wordoflife
Mar 17, 11:04 PM
I think the IPS display makes the screen pop out to people who are near by and then they comment on how nice it looks.
I know this from experience :eek:
The iPhone 4 display stands out like crazy (compared to my 3GS and other phones)
I know this from experience :eek:
The iPhone 4 display stands out like crazy (compared to my 3GS and other phones)
ct2k7
Apr 23, 05:28 PM
I'd have to disagree. There are a lot of ways to keep tabs on someone if you wish to do them harm. The issue is whether the (as yet unknown) purpose of this data is useful enough to justify it's being there in the state it's in. There is no immediate way it gives anyone any special or expedient means of causing another harm. You'll need a lot of contingencies and variables come together to form specific cases. I really don't see that happening. That said, the reasons I've seen so far aren't that nefarious. It actually makes sense to be tracked in this way, especially in light of the argument that it's a caching mechanism in order to make it easier to switch from tower to tower. I can believe this. I don't believe there's any evil behind it. Nor do I for the moment believe this is easily accessible by anyone other than physically by the user/owner of the phone. And then it's likely not easy for the average person.
Said paedophile *before* this information has been able to track children without problems using other means, I'd wager. Likely easier means, though I'm not well-versed in the specific modus operandi of paedophiles. I suspect I'll need forensics/law enforcement training to get a complete understanding.
Besides, your example is based upon pure conjecture. First assumption is they are able to hack into their phone. Is hacking into iPhones remoely a big problem out in the wild? Not that I've heard or seen.
What I'm saying is take the "wait and see" aproach before we begin to vilify and condemn Apple as self-serving, careless data-mining opportunists.
So it's a plea for sanity. But I've noticed that whenever Apple's quarterly report rolls around and it's usually stellar news, the insanity of our loveable contrarians ramps up, purely for the purpose of being contrarians, as if we need to "balance out" all the enthusiasm with careful doses of negativity so we're not *too* positive. I'm not referring to you, roadbloc, by the way.
So in any case, this is my position, and I'll say it's the same position I'd take if it were Google and MS.
Read the first line.
Hack the computers, not the iPhones.
Said paedophile *before* this information has been able to track children without problems using other means, I'd wager. Likely easier means, though I'm not well-versed in the specific modus operandi of paedophiles. I suspect I'll need forensics/law enforcement training to get a complete understanding.
Besides, your example is based upon pure conjecture. First assumption is they are able to hack into their phone. Is hacking into iPhones remoely a big problem out in the wild? Not that I've heard or seen.
What I'm saying is take the "wait and see" aproach before we begin to vilify and condemn Apple as self-serving, careless data-mining opportunists.
So it's a plea for sanity. But I've noticed that whenever Apple's quarterly report rolls around and it's usually stellar news, the insanity of our loveable contrarians ramps up, purely for the purpose of being contrarians, as if we need to "balance out" all the enthusiasm with careful doses of negativity so we're not *too* positive. I'm not referring to you, roadbloc, by the way.
So in any case, this is my position, and I'll say it's the same position I'd take if it were Google and MS.
Read the first line.
Hack the computers, not the iPhones.
jdiddy
Sep 12, 01:51 AM
Daffy Duck is from Warner, not Disney.
Lol good catch. I'm kind of excited about tommorow its making it hard to sleep argg.
Lol good catch. I'm kind of excited about tommorow its making it hard to sleep argg.
diamond.g
Apr 21, 10:41 AM
I just noticed them as well. Was kinda surprised, but figured out what they were pretty quick!
BJNY
Jan 14, 12:37 PM
My computers dedicated for pro digital photography don't require more than ~5GB for the OS and apps, so that would leave 25GB for RAW data. 64SSD would certainly give more breathing room since most sessions are 20GB to 50GB.
Aniej
Jan 5, 03:21 PM
it would be nice if we could also post a countdown ticker as well don't you think? Like the widget for macworld or jsw's madejew post counter?
SciFrog
May 10, 05:16 PM
Seing your "adventures", no way I would ever try to do anything on a custom rig...
avkills
Sep 12, 06:58 AM
Apple would be stupid to make a branded portable projector. That market is already saturated by Epson, Eiki, InFocus, NEC, Sony, Panasonic, need I go on...
I think the wireless video streaming device makes more sense. Make the wireless part interchangeable for future upgrades. 720p H.264 could easily stream over 10mbit connections. Better include a HDMI connector, component video out, s-video out and optical/analog audio. If not, it is dead in the water.
-mark
I think the wireless video streaming device makes more sense. Make the wireless part interchangeable for future upgrades. 720p H.264 could easily stream over 10mbit connections. Better include a HDMI connector, component video out, s-video out and optical/analog audio. If not, it is dead in the water.
-mark
tristangage
Apr 22, 02:50 PM
To me, the whole idea is completely redundant.
Yeah, we can tell.
Yeah, we can tell.
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.
davepoint
Aug 12, 04:31 PM
surely they wouldn't update the specs only to release something new in a month or so..
mauka
Nov 24, 12:46 PM
At the Honolulu Apple Store I was able to buy a black MacBook, using govt employee discount less black friday discount, total price $1309.00. At first they were saying no double discounts, but after a bit of a stand down myself and another unrelated buyer got the deal. :)
longofest
Oct 28, 04:50 PM
Folks, I think you are misinterpreting what the OSx86 project is doing (at least in this case)...
The OSx86 project is taking the Darwin and XNU source that Apple releases and making them so they can run on any x86 hardware. Basically, they are bringing back the functionality that Darwin and XNU had BEFORE Apple ported OSX to Intel, as the x86 versions of Darwin used to run on any x86 hardware until Apple started including a lot of EFI-specific commands (as well as some other things). If you download and compile the OSx86 source, you won't be able to get a full-fledged OSX user experience, because they have not circumvented Apple's TPM protections for the GUI. In order to get Aqua, you need to have the Aqua resource files (which you'd have to get from a OSX install CD), and you'd have to get the TPM keys, which would be illegal.
Also remember, Darwin and XNU does NOT EQUAL the full OSX user experience. Darwin/XNU is just a command-line operating system, as that is the only part that is open-source.
The OSx86 project is taking the Darwin and XNU source that Apple releases and making them so they can run on any x86 hardware. Basically, they are bringing back the functionality that Darwin and XNU had BEFORE Apple ported OSX to Intel, as the x86 versions of Darwin used to run on any x86 hardware until Apple started including a lot of EFI-specific commands (as well as some other things). If you download and compile the OSx86 source, you won't be able to get a full-fledged OSX user experience, because they have not circumvented Apple's TPM protections for the GUI. In order to get Aqua, you need to have the Aqua resource files (which you'd have to get from a OSX install CD), and you'd have to get the TPM keys, which would be illegal.
Also remember, Darwin and XNU does NOT EQUAL the full OSX user experience. Darwin/XNU is just a command-line operating system, as that is the only part that is open-source.
jessica.
Apr 22, 07:04 AM
On IE7 whenever I click either the "up" or "down" arrow I get taken back to the forum index.
That is because those who oppose will find themselves without the right to vote. :p :D
That is because those who oppose will find themselves without the right to vote. :p :D
Nekbeth
Apr 26, 10:29 PM
What if after pressing the start button, you create a timer and start it. Then pressing the cancel button invalidates and releases it. Then pressing the start button would create another timer, using the same pointer.
Totally untested and probably broken code below, but should demonstrate the idea:
-(IBAction)startButton:(id) sender {
// myTimer is declared in header file ...
if (myTimer!=nil) { // if the pointer already points to a timer, you don't want to create a second one without stoping and destroying the first
[myTimer invalidate];
[myTimer release];
}
// Now that we know myTimer doesn't point to a timer already..
myTimer = [NSTimer scheduledTimerWithTimeInterval:aTimeInterval target:self selector:@selector(echoIt:) userInfo:myDict repeats:YES];
[myTimer retain];
}
-(IBAction)cancelIt:(id) sender {
[myTimer invalidate];
[myTimer release]; // This timer is now gone, and you won't reuse it.
}
Update *** "I though it worked but the timer kept going on the background.
crashed :confused:
wlh99, do you get an exception in the invalid method " [myTimer Invalidate]" ?
Totally untested and probably broken code below, but should demonstrate the idea:
-(IBAction)startButton:(id) sender {
// myTimer is declared in header file ...
if (myTimer!=nil) { // if the pointer already points to a timer, you don't want to create a second one without stoping and destroying the first
[myTimer invalidate];
[myTimer release];
}
// Now that we know myTimer doesn't point to a timer already..
myTimer = [NSTimer scheduledTimerWithTimeInterval:aTimeInterval target:self selector:@selector(echoIt:) userInfo:myDict repeats:YES];
[myTimer retain];
}
-(IBAction)cancelIt:(id) sender {
[myTimer invalidate];
[myTimer release]; // This timer is now gone, and you won't reuse it.
}
Update *** "I though it worked but the timer kept going on the background.
crashed :confused:
wlh99, do you get an exception in the invalid method " [myTimer Invalidate]" ?
Applejuiced
Apr 22, 09:02 PM
Working on the IE issues.
arn
Thank you.
On the iPhone safari browser it works fine.
arn
Thank you.
On the iPhone safari browser it works fine.
MattZani
Apr 6, 05:36 PM
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhWlSwqRLMRtbY1fPLkXtq82yfv2EGIm02ZB5BxSmyDylxWVYxicJ5Wy8ePvEOpjybYRPyf2nwutK_oIEO3JkLQyMZ_e5iRwSEgDfnqLwxhswz96JL2AzttjEpTziPHJCw6Q_er5xB4FUY/s1600/Source-Code-Movie-Poster.jpg
2 tickets to see Source Code, brilliant.
2 tickets to see Source Code, brilliant.
bedifferent
Apr 29, 06:50 PM
Like this? :p
Odd, I don't have that option in "System Preferences"
Odd, I don't have that option in "System Preferences"
UTclassof89
Jul 21, 01:39 PM
1) What isn't factored into your calculations is that because of its more-sensitive antenna, the iP4 was able to make calls, in marginal signal areas, where the 3GS showed no signal and was not able to attempt or receive a call... dropping any of these "never-before-possible" calls would reflect poorly on the iP4, and be included in the "< 1 call per hundred" more dropped calls by the iP4.
True, but a dropped call is a dropped call.
2) <1 per 100 more dropped calls by the iP4 than the 3GS. "< 1" can mean anything from, say, .0000000001 to .9999999999. Without knowing the real delta fraction it is difficult to base calculations on it.
We both know that's a crock. If "<1" was anything less than 0.8, Apple would have said "barely over one half of one percent". But they didn't. That means it's more like .97 or .98 (bet me an iPhone!)
3) The 3GS came into being with a plethora of available cases-- the iP4 with 1 case, that was in so short supply as to be non-available. Apple stated that 80% of the 3GSs left their store with a case. So, many 3Gs had 2 layers of antenna shielding, the 3GS plastic housing and an external case. The bulk of iP4s had neither-- 0 levels of antenna shielding.
Wow. Mr. Jobs, I didn't realize it was you.
The point isn't whether a case mitigates the issue--I have no doubt that it does. But Apple is spinning facts and pretending the issue is the typical attenuation issue other phones has. It isn't (otherwise the iphone 4's that left the store without a case would be dropping fewer calls, not more)
True, but a dropped call is a dropped call.
2) <1 per 100 more dropped calls by the iP4 than the 3GS. "< 1" can mean anything from, say, .0000000001 to .9999999999. Without knowing the real delta fraction it is difficult to base calculations on it.
We both know that's a crock. If "<1" was anything less than 0.8, Apple would have said "barely over one half of one percent". But they didn't. That means it's more like .97 or .98 (bet me an iPhone!)
3) The 3GS came into being with a plethora of available cases-- the iP4 with 1 case, that was in so short supply as to be non-available. Apple stated that 80% of the 3GSs left their store with a case. So, many 3Gs had 2 layers of antenna shielding, the 3GS plastic housing and an external case. The bulk of iP4s had neither-- 0 levels of antenna shielding.
Wow. Mr. Jobs, I didn't realize it was you.
The point isn't whether a case mitigates the issue--I have no doubt that it does. But Apple is spinning facts and pretending the issue is the typical attenuation issue other phones has. It isn't (otherwise the iphone 4's that left the store without a case would be dropping fewer calls, not more)
Anthony T
Apr 15, 10:44 PM
As much as I hope they are fake, they look like real photos.
Hephaestus
Mar 17, 07:35 PM
I get it a lot too but I just say "nah, this phone sucks it's the worst phone in the world" and they usually shut up.
They shut up because they have an insecurity about their phone and the iPhone 4 is the better phone. Shooting down a better phone makes their phone seem even worse. It's like a double headshot.
I hate to say it again but haters gon hate! It happens with ANYTHING. If you buy a BMW, Audi owners will waltz in saying "SEE MY CAR HAS THIS STANDARD IT'S WAY BETTER THAN BMW!!!!". If you buy a Rolex you get Omega and TAG Heuer owners going "MY WATCH IS SO MUCH BETTER THAN ROLEX BECAUSE IT'S CHEAPER AND IT HAS MORE THINGS IN IT!!!".
It's a thing you have to live with if you buy the most popular, top-of-the-line luxury things. If you can afford it, why not buy it?
the whole thing makes my brain hurt because it's so stupid and I don't care if the guy next to me had an Evo or an iPhone 4. :rolleyes:
That was exactly my point. I don't see why people care so much about what phone someone else has. It's only the Android folks that engage in this, I have yet to see an iPhone owner behave so pathetically.
They shut up because they have an insecurity about their phone and the iPhone 4 is the better phone. Shooting down a better phone makes their phone seem even worse. It's like a double headshot.
I hate to say it again but haters gon hate! It happens with ANYTHING. If you buy a BMW, Audi owners will waltz in saying "SEE MY CAR HAS THIS STANDARD IT'S WAY BETTER THAN BMW!!!!". If you buy a Rolex you get Omega and TAG Heuer owners going "MY WATCH IS SO MUCH BETTER THAN ROLEX BECAUSE IT'S CHEAPER AND IT HAS MORE THINGS IN IT!!!".
It's a thing you have to live with if you buy the most popular, top-of-the-line luxury things. If you can afford it, why not buy it?
the whole thing makes my brain hurt because it's so stupid and I don't care if the guy next to me had an Evo or an iPhone 4. :rolleyes:
That was exactly my point. I don't see why people care so much about what phone someone else has. It's only the Android folks that engage in this, I have yet to see an iPhone owner behave so pathetically.
kudukudu
Jan 15, 03:32 PM
i agree. I think it would have made sense to drop them in price in line with the mac pro update...and they didnt
I agree with you. The specifications of, say, the Dell 3008WFP really blow the 30" ACD out of the water: newer panel, every connection technology you could ever think of, etc.
I agree with you. The specifications of, say, the Dell 3008WFP really blow the 30" ACD out of the water: newer panel, every connection technology you could ever think of, etc.
AppliedVisual
Oct 17, 02:33 PM
Tape!?! :confused: who on earth uses tape anymore? This is.. 2006. And I was always under the impression that a medium with moving parts would be more prone to failure than one without. Certainly my VHS and cassette library have had their share of tapes being chewed up by the machine or worn out from use.
Tape is still the most reliable, long-term archival media available. Newer tape systems can transfer over 150MB/sec. to and from the tape and store several hundred GB on a single tape. Cost-wise, tape is expensive to buy into, but if you have sufficeint archival needs, it pays for itself over time. Many tape solutions once they reach their ROI point afer a year or two, often are cheaper than HDD storage by half or more. Sounds weird, I know, but that's the way it still is.
Most large data centers covering everything from web storage, insurance databases, financial institutions etc... Have mostly converted over to large-scale redundant servers and storage networks using RAID subsystems. This serves all their immediate storage and backup needs on site and is very reliable if managed properly. But nearly all of them still use an additional tape archival workflow for off-site data storage. There really is no other way right now... Wish there was. Hence the reason tape systems also keep evolving and pretty much match HDD capacity with tape capacity in most cases and transfer rates continue to improve. Comparing tape archival systems to VHS or miniDV tape is not a good comparison, data tapes (or at least the good ones) are very robust and actually very hard to damage. Short of placing them in a magnetic field for a period of time, they're mostly indestructable. They do have moving parts, but hardly any compared to a hard drive.
Using hard drives as an archival solution is a bad idea... Hard drives are not designed for this and can corrupt data over time. Not to mention, the platter system and motors are not designed to sit stationary for years at a time for long-term storage. Optical media isn't too bad, but most photo-sensitive dyes and films used in optical media will decay over time. CD-R media was originally claimed to have a lifespan of 30 to 100 years. Now that it's been around for 30+ years, we're finding out that claim was somewhat exaggerated. Recordable DVD media and HD-DVD and BD are no different, just higher data density on the discs. And also not anywhere near practical for large-scale solutions. Just how do you archive and manage 300 petabytes per year to DVD-R???
For small business type users and home users though, DVD-R media in addition to a good redundant RAID setup probably makes the most sense. Unless they're pushing lots of data doing HD video editing or something like that. In which case, it may still make sense to give tape a consideration as the long-term archive solution. Prosumer level tape archive systems exist and are not that expensive and much more reliable than shelved hard drives and much easier to manage than optical media. The VXA2 format can afford someone an external Firewire tape system w/2 tapes for < $1K. Tapes hold up to 160GB each and factoring in the cost of the drive plus enough tapes to back up about 3 terrabytes of data, the cost becomes cheaper than individual hard drives. So a few terrabytes down the road and you could be wishing you had considered tape if you're still using DVD-R. OTOH, DVD-R is just fine and dandy if a terrabyte or two is all you need. Because you can fit a lot of discs in a shoebox and sharpie pen to label them is pretty cheap too.
External drives are *not* long term archiving solutions. They are useful for storing vast amounts of data that presumably you want to actually access and use (and possibly modify) on a regular basis; also, they are good for the kind of incremental backups you refer to, Time Machine, Retrospect, other 3rd party backup tools can be used for this. But if you have important files you know aren't going to change, while having them on HDD is useful for instant access, that's not where they should be permanently archived -- they should be burned to a permanent medium, preferably more than one copy, and stored in a safe place (or places). If your drive fails and you still need the data to be on that drive, you can then restore from the permanent medium.
Um... I guess I got carried away and didn't mean to elaborate on what you already said. But, er... um.. Yep, I agree.
Tape is still the most reliable, long-term archival media available. Newer tape systems can transfer over 150MB/sec. to and from the tape and store several hundred GB on a single tape. Cost-wise, tape is expensive to buy into, but if you have sufficeint archival needs, it pays for itself over time. Many tape solutions once they reach their ROI point afer a year or two, often are cheaper than HDD storage by half or more. Sounds weird, I know, but that's the way it still is.
Most large data centers covering everything from web storage, insurance databases, financial institutions etc... Have mostly converted over to large-scale redundant servers and storage networks using RAID subsystems. This serves all their immediate storage and backup needs on site and is very reliable if managed properly. But nearly all of them still use an additional tape archival workflow for off-site data storage. There really is no other way right now... Wish there was. Hence the reason tape systems also keep evolving and pretty much match HDD capacity with tape capacity in most cases and transfer rates continue to improve. Comparing tape archival systems to VHS or miniDV tape is not a good comparison, data tapes (or at least the good ones) are very robust and actually very hard to damage. Short of placing them in a magnetic field for a period of time, they're mostly indestructable. They do have moving parts, but hardly any compared to a hard drive.
Using hard drives as an archival solution is a bad idea... Hard drives are not designed for this and can corrupt data over time. Not to mention, the platter system and motors are not designed to sit stationary for years at a time for long-term storage. Optical media isn't too bad, but most photo-sensitive dyes and films used in optical media will decay over time. CD-R media was originally claimed to have a lifespan of 30 to 100 years. Now that it's been around for 30+ years, we're finding out that claim was somewhat exaggerated. Recordable DVD media and HD-DVD and BD are no different, just higher data density on the discs. And also not anywhere near practical for large-scale solutions. Just how do you archive and manage 300 petabytes per year to DVD-R???
For small business type users and home users though, DVD-R media in addition to a good redundant RAID setup probably makes the most sense. Unless they're pushing lots of data doing HD video editing or something like that. In which case, it may still make sense to give tape a consideration as the long-term archive solution. Prosumer level tape archive systems exist and are not that expensive and much more reliable than shelved hard drives and much easier to manage than optical media. The VXA2 format can afford someone an external Firewire tape system w/2 tapes for < $1K. Tapes hold up to 160GB each and factoring in the cost of the drive plus enough tapes to back up about 3 terrabytes of data, the cost becomes cheaper than individual hard drives. So a few terrabytes down the road and you could be wishing you had considered tape if you're still using DVD-R. OTOH, DVD-R is just fine and dandy if a terrabyte or two is all you need. Because you can fit a lot of discs in a shoebox and sharpie pen to label them is pretty cheap too.
External drives are *not* long term archiving solutions. They are useful for storing vast amounts of data that presumably you want to actually access and use (and possibly modify) on a regular basis; also, they are good for the kind of incremental backups you refer to, Time Machine, Retrospect, other 3rd party backup tools can be used for this. But if you have important files you know aren't going to change, while having them on HDD is useful for instant access, that's not where they should be permanently archived -- they should be burned to a permanent medium, preferably more than one copy, and stored in a safe place (or places). If your drive fails and you still need the data to be on that drive, you can then restore from the permanent medium.
Um... I guess I got carried away and didn't mean to elaborate on what you already said. But, er... um.. Yep, I agree.
Jaymes
Mar 28, 02:51 PM
What did you think they would do, rummage through all the non-app store apps on the Mac platform? Lol, some people are ridiculous.
Are you new to the design awards? They have existed for years without the App Store. It used to to be that you would submit your app to Apple prior to WWDC. Why would an App Store be required?
Are you new to the design awards? They have existed for years without the App Store. It used to to be that you would submit your app to Apple prior to WWDC. Why would an App Store be required?
No comments:
Post a Comment