donlphi
Nov 29, 12:26 AM
I teach high school kids and I hear them talk about stuff all the time. I know one thing for sure, if kids can't find what they want on iTUNES, they will download it illegally. My thoughts are, if a record company doesn't want to sell their music at iTunes, it's their loss at this point. They could sell some or none. If it isn't available at iTunes, then people only have a few other options.
1. Buy the CD at a retail store (if there is one nearby and stock is available)
2. Go without completely
3. Download a copy from ____________ (fill in the blank)
If I spend $300 on a media player, I will (as will others) find a way to get any music on there.
I don't see Apple giving in unless they TRULY feel the record companies are deserving... which they are not.
1. Buy the CD at a retail store (if there is one nearby and stock is available)
2. Go without completely
3. Download a copy from ____________ (fill in the blank)
If I spend $300 on a media player, I will (as will others) find a way to get any music on there.
I don't see Apple giving in unless they TRULY feel the record companies are deserving... which they are not.
I WAS the one
Mar 23, 06:44 AM
Let's the game begin.... Nothing will be greater than the iPad unless they make an iOS based Tablet.
SevenInchScrew
Aug 19, 04:19 PM
Based on what, old gameplay footage?
Do you consider official images and video from E3 of this year, a mere 2 months ago, to be "old" footage? If so, then yes, I'm basing it on old gameplay footage. Look at the model and texture in this pic, and tell me that isn't straight out of GT4, just higher res....
{Click to huge-size}
http://i.imgur.com/KCOCw.jpg
http://us.gran-turismo.com/us/gallery/d5258.html
Look at this pic:
{pic}
That rx-7 looks tons better than anything GT4 ever had, but its still not as nice as the "premium" cars.
The pic you provided, with the RX7, Supra, etc, as with all the images shown recently from GC10, is of Premium� cars. Can you see in the windows? If so, then it is a Premium� car with a fully modeled interior. If not, they are a Standard� car, and have the dark tinted windows.
Time will tell, of course, but i'm certain they didnt just import models from GT4. What the hell would they have been doing for the past 5 years?
Oh, I don't know, maybe it was the....
Cristiano Ronaldo Wallpaper
Cristiano Ronaldo Wallpaper
ronaldo wallpaper. over
Cristiano Ronaldo Real Madrid
Cristiano Ronaldo - Cristiano
Cristiano Ronaldo Stoke
cristiano ronaldo wallpaper
96%. CRISTIANO
Labels: Christiano Ronaldo
Cristiano Ronaldo
Cristiano Ronaldo-Ronaldo-CR7-
ronaldo cristiano wallpaper.
Labels: Cristiano Ronaldo
Cristiano Ronaldo Wallpaper
ronaldo-cristiano Picture
Ronaldo Cristiano Portugal
![]()
Do you consider official images and video from E3 of this year, a mere 2 months ago, to be "old" footage? If so, then yes, I'm basing it on old gameplay footage. Look at the model and texture in this pic, and tell me that isn't straight out of GT4, just higher res....
{Click to huge-size}
http://i.imgur.com/KCOCw.jpg
http://us.gran-turismo.com/us/gallery/d5258.html
Look at this pic:
{pic}
That rx-7 looks tons better than anything GT4 ever had, but its still not as nice as the "premium" cars.
The pic you provided, with the RX7, Supra, etc, as with all the images shown recently from GC10, is of Premium� cars. Can you see in the windows? If so, then it is a Premium� car with a fully modeled interior. If not, they are a Standard� car, and have the dark tinted windows.
Time will tell, of course, but i'm certain they didnt just import models from GT4. What the hell would they have been doing for the past 5 years?
Oh, I don't know, maybe it was the....
Mattie Num Nums
Mar 31, 02:27 PM
The biggest advantage always given for Android over iOS is that it's "open source." Well, clearly that's not the case anymore. So, I can't think of any other reason to use Android over iOS, or even Windows 7. It looks like junk, and it's just a cheap ripoff of iOS.
Thats not at all what this article is saying. The Android project is still going to be "open source".
Thats not at all what this article is saying. The Android project is still going to be "open source".
Half Glass
Sep 14, 12:49 PM
Well, if you can't find evidence of Windows running on well on machine with >2 processors, or of the significant low-level changes Microsoft have made to ensure it does, you aren't looking very hard.
Agreed.
Don't forget the new MacPros where XP runs very well (minus the MB chipset/SATA issue where there is a workaround.) It recognizes all four cores and seems very stable.
--HG
Agreed.
Don't forget the new MacPros where XP runs very well (minus the MB chipset/SATA issue where there is a workaround.) It recognizes all four cores and seems very stable.
--HG
kntgsp
Mar 31, 06:23 PM
The biggest advantage always given for Android over iOS is that it's "open source." Well, clearly that's not the case anymore. So, I can't think of any other reason to use Android over iOS, or even Windows 7. It looks like junk, and it's just a cheap ripoff of iOS.
That, right there, is one of the reasons why the Apple community is widely mocked. You should be ashamed of yourself. A complete lack of understanding on the most basic principles of technology.
That, right there, is one of the reasons why the Apple community is widely mocked. You should be ashamed of yourself. A complete lack of understanding on the most basic principles of technology.
KnightWRX
Mar 26, 07:58 AM
2) $129 is too much. This one cracks me up. Apple is bundling a $500 product into the OS (and other OS based servers are far more expensive) and people think $129 is too much?
Apple is bundling a bunch of GUI management tools, akin to Webmin. Was that worth 500$ before ? Nope. Is it more expensive elsewhere ? No. Let's face it, OS X Server was always a toy Unix compared to other big-Iron Unix systems and even to Linux as far as enterprise support goes. Volume management, hello Cupertino ?
Their old archaic way of managing storage is atrocious and no, I don't necessarily want to hook up with a huge array and run Xsan, I just want to intelligently manage my local storage. No, just RAID1 volumes is not enough, I want my volumes logical and independant of my physical volumes. I want to be able to move logical extents to new physical extents without having to take down anything on the box.
And what about those GUI tools ? I can't even just do X11 tunneling over SSH to my desktop to run them, I have either run their Remote Desktop stuff or use a 3rd party solution like VNC... What good are they ? At least make them web based (HP Systems Management Homepage type stuff) and join in to what the rest of the industry got clued into years ago if you don't want to code GUI stuff over X11.
And other OS based servers are not more expensive. Solaris is free (http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/server-storage/solaris/downloads/index.html). I won't even bother linking to all the free distributions of Linux that are ready for the server (Fedora, OpenSuSE, Arch, Ubuntu). The BSDs. Unix server product vendors make their money off of support contracts, not the actual software itself, an arena Apple obviously wants no part of.
All the bits and pieces of server software is mostly re-packaged open source components nowadays anyhow. Most every vendor out there is using Apache and Tomcat in their web-based products, Postfix on the mail side, I've seen a lot of MySQL and PostgreSQL based products (HP uses both, MySQL I've seen in their Output Manager product, PostgreSQL in their System Fault Management, Symantec uses MySQL for Brightmail), and let's not even get into OpenSSL and OpenSSH...
Heck, even Apple does this. OS X server is just a bunch of open source components packaged up together. Apache, OpenLDAP, OpenSSH, ClamAV...
So please, pretty please, with a cherry on top, let's not call OS X Server something worth 500$ and compare it to "others that are more expensive but in actuality are free to download and run and only expensive to get vendor support for".
This rant was longer than it should have been. I love OS X as a desktop OS. I'd pay 129$ for a Lion upgrade with my eyes closed. Best of both worlds. Unix underpinnings and powerful command-line (everything is there!) with integration for all my server products yet fast and easy to setup GUI that is mostly consistent so as to attract a large user base that makes it a good proposition for commercial software vendors to port their packages to. Apple just never got really serious about the server side of it (and lets face it, it's not their business and they obviously want no part of the entreprise market) and I'm not faulting them for that. Let's not be as disingenious as to claim their selling you a 500$ product for 129$ though.
I'm shocked at how many people are so willing to just wave away all the nice under-the-hood changes and improvements that Snow Leopard offers just because there aren't any super-radical UI changes... really disappointing to be honest. Does it really have to be all flashy to be of interest to you? What, the functional side of things doesn't matter any more?
See how this little change in your comment still makes it apply very much to the MacRumors crowd ? ;) The fact is, you're not really dealing with technical people on MacRumors, no matter how much some of them pretend they are. Heck, some of them still believe that HTML is a programming language and that they are web developers because their tools of choice are PhotoShop and Dreamweaver.
Apple is bundling a bunch of GUI management tools, akin to Webmin. Was that worth 500$ before ? Nope. Is it more expensive elsewhere ? No. Let's face it, OS X Server was always a toy Unix compared to other big-Iron Unix systems and even to Linux as far as enterprise support goes. Volume management, hello Cupertino ?
Their old archaic way of managing storage is atrocious and no, I don't necessarily want to hook up with a huge array and run Xsan, I just want to intelligently manage my local storage. No, just RAID1 volumes is not enough, I want my volumes logical and independant of my physical volumes. I want to be able to move logical extents to new physical extents without having to take down anything on the box.
And what about those GUI tools ? I can't even just do X11 tunneling over SSH to my desktop to run them, I have either run their Remote Desktop stuff or use a 3rd party solution like VNC... What good are they ? At least make them web based (HP Systems Management Homepage type stuff) and join in to what the rest of the industry got clued into years ago if you don't want to code GUI stuff over X11.
And other OS based servers are not more expensive. Solaris is free (http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/server-storage/solaris/downloads/index.html). I won't even bother linking to all the free distributions of Linux that are ready for the server (Fedora, OpenSuSE, Arch, Ubuntu). The BSDs. Unix server product vendors make their money off of support contracts, not the actual software itself, an arena Apple obviously wants no part of.
All the bits and pieces of server software is mostly re-packaged open source components nowadays anyhow. Most every vendor out there is using Apache and Tomcat in their web-based products, Postfix on the mail side, I've seen a lot of MySQL and PostgreSQL based products (HP uses both, MySQL I've seen in their Output Manager product, PostgreSQL in their System Fault Management, Symantec uses MySQL for Brightmail), and let's not even get into OpenSSL and OpenSSH...
Heck, even Apple does this. OS X server is just a bunch of open source components packaged up together. Apache, OpenLDAP, OpenSSH, ClamAV...
So please, pretty please, with a cherry on top, let's not call OS X Server something worth 500$ and compare it to "others that are more expensive but in actuality are free to download and run and only expensive to get vendor support for".
This rant was longer than it should have been. I love OS X as a desktop OS. I'd pay 129$ for a Lion upgrade with my eyes closed. Best of both worlds. Unix underpinnings and powerful command-line (everything is there!) with integration for all my server products yet fast and easy to setup GUI that is mostly consistent so as to attract a large user base that makes it a good proposition for commercial software vendors to port their packages to. Apple just never got really serious about the server side of it (and lets face it, it's not their business and they obviously want no part of the entreprise market) and I'm not faulting them for that. Let's not be as disingenious as to claim their selling you a 500$ product for 129$ though.
I'm shocked at how many people are so willing to just wave away all the nice under-the-hood changes and improvements that Snow Leopard offers just because there aren't any super-radical UI changes... really disappointing to be honest. Does it really have to be all flashy to be of interest to you? What, the functional side of things doesn't matter any more?
See how this little change in your comment still makes it apply very much to the MacRumors crowd ? ;) The fact is, you're not really dealing with technical people on MacRumors, no matter how much some of them pretend they are. Heck, some of them still believe that HTML is a programming language and that they are web developers because their tools of choice are PhotoShop and Dreamweaver.
NebulaClash
Apr 27, 10:19 AM
Maybe that's what you heard.
I heard that the database couldn't be user purged (easily)
The the database kept data from Day one
and that Location services being turned off didn't change the recording of the data.
Apple fans were "more correct". Wow. Ok - if you say so.... and if it helps you sleep at night
I'm talking about the hyperbole, not the sensible discussion that was going on too. You are capable of such discussions, and so am I. We do not represent the majority of the comments in these threads which contained lots of hair-on-fire paranoia. The Apple fans trying to talk such folks down off the roof were right.
I heard that the database couldn't be user purged (easily)
The the database kept data from Day one
and that Location services being turned off didn't change the recording of the data.
Apple fans were "more correct". Wow. Ok - if you say so.... and if it helps you sleep at night
I'm talking about the hyperbole, not the sensible discussion that was going on too. You are capable of such discussions, and so am I. We do not represent the majority of the comments in these threads which contained lots of hair-on-fire paranoia. The Apple fans trying to talk such folks down off the roof were right.
ccrandall77
Aug 11, 03:15 PM
There is a huge difference between an OS and a cellphone standard. Having two cellphone standards is like having two internets. You as a customer have no idea weather you use CDMA or GSM. I dont know about you, but I use my cell for talking end send/receive data. I dont give a rats ass whether this done through code division or time division...
Yes, but I do notice that my data transfers are about 5x faster on my EVDO phone than on my EDGE phone and I don't get nearly as many dropped calls when switching between towers like I did when I used T-Mobile and Cingular.
Yes, but I do notice that my data transfers are about 5x faster on my EVDO phone than on my EDGE phone and I don't get nearly as many dropped calls when switching between towers like I did when I used T-Mobile and Cingular.
andrewsd
Mar 31, 02:27 PM
Say What I thought a closed system was bad..hahahhaahahahah
unlinked
Apr 6, 04:51 PM
BTW... the Xoom at the Best Buy here is broken... been that way for two weeks now according to the sales guy.
If the sales are so bad why don't they just replace it from the stock they have?
If the sales are so bad why don't they just replace it from the stock they have?
glassbathroom
Jul 28, 03:21 AM
Ok, here goes. (Quick pass)
http://img161.imageshack.us/img161/3350/macminidblwidepk4.jpg
Eeek. Not so sure I like that.
Hmmm... maybe with just one slot?
http://img54.imageshack.us/img54/4436/macminidblwideunislotvr9.jpg
A little better. I personally prefer the taller narrower one, though.
Big is the new small.
http://img161.imageshack.us/img161/3350/macminidblwidepk4.jpg
Eeek. Not so sure I like that.
Hmmm... maybe with just one slot?
http://img54.imageshack.us/img54/4436/macminidblwideunislotvr9.jpg
A little better. I personally prefer the taller narrower one, though.
Big is the new small.
psionic001
Nov 28, 07:50 PM
Actually, they do. They also got paid on every blank tape sold when cassettes were big. I think it is crazy for everyone to think that the music industry is greedy when it getting squeezed out of all of their revenue streams. So, Apple makes hundreds of millions off of their back on the itunes site, and a billion off of iPod sales, and they cannot share in the wealth?
It doesn't cost the consumer any more, why wouldn't you want the people who actually make the music you are listening to get compensated?
This debate is stale. People want something for nothing.
Haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa.
That's it!.... I'm not buying any more tapes...
Actually I think two things should happen:
1) Universal should pay an anual feel to be on ITS.
2) Universal should pay a further industry fee to Apple (or DAP manufacturers) to go towards DRM R&D.;
It doesn't cost the consumer any more, why wouldn't you want the people who actually make the music you are listening to get compensated?
This debate is stale. People want something for nothing.
Haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa.
That's it!.... I'm not buying any more tapes...
Actually I think two things should happen:
1) Universal should pay an anual feel to be on ITS.
2) Universal should pay a further industry fee to Apple (or DAP manufacturers) to go towards DRM R&D.;
uv23
Jul 31, 12:07 PM
Apple will never ship a desktop machine so close in size to the mini. Impractical and too much market confusion. I'm expecting a ~25% decrease in size of the current G5 tower, making it more mid-tower sized. This would still be an improvement to the current behemoths.
Marx55
Jul 15, 02:23 AM
My top 10 features (in order of preference).
1. Quiet Mac. THAT IS A MUST. If possible, no fans.
2. Modular Mac. Use any Apple cinema display with it.
3. Fast 7,200 rpm drive inside. NO SLOW DRIVES!
4. At least a maximum of 2 GB RAM (BTO).
5. FireWire 800 (2), 400 (2), USB 2 (6) and eSATA (2).
6. True 64-bit microprocessor inside.
7. True Intel virtualization microprocessor inside.
8. Two Blu-ray drives built-in (at least as a BTO).
9. Upgradeable microprocessor inside.
10. Reasonably priced. Check out current PC boxes!
1. Quiet Mac. THAT IS A MUST. If possible, no fans.
2. Modular Mac. Use any Apple cinema display with it.
3. Fast 7,200 rpm drive inside. NO SLOW DRIVES!
4. At least a maximum of 2 GB RAM (BTO).
5. FireWire 800 (2), 400 (2), USB 2 (6) and eSATA (2).
6. True 64-bit microprocessor inside.
7. True Intel virtualization microprocessor inside.
8. Two Blu-ray drives built-in (at least as a BTO).
9. Upgradeable microprocessor inside.
10. Reasonably priced. Check out current PC boxes!
noisycats
Mar 22, 05:10 PM
x
playaj82
Aug 8, 07:38 AM
I know a lot of people are excited about Time Machine, but I was kind of worried last night when I showed it to one of my friends.
Unlike Expose, Fast User Switching, iTunes, Dashboard, etc... that have immediate impact and understanding as to why the features are so neat, Time Machine is actually rather complicated.
I explained and showed it to my friend, and she said, "so what, when I delete something it stays on the hard drive anyways"
All of us here obviously understand the significance of this program, but does anybody else think this will be difficult to market to the "average" user.
Unlike Expose, Fast User Switching, iTunes, Dashboard, etc... that have immediate impact and understanding as to why the features are so neat, Time Machine is actually rather complicated.
I explained and showed it to my friend, and she said, "so what, when I delete something it stays on the hard drive anyways"
All of us here obviously understand the significance of this program, but does anybody else think this will be difficult to market to the "average" user.
anthonymoody
Apr 8, 08:14 AM
Aren't retail stores in the business of, you know, making sales? Why the F would they artificially limit the sales of a given product? Makes zero sense unless they just wanted to be douchey and keep people returning day after day to drive up foot traffic and hope for other spillover sales foam impulse purchases. But could that be worth all that much?
Reminds me of a true story - went into one of those pre-made sandwich shops because I need to feed a horde unexpectedly, and quickly. I asked for all their stock of three different kinds of sandwich. The woman behind the counter said "but sir what will we sell to other people!".
Bizarre way to run a business.
Reminds me of a true story - went into one of those pre-made sandwich shops because I need to feed a horde unexpectedly, and quickly. I asked for all their stock of three different kinds of sandwich. The woman behind the counter said "but sir what will we sell to other people!".
Bizarre way to run a business.
alfonsog
Apr 27, 09:11 AM
If anyone wants complete privacy they shouldn't use a cell phone anyway. Or internet, or credit cards, or electricity, or work, or pay taxes. I would think Droid phones would be worse since their creator was Google which is all about tracking you to sell ads. No difference than junk mail, they know your home address and what stores are in your proximity.
Also to Apple logging might mean using the data to track you, which they aren't.
Also to Apple logging might mean using the data to track you, which they aren't.
archer75
Apr 5, 04:56 PM
I'm hoping for new imacs too. And mini's. I just got a promotion at work and approval from the wife to pretty much buy whatever mac I want. Except for the high end mac pro.
al2o3cr
Apr 25, 01:43 PM
Hope nobody tells these lawyers that anybody who can access the location data can also get at the address book and text messages - OMG PRIVACY VIOLATION!
Amazing Iceman
Mar 31, 05:27 PM
Really? :confused:
I always perceived it as everyone against Apple. Just read the comments on any tech site anytime Apple launches a new product. "This has fail written all over it".... "only iSheep will buy this crap"...... blah, blah, blah.
The amount of people who never bought an Apple product, but will still log-on to blast away at anything Apple is really quite amusing. ;)
Yeah. Some people don't realize that the final words are reflected in the Financial Reports, Quarterly Earnings, etc.
Regardless of what surveys may reveal, the final word is in the $$$ it keeps generating.
Being this the case, I want to be a total failure, just like Apple. They are failing so hard, their earnings are out of control... Too much money for them to handle. What a failure! :D
I always perceived it as everyone against Apple. Just read the comments on any tech site anytime Apple launches a new product. "This has fail written all over it".... "only iSheep will buy this crap"...... blah, blah, blah.
The amount of people who never bought an Apple product, but will still log-on to blast away at anything Apple is really quite amusing. ;)
Yeah. Some people don't realize that the final words are reflected in the Financial Reports, Quarterly Earnings, etc.
Regardless of what surveys may reveal, the final word is in the $$$ it keeps generating.
Being this the case, I want to be a total failure, just like Apple. They are failing so hard, their earnings are out of control... Too much money for them to handle. What a failure! :D
shawnce
Aug 18, 02:02 AM
Lastly, OS X will always be superior to Windows based on the fact that it's built on a UNIX foundation. If I'm not mistaken, Windows code has just built on top of existing code year-after-year. :mad: I think the OS X was a fresh build.
Mac OS X is built on top of a LOT of existing code from inside Apple and outside Apple.
You may want to review the lineage of Mac OS X in the history of unix (http://www.levenez.com/unix/history.html#21).
Anyway aspects of Mac OS X are far far older then Windows (not that that is a bad thing) and aspects of Mac OS X are more modern/recent then what Windows currently has (of course Windows has several things more modern then Mac OS X).
Mac OS X is built on top of a LOT of existing code from inside Apple and outside Apple.
You may want to review the lineage of Mac OS X in the history of unix (http://www.levenez.com/unix/history.html#21).
Anyway aspects of Mac OS X are far far older then Windows (not that that is a bad thing) and aspects of Mac OS X are more modern/recent then what Windows currently has (of course Windows has several things more modern then Mac OS X).
NJRonbo
Jun 15, 02:17 PM
What a cluster F it was at Radio Shack.
It was just my friend and I on line. Nobody else.
Was there for 30 minutes before I left for work
leaving them with my name. My friend stayed
an additional 30 minutes.
They could not generate a pin. System kept
rejecting their request. Finally we were told they
were out of pins.
Meanwhile, I still see posts about some of you
getting PIN numbers.
It was just my friend and I on line. Nobody else.
Was there for 30 minutes before I left for work
leaving them with my name. My friend stayed
an additional 30 minutes.
They could not generate a pin. System kept
rejecting their request. Finally we were told they
were out of pins.
Meanwhile, I still see posts about some of you
getting PIN numbers.
