Gem�tlichkeit
Apr 20, 01:26 PM
Just read the licensing pdf posted in this thread.
The bold part of section 4 is what this is talking about. You can opt out of it collecting location data if you turn off location detection. It's collecting data based on you agreeing to it.
The bold part of section 4 is what this is talking about. You can opt out of it collecting location data if you turn off location detection. It's collecting data based on you agreeing to it.
radcity
Apr 23, 09:24 PM
i picked up a 13" air loaded about a month ago. I know the rumors about sandybridge would be out. But after the 13" pro's were screen neutered I sat down and decided that despite all the 'pro' level work I do an air would be fine. I was right and don't regret my purchase one bit. something new will always come out anyway.
completely agree
completely agree
gnasher729
Sep 11, 07:09 AM
now is the Xeon processor faster than the core 2 duo?
That is a rather pointless question since the Xeon processor in the MacPro _is_ a Core 2 Duo processor.
That is a rather pointless question since the Xeon processor in the MacPro _is_ a Core 2 Duo processor.
scott523
Apr 22, 11:25 AM
This might be a attractive buy for me. I hope it Kuo is right on track... now if he could just refine his iPhone 5 predictions..
iApples
Apr 4, 12:28 PM
Anybody responsible for guarding should have a gun. If the person isn't qualified to carry a gun, they he/she isn't qualified to guard anything and shouldn't be a guard.
When you're exchanging gunfire with a criminal, the main goal is not to wound; it is to remove the threat to your life completely. Let's say the guard shoots the guy in the arm, the guy's going to be so pumped up on adrenaline that he's not going to even know he's shot, giving him plenty of opportunity to take another shot.
Ask yourself this: If it were your life he was guarding, what would you want the guard to do?
Well said.
I don't feel bad for criminals... I rather see him die than an innocent bystander that was just visiting the Apple store.
When you're exchanging gunfire with a criminal, the main goal is not to wound; it is to remove the threat to your life completely. Let's say the guard shoots the guy in the arm, the guy's going to be so pumped up on adrenaline that he's not going to even know he's shot, giving him plenty of opportunity to take another shot.
Ask yourself this: If it were your life he was guarding, what would you want the guard to do?
Well said.
I don't feel bad for criminals... I rather see him die than an innocent bystander that was just visiting the Apple store.
jholzner
Sep 16, 02:03 PM
A shame about scrapping the idea of a ground up design - I hope that doesn't lead to a lack of innovation. That's what really leads Apple along! Although if they just make a killer phone (I'm sure they will at some point...) it's bound to sell buckets loads!
Uber
I don't think scrapping the ground up design will hurt. The iPod was made mostly from off the shelf parts when it was introd. but it still was awesome. Hopefully they can do the same thing with their phone. My contract doesn't expire until December 2007 but I want one...and I don't even know what it is yet.
Uber
I don't think scrapping the ground up design will hurt. The iPod was made mostly from off the shelf parts when it was introd. but it still was awesome. Hopefully they can do the same thing with their phone. My contract doesn't expire until December 2007 but I want one...and I don't even know what it is yet.
LarryC
Apr 22, 06:51 PM
AMD would be producing better CPU's via increased profits if Apple chose them over Intel from the start.
I always thought that if Apple ever went with something other than PPC that they would go with AMD. Better late than never.
I always thought that if Apple ever went with something other than PPC that they would go with AMD. Better late than never.
maxmiles
Apr 4, 11:55 AM
Oh.. if there was an exchange of gunfire I'm glad the security officer survived. I thought this was a case of an over anxious gun user.
Tito
Sep 14, 12:13 AM
This thing has the potential to be Apple's ultimate David attack on Goliath. There's a lot riding on this phone and they better make sure that they get it right because everyone is watching. If they have any problems the thing will be doomed. Remember the mp3 turf is theirs that all these phone manufactures and others are trying beat them at. Now Apple's taking these guys on in the phone industry's backyard. It won't be as easy as all the rumor mills are making it appear.
That said...I just had to recently switch to Cingular network and went with the freebie Nokia just because I know if I bought anything new this thing would come out the next day. And yes I'll probably purchase one if they get it right.
That said...I just had to recently switch to Cingular network and went with the freebie Nokia just because I know if I bought anything new this thing would come out the next day. And yes I'll probably purchase one if they get it right.
Xenious
Sep 26, 08:33 AM
What a joy killer. Launch the iphone as network independant then let carriers subsidize it if they want. Even if I was a cingular customer I sure do not want a phone locked to any one carrier. All of this because we (americans in general) only want cheap cheap subsidized phones.
The good news here is that it will likelye be GSM based (hello world).
The good news here is that it will likelye be GSM based (hello world).
vitaboy
Aug 24, 04:34 PM
First, $100 million is load of money for anyone. Time was, not so long ago, that reporting a $100 million quarterly profit was a big deal for Apple. The iPod doesn't "make" $6 billion a year for Apple. That's just revenue. Profits are a faction of that revenue.
This might be a valid point, except that the $100 million payout isn't being charged against profits. Instead, it is being recorded as an asset and ammortized over many years, meaning it will have very minimal impact to the bottom line.
Second, Creative doesn't "give up" anything but a license to Apple for technology Apple was using before for nothing. No matter how you cut it, the license fee come right out of Apple's bottom line.
I believe this is incorrect. Just because Apple is paying the fee doesn't mean it comes directly out of Apple's profits. As stated above, the licensing fee will be ammortized over several years and thus the impact to the bottom line will be nil.
Secondly, the fee is conditional. If Creative manages to secure other licensing deals, they pay Apple back some of that $100 million. Perhaps all, if the other fees are substantial. That sounds more like a "loan" to me.
If this can be called a "win" for Apple, it's in their getting this issue squared away relatively quickly, so it doesn't overhang the next generation of iPod releases. The long-term impacts of allowing the suit to drag on could have been considerable, just as it was for RIM. Especially if in the end, they lost.
No disagreement with this. The only thing is that NTP never agreed to pay RIM back part of its licensing fee if it was successful in securing new licensees. And NTP didn't decide to become a maker of Blackberry add-on devices.
By officially becoming a member of the "Made for iPod" program, Creative is basically unofficially pre-announcing that it is exiting the player business (contrary to official denial, which are necessary in order for it to sell of remaining inventory). Zen's lost huge marketshare against Sandisk, of all companies, and there's no way Zen will hold on to what little marketshare it has with Zune entering the scene. Not to mention that "Zen" and "Zune" are phonetically similar, which all but guarantees the situation will be hopeless for the Zen line of players.
Creative realized it makes more sense to extract licensing fees from Microsoft for Zune than try to compete directly as it had against the iPod.
With that exit strategy tucked under its belt, it's now free to focus on creating great iPod accessories, which will require far less R&D than music players, and will actually be profitable.
Apple "lost" all right. Here's a summary from The Motley Fool
Apple Gets Creative (http://www.fool.com/News/mft/2006/mft06082410.htm)
What's more, Apple is allowed to recoup costs if others agree to license Creative's patent. Will there be other deals? It's a good bet Creative will try to secure some; the $100 million the firm is getting from Apple will juice per-share earnings by $0.85 in the current quarter.
Plus, there are plenty of targets, with the biggest and most obvious being Microsoft (Nasdaq: MSFT). Its planned Zune player is expected out before the holiday season. Creative could get ahold of a beta version of the device and, if there's evidence of a patent violation, file suit and petition for an injunction.
Apple would love nothing better, of course. But even if Mr. Softy and other i-wannabes avoid the courts, they're unlikely to avoid the extra time and expense of working around Creative's patent. That, too, is a win for the Mac maker. Well done, Steve.
This is what would be called Pyrrhic victory for Creative. Sure, it looks like they won the battle, but only at such a cost that it ends up being a defeat in the long term.
This might be a valid point, except that the $100 million payout isn't being charged against profits. Instead, it is being recorded as an asset and ammortized over many years, meaning it will have very minimal impact to the bottom line.
Second, Creative doesn't "give up" anything but a license to Apple for technology Apple was using before for nothing. No matter how you cut it, the license fee come right out of Apple's bottom line.
I believe this is incorrect. Just because Apple is paying the fee doesn't mean it comes directly out of Apple's profits. As stated above, the licensing fee will be ammortized over several years and thus the impact to the bottom line will be nil.
Secondly, the fee is conditional. If Creative manages to secure other licensing deals, they pay Apple back some of that $100 million. Perhaps all, if the other fees are substantial. That sounds more like a "loan" to me.
If this can be called a "win" for Apple, it's in their getting this issue squared away relatively quickly, so it doesn't overhang the next generation of iPod releases. The long-term impacts of allowing the suit to drag on could have been considerable, just as it was for RIM. Especially if in the end, they lost.
No disagreement with this. The only thing is that NTP never agreed to pay RIM back part of its licensing fee if it was successful in securing new licensees. And NTP didn't decide to become a maker of Blackberry add-on devices.
By officially becoming a member of the "Made for iPod" program, Creative is basically unofficially pre-announcing that it is exiting the player business (contrary to official denial, which are necessary in order for it to sell of remaining inventory). Zen's lost huge marketshare against Sandisk, of all companies, and there's no way Zen will hold on to what little marketshare it has with Zune entering the scene. Not to mention that "Zen" and "Zune" are phonetically similar, which all but guarantees the situation will be hopeless for the Zen line of players.
Creative realized it makes more sense to extract licensing fees from Microsoft for Zune than try to compete directly as it had against the iPod.
With that exit strategy tucked under its belt, it's now free to focus on creating great iPod accessories, which will require far less R&D than music players, and will actually be profitable.
Apple "lost" all right. Here's a summary from The Motley Fool
Apple Gets Creative (http://www.fool.com/News/mft/2006/mft06082410.htm)
What's more, Apple is allowed to recoup costs if others agree to license Creative's patent. Will there be other deals? It's a good bet Creative will try to secure some; the $100 million the firm is getting from Apple will juice per-share earnings by $0.85 in the current quarter.
Plus, there are plenty of targets, with the biggest and most obvious being Microsoft (Nasdaq: MSFT). Its planned Zune player is expected out before the holiday season. Creative could get ahold of a beta version of the device and, if there's evidence of a patent violation, file suit and petition for an injunction.
Apple would love nothing better, of course. But even if Mr. Softy and other i-wannabes avoid the courts, they're unlikely to avoid the extra time and expense of working around Creative's patent. That, too, is a win for the Mac maker. Well done, Steve.
This is what would be called Pyrrhic victory for Creative. Sure, it looks like they won the battle, but only at such a cost that it ends up being a defeat in the long term.
Full of Win
Apr 20, 11:45 AM
Am I the only person laughing at this? If you didn't know your phone was already tracking you, then you should read up. All phones do it and it is not limited to the iPhone. Most common reason it would be done is for emergency needs. Just go to another cell tower and watch it track you. Next story please.
Reading is fundamental. The point is not tracking the phone, its keeping a usable log of it on the computer and phone that can be accessed by others.
Big difference.
Reading is fundamental. The point is not tracking the phone, its keeping a usable log of it on the computer and phone that can be accessed by others.
Big difference.
dukebound85
Apr 25, 02:42 AM
I volunteered only to further my college applications. I really couldn't give a crap about the people my work supposedly helped. All I care about is that it helped me.
I don't view myself as cold hearted, I view myself as being a realist. This "let's be nice to everyone" crap has turned 95% of society into blithering retarded bleeding hearts. I only care about people who I can use to further myself, or those who have genuinely done something caring for me (family); otherwise you are completely expendable to me (take note anyone who works under me in a decade). I do not feel that society's rules apply to me, because I simply know that I am better than many of the people in society; the rules (including speed limits) are there for lesser folk. Look at our pop culture, it shows how stupid most are. What you call morally and ethically bankrupt, I call opportunistic and motivated.
For proclaiming yourself as a realist, you live in quite the imaginary land if you think you can disregard laws and then think you won't have to face some very real consequences.
Lesser folk...who do you think you are? Thank god my 16 year old brother does not have this mindset as I would have to smack some sense into him
Then again, it must be nice being born into a fortunistic household (harvard parents, judges in family, etc) in terms of monetary means only with no doing of your own. But of course, that mere act of being born earned you that right to be better than everyone else. Got it.
I don't view myself as cold hearted, I view myself as being a realist. This "let's be nice to everyone" crap has turned 95% of society into blithering retarded bleeding hearts. I only care about people who I can use to further myself, or those who have genuinely done something caring for me (family); otherwise you are completely expendable to me (take note anyone who works under me in a decade). I do not feel that society's rules apply to me, because I simply know that I am better than many of the people in society; the rules (including speed limits) are there for lesser folk. Look at our pop culture, it shows how stupid most are. What you call morally and ethically bankrupt, I call opportunistic and motivated.
For proclaiming yourself as a realist, you live in quite the imaginary land if you think you can disregard laws and then think you won't have to face some very real consequences.
Lesser folk...who do you think you are? Thank god my 16 year old brother does not have this mindset as I would have to smack some sense into him
Then again, it must be nice being born into a fortunistic household (harvard parents, judges in family, etc) in terms of monetary means only with no doing of your own. But of course, that mere act of being born earned you that right to be better than everyone else. Got it.
reflex
Sep 14, 08:21 AM
My take on this: Apple releases new MBP's next week and Aperture 2 at the special event. Kind of like they did with the iMac vs the movie downloads.
Btw, the 24th is a Sunday ... has Apple ever released anything on a Sunday? Or held an event?
Btw, the 24th is a Sunday ... has Apple ever released anything on a Sunday? Or held an event?
adnoh
Mar 22, 02:15 PM
a quiet spec bump with no external changes sans thunderpants would not surprise me.
ergle2
Sep 11, 12:13 AM
I came to the opposite conclusion....
Running many compute-bound single-threaded benchmarks and apps - I saw how NT (pre Win2k) would balance across CPUs (that is, a "100%" compute-bound job would show each CPU running at 50%).
However, setting affinity so that one CPU was 100% and the other was 0% had no significant effect on the run times. (And by "significant" I mean statistically significant - I literally ran hundreds of runs in each configuration.)\\
By the way, with Win2k3 (and XP 64-bit, really the same system) you see much less "balancing" - a single-threaded app will stick to a CPU for much longer.
I suspect if any observable difference occurs depends upon the application, dataset, etc.
I'm guessing the 50% "balanced" method was done to try and keep a single CPU from heating up too much, and with the advent of multicore systems, it probably no longer matters which core is generating the heat due to them being in a single package.
It could also be MS found that certain circumstances (like mine) resulted in improvements in processing.
Interesting stuff.
Running many compute-bound single-threaded benchmarks and apps - I saw how NT (pre Win2k) would balance across CPUs (that is, a "100%" compute-bound job would show each CPU running at 50%).
However, setting affinity so that one CPU was 100% and the other was 0% had no significant effect on the run times. (And by "significant" I mean statistically significant - I literally ran hundreds of runs in each configuration.)\\
By the way, with Win2k3 (and XP 64-bit, really the same system) you see much less "balancing" - a single-threaded app will stick to a CPU for much longer.
I suspect if any observable difference occurs depends upon the application, dataset, etc.
I'm guessing the 50% "balanced" method was done to try and keep a single CPU from heating up too much, and with the advent of multicore systems, it probably no longer matters which core is generating the heat due to them being in a single package.
It could also be MS found that certain circumstances (like mine) resulted in improvements in processing.
Interesting stuff.
sum1
Mar 23, 06:50 PM
I actually agree. Pull 'em. It may be censorship, but it's dangerous not to.
I Agree too! Remove it. Anyone afraid of being caught drunk shouldn't be driving drunk & kill someone!
I Agree too! Remove it. Anyone afraid of being caught drunk shouldn't be driving drunk & kill someone!
Mac Fly (film)
Sep 14, 10:03 PM
one of the best predictions i have heard to date...
Why thank you!
Why thank you!
bloodycape
Aug 24, 06:08 PM
2) Creative exits the player business because it will be squeezed by the iPod and Zune from above, and Sandisk and iRiver from below. The field will just be too crowded with Zune. Because no matter how much money Zune will lose in the first few years, Microsoft will no doubt keep it afloat rather than cede defeat in this space. That might help Zune to take away some share away from the iPod eventually, but not before Zune eats the bulk of Creative's and Sandisk's share first. Creative has to be thinking about whether continuing to pour R&D and marketing into players is worth it with Microsoft competing directly against them. My guess it they'll bail as soon as they are able.
At the moment Sandisk is ahead of Creative in terms of profit and market shares because since Sandisk makes their own flash drives they can sell larger capacity drives at a lower price hence the 8gig Sansa being the same price as many 4gig players. And in Korea and Japan iRiver if I am not mistaken is doing better than creative because they have some items there that are actually meeting the demand of their consumers i.e. pocket dictionaries that play games, support audio and video. Yet Creative still enough made some profits in Q1 and Q2 of 2006.
At the moment Sandisk is ahead of Creative in terms of profit and market shares because since Sandisk makes their own flash drives they can sell larger capacity drives at a lower price hence the 8gig Sansa being the same price as many 4gig players. And in Korea and Japan iRiver if I am not mistaken is doing better than creative because they have some items there that are actually meeting the demand of their consumers i.e. pocket dictionaries that play games, support audio and video. Yet Creative still enough made some profits in Q1 and Q2 of 2006.
strike1555
Nov 15, 08:58 AM
Aristotle has absolutely no clue as to what he's talking about, LOL.
Evangelion
Sep 9, 11:00 AM
The Napa chipset used with Yonah only supported 32 address lines.
Napa is the hardware-platform, composed of Yonah, Intel Mobile 945-chipset and Intel Pro Wireless. AKA third generation Centrino. And since the CPU used in that platform is 32bits, the platfom can be called a 32bit platfom. Note: this has nothing to do with the bitness of the logic-board. Napa64 (or rather: Santa Rosa) is Fourth generation Centrino that uses Merom and new chipset.
Napa is the hardware-platform, composed of Yonah, Intel Mobile 945-chipset and Intel Pro Wireless. AKA third generation Centrino. And since the CPU used in that platform is 32bits, the platfom can be called a 32bit platfom. Note: this has nothing to do with the bitness of the logic-board. Napa64 (or rather: Santa Rosa) is Fourth generation Centrino that uses Merom and new chipset.
charlituna
Apr 20, 12:15 PM
WOW this is a major privacy breach.
How so. The phone is recording where it goes. There is no proof that it is sending that information to anyone.
And how likely is it that you are going to be careless with your iphone and/or the computer you sync it to. Particularly without a passcode lock on your iphone to protect your personal data.
Apple has provided the means to lock your phone, to auto wipe it if someone can't guess your pass code in several times and even to turn off location services and refuse app by app to allow them to use your location. Plus you can encrypt the back ups to your computer.
Unless you can prove they are transmitting that data to another party without your permission what wrong is Apple doing, what are they breaching.
How so. The phone is recording where it goes. There is no proof that it is sending that information to anyone.
And how likely is it that you are going to be careless with your iphone and/or the computer you sync it to. Particularly without a passcode lock on your iphone to protect your personal data.
Apple has provided the means to lock your phone, to auto wipe it if someone can't guess your pass code in several times and even to turn off location services and refuse app by app to allow them to use your location. Plus you can encrypt the back ups to your computer.
Unless you can prove they are transmitting that data to another party without your permission what wrong is Apple doing, what are they breaching.
AppleScruff1
Apr 19, 10:53 AM
Apple will probably sue them for responding.
hayesk
May 3, 12:41 PM
but i thought half the point of TB was that you would only need one output from the computer, and since we don't have any TB displays (or anything for that matter) how do we know that the ports are limited to one display?
TB has two 10 Gbps channels. A display takes up one of them. To power a second display, you could use the other channel, but you'd need some kind of breakout box that housed a video card.
TB has two 10 Gbps channels. A display takes up one of them. To power a second display, you could use the other channel, but you'd need some kind of breakout box that housed a video card.
Hiç yorum yok:
Yorum Gönder