ericinboston
Apr 11, 05:05 PM
My issue with USB has always been that it goes through the CPU. At the speeds of USB 3.0, this could really bite performance.
Well, I guess in the beginning it could hurt the performance...for people, say, who are using 5 year old computers who pop in a USB 3.0 PCI card.
But for the folks who are buying computers these days with dual and quad cores that are tons of times faster than 5 year old chips, the performance hit will be minimized...and will continue to fade as the CPUs of tomorrow just keep getting better/faster while USB 3.0 stays the same.
I'm not an expert on USB...
Most people who have a computer that is 1-3 years old who upgrade to USB 3.0 are seeing 2-4x immediate performance improvements...which is killer for transfers that used to take 2 hours but now take <45 minutes. :) It might not be at its tip top best but for a $30 PCI card and the same price for a USB 3.0 drive vs. a 2.0 drive, the $30 is a great investment.
:)
Well, I guess in the beginning it could hurt the performance...for people, say, who are using 5 year old computers who pop in a USB 3.0 PCI card.
But for the folks who are buying computers these days with dual and quad cores that are tons of times faster than 5 year old chips, the performance hit will be minimized...and will continue to fade as the CPUs of tomorrow just keep getting better/faster while USB 3.0 stays the same.
I'm not an expert on USB...
Most people who have a computer that is 1-3 years old who upgrade to USB 3.0 are seeing 2-4x immediate performance improvements...which is killer for transfers that used to take 2 hours but now take <45 minutes. :) It might not be at its tip top best but for a $30 PCI card and the same price for a USB 3.0 drive vs. a 2.0 drive, the $30 is a great investment.
:)
DeathChill
Apr 24, 12:12 PM
I tend to ignore my family/co-workers when I talk about this stuff. The Apple bias there is quite evident and I don't expect anything other than Apple stuff there. I wouldn't draw conclusions on Mac market share from them either as it would put the Mac on top of Windows by a huge margin. ;)
I try to be honest with myself because if I looked at them, I would draw the same conclusions you and many others are here and just say Apple is leading by a huge margin, which just isn't the case. I don't have enough attachement to Apple as a vendor to go around cheerleading for them.
Haha, if I used my family as a Mac market share indicator then Apple would have sold one Mac...to me.
Yeah that's why I was curious if there was data to support your statement that all of the carriers here are selling tons. I honestly have no idea who's in the lead up here, but based on my observations it'd be iPhone and based on yours it's Android. If they'd release some damned info, eh?
I try to be honest with myself because if I looked at them, I would draw the same conclusions you and many others are here and just say Apple is leading by a huge margin, which just isn't the case. I don't have enough attachement to Apple as a vendor to go around cheerleading for them.
Haha, if I used my family as a Mac market share indicator then Apple would have sold one Mac...to me.
Yeah that's why I was curious if there was data to support your statement that all of the carriers here are selling tons. I honestly have no idea who's in the lead up here, but based on my observations it'd be iPhone and based on yours it's Android. If they'd release some damned info, eh?
Tommyg117
Jul 24, 05:49 PM
I thought they already had one. Oh well, I bought the wireless regular bluetooth mouse but I never use it for my powerbook.
alent1234
Apr 22, 09:40 AM
Not sure I understand, I've had 4G on my Evo for over a year now...
Hrm....
wimax is not 4G. it even shows up with the wifi icon when it's connected. LTE is a real ITU standard that will eventually pave the way for real 4G
Hrm....
wimax is not 4G. it even shows up with the wifi icon when it's connected. LTE is a real ITU standard that will eventually pave the way for real 4G
Cinnabar
Mar 31, 11:06 AM
This looks good. Are people forgetting how rubbish iCal is at the moment. Beyond aesthetics, I'd like a calendar that is useful....
daneoni
May 2, 12:16 AM
Where the **** did I ever suggest anything of the sort?
Because I'm not jumping for joy and mindlessly chanting it means I didn't want justice done for a mass murderer?
Who was talking about stretches earlier? :mad:
Probably because you're coming across as overtly cynical about the whole thing with your 'this is zero news/we might actually be worse off' stance. No matter how much you spin it...it is huge news. Both PR wise, as well as to those directly involved the war.
Everyone and their grandmother knows it's not over...not even by a long shot, something even Obama stressed in his speech. We all know whats likely coming. But that doesn't change the fact that the triumph...however small in the grand scheme remains significant
Because I'm not jumping for joy and mindlessly chanting it means I didn't want justice done for a mass murderer?
Who was talking about stretches earlier? :mad:
Probably because you're coming across as overtly cynical about the whole thing with your 'this is zero news/we might actually be worse off' stance. No matter how much you spin it...it is huge news. Both PR wise, as well as to those directly involved the war.
Everyone and their grandmother knows it's not over...not even by a long shot, something even Obama stressed in his speech. We all know whats likely coming. But that doesn't change the fact that the triumph...however small in the grand scheme remains significant
beany boy
Apr 14, 07:51 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8H7)
4.3.2 feels smoother to me. Take that with as many grains of sand as you like.
4.3.2 feels smoother to me. Take that with as many grains of sand as you like.
gwangung
Jul 21, 07:44 PM
By definition, having alternatives makes Apple NOT a monopoly.
Really. We have an awful lot of ill-educated people around here who think they know economics....Wayyyyyyy too many people are saying that with a straight face.
Really. We have an awful lot of ill-educated people around here who think they know economics....Wayyyyyyy too many people are saying that with a straight face.
KnightWRX
Apr 22, 12:07 PM
4. Per Bash, i never said it wasnt part of GPL/GNU - it is - I agree.
Look, I'll just ignore you. Your knowledge of all of this is lacking and now you're backtracking. To answer that specific point. Yes, you did say Bash wasn't part of the GNU licensing, quite clearly showing you have no understanding of the situation :
Bash is under the GPL license - not GNU. Never has been GNU
Look, I'll just ignore you. Your knowledge of all of this is lacking and now you're backtracking. To answer that specific point. Yes, you did say Bash wasn't part of the GNU licensing, quite clearly showing you have no understanding of the situation :
Bash is under the GPL license - not GNU. Never has been GNU
jpg
Apr 27, 12:48 PM
Raise a glass to the home server!
Many of us have been streaming our music for years.
This is where I think the puck is headed.
Make your own cloud.... With our all new TimeCapsule, now called iServer :apple:
Many of us have been streaming our music for years.
This is where I think the puck is headed.
Make your own cloud.... With our all new TimeCapsule, now called iServer :apple:
bdkennedy1
Mar 31, 01:19 PM
That calendar is just ugly. I don't like where Apple is going with this UI realism. If I want a calendar that looks like that then I will go out and buy a real one.
(marc)
Apr 25, 02:54 AM
How did they find out that she's a transgender? It's not like women's restrooms have urinals...
They said "Why are you talking to my man?" to a transgendered woman in a women's "restroom"? :confused:
Does not compute.
Why not? :confused:
They said "Why are you talking to my man?" to a transgendered woman in a women's "restroom"? :confused:
Does not compute.
Why not? :confused:
.jpg "funny quotes for exams. funny quotes for exams. funny; funny quotes for exams. funny. munkery. May 2, 04:05 PM")
rasmasyean
May 1, 10:42 PM
Looking forward to the movie version. ;)
Just keep up with Youtube for the loads of "indy" movies. ;)
Just keep up with Youtube for the loads of "indy" movies. ;)
Chef Medeski
Oct 18, 05:34 PM
The computers that are just finishing a CPU conversion, but are still rated as being good buys by non-Mac publications?
Perspective, my young padawan, perspective....
I hear a bit of what he is saying though. I mean there wasn't much innovation, just.... it was more like building the perfect car, say something like a Subaru WRX ( my car that I love very much) but replaced with a nicer engine from Porsche.... some better tires off a Lancer.... a nice tranny off of Porsche again.... neverthless... this is what they did with the Mac. Took some great stuff out there like Glossy Screen, Webcams, and Intel chips and put em in our loving Mac. However, the only piece of innocation was the Maglev charger. There was no new standards... no new gear. Yet, I do believe you are asking for too much if they are expected to innovate every product revision. Its becoming a very big company.... its no longer a couple thousand products where you can mess-up on some new innovation...
But I'm not worried... there hasn't been much innovation elsewhere either so its not like Apple is behind... they are in front. Just not WAY in front. We'll see what happens with Leopard/802.11N/Santa Rosa/HD DVDs/Hybrid HDs..... innovation is in the pipeline. Don't worry.
2007 is going to be a very good year.
And 2008 even better. Presidential Election! ;)
Perspective, my young padawan, perspective....
I hear a bit of what he is saying though. I mean there wasn't much innovation, just.... it was more like building the perfect car, say something like a Subaru WRX ( my car that I love very much) but replaced with a nicer engine from Porsche.... some better tires off a Lancer.... a nice tranny off of Porsche again.... neverthless... this is what they did with the Mac. Took some great stuff out there like Glossy Screen, Webcams, and Intel chips and put em in our loving Mac. However, the only piece of innocation was the Maglev charger. There was no new standards... no new gear. Yet, I do believe you are asking for too much if they are expected to innovate every product revision. Its becoming a very big company.... its no longer a couple thousand products where you can mess-up on some new innovation...
But I'm not worried... there hasn't been much innovation elsewhere either so its not like Apple is behind... they are in front. Just not WAY in front. We'll see what happens with Leopard/802.11N/Santa Rosa/HD DVDs/Hybrid HDs..... innovation is in the pipeline. Don't worry.
2007 is going to be a very good year.
And 2008 even better. Presidential Election! ;)
iSamurai
Apr 14, 02:06 AM
meh. my iPhone is white since last year thanks to eBay. :D
Astro7x
May 3, 08:08 AM
Does this model support Jumbo Frames for a change? Why did Apple have to take that feature out, we could go for some cheap iMac Workstations for video editing!
hipnotizer
May 2, 12:15 PM
I really hope that it comes tomorrow as my apple store credit card is on fire waiting to be spent. ;) however @dpdesilva on twitter is rumoring that apple will delay imac refresh due to leaks and rumors being overshadowed by Bin Laden's Death. Personally I think it might be B.S. I care more about my Imac than the story of his death.
turbobass
Apr 25, 01:01 PM
I hope by "next week" they mean "tomorrow"...
MagnusVonMagnum
Nov 20, 10:40 AM
If you don't address those very good reasons, your argument won't be very convincing. We do not want the CPU suck, the identity leaking, the UI inconsistencies, and the very real risk of "zero day" Adobe bugs.
Whom am I trying to convince? Illogical and irrational people who worship Steve Jobs and hate what he hates? Such people will not care or listen to any form of reason. That's why the word fanatic is in fanboy. No, I talk about an option to turn Flash on or off at will and you find it offensive to even offer an option. That is irrational at best.
Everything you fear would be avoided if someone just turned Flash OFF (or it could default to off and have to be turned on). I've said since the first post the word OPTION. You don't seem to comprehend that word or understand why those of us that would want the choice of having Flash are not asking you to give up anything in the process. You could always turn it off if it were present. We cannot turn it on if it's not present.
In other words, you are not competent to carry on a rational discussion. You're just here to vent.
No, I just don't see any point in trying to carry on a logical, rational discussion with someone whose "argument" is based purely on emotion. If it weren't, you wouldn't object to an option for those of us that don't agree with Steve Jobs point of view because an option satisfies all your arguments against having Flash because you can always just leave it OFF. It cannot do harm if it's off no matter how paranoid you may become about having it on your device.
Many millions of people have Flash installed on their Macs (let alone those using Windows and Linux) and they could remove it. They know that if they do, some web sites will cease to function properly and thus they leave it on. The security concerns you mentioned will be addressed as all security bugs are in both OSX and Windows.
Users of those 120M+ devices don't have to hope. They are already free of Flash!
Free of Flash? You say that in a tone that sounds like they're free of slavery or something. No, what they're free of is the ability to access millions of web sites that require Flash to view them or much of their content and I do not see that as a good thing. But my point of view doesn't require you to see it. I said from the first post I wanted an option to use Flash. You could still choose to turn it off if it were there. I cannot turn on what is not present nor should I have to buy some absurd 3rd party converter that requires their web site to be running to use it.
The analogy makes no sense. Nobody is forcing you to use any Apple product.
And so that makes it OK for him to behave as he does? A lot of us like Apple products, but we would like them a lot better if Steve would just stick to making the products unfettered instead of trying to force his opinions and world view on people in the process. He doesn't like Flash so he decides for everyone they should not use Flash. What if Steve decided iOS shall no longer support MP3 files, only AAC? I suppose you would accept that as OK too? Update iOS and your MP3s no longer function. Yes, that would be just wonderful if they did that. After all, AAC is superior to MP3, so why should Apple support a legacy inferior heavily pirated format? By your logic, they should not.
If you really want the "full web experience" of zero-day Adobe bugs, get an Android phone. Note: Android phones were vulnerable to the last zero-day Adobe bug. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt)
I don't want a phone period guy. I only want and use an iPod Touch. Is there an Android iPod Touch? Android didn't exist when Apple made the claims of accessing the full Internet either and it doesn't make that any less a lie.
The fact that I can't catch zero-day Adobe attacks on my iPhone is a great reason to praise Apple's decision.
You act as if Apple has no vulnerabilities to attack. That is extremely naive to the point of emotionalism once again. In fact it's just the opposite. Apple's security is rated as bad compared to Windows and only the fact that there are so few Mac users compared to Windows has saved it thus far. As the popularity of iOS devices has exploded, it's inevitable that it will start attracting malware. It's only a matter of time. Will you wish you never bought an iPhone on that day or will you recognize that companies simply have to find and patch vulnerabilities. Apple has patched numerous security flaws in OSX over the years. Should we plug our ears and say there is no such thing?
Do tell: what exact sites are you talking about? What exact legacy flash applications are running on those sites to which you can find no substitute?
A quick search (you do know how to do that don't you?) reveals offhand a few example sites that don't use HTML5 video (which could and may in the future, but that doesn't help someone today):
Gametrailers
GiantBomb
Vimeo
Playstation Blog
Stiq of Joy
Engadget
Try some of these effects on this site this with HTML5:
http://superior-web-solutions.com/
Maybe read this article on Flash. Most HTML5 is just a video player. Flash isn't just a video player and it didn't even start as one.
http://www.andrewgreig.com/2010/06/html5-is-not-a-flash-replacement-and-shouldnt-be-seen-that-way/
Perhaps you want an open standard? So when does Apple stop requiring Quicktime on their web sites? :rolleyes:
Nobody is holding a gun to your head. Nobody is holding you hostage.
If you don't like the choices that Apple made, then ditch your iOS device and get an Android. Simple.
No, they're just boring me to death with emotional arguments why everyone should either worship Steve Jobs or leave the platform and get an Android instead similar to the "love OSX or leave it" arguments the fanboys regularly produce.
This is the first little lie in your rant. The iOS users don't find it inconvenient. If Flash were so damn important to them, they would have bought some device that could run Flash.
The fact that you think my statement is a "lie" based on a subjective opinion tells me you cannot even tell fact from fiction let alone lies from opinions. Trying to see someone else's point of view is completely foreign to you. You view the world through tinted lenses. What you say is akin to if you don't like something about OSX, go buy a Windows machine, as if there aren't any compromises along the way on that platform either (not to mention having to replace possibly thousands and thousands of dollars worth of software for a given platform to do so). Not liking something about a given platform and wanting to change it doesn't mean another platform is more viable in ALL areas or that a person may wish to spend a lot of money to make that change just because of that one issue. Perhaps you'd like to send me a free Android phone to replace my aging 1st Gen iPod Touch that I bought before Android even existed? I'd happily consider such an offer. Of course I'll need replacement apps as well.
The people who bought those 120M+ devices disagree with you.
You seem to forge that I and others that actually want Flash are part of those people dude. Get over yourself. Just because you don't like Flash doesn't mean the rest of us have hatred for it. Some of us simply don't like our iPhones, iPads and iPod Touches crippled for no reason. Besides, how you try to turn my initial argument that I'd prefer to see an option to use Flash for those of us that want it rather than no option into this flipping crusade against all things Apple and Flash alike is beyond me. You are making mountains out of mole hills and lies out of opinions. For what? I can't make you see things the way I see them. I never wanted to try. That's why I said OPTION. But you would deny everyone who wants that option to have it just like Steve Jobs. Steve does it because he's a control freak (he was once ousted from Apple for this very reason). I imagine you do it because you love Apple. Sadly, I actually prefer Steve's reason.
This is the second little lie. Apple did provide a choice: they approved the SkyFire App. They didn't have to do that.
Didn't they? It doesn't violate their rules for an app so how could they not approve it without being outright liars? Oh wait. They have done that before so I can see your point. ;)
Apple has also announced they will approve Flash Apps using Adobe's cross-compiler for iOS. If there actually are crucial Flash apps -- you haven't named a single specific one so far -- the owners of those apps should be able to easily cross-compile their apps for the iOS App Store.
Apple formerly announced they would NOT support it. Why did they change their minds? Could it have something to do with the Justice Department starting an investigation into anti-trust behaviors by Apple policies? Noooo....it couldn't be that. Apple is allowed to single out companies it doesn't like and compete with to just willy-nilly throw specifically into their license agreements.
And that is the third little lie. Flash is a proprietary and legacy platform. It's on the way down now.
I say if you don't have Flash you don't have the full Internet and you call that a "lie" based on the above quote? What freaking UNIVERSE do you live in??????? ROTFLMAO. You cannot tell a statement of fact from an idea in your head that somehow says that the "full internet" doesn't include sites that use "propriety" formats. Come on man. That position not only ignore reality it even invalidiates Apple's own web site as being part of the "full Internet" !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You need to try harder. Calling someone a liar when they are obviously stating facts and/or opinions just makes you look immature.
because accusing someone of lying when it's obvious
Even Adobe has acknowledged that a Flash-only choice is a bankrupt strategy (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999). After websites start offering their content with an open standard, you've gotta ask: what exactly is the value in continuing to prop up Flash?
First of all, you are the one that is calling it a "bankrupt strategy". I see nothing in that thread by Adobe that even addresses the matter. Adobe is simply trying to sell products and if they can easily sell more products to Apple users by providing an easy way to convert their hard work Flash sites into HTML5, they are going to do so and laugh all the way to the bank. That in NO WAY invalidates the fact that there are still plenty of Flash only sites out there and plenty of flash uses (e.g. Flash games) that HTML5 is no simple substitute for regardless. Until the Internet is Flash free, there is going to be a need and a will by people to have the option to view Flash.
The mere fact that this Skyfire app has raked in over $1 MILLION in sales already shows just how big that will is. Yet you reject the desire to be able to use Flash web sites as meaningless and unnecessary while the thread title alone proves you wrong.
Whom am I trying to convince? Illogical and irrational people who worship Steve Jobs and hate what he hates? Such people will not care or listen to any form of reason. That's why the word fanatic is in fanboy. No, I talk about an option to turn Flash on or off at will and you find it offensive to even offer an option. That is irrational at best.
Everything you fear would be avoided if someone just turned Flash OFF (or it could default to off and have to be turned on). I've said since the first post the word OPTION. You don't seem to comprehend that word or understand why those of us that would want the choice of having Flash are not asking you to give up anything in the process. You could always turn it off if it were present. We cannot turn it on if it's not present.
In other words, you are not competent to carry on a rational discussion. You're just here to vent.
No, I just don't see any point in trying to carry on a logical, rational discussion with someone whose "argument" is based purely on emotion. If it weren't, you wouldn't object to an option for those of us that don't agree with Steve Jobs point of view because an option satisfies all your arguments against having Flash because you can always just leave it OFF. It cannot do harm if it's off no matter how paranoid you may become about having it on your device.
Many millions of people have Flash installed on their Macs (let alone those using Windows and Linux) and they could remove it. They know that if they do, some web sites will cease to function properly and thus they leave it on. The security concerns you mentioned will be addressed as all security bugs are in both OSX and Windows.
Users of those 120M+ devices don't have to hope. They are already free of Flash!
Free of Flash? You say that in a tone that sounds like they're free of slavery or something. No, what they're free of is the ability to access millions of web sites that require Flash to view them or much of their content and I do not see that as a good thing. But my point of view doesn't require you to see it. I said from the first post I wanted an option to use Flash. You could still choose to turn it off if it were there. I cannot turn on what is not present nor should I have to buy some absurd 3rd party converter that requires their web site to be running to use it.
The analogy makes no sense. Nobody is forcing you to use any Apple product.
And so that makes it OK for him to behave as he does? A lot of us like Apple products, but we would like them a lot better if Steve would just stick to making the products unfettered instead of trying to force his opinions and world view on people in the process. He doesn't like Flash so he decides for everyone they should not use Flash. What if Steve decided iOS shall no longer support MP3 files, only AAC? I suppose you would accept that as OK too? Update iOS and your MP3s no longer function. Yes, that would be just wonderful if they did that. After all, AAC is superior to MP3, so why should Apple support a legacy inferior heavily pirated format? By your logic, they should not.
If you really want the "full web experience" of zero-day Adobe bugs, get an Android phone. Note: Android phones were vulnerable to the last zero-day Adobe bug. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt)
I don't want a phone period guy. I only want and use an iPod Touch. Is there an Android iPod Touch? Android didn't exist when Apple made the claims of accessing the full Internet either and it doesn't make that any less a lie.
The fact that I can't catch zero-day Adobe attacks on my iPhone is a great reason to praise Apple's decision.
You act as if Apple has no vulnerabilities to attack. That is extremely naive to the point of emotionalism once again. In fact it's just the opposite. Apple's security is rated as bad compared to Windows and only the fact that there are so few Mac users compared to Windows has saved it thus far. As the popularity of iOS devices has exploded, it's inevitable that it will start attracting malware. It's only a matter of time. Will you wish you never bought an iPhone on that day or will you recognize that companies simply have to find and patch vulnerabilities. Apple has patched numerous security flaws in OSX over the years. Should we plug our ears and say there is no such thing?
Do tell: what exact sites are you talking about? What exact legacy flash applications are running on those sites to which you can find no substitute?
A quick search (you do know how to do that don't you?) reveals offhand a few example sites that don't use HTML5 video (which could and may in the future, but that doesn't help someone today):
Gametrailers
GiantBomb
Vimeo
Playstation Blog
Stiq of Joy
Engadget
Try some of these effects on this site this with HTML5:
http://superior-web-solutions.com/
Maybe read this article on Flash. Most HTML5 is just a video player. Flash isn't just a video player and it didn't even start as one.
http://www.andrewgreig.com/2010/06/html5-is-not-a-flash-replacement-and-shouldnt-be-seen-that-way/
Perhaps you want an open standard? So when does Apple stop requiring Quicktime on their web sites? :rolleyes:
Nobody is holding a gun to your head. Nobody is holding you hostage.
If you don't like the choices that Apple made, then ditch your iOS device and get an Android. Simple.
No, they're just boring me to death with emotional arguments why everyone should either worship Steve Jobs or leave the platform and get an Android instead similar to the "love OSX or leave it" arguments the fanboys regularly produce.
This is the first little lie in your rant. The iOS users don't find it inconvenient. If Flash were so damn important to them, they would have bought some device that could run Flash.
The fact that you think my statement is a "lie" based on a subjective opinion tells me you cannot even tell fact from fiction let alone lies from opinions. Trying to see someone else's point of view is completely foreign to you. You view the world through tinted lenses. What you say is akin to if you don't like something about OSX, go buy a Windows machine, as if there aren't any compromises along the way on that platform either (not to mention having to replace possibly thousands and thousands of dollars worth of software for a given platform to do so). Not liking something about a given platform and wanting to change it doesn't mean another platform is more viable in ALL areas or that a person may wish to spend a lot of money to make that change just because of that one issue. Perhaps you'd like to send me a free Android phone to replace my aging 1st Gen iPod Touch that I bought before Android even existed? I'd happily consider such an offer. Of course I'll need replacement apps as well.
The people who bought those 120M+ devices disagree with you.
You seem to forge that I and others that actually want Flash are part of those people dude. Get over yourself. Just because you don't like Flash doesn't mean the rest of us have hatred for it. Some of us simply don't like our iPhones, iPads and iPod Touches crippled for no reason. Besides, how you try to turn my initial argument that I'd prefer to see an option to use Flash for those of us that want it rather than no option into this flipping crusade against all things Apple and Flash alike is beyond me. You are making mountains out of mole hills and lies out of opinions. For what? I can't make you see things the way I see them. I never wanted to try. That's why I said OPTION. But you would deny everyone who wants that option to have it just like Steve Jobs. Steve does it because he's a control freak (he was once ousted from Apple for this very reason). I imagine you do it because you love Apple. Sadly, I actually prefer Steve's reason.
This is the second little lie. Apple did provide a choice: they approved the SkyFire App. They didn't have to do that.
Didn't they? It doesn't violate their rules for an app so how could they not approve it without being outright liars? Oh wait. They have done that before so I can see your point. ;)
Apple has also announced they will approve Flash Apps using Adobe's cross-compiler for iOS. If there actually are crucial Flash apps -- you haven't named a single specific one so far -- the owners of those apps should be able to easily cross-compile their apps for the iOS App Store.
Apple formerly announced they would NOT support it. Why did they change their minds? Could it have something to do with the Justice Department starting an investigation into anti-trust behaviors by Apple policies? Noooo....it couldn't be that. Apple is allowed to single out companies it doesn't like and compete with to just willy-nilly throw specifically into their license agreements.
And that is the third little lie. Flash is a proprietary and legacy platform. It's on the way down now.
I say if you don't have Flash you don't have the full Internet and you call that a "lie" based on the above quote? What freaking UNIVERSE do you live in??????? ROTFLMAO. You cannot tell a statement of fact from an idea in your head that somehow says that the "full internet" doesn't include sites that use "propriety" formats. Come on man. That position not only ignore reality it even invalidiates Apple's own web site as being part of the "full Internet" !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You need to try harder. Calling someone a liar when they are obviously stating facts and/or opinions just makes you look immature.
because accusing someone of lying when it's obvious
Even Adobe has acknowledged that a Flash-only choice is a bankrupt strategy (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999). After websites start offering their content with an open standard, you've gotta ask: what exactly is the value in continuing to prop up Flash?
First of all, you are the one that is calling it a "bankrupt strategy". I see nothing in that thread by Adobe that even addresses the matter. Adobe is simply trying to sell products and if they can easily sell more products to Apple users by providing an easy way to convert their hard work Flash sites into HTML5, they are going to do so and laugh all the way to the bank. That in NO WAY invalidates the fact that there are still plenty of Flash only sites out there and plenty of flash uses (e.g. Flash games) that HTML5 is no simple substitute for regardless. Until the Internet is Flash free, there is going to be a need and a will by people to have the option to view Flash.
The mere fact that this Skyfire app has raked in over $1 MILLION in sales already shows just how big that will is. Yet you reject the desire to be able to use Flash web sites as meaningless and unnecessary while the thread title alone proves you wrong.
MattMJB0188
May 4, 09:51 AM
I don't understand one thing. Why can't Apple confirm this themselves? That way people will at least know what they can do. Either you wait or you move onto to another device.
aswitcher
Oct 24, 08:36 AM
Great -- that was my only holdout. Where did you see the info about 802.11n being included?
Just an educated guess.
Just an educated guess.
motulist
Aug 18, 06:56 PM
... was that what you were after?
No, that's the opposite of what I was after, that's the bug it has now. Sigh, this is exactly what I predicted, they added a bunch of new features but haven't fixed any of the major usability bugs and flaws it already has. Why does apple show iCal such contempt?
No, that's the opposite of what I was after, that's the bug it has now. Sigh, this is exactly what I predicted, they added a bunch of new features but haven't fixed any of the major usability bugs and flaws it already has. Why does apple show iCal such contempt?
NewbieNerd
Jul 24, 03:58 PM
Also, I'n not a big fan of using batteries in mice. Why not have a wireless mouse that is re-chargable? Or one that you can use wires with if the battery gets low?
I disagree with this. Why should every single device I need to recharge have a seperate wire to deal with, or even if it were some common wire, like the one used with the iPod, why should I have to keep track of all these things when I can just use rechargable batteries in everything and then charge them from a single charger? If I am at work and my BT mouse dies in the morning, should I have to hook a cord to my computer or the wall to charge it? Even if I can still use it as it charges, what was the point of getting the BT? With batteries, I just have two sets and can swap them out on the fly when needed while the others charge.
EDIT: BTW, I absolutely love my Mighty Mouse and was thinking just this morning how I would love to have one with BT. I am in need of another mouse as I have taken my wireless and Mighty Mouse to work and have a lonely iMac at home. SWEET!
I disagree with this. Why should every single device I need to recharge have a seperate wire to deal with, or even if it were some common wire, like the one used with the iPod, why should I have to keep track of all these things when I can just use rechargable batteries in everything and then charge them from a single charger? If I am at work and my BT mouse dies in the morning, should I have to hook a cord to my computer or the wall to charge it? Even if I can still use it as it charges, what was the point of getting the BT? With batteries, I just have two sets and can swap them out on the fly when needed while the others charge.
EDIT: BTW, I absolutely love my Mighty Mouse and was thinking just this morning how I would love to have one with BT. I am in need of another mouse as I have taken my wireless and Mighty Mouse to work and have a lonely iMac at home. SWEET!
Kyffin
Nov 15, 06:42 PM
Gotta say I disagree with you on that, I've always thought good quality clobber is worth the money.
Just for why is that I'm facing a new wardrobe after eleven+ years service from the last (I tend to do things periodically) when I had a half dozen suits made up and some good shoes. As for the suits they hang better than anything off the peg to this day and I'll get a couple more years out of them yet (the cut and full canvassing mean that you save money on the price per wear basis as well as being continuously better turned out). Its really win, win, win (especially if you like to support skilled local crafts &c.)
Personally I like wearing the same clothes for years- my shoes probably have seen thousands of miles and get more comfortable with every step (I like having a cobbler too- even if he's only seen two pairs from a rotation of three over a decade:eek:). Similarly shirts just get better until they turn into mufti (I rotate shirts and treat them well so easily get 3+ years until the collars/cuffs fray past the 'would you be happy to meet the Queen in that?' point- fortunately thats when I luv 'em the most!)
I suppose its diffrent strokes/ diffrent folkes, but I really don't get the whole sweatshop/ single use/ el cheapo clothes, nor the crassness of expensive branded clothes with a only slightly longer life. Not a value judgement, but really don't see any worth in doing it this way. /2p
Just for why is that I'm facing a new wardrobe after eleven+ years service from the last (I tend to do things periodically) when I had a half dozen suits made up and some good shoes. As for the suits they hang better than anything off the peg to this day and I'll get a couple more years out of them yet (the cut and full canvassing mean that you save money on the price per wear basis as well as being continuously better turned out). Its really win, win, win (especially if you like to support skilled local crafts &c.)
Personally I like wearing the same clothes for years- my shoes probably have seen thousands of miles and get more comfortable with every step (I like having a cobbler too- even if he's only seen two pairs from a rotation of three over a decade:eek:). Similarly shirts just get better until they turn into mufti (I rotate shirts and treat them well so easily get 3+ years until the collars/cuffs fray past the 'would you be happy to meet the Queen in that?' point- fortunately thats when I luv 'em the most!)
I suppose its diffrent strokes/ diffrent folkes, but I really don't get the whole sweatshop/ single use/ el cheapo clothes, nor the crassness of expensive branded clothes with a only slightly longer life. Not a value judgement, but really don't see any worth in doing it this way. /2p
No comments:
Post a Comment