WestonHarvey1
Jul 21, 12:51 PM
You seem to have missed the "... MORE than iPhone 3gs" part.
A better antenna should drop FEWER calls (unless there's a flaw)
You don't get the real picture about performance from that average. What are the call drop numbers when people don't "hold it wrong"? Let's say they were 50 fewer on the 4. That would indicate a massively improved overall antenna design. So you'd have an antenna that holds on to calls about exactly as well on average, with the *ability to greatly exceed previous performance depending on use*. That can't be ignored.
And not all dropped calls are signal related. Some are capacity related and we have no idea how AT&T runs those numbers.
A better antenna should drop FEWER calls (unless there's a flaw)
You don't get the real picture about performance from that average. What are the call drop numbers when people don't "hold it wrong"? Let's say they were 50 fewer on the 4. That would indicate a massively improved overall antenna design. So you'd have an antenna that holds on to calls about exactly as well on average, with the *ability to greatly exceed previous performance depending on use*. That can't be ignored.
And not all dropped calls are signal related. Some are capacity related and we have no idea how AT&T runs those numbers.
bikertwin
Sep 25, 03:51 PM
Technically my POWERMAC G4 can run iMovie, Keynote, and other mac software. RUNNING and FUNCTIONING (at a reasonable speed) are two totally different things. iPhoto takes a day to get going. I can't imagine aperture.
Anyway... I don't want to ruin anybody's happy day, but the reality is, if you don't have the latest and greatest Apple Machine, the current software runs pretty slow.
Go to the Apple store (yes, this means some of you will have to leave your apartment) and try running this software on a mac mini. Don't get depressed when it takes your entire lunch break to start the software. Forget about moving stacks of photos around and editing. As I mentioned... I had problems with the G5 QUAD and the original aperture at my Apple Store in Seattle.
Just a thought.
I wouldn't get too excited about Aperture running on 'lighter' hardware such as MacBooks or Mac minis. I think the idea is that, rather than doing hardcore raw file processing on these lightweight hardware products, you'd just have your JPEG-preview-only Aperture library on these machines. So the really speedy functionality on this lightweight hardware would be limited to organizing, sorting, searching, slideshows, etc. of pre-generated JPEG previews.
I doubt we'll be doing hardcore bulk raw processing on a Mac mini, even with Aperture 1.5. But I wouldn't mind if we could.
Anyway... I don't want to ruin anybody's happy day, but the reality is, if you don't have the latest and greatest Apple Machine, the current software runs pretty slow.
Go to the Apple store (yes, this means some of you will have to leave your apartment) and try running this software on a mac mini. Don't get depressed when it takes your entire lunch break to start the software. Forget about moving stacks of photos around and editing. As I mentioned... I had problems with the G5 QUAD and the original aperture at my Apple Store in Seattle.
Just a thought.
I wouldn't get too excited about Aperture running on 'lighter' hardware such as MacBooks or Mac minis. I think the idea is that, rather than doing hardcore raw file processing on these lightweight hardware products, you'd just have your JPEG-preview-only Aperture library on these machines. So the really speedy functionality on this lightweight hardware would be limited to organizing, sorting, searching, slideshows, etc. of pre-generated JPEG previews.
I doubt we'll be doing hardcore bulk raw processing on a Mac mini, even with Aperture 1.5. But I wouldn't mind if we could.
Blorzoga
May 3, 10:25 PM
I'll buy one when it gets a capacitive pressure based screen/stylus (Like the HTC Flyer)
Well I guess you won't be buying one then. Good luck with your HTC Flyer ( whatever th hell that is)
Well I guess you won't be buying one then. Good luck with your HTC Flyer ( whatever th hell that is)
Koronis
Apr 8, 12:45 PM
What a surprise, Tech Crunch got a story completely wrong
rtdgoldfish
Apr 3, 08:42 PM
Can't the police get a warrant for the IP address? I think if they have a warrant above their heads they might "find" a IP address. All the information they get from a xbox or 360 that gets on XBL they HAVE to know the IP.
Well, I guess Microsoft thinks they are above the law (what else is new) and claims they don't have to give out the info to anyone. I'm not sure if the cops are able to get a suppena for Microsoft's info.
This post is on Digg, we are trying to get some attention from Microsoft. If you have a Digg.com account, Digg it! http://digg.com/gaming_news/Stolen_Xbox_360_Microsoft_refuses_to_assist_police
Well, I guess Microsoft thinks they are above the law (what else is new) and claims they don't have to give out the info to anyone. I'm not sure if the cops are able to get a suppena for Microsoft's info.
This post is on Digg, we are trying to get some attention from Microsoft. If you have a Digg.com account, Digg it! http://digg.com/gaming_news/Stolen_Xbox_360_Microsoft_refuses_to_assist_police
dunk321
Mar 17, 01:43 AM
LOL, funny was just in there 2 days ago to exchange my defective smart cover, yep
SuperJudge
Apr 12, 09:04 PM
Great album from Devin Townsend :)
I almost didn't recognize him without his skullet! :eek:
I almost didn't recognize him without his skullet! :eek:
c-Row
Sep 12, 12:55 AM
Yeah - I hope that 19.99$ price tag is wrong. Not that it matters for me - unless movies will be available worldwide.
cal6n
Jan 15, 01:23 PM
iPhone and Touch: Stay jailbroken.
MBA: Sexy but no use to me.
The rest: Meh...
MBA: Sexy but no use to me.
The rest: Meh...
TheUndertow
Apr 25, 12:42 PM
I would LOL if it stood for iPhone 4S(print).
dethmaShine
Apr 18, 07:40 AM
Wow, so the finder is finally giving us, what other OS' had for years. I wonder what the fanboys will say now, after defending this lack of a feature for years.
I suspect along the lines that apple innovates again and creates a brand new feature :p
I don't know which iPhone users were you talking about.
Everyone wanted multi-tasking; there are hypocrites, but can't believe any body touting that multi-tasking is bad or could be bad.
I suspect along the lines that apple innovates again and creates a brand new feature :p
I don't know which iPhone users were you talking about.
Everyone wanted multi-tasking; there are hypocrites, but can't believe any body touting that multi-tasking is bad or could be bad.
zwida
Nov 24, 09:10 AM
Just saved $101 on a BTO 24" iMac and $11 on Parallels. Bought some other random stuff, but no savings.
Now I've got that waiting-for-the-new-computer-to-ship itchiness.
:)
Now I've got that waiting-for-the-new-computer-to-ship itchiness.
:)
firestarter
Apr 26, 11:21 AM
Like this: 283005
The Slender Man, of course.
slender man, marble
slender man marble hornets. TheQuestion. Mar 26, 12:22 AM. Can#39;t believe it#39;s anywhere near GM time. Way too many bugs and inconsistencies in behavior.
Towering high the Slender Man
View topic - Slender Man
design of the Slender Man
puckhead193
Mar 18, 07:05 PM
i used to hate iphone owners (because i wanted one) but now that I have the perfect phone i'm happy and don't care what people say.
dsnort
Aug 2, 07:06 AM
Does anyone know what became of the constitutional challenge to the french iTunes law? I had read somewhere that the opposition party was trying to get the law overturned, haven't seen anything more about it since.
Eraserhead
Oct 29, 05:36 AM
Say good bye to programs like InsomniaX/Sleepless and other hacks.
I mention the two first apps because they were relying on the 10.4.8 source code to see what has broken the software from 10.4.7
The front page on macrumors says (for this article) that the source is available to anyone with an Apple account, this is really clever, as it's free to get the access but when you sign up for a developer account you have to agree not to share the software as it's "pre-release" and that's breaking the NDA. Basically if OSX86 Project stick 10.4.8 online now they have to get the source from an Apple developer account, so if OSX86 stick this source on their site Apple can make them pull it, AND developers can still get the access they need, it's a win-win situation.
Pirates can still also get the source at stick it on Bit Torrent trackers but they cannot get the publicity except in black hat circles so Apple cares less, as there's nothing they can ever do about that.
Being in IT, I have seen MS's progression on OS's and let me tell you this - they turned their heads to piracy in the NT/9x/2k days. Why? They wanted marketshare. They were willing to forgo some sales for the tie and lock in to Windows. Then once it's firmly entrenched in business and homes, they started to crack down. Makes sense - you are hooked on their software and have your stuff firmly entrenched with no migration out path and now you have to pay. It's like the crack dealer that gives you your first few hits free only to hook you later once you can't quit.
That's the sole reason for activation. Has little to do with piracy although they will claim that.
I'd doubt Apple would do a WGA thing as they are not looking for world domination and control like Microsoft.
Exactly, just what everyone else does on Piracy (just like Apple)
I mention the two first apps because they were relying on the 10.4.8 source code to see what has broken the software from 10.4.7
The front page on macrumors says (for this article) that the source is available to anyone with an Apple account, this is really clever, as it's free to get the access but when you sign up for a developer account you have to agree not to share the software as it's "pre-release" and that's breaking the NDA. Basically if OSX86 Project stick 10.4.8 online now they have to get the source from an Apple developer account, so if OSX86 stick this source on their site Apple can make them pull it, AND developers can still get the access they need, it's a win-win situation.
Pirates can still also get the source at stick it on Bit Torrent trackers but they cannot get the publicity except in black hat circles so Apple cares less, as there's nothing they can ever do about that.
Being in IT, I have seen MS's progression on OS's and let me tell you this - they turned their heads to piracy in the NT/9x/2k days. Why? They wanted marketshare. They were willing to forgo some sales for the tie and lock in to Windows. Then once it's firmly entrenched in business and homes, they started to crack down. Makes sense - you are hooked on their software and have your stuff firmly entrenched with no migration out path and now you have to pay. It's like the crack dealer that gives you your first few hits free only to hook you later once you can't quit.
That's the sole reason for activation. Has little to do with piracy although they will claim that.
I'd doubt Apple would do a WGA thing as they are not looking for world domination and control like Microsoft.
Exactly, just what everyone else does on Piracy (just like Apple)
ehoui
May 4, 04:00 PM
Why is someone bothered if the question itself does no harm. Grow up or change doctors if you don't like to be asked questions. This law is about as anti-libertarian and useless government intrusion as it gets.
iGary
Sep 26, 04:56 PM
After all of the comments about how great Aperture ran, and considering how crappy it was running on mine, I decided to take into the Apple Store.
The video card is defective and they are replacing it. No wonder my experience with the program stunk.
:)
The video card is defective and they are replacing it. No wonder my experience with the program stunk.
:)
Unspeaked
Mar 24, 04:37 PM
Can anyone remember the name of the iTunes player in the pic from 2001? it had LOADS of skins and the particular one in the pic! used to sink into the desktop when you clicked the screen or on another program, does anyone know if they brought it back to life? I miss that player SOOOOO MUCHHHHH :(
I think that's Audion.
http://www.panic.com/audion/
I think that's Audion.
http://www.panic.com/audion/
BC2009
May 2, 03:39 PM
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."
dude you do PR? couldn't tell.
all I am saying is that it is far more likely that this is a bug than intentional. if they wanted to do something intentionally to track people they could have hidden it very easily (and who knows if they do). I never said this was NOT a bug -- clearly it is. "End of story".
You should know that hindsight is 20/20. I am surrounded by IT professionals too -- and wait -- I am one (one who creates systems governed by strict compliance rules) -- one with lots of experience in software engineering and very senior with my company. I am sure that if I asked anybody today if they thought that file size was too large, they would definitely use their 20/20 hindsight to say "of course it is". I would.
But the fact of the matter is that these sort of things are exactly what can slip through the software development process. Most automated test cases are based around things that have already gone wrong (these are called regression tests) -- because you want to make sure you don't make the same mistake twice. It's likely that proactive "unit tests" around this code would have been written to trap the file size growing without bounds and filling up the device. Few would have thought to write a test to check how many records were being stored. Its exactly the kind of thing that is missed in the design process can make its way all the way into production. And, because of regression tests, the kind of thing that should not happen again.
I never said I trusted Apple's altruism. For all I know they are really tracking all of us -- it just won't be in a database stored on my phone. For all I know, AT&T is tracking me, as is Google, and Verizon. All have the capability based on my online Internet and wireless usage patterns and the devices I carry. I am just choosing not to be paranoid about it. This little "media scare" did not make me any more vulnerable to be tracked -- the means has been there for years. Incidentally, Google can read all my email too.
For somebody who doesn't "really care", your sure took offense to my pointing out that it was unlikely that this was some kind of Apple conspiracy. What would be a smoking gun would be finding personally identifiable location data on Apple's servers -- it would be very hard for Apple to talk their way out of that -- kinda like how Google tried to say "we didn't mean to gleam data off unprotected WiFi networks as we rolled our trucks by, we just happened to store it inadvertently." I'm sure somebody intended to keep that data -- it's kinda like accidentally starting a car and driving somewhere -- too many steps involved. Some idiot at Google did it and some smarter person realized the stupidity in it and they decided to come clean and destroy the data.
Apple used this tacky process you described becuase they obviously wanted to CONCEAL it from users, they certainly would not want the FEDS, Washinton and other agencies to know that they where doing it to them, whether or not they picked certain individuals is a matter Congress will settle, im sure if a mafia or cartel had this type of access they would also monitor wall street and join in on the scams.
And yeah Google does record but they at least give you the option to turn it off which makesd them liable if they intrude, Apple uses suckers and propaganda on forums and BS to cover up their sweatshop companies and 3rd party developers who probably helped them spy on competitors.
<sarcasm>
Yeah definitely, and the worst thing about Apple is that the iPhone transmits a signal in the middle of the night that brainwashes the user into fully trusting Steve Jobs as his/her new leader.
</sarcasm>
Please -- go hide in your basement bomb shelter. Just make sure the walls are lined with lead to protect you from those iPhone transmission signals.
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."
dude you do PR? couldn't tell.
all I am saying is that it is far more likely that this is a bug than intentional. if they wanted to do something intentionally to track people they could have hidden it very easily (and who knows if they do). I never said this was NOT a bug -- clearly it is. "End of story".
You should know that hindsight is 20/20. I am surrounded by IT professionals too -- and wait -- I am one (one who creates systems governed by strict compliance rules) -- one with lots of experience in software engineering and very senior with my company. I am sure that if I asked anybody today if they thought that file size was too large, they would definitely use their 20/20 hindsight to say "of course it is". I would.
But the fact of the matter is that these sort of things are exactly what can slip through the software development process. Most automated test cases are based around things that have already gone wrong (these are called regression tests) -- because you want to make sure you don't make the same mistake twice. It's likely that proactive "unit tests" around this code would have been written to trap the file size growing without bounds and filling up the device. Few would have thought to write a test to check how many records were being stored. Its exactly the kind of thing that is missed in the design process can make its way all the way into production. And, because of regression tests, the kind of thing that should not happen again.
I never said I trusted Apple's altruism. For all I know they are really tracking all of us -- it just won't be in a database stored on my phone. For all I know, AT&T is tracking me, as is Google, and Verizon. All have the capability based on my online Internet and wireless usage patterns and the devices I carry. I am just choosing not to be paranoid about it. This little "media scare" did not make me any more vulnerable to be tracked -- the means has been there for years. Incidentally, Google can read all my email too.
For somebody who doesn't "really care", your sure took offense to my pointing out that it was unlikely that this was some kind of Apple conspiracy. What would be a smoking gun would be finding personally identifiable location data on Apple's servers -- it would be very hard for Apple to talk their way out of that -- kinda like how Google tried to say "we didn't mean to gleam data off unprotected WiFi networks as we rolled our trucks by, we just happened to store it inadvertently." I'm sure somebody intended to keep that data -- it's kinda like accidentally starting a car and driving somewhere -- too many steps involved. Some idiot at Google did it and some smarter person realized the stupidity in it and they decided to come clean and destroy the data.
Apple used this tacky process you described becuase they obviously wanted to CONCEAL it from users, they certainly would not want the FEDS, Washinton and other agencies to know that they where doing it to them, whether or not they picked certain individuals is a matter Congress will settle, im sure if a mafia or cartel had this type of access they would also monitor wall street and join in on the scams.
And yeah Google does record but they at least give you the option to turn it off which makesd them liable if they intrude, Apple uses suckers and propaganda on forums and BS to cover up their sweatshop companies and 3rd party developers who probably helped them spy on competitors.
<sarcasm>
Yeah definitely, and the worst thing about Apple is that the iPhone transmits a signal in the middle of the night that brainwashes the user into fully trusting Steve Jobs as his/her new leader.
</sarcasm>
Please -- go hide in your basement bomb shelter. Just make sure the walls are lined with lead to protect you from those iPhone transmission signals.
stefan15
Jul 24, 11:39 AM
MAN.. these designers aren't getting it.. The ipod looks great because the design is ultra simple, clean. Why doesn't anyone else get this? Less is more.. That grey border around the screen is horrendously ugly. And why SILVER on the middle button? Arhghgh
One way or another, this means the ipod will only get better (that's the nature of competition)
One way or another, this means the ipod will only get better (that's the nature of competition)
skunk
Apr 21, 12:12 PM
Exactly.Very inexactly. The Arabs invented 0 some time ago. The system is borked.
stefan15
Jul 24, 11:41 AM
[--micropod image--]
OMG almost killed myself laughing
OMG almost killed myself laughing
Detlev
Mar 28, 02:41 PM
Next they'll want everyone to have an Apple ID to use their services.
Wait�
Wait�
No comments:
Post a Comment