stroked
Apr 4, 12:32 PM
Was It really necessary to kill him?
No
Anyone who is trained with a hand gun, is told to shoot to kill. This scum deserved to die.
No
Anyone who is trained with a hand gun, is told to shoot to kill. This scum deserved to die.
ThaDoggg
Apr 25, 02:08 PM
Ahhh just as I bought a new MBP!!!!! Hopefully resale value won't take too big of a hit :(
TheManOfSilver
Sep 5, 07:19 PM
Who?
Try visiting www.pixar.com ;)
Try visiting www.pixar.com ;)
torbjoern
Apr 25, 02:50 AM
conditional love. AKA the love of a spoiled brat.
And it's worth... ****-all...
Am I the only one that thinks this kid is completely FOS? He's that guy who has to torment everyone and lie about how smart and rich he is to make himself feel better about his shallow, lonely, crappy life. Typical internet tough guy.
Dude, good luck at "Harvard". You wouldn't last 10 minutes.
You certainly ain't the only one. Obvious troll is obvious.
And it's worth... ****-all...
Am I the only one that thinks this kid is completely FOS? He's that guy who has to torment everyone and lie about how smart and rich he is to make himself feel better about his shallow, lonely, crappy life. Typical internet tough guy.
Dude, good luck at "Harvard". You wouldn't last 10 minutes.
You certainly ain't the only one. Obvious troll is obvious.
w00master
Nov 13, 02:42 PM
Obviously the images are copyrighted by Apple, and those images they don't want people using. Ok, well, that is their rights, they designed them and copyrighted them. Either they have to license those images from Apple (which I doubt Apple would do) or make their own. Just like every other copyright, you don't have the right to breech. If Apple doesn't defend their copyright, then they can lose it, so they HAVE to fight for it.
Again... you clearly did not read the developer's side.
Btw, those "copyrighted images?" Programmers use them all the time on OS X. Why? Because THEY'RE FROM OS X APIs.
w00master
Again... you clearly did not read the developer's side.
Btw, those "copyrighted images?" Programmers use them all the time on OS X. Why? Because THEY'RE FROM OS X APIs.
w00master
Eidorian
Jul 14, 12:26 PM
What? You said the word Merom but didn't include a link to the guide? :p
Well anyways, if Apple could get Conroes into iMacs it would be great. A challenge I know (and I still personally think it is more likely to be a Merom iMac) but it would help to be that little bit more competitive. The rest is pretty much predictable, Merom for MBPs and eventually MacBooks and Mac Minis. Woodcrest for Mac Pro and MacServe (Macs in everything right ;) ). iMac's future is a big ?.Yeah, if they can fit a Conroe into the iMac, more power to Apple. I just hope it doesn't turn it into the blast furnace my iMac G5 was.
From what I can tell Merom is just a Conroe that can operate at a lower TDP. They're all just fabricated off the same piece of silicon. (Someone posted an image on this.)
Well anyways, if Apple could get Conroes into iMacs it would be great. A challenge I know (and I still personally think it is more likely to be a Merom iMac) but it would help to be that little bit more competitive. The rest is pretty much predictable, Merom for MBPs and eventually MacBooks and Mac Minis. Woodcrest for Mac Pro and MacServe (Macs in everything right ;) ). iMac's future is a big ?.Yeah, if they can fit a Conroe into the iMac, more power to Apple. I just hope it doesn't turn it into the blast furnace my iMac G5 was.
From what I can tell Merom is just a Conroe that can operate at a lower TDP. They're all just fabricated off the same piece of silicon. (Someone posted an image on this.)
Jvhowube
Aug 31, 02:11 PM
all I care about is getting my MB/P with Merom inside of it. I'm starting school with a POS laptop, and I need someone to tell me that I'll be ordering a new computer on the 12th. PLEASE!
Warbrain
Apr 20, 10:49 AM
Edited above. Re :gps
Thanks for actually updating it and replying to me. That's refreshing.
Thanks for actually updating it and replying to me. That's refreshing.
kingtj
Sep 19, 02:00 PM
That statement isn't *quite* true. A lot of people bought the DLO Home Docks (sold at Best Buy and other retail outlets) largely because they allow a docked iPod video to send video out to a TV set via s-video or RCA cables, and the user to control it remotely with the dock's included remote.
This is fairly remarkable, considering that the really only viable place to watch these movies is on an iPod! Yes, you can watch it on your iMac, or on your television hooked to a Mac Mini, but really, the set top box (iTV) can't come soon enough! Furthermore, this is really the kind of content that lends itself to the TV, rather than the iPod (Disney movies that parents put on replay for hours on end.)
Of course, maybe these stats are dominated by those who wanted to watch Coyote Ugly on the train, on their way to work ;-) .
This is fairly remarkable, considering that the really only viable place to watch these movies is on an iPod! Yes, you can watch it on your iMac, or on your television hooked to a Mac Mini, but really, the set top box (iTV) can't come soon enough! Furthermore, this is really the kind of content that lends itself to the TV, rather than the iPod (Disney movies that parents put on replay for hours on end.)
Of course, maybe these stats are dominated by those who wanted to watch Coyote Ugly on the train, on their way to work ;-) .
thadgarrison
Sep 19, 03:30 PM
I think this is a result of people testing out the service. You can't possibly quantify how successful this will be until it's been around long enough for the "newness" to wear off and for real-world usage to begin.
125,000 downloads really isn't that big of a number. Especially considering the mass media coverage of the announcement and the vast number of people using iTunes.
The jury is still way out.
125,000 downloads really isn't that big of a number. Especially considering the mass media coverage of the announcement and the vast number of people using iTunes.
The jury is still way out.
maclaptop
Apr 19, 09:59 PM
Please come to Korea. Samsung have been doing this illegally for years, often suing the small person to popperdom. No big corporation is good, but when you attach massive corps under the umbrella of a conglomerate, you combine all of that evil into one massive black hole.
At least Apple try to get to the bottom of suicides and deaths at their factories; at least they have only one core business to protect ruthlessly. Samsung (indeed, the biggest copycat I've seen) are huge pirates (selling fake DVD's/CD's in their grocery stores; rebadging Mercedes, Nissan, etc., cars for their own line; buying out large portions of most newspapers here). Apple's rise to the top has been fettered with bad, but not outright illegal bad to the extent Samsung's has.
Now we have bad planting a peck on evil.
I fly internationally for business, with three visits per year to a different division of Samsung.
Please do not get me wrong, I am not advocating for them.
I have a full understanding of the business culture of both Samsung and Apple. The point I'm making is Apple could choose to take the high road, no one is forcing their hand, nor will Apple suffer.
Apple's track record is too well established, just witness their overwhelming success.
There is simply no reason, contrary to what some may believe, for Apple to add yet another law suit to the long list they've originated.
Apple could have chosen to be a world class leader with a great positive aire of confidence, not fear and paranoia.
It's no secret that Samsung and others run a rough and tumble business in their region.
Finally, its my preference to choose the products that suit my needs no matter who builds them.
We live in a global economy without the luxury of choosing the country of manufacturer. While it could be argued "just don't buy from them". We all know that isn't going to hurt a huge company one bit.
At least Apple try to get to the bottom of suicides and deaths at their factories; at least they have only one core business to protect ruthlessly. Samsung (indeed, the biggest copycat I've seen) are huge pirates (selling fake DVD's/CD's in their grocery stores; rebadging Mercedes, Nissan, etc., cars for their own line; buying out large portions of most newspapers here). Apple's rise to the top has been fettered with bad, but not outright illegal bad to the extent Samsung's has.
Now we have bad planting a peck on evil.
I fly internationally for business, with three visits per year to a different division of Samsung.
Please do not get me wrong, I am not advocating for them.
I have a full understanding of the business culture of both Samsung and Apple. The point I'm making is Apple could choose to take the high road, no one is forcing their hand, nor will Apple suffer.
Apple's track record is too well established, just witness their overwhelming success.
There is simply no reason, contrary to what some may believe, for Apple to add yet another law suit to the long list they've originated.
Apple could have chosen to be a world class leader with a great positive aire of confidence, not fear and paranoia.
It's no secret that Samsung and others run a rough and tumble business in their region.
Finally, its my preference to choose the products that suit my needs no matter who builds them.
We live in a global economy without the luxury of choosing the country of manufacturer. While it could be argued "just don't buy from them". We all know that isn't going to hurt a huge company one bit.
Lollypop
Sep 10, 09:50 AM
Not if you transcode multiple files simultaneously - which is what I do with multiple instances of Toast 7 and Handbrake..
Plus that will probably be fixed in QuickTime 8 which is likely to come with Leopard.
Its nice to say multiple instances of everything, but thats not really ideal... do I really want to run 3 copies of final cut and 2 copies of handbrake and and and and to efficiently use my machine? doesnt running multiple copies of something also come with a bit of a memory overhead? The core wars will also run into problems, just like the Mhz war did, Mhz doesnt always mean performance, nor does core count.
Apple now has a entire lineup with dual cores, they will have to think ahead, and make their software run effectively on 4 or 8 cpu's.
The problem with the xMac as a product for Apple is two fold. Firstly, it has to be agressively priced, because, of all the Macs, it's the one that will be facing the most head-to-head competition from other vendors, and it will have the fewest Apple-only features to justify significant price differences. Secondly, it will have to be easily expandable to be competitive, and consequently, it will suffer from 3rd-party hardware and software quality issues.
I dont see how cheap hardware wil be a problem for a xMac, it isnt really a problem for the mac pro??? With 2 pci express slots people wont have to much choices (but at least they will have a choice), and its very very rare to have PC hardware that will even work on a mac, rom issues are normally to blame. But I agree apple needs to compete, and will have to be very very inovative if they go xMac classed machine.
Plus that will probably be fixed in QuickTime 8 which is likely to come with Leopard.
Its nice to say multiple instances of everything, but thats not really ideal... do I really want to run 3 copies of final cut and 2 copies of handbrake and and and and to efficiently use my machine? doesnt running multiple copies of something also come with a bit of a memory overhead? The core wars will also run into problems, just like the Mhz war did, Mhz doesnt always mean performance, nor does core count.
Apple now has a entire lineup with dual cores, they will have to think ahead, and make their software run effectively on 4 or 8 cpu's.
The problem with the xMac as a product for Apple is two fold. Firstly, it has to be agressively priced, because, of all the Macs, it's the one that will be facing the most head-to-head competition from other vendors, and it will have the fewest Apple-only features to justify significant price differences. Secondly, it will have to be easily expandable to be competitive, and consequently, it will suffer from 3rd-party hardware and software quality issues.
I dont see how cheap hardware wil be a problem for a xMac, it isnt really a problem for the mac pro??? With 2 pci express slots people wont have to much choices (but at least they will have a choice), and its very very rare to have PC hardware that will even work on a mac, rom issues are normally to blame. But I agree apple needs to compete, and will have to be very very inovative if they go xMac classed machine.
starflyer
Mar 29, 11:12 AM
It would be more interesting to see their PROFIT SHARE predictions.
brepublican
Aug 23, 06:12 PM
$100 million? Yikes. :eek:
And thats getting off easy. This amount of money is nothing compared to the profits Apple have made off using 'Creative's technology'. And it bodes well for Apple cos they can continue using it :)
And thats getting off easy. This amount of money is nothing compared to the profits Apple have made off using 'Creative's technology'. And it bodes well for Apple cos they can continue using it :)
mrkramer
Apr 25, 01:51 AM
I wouldn't go so far as to kill someone. If I killed them, how could they learn a lesson?
-Don
You won't be intending to kill someone, but if you get in an accident at or above freeway speeds, you or someone else will be killed wether you are trying to kill them or not, and even if you game the system to get off of any charges you will still have to live with the fact that you killed someone.
-Don
You won't be intending to kill someone, but if you get in an accident at or above freeway speeds, you or someone else will be killed wether you are trying to kill them or not, and even if you game the system to get off of any charges you will still have to live with the fact that you killed someone.
justflie
Oct 27, 11:23 AM
I may have missed this being said already, but just in case...
Handing out flyers outside their booth area was just ONE problem, according to a Macworld article (http://www.macworld.co.uk/mac/news/index.cfm?newsid=16291&pagtype=allchandate). Here's an excerpt:
"There then followed a number of complaints about the behaviour of Greenpeace activists from four visitors and five exhibitors, one of which was Apple. Allegedly, Greenpeace attendees were invading other stands for mock photo shoots and replacing other exhibitors� promotional material with their own."
So too bad Greenpeace, you pushed too far
Handing out flyers outside their booth area was just ONE problem, according to a Macworld article (http://www.macworld.co.uk/mac/news/index.cfm?newsid=16291&pagtype=allchandate). Here's an excerpt:
"There then followed a number of complaints about the behaviour of Greenpeace activists from four visitors and five exhibitors, one of which was Apple. Allegedly, Greenpeace attendees were invading other stands for mock photo shoots and replacing other exhibitors� promotional material with their own."
So too bad Greenpeace, you pushed too far
andys53
Apr 22, 02:12 AM
How does streaming music to my iPhone help me, when O2 cap my Internet usage, and then charge when you use more.
It won't, but if you have iTunes on a computer at home, it could save you on constantly replacing worn out hard drives before they crash and lose all your library.
It won't, but if you have iTunes on a computer at home, it could save you on constantly replacing worn out hard drives before they crash and lose all your library.
milo
Aug 28, 01:59 PM
Um, it's most current whenever you buy it.
As long as you're not buying the past generation, anyway.
If you walked into the Apple Store today and bought a 2GHz MacBook, it'd be the most current.
But if you buy right after an update, instead of right before, your computer will remain current for a longer time. Can't really blame people for wanting to hold out for a rev, especially when it's inevitable that it will be very soon.
As long as you're not buying the past generation, anyway.
If you walked into the Apple Store today and bought a 2GHz MacBook, it'd be the most current.
But if you buy right after an update, instead of right before, your computer will remain current for a longer time. Can't really blame people for wanting to hold out for a rev, especially when it's inevitable that it will be very soon.
cmaier
Nov 13, 10:35 PM
Actually, "this complaint" is about something that is in the developer's guide. The use of Apple icons. There have been lots of apps that have been rejected over it because of the use of icons to similar to other iPhone system icons, or Apple OS icons.
No, actually it says:
(d) To the best of Your knowledge and belief, Your Application and Licensed Application Information do not and will not violate, misappropriate, or infringe any Apple or third party copyrights, trademarks, rights of privacy and publicity, trade secrets, patents, or other proprietary or legal rights (e.g. musical composition or performance rights, video rights, photography or image rights, logo rights, third party data rights, etc. for content and materials that may be included in Your Application);
This is language with legal meaning. There is almost certainly no copyright infringement (fair use, which is a multi-factor test - making money off of the "copying" doesn't eliminate it. Or implied license/exhaustion.)
It doesn't say "you can't use apple icons." It says "you can't INFRINGE apple copyright."
No, actually it says:
(d) To the best of Your knowledge and belief, Your Application and Licensed Application Information do not and will not violate, misappropriate, or infringe any Apple or third party copyrights, trademarks, rights of privacy and publicity, trade secrets, patents, or other proprietary or legal rights (e.g. musical composition or performance rights, video rights, photography or image rights, logo rights, third party data rights, etc. for content and materials that may be included in Your Application);
This is language with legal meaning. There is almost certainly no copyright infringement (fair use, which is a multi-factor test - making money off of the "copying" doesn't eliminate it. Or implied license/exhaustion.)
It doesn't say "you can't use apple icons." It says "you can't INFRINGE apple copyright."
CapturedDarknes
Nov 13, 10:38 PM
No, actually it says:
(d) To the best of Your knowledge and belief, Your Application and Licensed Application Information do not and will not violate, misappropriate, or infringe any Apple or third party copyrights, trademarks, rights of privacy and publicity, trade secrets, patents, or other proprietary or legal rights (e.g. musical composition or performance rights, video rights, photography or image rights, logo rights, third party data rights, etc. for content and materials that may be included in Your Application);
This is language with legal meaning. There is almost certainly no copyright infringement (fair use, which is a multi-factor test - making money off of the "copying" doesn't eliminate it. Or implied license/exhaustion.)
It doesn't say "you can't use apple icons." It says "you can't INFRINGE apple copyright."
You're absolutely right, which means, unless you OWN or LICENSE the icons from Apple, you can't use them. That's what copyright infringement means.
(d) To the best of Your knowledge and belief, Your Application and Licensed Application Information do not and will not violate, misappropriate, or infringe any Apple or third party copyrights, trademarks, rights of privacy and publicity, trade secrets, patents, or other proprietary or legal rights (e.g. musical composition or performance rights, video rights, photography or image rights, logo rights, third party data rights, etc. for content and materials that may be included in Your Application);
This is language with legal meaning. There is almost certainly no copyright infringement (fair use, which is a multi-factor test - making money off of the "copying" doesn't eliminate it. Or implied license/exhaustion.)
It doesn't say "you can't use apple icons." It says "you can't INFRINGE apple copyright."
You're absolutely right, which means, unless you OWN or LICENSE the icons from Apple, you can't use them. That's what copyright infringement means.
milo
Aug 28, 01:42 PM
Apple isn't trying to remain competitive with anyone. :rolleyes:
Never have, never will.
They march to the beat of their own drum.
They're competitive with the Mac Pro. Very competitive.
I'd like to see apple release merom and conroe machines ASAP, but I'm not going to rake them over the coals for lagging the announcements from PC makers by a few days (probably in the next two or three tuesdays).
Are all the pc merom laptops shipping immediately?
I think that Apple shouldn't enter that race.. their products are distinguished by other features than mere processing power (as soon as this changes: goodbye Apple), and coming out with new models every few months will probably just piss off Apple customers (so far, it's pretty easy to know ALL current laptop models that Apple offers - can you say that for Dell, too?).
Updating wouldn't mean new models, just bumps to what they're shipping now. And that's a GOOD thing, apple customers should be happy about having the latest and greatest available, not pissed off. Apple needs to consistently keep up with the latest cpus.
Never have, never will.
They march to the beat of their own drum.
They're competitive with the Mac Pro. Very competitive.
I'd like to see apple release merom and conroe machines ASAP, but I'm not going to rake them over the coals for lagging the announcements from PC makers by a few days (probably in the next two or three tuesdays).
Are all the pc merom laptops shipping immediately?
I think that Apple shouldn't enter that race.. their products are distinguished by other features than mere processing power (as soon as this changes: goodbye Apple), and coming out with new models every few months will probably just piss off Apple customers (so far, it's pretty easy to know ALL current laptop models that Apple offers - can you say that for Dell, too?).
Updating wouldn't mean new models, just bumps to what they're shipping now. And that's a GOOD thing, apple customers should be happy about having the latest and greatest available, not pissed off. Apple needs to consistently keep up with the latest cpus.
milo
Sep 11, 03:46 PM
Close, Manic Mouse. I dont understand people's belief that every Intel chip made has to go into an Apple machine. I doubt the Conroe will be used in any Mac nor the Kentsfield. The range is covered, and I'm sick of these silly rumors of Mac mid towers.
There wont be a mid tower, not now, not "Next Tuesday".
Conroe is intels best bang for the buck. It would be stupid for apple not to use it, and go with chips that are slower and more expensive instead. But apple still does some things that are stupid.
I still think we'll see a mid tower, or at least some mac with conroe. Tommorow? Probably not, but who knows?
There wont be a mid tower, not now, not "Next Tuesday".
Conroe is intels best bang for the buck. It would be stupid for apple not to use it, and go with chips that are slower and more expensive instead. But apple still does some things that are stupid.
I still think we'll see a mid tower, or at least some mac with conroe. Tommorow? Probably not, but who knows?
pna
Sep 5, 07:02 PM
Yeah... yeah... Movies for the American audience...
...I don't even get TV shows... :(
Yes, but you get to live in Norway, and in Bergen no less. I'll be in Bergen next week, and will be happy to bring you some TV shows.
...I don't even get TV shows... :(
Yes, but you get to live in Norway, and in Bergen no less. I'll be in Bergen next week, and will be happy to bring you some TV shows.
hondaboy945
Aug 23, 10:23 PM
So dose this mean ms can sue apple if they decided to use wifi in ipods ????
I skimmed to this post, so sorry if it has been answered. Does MS own every Wi-Fi license. Just wanted too know.
I skimmed to this post, so sorry if it has been answered. Does MS own every Wi-Fi license. Just wanted too know.
No comments:
Post a Comment