentsI could not be less interested in taking part in one your tedious party political rants. I was simply suggesting a blindingly obvious reason for the difference between the size of the bought coalition of the craven in 2003 and the present effort. You brought that up, nobody else.
Multimedia
Jul 29, 07:03 PM
this would be smart because as of right now the mac book pro doesnt WOW me over the macbook. Do you think the "core 3" will also have the same pin structure as the 2's?Core 3 is in 2009. Many things will be very different by then. You wouldn't want to upgrade a 2006 Mac in 2009.Not a chance in hell, give up the idea of upgrading your Mac already :rolleyes:
The newer Meroms that are to come out Q2 2007 will be based off a completely new socket.With Santa Rosa to boot!
The newer Meroms that are to come out Q2 2007 will be based off a completely new socket.With Santa Rosa to boot!
TripHop
Jun 9, 08:53 PM
Okay.. well I guess I wont be taking my chances at RadioShack. If they let me preorder, would I be good to go on launch day? Or could i still encounter problemsLooks like it will be no problem to lock in an iP4 for launch morning as long as we pre-order next Tuesday morning. It's sort of like 2 launch days - pre order next Tuesday the 15th for a $50 advance (in the form of a gift card) and receive the 24th. The Shack is much handier than any other launch store for me. :)
Roessnakhan
Mar 22, 12:53 PM
So what is next year the year of? Phones again let me guess
Yeah, probably.
Yeah, probably.
littleman23408
Dec 6, 08:15 PM
I got an 03 Lotus Elise :rolleyes:
Its a nice car, i just have no use for it. Idk if there are Lotus-only races later on so i didnt sell it yet.
I noticed in my garage that theres an option for sharing cars online. I havent read the GT5 manual so i have no idea what it does, but i assume it would allow my PSN friends to drive my cars if i'm not using them. I shared my Citroen, if someone is logged on later check the Online tab of your garage and see if its there. Just dont put too many miles on it ;)
Werd, I'll check later. I know I noticed you online earlier. I wanted to send you a message so we could race. I went in the lobby and was just :confused:
So how do we go about setting up a two (or more) race?
Its a nice car, i just have no use for it. Idk if there are Lotus-only races later on so i didnt sell it yet.
I noticed in my garage that theres an option for sharing cars online. I havent read the GT5 manual so i have no idea what it does, but i assume it would allow my PSN friends to drive my cars if i'm not using them. I shared my Citroen, if someone is logged on later check the Online tab of your garage and see if its there. Just dont put too many miles on it ;)
Werd, I'll check later. I know I noticed you online earlier. I wanted to send you a message so we could race. I went in the lobby and was just :confused:
So how do we go about setting up a two (or more) race?
ghostlines
Apr 25, 02:26 PM
Maybe I have a bit of tunnel vision but is simply storing location data of customers on THEIR own machines so wrong? I heard in some comments that this info could be used for caching purposes.
If it's illegal to store location data unknowingly on my own machine then Apple has lost this case already. But I think not. I say prove that Apple did upload and use this location info. Otherwise Apple can simply claim they used it for caching or for a secret location based app they were planning on releasing for people to opt into.(:hint: for Apple's lawyers)
If Apple loses this then I hope lawsuits follow for similar companies that also do such things. When you're on the top people like to bash for the smallest of things.
If it's illegal to store location data unknowingly on my own machine then Apple has lost this case already. But I think not. I say prove that Apple did upload and use this location info. Otherwise Apple can simply claim they used it for caching or for a secret location based app they were planning on releasing for people to opt into.(:hint: for Apple's lawyers)
If Apple loses this then I hope lawsuits follow for similar companies that also do such things. When you're on the top people like to bash for the smallest of things.
