matrix07
Apr 16, 12:43 PM
No, when Apple revealed the iPhone most people were thinking something along the line of "Apple seriously need to reconsider leaving out 3G and the ability to install software if they want to make it in the smart phone business", a phone that doesn't let you install new software is by definiton not a smart phone. The iPhone 3G was the real deal, ofcourse the first gen was successful, simply because it was Apple, but the 3G was when it turned into a good product and soared in popularity.
And iPhone is far from the first icon based phone and I personally believe the Sony Ericsson P800 and P900 was a big inspiration for iPhone.
It still hurts you, isn't it? When it's Apple that re-invent the phone.
Goes on. Keep denying pal. Let us know how hurt you are. Pundits out there all accepted what iPhone did to the industry. Only bitter person like you can not accept that. :cool:
I find this whole "Apple invented the smartphone" argument amusing.
You are one of those idiots crawling at Engadget who saw Macworld 2007 keynote and think only one thing.. "touch screen keyboard? Yuck!!!", I guess. LOL
And iPhone is far from the first icon based phone and I personally believe the Sony Ericsson P800 and P900 was a big inspiration for iPhone.
It still hurts you, isn't it? When it's Apple that re-invent the phone.
Goes on. Keep denying pal. Let us know how hurt you are. Pundits out there all accepted what iPhone did to the industry. Only bitter person like you can not accept that. :cool:
I find this whole "Apple invented the smartphone" argument amusing.
You are one of those idiots crawling at Engadget who saw Macworld 2007 keynote and think only one thing.. "touch screen keyboard? Yuck!!!", I guess. LOL
kresh
Oct 28, 02:41 PM
The thin veneer is off the vast majority of people that clamor for OSS.
Whenever I hear the OSS crowd scream "Software should be FREE!" I translate that to mean "I refuse to pay someone for their work, thus I will STEAL it"!
I don't blame Apple. The OSS community abused what they had and turned to piracy by stealing the GUI. Kudos Apple.
Whenever I hear the OSS crowd scream "Software should be FREE!" I translate that to mean "I refuse to pay someone for their work, thus I will STEAL it"!
I don't blame Apple. The OSS community abused what they had and turned to piracy by stealing the GUI. Kudos Apple.
leekohler
Apr 18, 12:38 PM
Left handed people have always been persecuted and represent a significantly larger portion of society than homosexuals, plus they tend to do well in society regardless of the persecution.
It's already been explained to you that left-handedness is mentioned in history classes. Why do you have a problem with gay people being discussed? WHY?
Answer the question, although I think I already know your answer.
It's already been explained to you that left-handedness is mentioned in history classes. Why do you have a problem with gay people being discussed? WHY?
Answer the question, although I think I already know your answer.
PeterQVenkman
Apr 15, 09:58 PM
It's probably a grainy render from Next Limit's Maxwell render.
CorvusCamenarum
Apr 17, 02:35 PM
It's so refreshing to see that with their 1 in 4 illiteracy rate and 1 in 5 high school dropout rate, California really has their priorities in order when it comes to education. Well done I say.
Much Ado
Jan 12, 03:46 AM
They are BLOGGERS. There are no rules in blogging. There are no codes of ethics.
As soon as you start advertising on your blog and maintain a healthy stream for revenue from hits, you become more than just a blog. They owe it to themselves to be professional for the sake of their reputations, and they just screwed that up royally.
As soon as you start advertising on your blog and maintain a healthy stream for revenue from hits, you become more than just a blog. They owe it to themselves to be professional for the sake of their reputations, and they just screwed that up royally.
Burgess07
Apr 29, 06:56 PM
Odd, I don't have that option in "System Preferences"
I used Photoshop.
I used Photoshop.
twoodcc
May 12, 05:54 PM
well i'm just having all kinds of problems. i noticed i had 2 of my systems down! the alienware and the home built rig - both were running 3.7 ghz, go figure.
so i decided to drive the 1.5 hours back to my apartment and check on them. i drove thru a storm to get here, and the power had flickered! so everything, including my server had restarted! good thing i decided to make the drive.
so hopefully i can get things straight here, and then i still gotta drive back and go to work in the am
so i decided to drive the 1.5 hours back to my apartment and check on them. i drove thru a storm to get here, and the power had flickered! so everything, including my server had restarted! good thing i decided to make the drive.
so hopefully i can get things straight here, and then i still gotta drive back and go to work in the am
macfan881
Oct 6, 01:38 PM
Verizon Still SUCKS over ATT though mainly for two reasons A. They Cripple the phones beyond belife and 2 there lovely UI is disgusting
Shotgun OS
Mar 17, 01:55 AM
This has to be trolling.
KnightWRX
Mar 13, 11:25 AM
I think there will be a change in computing
So you mean computing won't be "Input, Process, Output, Storage" but something else ?
No, there will be no change in computing. It's already general and basic enough to cover all the bases.
and tablets are the future of it. I do think servers/ power machines will remain, but I can see them becoming specialised (such as in power stations etc). I can see Linux filling that whole perfectly. I do feel that tablets/ touch based computers are the future, but I think they need voice recognition software to truly come into play for text input. If the iPad had a killer voice recognition software, then MS Word for iPad might truly become a game changer. As good as any touchscreen is, typing 2,000 words on a touchscreen would be a bit of a push.
You failed to see any of my points. Tablets are not some kind of "future change to computers!", tablets are very much computing devices utilizing the same concepts and ideas that have been the very core of the industry for the last 50 years.
Touch based computer ? It's still input and input is just that, input. It doesn't matter whether is touch, keyboards, mice, network, voice, biometrics. Input is input.
A lot of you people want to see a massive change where frankly there isn't any. A new type of device doesn't somehow make everything different. It can just be a "new type of device", something the computer industry of the last 50 years has seen plenty of.
Read my post again carefully, you'll see that I already addressed all your points. Don't just respond to me without even understanding what I'm talking about and at least trying to counteract my points if you're going to try to contradict me.
So you mean computing won't be "Input, Process, Output, Storage" but something else ?
No, there will be no change in computing. It's already general and basic enough to cover all the bases.
and tablets are the future of it. I do think servers/ power machines will remain, but I can see them becoming specialised (such as in power stations etc). I can see Linux filling that whole perfectly. I do feel that tablets/ touch based computers are the future, but I think they need voice recognition software to truly come into play for text input. If the iPad had a killer voice recognition software, then MS Word for iPad might truly become a game changer. As good as any touchscreen is, typing 2,000 words on a touchscreen would be a bit of a push.
You failed to see any of my points. Tablets are not some kind of "future change to computers!", tablets are very much computing devices utilizing the same concepts and ideas that have been the very core of the industry for the last 50 years.
Touch based computer ? It's still input and input is just that, input. It doesn't matter whether is touch, keyboards, mice, network, voice, biometrics. Input is input.
A lot of you people want to see a massive change where frankly there isn't any. A new type of device doesn't somehow make everything different. It can just be a "new type of device", something the computer industry of the last 50 years has seen plenty of.
Read my post again carefully, you'll see that I already addressed all your points. Don't just respond to me without even understanding what I'm talking about and at least trying to counteract my points if you're going to try to contradict me.
maflynn
Mar 7, 10:30 AM
Why is Apple the only tech company that makes unique products? All the other big ones seem to just drop in behind Apple after they invent something...
Actually they're not the only tech company that makes unique products. You probably need to turn your iMac off and go outside more :p
There's plenty of good things being produced by non-apple companies. Yeah apple makes some good things, but they're not the be all and end all on electronics.
Actually they're not the only tech company that makes unique products. You probably need to turn your iMac off and go outside more :p
There's plenty of good things being produced by non-apple companies. Yeah apple makes some good things, but they're not the be all and end all on electronics.
Ryeno
May 3, 05:15 PM
You are paying to use data on your mobile device. If you want to use it to link up other devices, there is a separate service for that.
This is not exactly brain surgery here.
thank god you are not a brain surgeon. This is no different then paying for internet @ home and getting a modem (cell phone) that only allows connection to one PC (cell phone). Then being forced to pay an extra fee just to split the signal to another PC (use a router in this example).
This is not exactly brain surgery here.
thank god you are not a brain surgeon. This is no different then paying for internet @ home and getting a modem (cell phone) that only allows connection to one PC (cell phone). Then being forced to pay an extra fee just to split the signal to another PC (use a router in this example).
twoodcc
Apr 1, 10:53 PM
Thanks. I should be there tomorrow night. Looking forward to it!
citizenzen
Apr 22, 10:00 AM
... teach our kids why rome fell ...
You mean because they passed laws against homosexuality?
While I find that a little simplistic, if you really want to run with that theory that's your choice.
Homosexuality in ancient Rome (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_ancient_Rome)
Homosexuality in ancient Rome features dispassionately in many literary works, poems, graffiti and in comments, for example, on the sexual predilections of single emperors: Edward Gibbon famously observed that "of the first fifteen emperors Claudius was the only one whose taste in love was entirely correct". Surviving graphic representations are, on the other hand, rarer in ancient Rome than in classical Greece. Attitudes toward homosexuality changed over time ranging from the matter-of-fact acceptance of Republican Rome and the pagan Empire to rising condemnation, exampled by the Athenian Sextus Empiricus, who asserted that άρρενομιζία was outlawed in Rome— and in Athens, too!— and Cyprian.
The term homosexuality is anachronistic for the ancient world, since there is no single word in either Latin or ancient Greek with the same meaning as the modern concept of homosexuality, nor was there any sense that a man was defined by his gender choices in love-making; "in the ancient world so few people cared to categorize their contemporaries on the basis of the gender to which they were erotically attracted that no dichotomy to express this distinction was in common use", James Boswell has noted.
...
Later Empire
The rise of statutes legislating against homosexuality begins during the social crisis of the 3rd century, when a series of laws were promulgated regulating various aspects of homosexual relations, from the statutory rape of minors to gay marriages. By the sixth century homosexual relations were expressly prohibited for the first time, as Procopius notes.
On a related note, a search of the string "homo" in the article The Decline of Rome (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fall_of_rome) comes up with zero results.
You gotta do better than that bassfingers. :rolleyes:
You mean because they passed laws against homosexuality?
While I find that a little simplistic, if you really want to run with that theory that's your choice.
Homosexuality in ancient Rome (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_ancient_Rome)
Homosexuality in ancient Rome features dispassionately in many literary works, poems, graffiti and in comments, for example, on the sexual predilections of single emperors: Edward Gibbon famously observed that "of the first fifteen emperors Claudius was the only one whose taste in love was entirely correct". Surviving graphic representations are, on the other hand, rarer in ancient Rome than in classical Greece. Attitudes toward homosexuality changed over time ranging from the matter-of-fact acceptance of Republican Rome and the pagan Empire to rising condemnation, exampled by the Athenian Sextus Empiricus, who asserted that άρρενομιζία was outlawed in Rome— and in Athens, too!— and Cyprian.
The term homosexuality is anachronistic for the ancient world, since there is no single word in either Latin or ancient Greek with the same meaning as the modern concept of homosexuality, nor was there any sense that a man was defined by his gender choices in love-making; "in the ancient world so few people cared to categorize their contemporaries on the basis of the gender to which they were erotically attracted that no dichotomy to express this distinction was in common use", James Boswell has noted.
...
Later Empire
The rise of statutes legislating against homosexuality begins during the social crisis of the 3rd century, when a series of laws were promulgated regulating various aspects of homosexual relations, from the statutory rape of minors to gay marriages. By the sixth century homosexual relations were expressly prohibited for the first time, as Procopius notes.
On a related note, a search of the string "homo" in the article The Decline of Rome (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fall_of_rome) comes up with zero results.
You gotta do better than that bassfingers. :rolleyes:
Cromulent
Apr 27, 10:52 PM
thats funny, as soon as someone mentions "what's a pointer"..everyone shoots to kill here, and they tell you to step out or go deep yourself in books. The last thing you'll get is a simple answer, which 1 out 20 developers give you without asking you "Have you even read the objective-C manual?? cause if not you should leave the Real Coding and go study now
Fine. I'll give you a simple answer to "What is a pointer?".
It is a memory address. Nothing more and nothing less. The reason people don't give you the simple answer is because it will mean nothing to you and you won't understand the answer until you have read the articles and documents that people have been trying to get you to read.
Frankly having read this thread I think your behaviour is disgusting. People have been falling over themselves here trying to help you and you are just dismissing every single piece of help that is being offered to you.
Fine. I'll give you a simple answer to "What is a pointer?".
It is a memory address. Nothing more and nothing less. The reason people don't give you the simple answer is because it will mean nothing to you and you won't understand the answer until you have read the articles and documents that people have been trying to get you to read.
Frankly having read this thread I think your behaviour is disgusting. People have been falling over themselves here trying to help you and you are just dismissing every single piece of help that is being offered to you.
WestonHarvey1
Apr 29, 02:05 PM
And people kept telling me that OSX and iOS weren't going to merge in any meaningful manner for years ahead, if ever. Yeah right. I'd bet the one after this has them nearly fully merged and I mean towards iOS for the most part. OSX will be dumbed down to the lowest common brain cell and you won't be able to get free/open software anymore. It'll have to come through the App Store or not at all. Wait and see. That is the point I'll be moving on.
Uh huh. Then just jailbreak this hypothetical Mac, or buy the developer Mac that's going to be needed to make software for the iOS Mac.
Uh huh. Then just jailbreak this hypothetical Mac, or buy the developer Mac that's going to be needed to make software for the iOS Mac.
miles01110
Apr 22, 06:13 AM
On IE7 whenever I click either the "up" or "down" arrow I get taken back to the forum index.
mw360
Apr 6, 10:05 AM
I see your point, but I think that it's quite uncharitable to question the motives of individuals but let apple have a pass. They are in the position to do whatever they want, and there's no way that they WOULD reimburse those whose apps were rejected for the same function, but my point is that they shouldn't have rejected those apps at all. It's hypocritical of them to reject an app for a reason, and then when they get desperate for their iAd program to catch on more with advertisers (which apparently aren't as excited for the platform as Apple had hoped) they change their mind and create their own app.
And besides, an ad impression is an ad impression. The only iAds that I click on are accidental. If people want to download an app to see what an iAd looks like, they are also getting the best of what the advertisers had hoped for: the chance to make somebody want to use their product. They pay for the option of changing somebody's mind, not to actually do it. They pay to put the advertisement in partial view. Not to actually sell products directly.
It doesn't matter who makes the app, if they are putting the ads in front of people, they deserve the money. That goes for Apple or any of the several individuals that have already created such apps.
With respect, you clearly don't work in advertising. You pay to put ads in front of the right people, not just anyone. Especially not competing advertisers and agencies. Why do you think Google (a) makes so much advertising revenue and (b) collects so much data about its users? Coincidence?
Secondly individuals are just as greedy as corporations, and generally get to operate outside of the spotlight. Apple has a lot to lose if its iAd platform is seen to be poorly targeting users, but an App developer has a lot to gain from indiscriminate iAd spamming. So in this case, yes, for the sake of self interest I'd expect Apple to reimburse advertisers for clicks inside their iAd app, and I'd expect an independent developer of a similar app to laugh all the way to the bank.
I never said btw I'd expect Apple to reimburse developers for their time on rejected apps. Or if I did I didn't mean it.
And besides, an ad impression is an ad impression. The only iAds that I click on are accidental. If people want to download an app to see what an iAd looks like, they are also getting the best of what the advertisers had hoped for: the chance to make somebody want to use their product. They pay for the option of changing somebody's mind, not to actually do it. They pay to put the advertisement in partial view. Not to actually sell products directly.
It doesn't matter who makes the app, if they are putting the ads in front of people, they deserve the money. That goes for Apple or any of the several individuals that have already created such apps.
With respect, you clearly don't work in advertising. You pay to put ads in front of the right people, not just anyone. Especially not competing advertisers and agencies. Why do you think Google (a) makes so much advertising revenue and (b) collects so much data about its users? Coincidence?
Secondly individuals are just as greedy as corporations, and generally get to operate outside of the spotlight. Apple has a lot to lose if its iAd platform is seen to be poorly targeting users, but an App developer has a lot to gain from indiscriminate iAd spamming. So in this case, yes, for the sake of self interest I'd expect Apple to reimburse advertisers for clicks inside their iAd app, and I'd expect an independent developer of a similar app to laugh all the way to the bank.
I never said btw I'd expect Apple to reimburse developers for their time on rejected apps. Or if I did I didn't mean it.
AppleScruff1
Apr 11, 06:00 PM
I wouldn't bother arguing *LTD* about this. Many have tried and failed. He simply refuses to accept that Redmond has produced some quality products without ripping off Apple. Each versions of every Microsoft products have their +'s and -'s. Recently, with Windows 7, Office IE9, WP7; Microsoft have been churning out some quality, solid, software. Not to mention what a great success the Xbox has turned out to be. Yes, they are not always the first to have some features in their products, but neither are Apple at times. Fast user switching is one that springs to mind.
Just because they licence their software to a range of hardware companies, *LTD* automatically thinks they are trash. And, yes, some of their products have been trash. But so have Apple's at times.
No need to argue or try to change his mind. When someone is very close minded there is no reasoning.
Just because they licence their software to a range of hardware companies, *LTD* automatically thinks they are trash. And, yes, some of their products have been trash. But so have Apple's at times.
No need to argue or try to change his mind. When someone is very close minded there is no reasoning.
CerealKillers
Mar 17, 12:49 AM
Hahah sweet. This happened to me a couple yrs ago with an iPod touch. I put $75 on my credit card and was gonna pay the rest with cash when I was handed a receipt and the iPod Touch.
cherrypop
Oct 11, 09:00 AM
Makes total sense to me: Microsoft's Zune introduction naturally raised the bar for MP3 players. Some of the press Zune is getting for its larger display, clean design and usability is adding to the pressure for Apple to ship an answer to the Zune.
Apple is ready to announce their rumored video/wireless iPod
Apple is ready to announce their rumored video/wireless iPod
bigdz68
Nov 24, 07:29 AM
I'm still seeing only one discount applied online.
I was not able to get an EDU discount and sale discount.
BUT, if you are a gvt worker you can get both discounts.
I priced out a new 80GB ipod w/2 Evo3 skins, and the applecare protection plan and it was $30 cheaper with the GVT discount ... but no luck with EDU
I was not able to get an EDU discount and sale discount.
BUT, if you are a gvt worker you can get both discounts.
I priced out a new 80GB ipod w/2 Evo3 skins, and the applecare protection plan and it was $30 cheaper with the GVT discount ... but no luck with EDU
ferrous
Mar 24, 03:43 PM
Happy Birthday! Free iPad for everyone! :)
No comments:
Post a Comment