asif786
Sep 10, 07:02 PM
hokay, i'm a little late to this thread but i'll still chime in..
with regards to kanye's appearance at the special event, it was okay i guess. he is one of the most 'happening' people in music so it was a good move by apple to pick someone different to who they normally do. plus i guess it woke the crowd up! ;)
However, i think it would've been cool to get madonna there. she's probably liked a lit more than Kanye. but giving anyone a madonna performance would put a smile on their face..and thats exactly what you want to do at a media event - make the journalists happy. i guess she was just way too busy or she commanded some crazy fee..
still, madonna's hot. end of. :rolleyes:
with regards to kanye's appearance at the special event, it was okay i guess. he is one of the most 'happening' people in music so it was a good move by apple to pick someone different to who they normally do. plus i guess it woke the crowd up! ;)
However, i think it would've been cool to get madonna there. she's probably liked a lit more than Kanye. but giving anyone a madonna performance would put a smile on their face..and thats exactly what you want to do at a media event - make the journalists happy. i guess she was just way too busy or she commanded some crazy fee..
still, madonna's hot. end of. :rolleyes:
benthewraith
Oct 17, 09:32 PM
Nope. Cheap always prevails when it comes to marketshare. The average consumer is fairly thick, when they walk along the aisles at Walmart and wonder which one to chuck in their shopping trolley the majority will go for the cheapest.
Thick or smart? The average consumer is NOT going to spend the amount of money for Blu-Ray player, when they can get HD-DVD for cheaper. Not everyone is as fortunate as you to put $1000 down on a player.
Thick or smart? The average consumer is NOT going to spend the amount of money for Blu-Ray player, when they can get HD-DVD for cheaper. Not everyone is as fortunate as you to put $1000 down on a player.
thegman1234
Jan 2, 11:48 PM
I actually think the numbers will be smaller because even if people say they will leave now, when it comes time to actually do it....only a portion will actually follow through.
That's a good point. Leave it to people to actually do the things they say they're going to do... but that's a different topic for a whole different forum.
That's a good point. Leave it to people to actually do the things they say they're going to do... but that's a different topic for a whole different forum.
Ommid
Apr 25, 11:49 AM
4s ftw.
Adamo
Oct 4, 08:06 AM
I imagine they should be banned from MacWorld, but I also think it's the funniest thing I've seen today and absolutely hilarious. :)
infiniteentropy
Mar 24, 03:10 PM
So the next will be:
OS Xi
... little i being key.
Times, they are a-changin'... when they release XCode / gcc for iOS, the corner will have been turned. From there, it'll get crazy... :apple:
OS Xi
... little i being key.
Times, they are a-changin'... when they release XCode / gcc for iOS, the corner will have been turned. From there, it'll get crazy... :apple:
radiohead14
Apr 16, 04:45 AM
I bet Google try to sell to the label the idea of free advertisement supported music, and Google get to keep 70% of the revenue.:eek:
princess diana crash photos
New Pictures of Princess Diana
New Pictures of Princess Diana
princess diana crash pictures.
Diana, Princess of Wales,
chi princess diana crash
juanster
Jul 21, 10:47 AM
Apple should spend the money spent on pointing fingers at others and no a bumper is not a fix. It only happens to 1% of the users? Greeeeat. That's 1% more than it should. So get to work and stop trying to look at others failures that are similar to yours.
What's apple trying to say? That they are failing At fixing something just better?
What's apple trying to say? That they are failing At fixing something just better?
pondosinatra
Apr 29, 03:12 PM
Can anyone confirm if the stupid Help menu font spacing bug is still present?
JPTech
Apr 29, 06:43 PM
Well that's good. I wasn't liking the way the UI was going, and this is a step (admittedly backwards) in the right direction. Hey, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.
vnle
Apr 10, 06:56 PM
Similar tastes...I have the 23" and M10's as well. But where did you find black Swans?...unless it's painted after the fact
Not the OP but here ya go! (http://lockwaresystems.com/swanm10b-179.html)
Not the OP but here ya go! (http://lockwaresystems.com/swanm10b-179.html)
steviem
Apr 9, 12:57 PM
It's really easy to spot fake beats when your scrutinizing them.
The knockoffs don't break? j/k
The knockoffs don't break? j/k
marksman
May 3, 04:56 PM
Ok, I'm taking down the names of all the carrier defenders here.
The next time you people bitch about the cable companies or magazine publishers charging you twice for the "one" thing you paid for I'm gonna be all over you.
It is not a matter of being a carrier defender.
It is a matter of being a carrier customer who does not want to have to pay more for their service because people want to steal tethering service.
Nobody is charging you twice for one thing here.
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.
I'd agree with you that there may be consideration with unlimited data plans as you might be using your phone outside the scope of what they initially envisioned when they offered you unlimited data, but those are largely a thing of the past now.
With regards to tiered pricing, what you're suggesting is that you're not entitled to the data you paid for should you choose to use some of it for tethering. If you paid for 2 GB a month, you can damn well get 2 GB a month. 2 GB a month was the consideration they offered you. It's none of your concern if the carrier sold it to you with the assumption that you'd only use 500 MB a month. They can't charge you more because your tethering makes you more likely to approach the 2 GB cap they offered you.
Sure they can.. For one they can just raise the price. They never sold you the data to be used with tethering in the first place. They sold you data to be used strictly with your registered mobile device. That is clearly outlined in the contract you signed with them. It is crystal clear.
Princess Diana Crash Photos:
princess diana crash scene.
princess diana crash body.
the crash are perhaps the
of Princess Diana#39;s
princess diana crash site.
The next time you people bitch about the cable companies or magazine publishers charging you twice for the "one" thing you paid for I'm gonna be all over you.
It is not a matter of being a carrier defender.
It is a matter of being a carrier customer who does not want to have to pay more for their service because people want to steal tethering service.
Nobody is charging you twice for one thing here.
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.
I'd agree with you that there may be consideration with unlimited data plans as you might be using your phone outside the scope of what they initially envisioned when they offered you unlimited data, but those are largely a thing of the past now.
With regards to tiered pricing, what you're suggesting is that you're not entitled to the data you paid for should you choose to use some of it for tethering. If you paid for 2 GB a month, you can damn well get 2 GB a month. 2 GB a month was the consideration they offered you. It's none of your concern if the carrier sold it to you with the assumption that you'd only use 500 MB a month. They can't charge you more because your tethering makes you more likely to approach the 2 GB cap they offered you.
Sure they can.. For one they can just raise the price. They never sold you the data to be used with tethering in the first place. They sold you data to be used strictly with your registered mobile device. That is clearly outlined in the contract you signed with them. It is crystal clear.
Nekbeth
Apr 27, 06:18 PM
EDIT: Finally, just a comment, PhoneyDeveloper pointed out that you had a parallel thread on the Apple Discussion forums. JMHO, but that's poor netiquette and is a waste of both your time and ours. At least link the two conversations, so folks don't end up repeating what someone else said on the other forum. Even just to say "someone over at the Apple Discussion Fourms (link) suggested ..."
B
Let me tell you something balamw, and I want you to remember it because it's obvious that you don't get my point either, even if I have said it over 10 times in this thread.
If you don't want to participate on my threads, stay out of it. Nobody is forcing you to read or post comment, alright ? If I want to open 10 threads on the subject in 10 different forums, well.. **** it.. that is how I like it. I'm not wasting anybodies time if they don't want to. Just ignore it and go to another one. I hope this is clear from now on.
About your links.. don't post them again.. I open one and read two paragraphs, I know where thats going. I could post 3 pages explaining you why and how Pro Developers should help Newbies but I not going to do that.
Next thing, quiz question: Just go ahead and ask, you can do as you like here; you'll sometimes get my answers just as sometimes I gets yours.
Again, thanks to all for commenting and helping.
My sources.. well, my main sources is the Apple documentation (all of it), then theres books and all the same stuff than most developers learn from. And.. no I haven't read all of the books, nor watch every video but I will.
I may not understand it all now balamw but give me a year or two and will see who needs some catching up to do.
well, back to work :)
B
Let me tell you something balamw, and I want you to remember it because it's obvious that you don't get my point either, even if I have said it over 10 times in this thread.
If you don't want to participate on my threads, stay out of it. Nobody is forcing you to read or post comment, alright ? If I want to open 10 threads on the subject in 10 different forums, well.. **** it.. that is how I like it. I'm not wasting anybodies time if they don't want to. Just ignore it and go to another one. I hope this is clear from now on.
About your links.. don't post them again.. I open one and read two paragraphs, I know where thats going. I could post 3 pages explaining you why and how Pro Developers should help Newbies but I not going to do that.
Next thing, quiz question: Just go ahead and ask, you can do as you like here; you'll sometimes get my answers just as sometimes I gets yours.
Again, thanks to all for commenting and helping.
My sources.. well, my main sources is the Apple documentation (all of it), then theres books and all the same stuff than most developers learn from. And.. no I haven't read all of the books, nor watch every video but I will.
I may not understand it all now balamw but give me a year or two and will see who needs some catching up to do.
well, back to work :)
Sykte
Apr 27, 07:29 PM
I have to say this thread has me captivated. First time ever..... code talk went from learning code to pooping in a pool within 3 pages.
quagmire
May 5, 09:27 AM
You must not read the news much. Or check out the robbery, rape, and murder statistics for your town. But I'll bet you're a nice friendly guy, and you live in the nice part of town, so it couldn't possibly happen to you, am I right? :rolleyes:
The better question here, is why do you feel so immune to violent crime?
Why are you using fear as part of your argument? I shouldn't have to have a gun on me to feel safe in my community. It's not saying I feel immune to crime, but fear of crime shouldn't drive a person.
At any rate, I don't think anyone here is going to argue the self-defense aspect of guns. Some people just don't understand the gun culture of this country.
Are you also confused about our obsessions with free speech? freedom of religion? or freedom of the press perhaps? Because those are protected in the Bill of Rights as well. Guns however, are unique in that they are the only material object, the only physical thing, that the Bill of Rights expressly protects ownership of. So we don't take to kindly to confused legislators who would try and take them away, or place unusual restrictions on that right.
So not understanding the gun culture in this country means we are against the 2nd amendment? Having the right to own guns and the gun culture are two separate matters, IMHO. I believe in the right to bear arms, but I don't understand the gun culture.
The better question here, is why do you feel so immune to violent crime?
Why are you using fear as part of your argument? I shouldn't have to have a gun on me to feel safe in my community. It's not saying I feel immune to crime, but fear of crime shouldn't drive a person.
At any rate, I don't think anyone here is going to argue the self-defense aspect of guns. Some people just don't understand the gun culture of this country.
Are you also confused about our obsessions with free speech? freedom of religion? or freedom of the press perhaps? Because those are protected in the Bill of Rights as well. Guns however, are unique in that they are the only material object, the only physical thing, that the Bill of Rights expressly protects ownership of. So we don't take to kindly to confused legislators who would try and take them away, or place unusual restrictions on that right.
So not understanding the gun culture in this country means we are against the 2nd amendment? Having the right to own guns and the gun culture are two separate matters, IMHO. I believe in the right to bear arms, but I don't understand the gun culture.
citizenzen
May 6, 10:08 AM
Go to a firing range and learn about guns, citizenzen- even if it scares and repulses you. Trust me, you'll be all the better for it, and you might learn something about yourself you never knew was there. After all, knowledge is power.
Here's a little knowledge. Try to empower yourself with it.
I've shot guns.
And yet ... somehow ... I'm not bewitched by the thrill of firearms.
I know. How is that even possible? :eek:
Here's a little knowledge. Try to empower yourself with it.
I've shot guns.
And yet ... somehow ... I'm not bewitched by the thrill of firearms.
I know. How is that even possible? :eek:
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.
ct2k7
Apr 22, 09:43 PM
Windows 8 is worse than anything else I've seen when it comes to keeping things secret. I'm seeing new screenshots nearly every day.
Popeye206
Apr 16, 05:59 PM
Apple has by far the most restrictive ecosystem. You can't even load applications that are not approved by Apple.
Ahhhh.... dude... the only Apps that don't really get approved are ones that do things that can cause security risks or just plain trying to steal your information.
Yeah, I know... there are also Apps that break the rules and get axed, but for the most part, my first point is true. Any legitimate application can get approved.
If you keep up with Android apps, security is one of the their problems. Open? Yes... risky? Yes.
Ahhhh.... dude... the only Apps that don't really get approved are ones that do things that can cause security risks or just plain trying to steal your information.
Yeah, I know... there are also Apps that break the rules and get axed, but for the most part, my first point is true. Any legitimate application can get approved.
If you keep up with Android apps, security is one of the their problems. Open? Yes... risky? Yes.
leekohler
Apr 22, 11:19 AM
we'll see how france looks when the interest on their debt exceeds their GDP. Paid vacation has to end sometime
Well, ours is not much better. We just never get anything for it. At least the French do.
Oh wait. Sorry- corporations and big oil have gotten quite a bit of money out of it.
Well, ours is not much better. We just never get anything for it. At least the French do.
Oh wait. Sorry- corporations and big oil have gotten quite a bit of money out of it.
twoodcc
Aug 11, 07:06 PM
^^ is 200mhz really that important :p
i'm tellin ya, there's something about starting with the number 4.
but it got too hot, and i had to turn it down to 3.98 ghz. not quite 4. hopefully it'll stay at that though
i'm tellin ya, there's something about starting with the number 4.
but it got too hot, and i had to turn it down to 3.98 ghz. not quite 4. hopefully it'll stay at that though
MacAddict1978
Apr 16, 04:03 PM
why do music companies make it so difficult to distribute their music? weird.
It's because they wan't to make it more enticing for people to steal music instead of making it easier for them to buy it. They can sue 80 year old ladies for a $million for 1 Incubus song... (no, seriously, they did.) That's a much better haul than 99 cents right? :D
Sounds like the Record companies are being their typical stupid selves. Only reason Apple is really able to get away with it is because they are Apple. It is not the closed system part but because they are Apple. I bet if the record company could they would say F you to Apple and pull out. I also would not be surpised if they regreat now making a deal with them when iTunes first launched.
This stinks over all. It is not closed or open argument. This is a record company being record companies.
iTunes made legally downloading relevant. We'd still not have a model like this if Apple hadn't done it (no one thought apple would grow to such a behmoth back at the time iTunes Store was born). We'd having something, but I doubt we'd have the flexibility of individual tracks at that price if individual tracks at all. Really, even though there is still piracy, iTunes probably saved the music industry more than it killed it IMO. And if the record labels don't like people cherry picking the 2 good songs of an ablbum, start putting out artists that have albums without filler (like that kesha creature)
It's because they wan't to make it more enticing for people to steal music instead of making it easier for them to buy it. They can sue 80 year old ladies for a $million for 1 Incubus song... (no, seriously, they did.) That's a much better haul than 99 cents right? :D
Sounds like the Record companies are being their typical stupid selves. Only reason Apple is really able to get away with it is because they are Apple. It is not the closed system part but because they are Apple. I bet if the record company could they would say F you to Apple and pull out. I also would not be surpised if they regreat now making a deal with them when iTunes first launched.
This stinks over all. It is not closed or open argument. This is a record company being record companies.
iTunes made legally downloading relevant. We'd still not have a model like this if Apple hadn't done it (no one thought apple would grow to such a behmoth back at the time iTunes Store was born). We'd having something, but I doubt we'd have the flexibility of individual tracks at that price if individual tracks at all. Really, even though there is still piracy, iTunes probably saved the music industry more than it killed it IMO. And if the record labels don't like people cherry picking the 2 good songs of an ablbum, start putting out artists that have albums without filler (like that kesha creature)
yg17
Apr 13, 12:19 PM
Let me give you a REAL scenario. I used to use my laptop backpack to carry my lunch to work and I was at the airport heading out of town. What I didn't know is that one of my butter knives had slid down under the lining of the backpack. Of course I went in security and was pulled to the side where I was professionally patted down. They then pulled me off to the side to further inspect the bag. I told them the story and they allowed me to slip it in an envelope to mail it home.
1. It worked as they did catch a potential weapon.
2. They were profesional about it the entire time (Boston TSA).
3. If you cooperate with them it is generally no big deal.
People that are making this difficult simply like to complain for the sake of complaining. Take the bus....
4. The most rational response would be to realize that a butter knife cannot harm anyone and allow you to carry it on the plane.
1. It worked as they did catch a potential weapon.
2. They were profesional about it the entire time (Boston TSA).
3. If you cooperate with them it is generally no big deal.
People that are making this difficult simply like to complain for the sake of complaining. Take the bus....
4. The most rational response would be to realize that a butter knife cannot harm anyone and allow you to carry it on the plane.
ليست هناك تعليقات:
إرسال تعليق