marksman
Apr 15, 07:13 PM
Not suprrising as the record labels are run by insane lunatics.
Steve Jobs is a wizard however, and has them all under a magical spell.
History will probably view his management of the record labels as one of his most amazing accomplishments.
It seems ridiculous that Google could not negotiate reasonable terms with the record labels, but again they are run by insane lunatics.
Steve Jobs is a wizard however, and has them all under a magical spell.
History will probably view his management of the record labels as one of his most amazing accomplishments.
It seems ridiculous that Google could not negotiate reasonable terms with the record labels, but again they are run by insane lunatics.
roadbloc
Mar 6, 03:14 PM
No they don't. They just attempt to copy (often badly), then license universally and flood the market with a lot junk that includes a ton of different models at very low price points.
The scary thing is is that you actually believe this nonsense.
The scary thing is is that you actually believe this nonsense.
kudukudu
Jan 15, 03:19 PM
As for stuff that DIDN'T get talked about:
- No desktop updates at all. I predict Apple getting out of the consumer desktop market in the next 2-3 years. No more iMac or mini.
Are you saying this because there were no desktop updates at MWSF? Apple just updated the Imacs in August 2007 and silently updated the Mac Pro last week (which was definitely long overdue for a refresh), presumably because they wanted MWSF to stay consumer oriented.
- No desktop updates at all. I predict Apple getting out of the consumer desktop market in the next 2-3 years. No more iMac or mini.
Are you saying this because there were no desktop updates at MWSF? Apple just updated the Imacs in August 2007 and silently updated the Mac Pro last week (which was definitely long overdue for a refresh), presumably because they wanted MWSF to stay consumer oriented.
ju5tin81
Sep 12, 07:37 AM
Not gonna happen. Apple will let you watch in the living room, it will just be via wireless streaming.
Damn! It would've given them the edge over Amazons 'unbox' thing and made them seem fairer... Ah well...
As long as there are no big 'WARNING' screens that you can't skip through like on a DVD disc....
Damn! It would've given them the edge over Amazons 'unbox' thing and made them seem fairer... Ah well...
As long as there are no big 'WARNING' screens that you can't skip through like on a DVD disc....
more...
Mad Mac Maniac
Apr 21, 01:53 PM
Very true. At the same time I will read and form an opinion of the topic all on my own. I'm sure I'm not alone there, but then again I am sure many will take the popular vote route and just form their opinion based on that. Either way, a post that is good for you and me may not be good for others. I've had a fair share of PMs about my posts, both in support of and against. It is all subjective, as you say, and this rating system will be similar.
well sometimes there is an article about different kind of processor, chips or whatever. some stuff that I don't know anything about. So then I like to look at the votes and see if this is something that is good or bad for Apple. I like to think that majority of the people voting have the same love of apple products and have more insight on this issue than I do.
well sometimes there is an article about different kind of processor, chips or whatever. some stuff that I don't know anything about. So then I like to look at the votes and see if this is something that is good or bad for Apple. I like to think that majority of the people voting have the same love of apple products and have more insight on this issue than I do.
Doctor Q
Apr 15, 06:10 PM
Is the difference that Apple is more willing to talk to and play ball with the content providers? Is it that Google has been "changing its demands"? Is it about technical concerns? Are the content provides trying to guess who the winning horse will be?
Or (my guess) is it all about the revenue sharing model?
Or (my guess) is it all about the revenue sharing model?
more...
bruinsrme
Oct 6, 12:07 PM
The iPhone to Verizon won't happen, especially with the announcement today that Verizon is teaming up with Google and their Android phone. I at first thought the commercial was just a leverage ploy on Verizons part, working on Apple and their negotiations. Now I think it's just the first shot over the bow.
Time to look at unlocking and bailing to T-Mo again and get out of this crap-shoot called AT$T.
http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20091006-709550.html
i have been waiting for that announcement.
The iphone is great but the jailbreaking thing and the efforts made by apple to prevent jailbreaking is wearing.
It will be interesting to see if the jailbreaking community starts to move over to a more open platform (if its more open of course)
Time to look at unlocking and bailing to T-Mo again and get out of this crap-shoot called AT$T.
http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20091006-709550.html
i have been waiting for that announcement.
The iphone is great but the jailbreaking thing and the efforts made by apple to prevent jailbreaking is wearing.
It will be interesting to see if the jailbreaking community starts to move over to a more open platform (if its more open of course)
Benjy91
Mar 25, 05:59 AM
Neowin has a nice article detailing a quick history.
10 Years of OS X (http://www.neowin.net/news/ten-years-of-os-x-from-heavily-criticized-to-heavily-praised)
10 Years of OS X (http://www.neowin.net/news/ten-years-of-os-x-from-heavily-criticized-to-heavily-praised)
more...
kalisphoenix
Nov 16, 06:52 PM
*********.
AP_piano295
May 4, 03:17 PM
Guns are tons of fun and I will probably own a few one day (when I live in an area where i can actually use them).
Gun's are dangerous and it's perfectly reasonable for pediatricians to talk with and inform parents about those risks and how to mitigate them. You'd be amazed HOW LITTLE some people know about raising kids
http://img849.imageshack.us/img849/1568/stupidq.th.jpg (http://img849.imageshack.us/i/stupidq.jpg/)
Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.us)
Gun's are dangerous and it's perfectly reasonable for pediatricians to talk with and inform parents about those risks and how to mitigate them. You'd be amazed HOW LITTLE some people know about raising kids
http://img849.imageshack.us/img849/1568/stupidq.th.jpg (http://img849.imageshack.us/i/stupidq.jpg/)
Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.us)
more...
eric_n_dfw
Oct 28, 04:57 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.
:rolleyes:
Anyone who understands what OSS and or "free software" is knows that they're not talking about money when they say it should be "free".
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software (emphasis added):
To help distinguish libre (freedom) software from gratis (zero price) software, Richard Stallman, founder of the free software movement, developed the following explanation: "Free software is a matter of liberty, not price. To understand the concept, you should think of 'free' as in 'free speech', not as in 'free beer'". More specifically, free software means that computer users have the freedom to cooperate with whom they choose, and to control the software they use.
Are there people who steal software, yes - but that has nothing to do with what we're talking about here.
FWIW: I work every day developing commercial web sites with free software (JBoss, Tomcat, Ant, Apache, gcc, Red Hat Enterprise Linux, Eclipse, etc...). Why? Because we don't want to pay for it? Hell no! We pay a lot of money in licenses and support contracts just like we would for non-OSS products. The difference is that, when needed, we can see why the software acts the way it does and even can change it if we find it necessary. We don't have to rely solely on a vendor's promise about how secure or optimized their code is because it's wide open for all to see. THAT is what OSS is all about.
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.
:rolleyes:
Anyone who understands what OSS and or "free software" is knows that they're not talking about money when they say it should be "free".
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software (emphasis added):
To help distinguish libre (freedom) software from gratis (zero price) software, Richard Stallman, founder of the free software movement, developed the following explanation: "Free software is a matter of liberty, not price. To understand the concept, you should think of 'free' as in 'free speech', not as in 'free beer'". More specifically, free software means that computer users have the freedom to cooperate with whom they choose, and to control the software they use.
Are there people who steal software, yes - but that has nothing to do with what we're talking about here.
FWIW: I work every day developing commercial web sites with free software (JBoss, Tomcat, Ant, Apache, gcc, Red Hat Enterprise Linux, Eclipse, etc...). Why? Because we don't want to pay for it? Hell no! We pay a lot of money in licenses and support contracts just like we would for non-OSS products. The difference is that, when needed, we can see why the software acts the way it does and even can change it if we find it necessary. We don't have to rely solely on a vendor's promise about how secure or optimized their code is because it's wide open for all to see. THAT is what OSS is all about.
Macula
Oct 28, 05:01 PM
Apple will need to open up osX to generic PC's but i can understand they'll want to wait until the Mac growth is stalling. Maybe at about 10% marketshare ?
Science fiction scenario: Five to seven years from today Apple and Hewlett Packard partner. HP gives up on Microsoft/Windows and ships machines with either Mac OS or Linux. Dell considers joining the club, as well.
Another five years later, Mac OS market share approaches that of Microsoft.
:cool: ;)
Science fiction scenario: Five to seven years from today Apple and Hewlett Packard partner. HP gives up on Microsoft/Windows and ships machines with either Mac OS or Linux. Dell considers joining the club, as well.
Another five years later, Mac OS market share approaches that of Microsoft.
:cool: ;)
more...
zioxide
Jan 12, 12:57 AM
Everyone is making comments that suggest that the Gizmodo guys are professionals and have broken some code of ethics.
They are BLOGGERS. There are no rules in blogging. There are no codes of ethics.
Sure they were over the top, but that drove traffic to their site. The only thing they are worried about is traffic to the site, that is how they make money.
Should they be banned? Why? It's not like they are journalists.
They were there with a press pass.
Anyways, according to a story that just went to the digg frontpage, the Gizmodo employee who did it has been banned from future CES events and they're still discussing actions against Gizmodo and Gawker media.
I say ban them. That was retarded. Companies pay tons of money for these shows trying to get them to go off without a hitch. Having displays randomly turning off is bad for them. It could cost them millions of dollars and could have even cost the people who set everything up their jobs.
Additionally, there's still a debate about whether bloggers are journalists... personally I'd say they are. But some idiots doing this just gives a bad name to bloggers everywhere.
I hope their whole company is banned from CES and other events so that they go out of business.
They are BLOGGERS. There are no rules in blogging. There are no codes of ethics.
Sure they were over the top, but that drove traffic to their site. The only thing they are worried about is traffic to the site, that is how they make money.
Should they be banned? Why? It's not like they are journalists.
They were there with a press pass.
Anyways, according to a story that just went to the digg frontpage, the Gizmodo employee who did it has been banned from future CES events and they're still discussing actions against Gizmodo and Gawker media.
I say ban them. That was retarded. Companies pay tons of money for these shows trying to get them to go off without a hitch. Having displays randomly turning off is bad for them. It could cost them millions of dollars and could have even cost the people who set everything up their jobs.
Additionally, there's still a debate about whether bloggers are journalists... personally I'd say they are. But some idiots doing this just gives a bad name to bloggers everywhere.
I hope their whole company is banned from CES and other events so that they go out of business.
asphalt-proof
Jan 10, 07:09 PM
I go to Gizmodo's site regularly and saw where they had admitted to their prank. I really didn't think much of it and even thought it was funny. However, i never read past the headlines so i didn't know they screwed with someone's presentation. That's just bad form and extremely inconsiderate. These presentors put a lot of time and energy preparing for that 10 miinutes or so that they have to spotlight. Yes, some are very lame, stupid, whatever. But for the most part, these people work very hard to do the best job they can. Not to mention that their job may be put in jeopardy if their presentation tanks.
I imagine that the Gizmodo staff were seriously CES-fatigued, over-stimulated by the flashy lights and loud, continuous noise, and slightly drunk. Fine. Most of the other bloggers were in the same state of mind. But none of them (at least as far as we know) didn't ******* with someone's presentation. I think they should be banned from CES next year as a punishment. Macworld? Not so much. It didn't happen there. Well, it didn't happen there. But I think that Apple would very carefully interview Gizmodo before giving them a press pass then make them sweat. Maybe even frisk them in public, before they entered the convention center. THat would make a lot of bloggers and vendors smile. Really make them sweat. But let them in anyways. Gizmodo is a very popular tech blog and for the most part, a very well done blog. Their coverage is important to Macworld. This way, Apple can ensure they get coverage but also get some karma points from other bloggers and vendors when they see how Apple deals with Gizmodo.
I imagine that the Gizmodo staff were seriously CES-fatigued, over-stimulated by the flashy lights and loud, continuous noise, and slightly drunk. Fine. Most of the other bloggers were in the same state of mind. But none of them (at least as far as we know) didn't ******* with someone's presentation. I think they should be banned from CES next year as a punishment. Macworld? Not so much. It didn't happen there. Well, it didn't happen there. But I think that Apple would very carefully interview Gizmodo before giving them a press pass then make them sweat. Maybe even frisk them in public, before they entered the convention center. THat would make a lot of bloggers and vendors smile. Really make them sweat. But let them in anyways. Gizmodo is a very popular tech blog and for the most part, a very well done blog. Their coverage is important to Macworld. This way, Apple can ensure they get coverage but also get some karma points from other bloggers and vendors when they see how Apple deals with Gizmodo.
more...
AndroidfoLife
Apr 15, 08:46 PM
and FAIL.
iphone needed nor had any competition to debut as a smash hit.
ipad needed nor had any competition to debut as a smash hit.
apple do stuff well and make good products because that's what the heck they frickin do!
they dont need anything to prod them on but their own imagination. companies that innovate by imitation because they got caught with their pants down arent about better products for end users. that's why their stuff sucked in the first place.
Yes and Palm smartphones and Blackberries never existed before the iPhone.
iphone needed nor had any competition to debut as a smash hit.
ipad needed nor had any competition to debut as a smash hit.
apple do stuff well and make good products because that's what the heck they frickin do!
they dont need anything to prod them on but their own imagination. companies that innovate by imitation because they got caught with their pants down arent about better products for end users. that's why their stuff sucked in the first place.
Yes and Palm smartphones and Blackberries never existed before the iPhone.
aiqw9182
Mar 28, 02:29 PM
Seriously Apple, how soon until the app store is the only way to install apps on your mac?
I can see it now: How to jailbreak your Mac
Seriously though, Apple's going to have to remove a ton of their current restrictions before that happens so I honestly don't see it happening anytime soon.
I can see it now: How to jailbreak your Mac
Seriously though, Apple's going to have to remove a ton of their current restrictions before that happens so I honestly don't see it happening anytime soon.
more...
emoeric
Dec 13, 03:27 PM
Right. One of the problems people have when they try to predict what Apple might do is they assume the past = the future. "Oh, Apple only does yearly updates, so this rumor is impossible." Well, Apple does what it does . . . until it doesn't. They don't do books, but now they do. They don't do movies, but now they do, etc.
Apple is not a MacRumors poster stubbornly sticking to the only thing they know. Apple changes as market conditions change. If they think they can increase profitability and market share by making semi-yearly phone updates, they are going to switch to semi-yearly phone updates. Simple as that.
So a Q1 2011 Verizon phone is quite possible.
The thing I believe we can agree on as well is the fact that LTE is not coming to iphone until atleast 2012. It's way too early of a technology for them to adopt it. I'll agree with your points but counter your general hypothesis with one side note: no LTE until 2012.
Apple is not a MacRumors poster stubbornly sticking to the only thing they know. Apple changes as market conditions change. If they think they can increase profitability and market share by making semi-yearly phone updates, they are going to switch to semi-yearly phone updates. Simple as that.
So a Q1 2011 Verizon phone is quite possible.
The thing I believe we can agree on as well is the fact that LTE is not coming to iphone until atleast 2012. It's way too early of a technology for them to adopt it. I'll agree with your points but counter your general hypothesis with one side note: no LTE until 2012.
GFLPraxis
Apr 15, 03:27 PM
My only claim is that something the TSA is doing is working to help prevent hijackings. This was in response to some arguments that nothing airport security was doing was in fact useful. If you go back, you will see I quoted both TSA and European stats, not just TSA. And that while there may have been no passenger hijackings in the 90s in the USA, there were a couple in Europe, and one in Japan. And then nothing in Europe and Japan or the USA since 9/11. Which I believe is due to increased airport security, similar to what the TSA does.
That's all I'm saying. I'm not advocating for the current screening, just refuting some baseless arguments that it's a total waste of money ("baseless" as in - "it's my opinion, and I'm not presenting any evidence to support it"). Opinions are fine, and everyone is entitled to them. Just don't expect me to accept an opinion as fact, if I can support my opposing opinion with at least some evidence.
(I'm using Japan and Europe 'cause they also have a tradition of terrorist organizations targeting their planes, and because they "harmonized" their screening standards to the TSA. No choice, if they wanted to continue flying their planes into or over US airspace. Other countries may have also harmonized (like Canada) but either they don't have a tradition of terrorism, or I don't have enough info about them.)
Alright, we might be perceiving each other's arguments differently and arguing semantics in that case.
I have no issue with airport security besides the last two years' increase. I feel the body scanners and pat downs on opt out are unnecessary wastes of time, money, and personal privacy.
I have no issue with other aspects of post 9/11 airport security. I fly all the time and never found it worth giving a thought before the recent implementation.
That's all I'm saying. I'm not advocating for the current screening, just refuting some baseless arguments that it's a total waste of money ("baseless" as in - "it's my opinion, and I'm not presenting any evidence to support it"). Opinions are fine, and everyone is entitled to them. Just don't expect me to accept an opinion as fact, if I can support my opposing opinion with at least some evidence.
(I'm using Japan and Europe 'cause they also have a tradition of terrorist organizations targeting their planes, and because they "harmonized" their screening standards to the TSA. No choice, if they wanted to continue flying their planes into or over US airspace. Other countries may have also harmonized (like Canada) but either they don't have a tradition of terrorism, or I don't have enough info about them.)
Alright, we might be perceiving each other's arguments differently and arguing semantics in that case.
I have no issue with airport security besides the last two years' increase. I feel the body scanners and pat downs on opt out are unnecessary wastes of time, money, and personal privacy.
I have no issue with other aspects of post 9/11 airport security. I fly all the time and never found it worth giving a thought before the recent implementation.
rerelease
Apr 25, 02:57 PM
I actually really dislike the borderless look. I hope they don't do this. A larger screen is one thing I really don't need. If I want a big screen, I'll get an iPad.
Same here. It's completely unwarranted, there's virtually no space to be gained and it looks aesthetically weaker compared to the iPhone 4.
Same here. It's completely unwarranted, there's virtually no space to be gained and it looks aesthetically weaker compared to the iPhone 4.
rtdgoldfish
Apr 5, 12:34 AM
Alrighty, since this thing got way too popular on Digg, I've had a lot of people trying to offer advice. A great deal more are saying this is all fake.
First of all, I am not breaking into my neighbor's house. I will not stoop to their level. I will not trash their place, spray paint their living room, nor leave dog droppings in their fridge. I will either let the police deal with this or let the stupidity of the criminals catch up with them in the end.
Second, I am not getting a lawyer. The amount it would cost me to get a lawyer would be way more than the cost of the 360 and games. This just doesn't make sense. The only reason I would get one is if they catch the guy and there is some sort of trial. Even then, I don't think I would need a lawyer, it would just be me testifying in court or something.
And finally, I don't really care if you think I am making this all up. The burglar broke in, took an Xbox and some games and left a good deal of other expensive stuff in the house. If you read the rest of my posts before saying "OMG WTF LIARZ WHO STEALZ JST A XBOX AND LEAVES A MACBOOK" you would know the situation. The cops have been following any leads I have given them, and things have happened.
If I get my Xbox back, wonderful. That is money that I don't have to spend replacing it. If I never see it again, oh well, life goes on.
I guess what I really wanted by getting this on Digg and all was some actual advice on what I should do now. Again, all I have gotten was advice from 15 year olds saying to throw bricks at my neighbor's house. This is not exactly the advice I was looking for and if anyone has any REAL advice to offer, that would be wonderful (such as names and numbers of someone at Microsoft).
I posted this on Macrumors because of the great community we have here. People are always friendly and open to discussion. Sometimes issues get solved, other times they don't. If getting this story on Digg brought some new (and unwanted) members to the forums, I am sorry.
Anyway, thanks for reading my post and I'll continue to update as things progress. :)
First of all, I am not breaking into my neighbor's house. I will not stoop to their level. I will not trash their place, spray paint their living room, nor leave dog droppings in their fridge. I will either let the police deal with this or let the stupidity of the criminals catch up with them in the end.
Second, I am not getting a lawyer. The amount it would cost me to get a lawyer would be way more than the cost of the 360 and games. This just doesn't make sense. The only reason I would get one is if they catch the guy and there is some sort of trial. Even then, I don't think I would need a lawyer, it would just be me testifying in court or something.
And finally, I don't really care if you think I am making this all up. The burglar broke in, took an Xbox and some games and left a good deal of other expensive stuff in the house. If you read the rest of my posts before saying "OMG WTF LIARZ WHO STEALZ JST A XBOX AND LEAVES A MACBOOK" you would know the situation. The cops have been following any leads I have given them, and things have happened.
If I get my Xbox back, wonderful. That is money that I don't have to spend replacing it. If I never see it again, oh well, life goes on.
I guess what I really wanted by getting this on Digg and all was some actual advice on what I should do now. Again, all I have gotten was advice from 15 year olds saying to throw bricks at my neighbor's house. This is not exactly the advice I was looking for and if anyone has any REAL advice to offer, that would be wonderful (such as names and numbers of someone at Microsoft).
I posted this on Macrumors because of the great community we have here. People are always friendly and open to discussion. Sometimes issues get solved, other times they don't. If getting this story on Digg brought some new (and unwanted) members to the forums, I am sorry.
Anyway, thanks for reading my post and I'll continue to update as things progress. :)
twoodcc
May 4, 06:31 PM
Speaking of aggravation, I'm having trouble with my new system. I'm back to stock cpu speed and for some reason the wu's don't want to use all of the cores/threads so bigadv units are running at 45+ min per frame now from 27 min per frame the first time I ran folding.
oh man. that's not good. what flags are you using?
-smp 12?
oh man. that's not good. what flags are you using?
-smp 12?
Popeye206
Dec 13, 01:20 PM
Verizon after the 1st of the year... Yes!
4G... No.
Other carriers... Yes!
I just don't see Apple changing all that much other than supporting CMDA in the iPhone 4.... IP 5.0... thats a different story. Verizon only... I think Apple needs all the carriers in the US now... the limited days need to end and this would give the iPhone 5 a great launch pad to a HUGE success. Sort of like most of Apple's products now. :)
4G... No.
Other carriers... Yes!
I just don't see Apple changing all that much other than supporting CMDA in the iPhone 4.... IP 5.0... thats a different story. Verizon only... I think Apple needs all the carriers in the US now... the limited days need to end and this would give the iPhone 5 a great launch pad to a HUGE success. Sort of like most of Apple's products now. :)
menlotechnical
Apr 23, 11:26 AM
OK, like any topic we should all be on the common ground about what we are talking about. Some guys pulled together this discussion about finding hidden tracking information.
The video is fairly short, but worth a watch just to speak somewhat intelligently on this issue:
http://mashable.com/2011/04/20/iphone-location-history/
The crazy part is, you have to keep in mind the ignorance of all the media people, all the 'journalists' all the comments on places like the Wall Street Journal. These people thrive on conspiracy and almost go out of their way to never get facts to talk about an issue.
After listening to this video I realize that these two have no idea what they are doing, while claiming that they have discovered something dramatic and private, they have only found that the LOCAL iPhone backup contains a database file that stores long lat information with time stamps, as well as country codes and area codes. Kind of like a call history you find in ALL cell phones. Additionally, the cell phone works by tracking it's relative positioning based on communications with cell towers. So the info they found was just the mechanics of cell phone and GPS technology. Yes, the phone keeps track of where you have been physically in relation to those towers. Probably moreso a mix of reliability for service - caching local locations and speeding up the ability for the device to switch from tower to tower. These boys also bring up the fact that every device has a unique ID as well as every tower! Wow. The next discovery they may make will be the fundamentals of ip v4 addressing and the TCP/IP stack (can't wait!!)
Seriously, watch that video and give us your impressions of what these two brains figured out.
Also, how come no one is talking about FB invasion.. which is really the whole sale invasion of privacy and selling your information - a practice stolen directly from credit card companies. Banks, insurance companies, brokerage firms, and credit card reporting companies spend more time and make more money without consent than any other industry. Even cell phone providers.
These boys wind up their discussion saying they really are not sure what this location information means, and that it remains in the iphone owners hands, and they cannot prove that it EVER leaves the phone, nor the PC. It is an ever growing file, which just is not practical for Apple to track of and constantly send to their offices. Probably, Facebook and 4square collect more information than Apple from any one iPhone.
Here is an excellent rebuttal that explains technical detail why these two are wrong:
The video is fairly short, but worth a watch just to speak somewhat intelligently on this issue:
http://mashable.com/2011/04/20/iphone-location-history/
The crazy part is, you have to keep in mind the ignorance of all the media people, all the 'journalists' all the comments on places like the Wall Street Journal. These people thrive on conspiracy and almost go out of their way to never get facts to talk about an issue.
After listening to this video I realize that these two have no idea what they are doing, while claiming that they have discovered something dramatic and private, they have only found that the LOCAL iPhone backup contains a database file that stores long lat information with time stamps, as well as country codes and area codes. Kind of like a call history you find in ALL cell phones. Additionally, the cell phone works by tracking it's relative positioning based on communications with cell towers. So the info they found was just the mechanics of cell phone and GPS technology. Yes, the phone keeps track of where you have been physically in relation to those towers. Probably moreso a mix of reliability for service - caching local locations and speeding up the ability for the device to switch from tower to tower. These boys also bring up the fact that every device has a unique ID as well as every tower! Wow. The next discovery they may make will be the fundamentals of ip v4 addressing and the TCP/IP stack (can't wait!!)
Seriously, watch that video and give us your impressions of what these two brains figured out.
Also, how come no one is talking about FB invasion.. which is really the whole sale invasion of privacy and selling your information - a practice stolen directly from credit card companies. Banks, insurance companies, brokerage firms, and credit card reporting companies spend more time and make more money without consent than any other industry. Even cell phone providers.
These boys wind up their discussion saying they really are not sure what this location information means, and that it remains in the iphone owners hands, and they cannot prove that it EVER leaves the phone, nor the PC. It is an ever growing file, which just is not practical for Apple to track of and constantly send to their offices. Probably, Facebook and 4square collect more information than Apple from any one iPhone.
Here is an excellent rebuttal that explains technical detail why these two are wrong:
SavMan
Oct 11, 08:11 PM
For the last time, folks...
THE MATERIALS ON THE 5G iPOD ARE NO DIFFERENT THAN THOSE ON THE 4G!
The main differences are the addition of black underlay on one model, and the change to squared edges from rounded. The top layer of acrylic on an iPod is clear, and like any clear solid, will shunt light along it. Ever look at fiber-optic cable? Notice this: if you shine a light at the terminal of the cable (the leading edge of the fibers) they will duct light to the other end. You won't see the light from the sides, nor will shining a light at the side of the cable cause light to be refracted through the cable ends.
What happens on the new iPods that didn't happen on the old ones is that a large amount of light is coming through the flat edges of the acrylic. When your iPod is shiny and new (or if you're smart enough to put a modicum of protection on your $250�$400 appliance) light just shunts from one side of the iPod to the other. When you start making scratches in the acrylic however, the light escapes through the new "edge" (the gouge), effectively illuminating the otherwise innocuous scratch. This is also why the black iPods seem more affected than the white: the contrast is obviously higher against a black background.
Another huge issue: most iPod users prior to this year owned the nearly scratch-proof iPod mini. The contrast between the anodized aluminum's resilience and the acrylic's proclivity to mar caused a lot more people to bitch. A lot of nanos were sold to folks who assumed they could just toss it in their pocket next to their coins and keys.
To recap: there were no material changes in the acrylic used on the new iPods. Period. The only difference is the manner in which the acrylic is shaped. The round sides of the old iPods didn't allow light to enter the skin to any significant degree. Check out a 4G sometime, God knows I see enough on a daily basis myself. They'll be every bit as scratched (usually more), but it won't effect the appearance nearly as much. Thank you.
(I wish I had a "The More You Know" image right here.)
THE MATERIALS ON THE 5G iPOD ARE NO DIFFERENT THAN THOSE ON THE 4G!
The main differences are the addition of black underlay on one model, and the change to squared edges from rounded. The top layer of acrylic on an iPod is clear, and like any clear solid, will shunt light along it. Ever look at fiber-optic cable? Notice this: if you shine a light at the terminal of the cable (the leading edge of the fibers) they will duct light to the other end. You won't see the light from the sides, nor will shining a light at the side of the cable cause light to be refracted through the cable ends.
What happens on the new iPods that didn't happen on the old ones is that a large amount of light is coming through the flat edges of the acrylic. When your iPod is shiny and new (or if you're smart enough to put a modicum of protection on your $250�$400 appliance) light just shunts from one side of the iPod to the other. When you start making scratches in the acrylic however, the light escapes through the new "edge" (the gouge), effectively illuminating the otherwise innocuous scratch. This is also why the black iPods seem more affected than the white: the contrast is obviously higher against a black background.
Another huge issue: most iPod users prior to this year owned the nearly scratch-proof iPod mini. The contrast between the anodized aluminum's resilience and the acrylic's proclivity to mar caused a lot more people to bitch. A lot of nanos were sold to folks who assumed they could just toss it in their pocket next to their coins and keys.
To recap: there were no material changes in the acrylic used on the new iPods. Period. The only difference is the manner in which the acrylic is shaped. The round sides of the old iPods didn't allow light to enter the skin to any significant degree. Check out a 4G sometime, God knows I see enough on a daily basis myself. They'll be every bit as scratched (usually more), but it won't effect the appearance nearly as much. Thank you.
(I wish I had a "The More You Know" image right here.)
0 comments:
Post a Comment