omegaphil6
Mar 17, 11:34 AM
bunch of haters. In a society where our own government is the biggest crook of all , you all have the nerve to jump down this guy's throat because of someone else's mistake!?!?
Plus, if you have ever been to a best buy, employees jump on and off registers all the time without logging off first. They will never know which employee did it.
also consider that this was this guy's karma coming back to him. He did good and now he is getting rewarded.
Plus if this cashier is dumb enough to mistake $230 for $500 plus tax then does Best Buy really want him working register and relying on customer honesty to save his job?
I say, im glad you got an iPad2 for $230. ENjoy it because it will probably never happen again!
Plus, if you have ever been to a best buy, employees jump on and off registers all the time without logging off first. They will never know which employee did it.
also consider that this was this guy's karma coming back to him. He did good and now he is getting rewarded.
Plus if this cashier is dumb enough to mistake $230 for $500 plus tax then does Best Buy really want him working register and relying on customer honesty to save his job?
I say, im glad you got an iPad2 for $230. ENjoy it because it will probably never happen again!
EiriasEmrys
Apr 25, 12:15 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8F190 Safari/6533.18.5)
I feel like apple could be attempting to spurn the rumors this time around by feeding a lot of different and false trails into the rumor mill. After the gizmodo incident and the press it got, they might be likely to try anything to keep their baby under wraps.
I feel like apple could be attempting to spurn the rumors this time around by feeding a lot of different and false trails into the rumor mill. After the gizmodo incident and the press it got, they might be likely to try anything to keep their baby under wraps.
ZilogZ80
Mar 17, 06:48 AM
Man, this thread is full of douchiness. Karma is symbolic, not literal.
Right, that's why I said People should conduct themselves according to their moral code. As in, people should be good because they want to be good - not because they are scared into being good.
Besides which, karma is most definately literal. Possibly not amongst coffeeshop-hipster-douches like yourself who like to bleat about it on the internet, but certainly amongst those who originated the concept.
Right, that's why I said People should conduct themselves according to their moral code. As in, people should be good because they want to be good - not because they are scared into being good.
Besides which, karma is most definately literal. Possibly not amongst coffeeshop-hipster-douches like yourself who like to bleat about it on the internet, but certainly amongst those who originated the concept.
bpaluzzi
May 4, 10:22 AM
The first link seems to be saying 4% of doctors read their email on an ipad. Do you think that really matches up with what the advertisement says, is that ground breaking?
Are you talking about this link?
http://www.healthcareitnews.com/news/physician-mobile-use-grows-45-percent
If so, I'm not sure how you came up with your statement. It's not even a misreading / misunderstanding. Your statement is just plain wrong.
Are you talking about this link?
http://www.healthcareitnews.com/news/physician-mobile-use-grows-45-percent
If so, I'm not sure how you came up with your statement. It's not even a misreading / misunderstanding. Your statement is just plain wrong.
arn
Jan 6, 08:51 PM
Could the Arn make sure we don't see advertisements for the new iPhone/iTV/MacWhatever/iStuff thingies when we reach this page?
done.
just some generic apple ads there now.
arn
done.
just some generic apple ads there now.
arn
Eidorian
Nov 16, 05:08 PM
Apple store updates turns out to be "HOLIDAY GIFT GUIDE."
http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE/WebObjects/AppleStore.woa/wa/RSLID?mco=7B2A6F69&nclm=HolidayMain2006
i believe that was already up.Yeah, I got an email for that page ages ago. Looks like they might have brought it to the front store page and maybe some hidden Black Friday updates.
http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE/WebObjects/AppleStore.woa/wa/RSLID?mco=7B2A6F69&nclm=HolidayMain2006
i believe that was already up.Yeah, I got an email for that page ages ago. Looks like they might have brought it to the front store page and maybe some hidden Black Friday updates.
NAG
May 3, 01:48 PM
And why is this on mac rumors.
Does it really matter what the competition does.
It shows you how superior their open os is. Because if it wasn't open it would be controlled by evil Apple who would force you to use tethering.
Does it really matter what the competition does.
It shows you how superior their open os is. Because if it wasn't open it would be controlled by evil Apple who would force you to use tethering.
lmalave
Oct 3, 12:31 PM
iTV is a definite. Whether or not it's available then, at the very least the final feature set will be specified. As part of that, Apple will probably announce all Macs are updated with 802.11n (already rumored to be the case for iMacs).
I would also rate the iPhone a very high probability. Apple is not stupid and they have to strike now while the iron is hot and the iPod is still at the top of its game. Music phones by SonyEricsson, LG, Samsung, Motorola, etc. may not have made a dent in iPod sales yet, but they are bound to once they improve the crappy media player software and increase capacity (and affordable 2 GB micro/mini SD flash cards are already available).
If Apple is able to deliver an iPhone by early I predict it will sweep aside all competitors (LG Chocolate, SonyEricsson Walkman phone, etc.), and also start taking large chunks of market share of "cool" fashionista-oriented phones like RAZR and Sidekick. Not because Apple is competing on features with the RAZR or Sidekick, but rather because it will become the new "cool" phone, and most people only own one phone, after all.
I would also rate the iPhone a very high probability. Apple is not stupid and they have to strike now while the iron is hot and the iPod is still at the top of its game. Music phones by SonyEricsson, LG, Samsung, Motorola, etc. may not have made a dent in iPod sales yet, but they are bound to once they improve the crappy media player software and increase capacity (and affordable 2 GB micro/mini SD flash cards are already available).
If Apple is able to deliver an iPhone by early I predict it will sweep aside all competitors (LG Chocolate, SonyEricsson Walkman phone, etc.), and also start taking large chunks of market share of "cool" fashionista-oriented phones like RAZR and Sidekick. Not because Apple is competing on features with the RAZR or Sidekick, but rather because it will become the new "cool" phone, and most people only own one phone, after all.
Ryeno
May 3, 05:15 PM
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.
thank god you are not a brain surgeon. This is no different then paying for internet @ home and getting a modem (cell phone) that only allows connection to one PC (cell phone). Then being forced to pay an extra fee just to split the signal to another PC (use a router in this example).
This is not exactly brain surgery here.
thank god you are not a brain surgeon. This is no different then paying for internet @ home and getting a modem (cell phone) that only allows connection to one PC (cell phone). Then being forced to pay an extra fee just to split the signal to another PC (use a router in this example).
motulist
Apr 29, 06:59 PM
Both styles are bad.
Neither style does a good job of obviously denoting which tab is currently active. It's a really poor visual interface to make one tab be a lighter shade of gray and make the other exactly same-shaped tab be just a darker shade of gray. The active tab should have a different shape that denotes being "in front", like having the active tab lift vertically a bit higher above the inactive tabs. And/or make the background color of the active tab have a bright active-looking color like yellow, while the inactive tabs stay gray.
Neither style does a good job of obviously denoting which tab is currently active. It's a really poor visual interface to make one tab be a lighter shade of gray and make the other exactly same-shaped tab be just a darker shade of gray. The active tab should have a different shape that denotes being "in front", like having the active tab lift vertically a bit higher above the inactive tabs. And/or make the background color of the active tab have a bright active-looking color like yellow, while the inactive tabs stay gray.
prady16
Oct 11, 09:45 AM
I am leaning towards a new iPod product before the end of the year for two reasons:
1) Zune is being release, Apple needs to steal the limelight here.
2) The last iPod update was a huge deal for the Nano and a non-event for the 5G iPod.
Thats a good call!
1) Zune is being release, Apple needs to steal the limelight here.
2) The last iPod update was a huge deal for the Nano and a non-event for the 5G iPod.
Thats a good call!
darh
Sep 12, 08:03 AM
Film content from Fox and Dreamworks?!
Look at the german Quicktime page, bottom left, under "iTunes Videos": Transporter 2 from Fox and Red Eye from Dreamworks!!
http://www.apple.com/de/quicktime/mac.html
yeah! Also in the Netherlands FWIW
Look at the german Quicktime page, bottom left, under "iTunes Videos": Transporter 2 from Fox and Red Eye from Dreamworks!!
http://www.apple.com/de/quicktime/mac.html
yeah! Also in the Netherlands FWIW
Dunepilot
Nov 17, 08:09 AM
It's the Brit pronunciation - like that extra syllable that they throw into aluminum...
Or rather that we haven't removed a letter 'i' from that word.
http://www.world-aluminium.org/history/language.html
Or rather that we haven't removed a letter 'i' from that word.
http://www.world-aluminium.org/history/language.html
bikertwin
Sep 25, 03:47 PM
Yes, a very good point. And it makes me wonder if Adobe will ever charge for it. In fact, now they have rebranded it Adobe "Photoshop" Darkroom, it leads me to believe it will be included as part of Photoshop and not as a seperate product. This might also be why they haven't released it yet, since the next version of Photoshop isn't finished. This strategy would undercut Apple since most photography professionals undoubtedly already own Photoshop and will upgrade.
No, Adobe is claiming Lightroom will be released in late early a good 3 months before PS CS3.
I think with this rebranding, they're positioning Lightroom between PS Elements and PS CS, hence PS Lightroom.
No, Adobe is claiming Lightroom will be released in late early a good 3 months before PS CS3.
I think with this rebranding, they're positioning Lightroom between PS Elements and PS CS, hence PS Lightroom.
freeny
Oct 11, 08:09 AM
And the saga continues....
Apples new codec reading giving the ipod twice the play time on a battery charge does give a little backing to the story....
just release the damn thing already.
Apples new codec reading giving the ipod twice the play time on a battery charge does give a little backing to the story....
just release the damn thing already.
AP_piano295
May 4, 03:19 PM
1. What business is it if a pediatrician asks if there are guns in the home? A child is more likely to get hit by a car, should the doctor be asking if their home is situated on a street? This reeks of a doctor playing politics.
Recreate Taylor Swift#39;s hair
Casual updo hairstyles
Taylor Swift Wavy Updo Taylor
BlindMellon
Apr 25, 08:34 PM
I don't get the fascination with a marginal bigger screen, if I need a bigger screen I get my iPad.
They had the perfect opportunity to change the screen size last year. They introducing a higher resolution screen and a new design. They could have designed the phone for a larger screen and talked about how the screen was both larger and sharper. Instead, they kept the same screen size and talked about the 326 PPI retina resolution.
So now you think that they are adding a larger screen with fewer PPI to last years' form-factor which was designed for a 3.5" screen? C'mon... get real.
Why would Apple create a new design with the same screen size if they were planning on using that same design a year later with a larger screen? It doesn't make any sense. If they had plans to use a larger screen, they would have done it with the iPhone 4. If they do it in the future, it will have a different design.
this is true and one of my main gripes: they had the opportunity to enlarge the screen back when they redesigned the whole damn phone. they drew a line in the sand with the 3.5" screen and i doubt they'll change it any time soon. plus, the longer they wait, the more foolish they'll look when they finally do get around to it.
They had the perfect opportunity to change the screen size last year. They introducing a higher resolution screen and a new design. They could have designed the phone for a larger screen and talked about how the screen was both larger and sharper. Instead, they kept the same screen size and talked about the 326 PPI retina resolution.
So now you think that they are adding a larger screen with fewer PPI to last years' form-factor which was designed for a 3.5" screen? C'mon... get real.
Why would Apple create a new design with the same screen size if they were planning on using that same design a year later with a larger screen? It doesn't make any sense. If they had plans to use a larger screen, they would have done it with the iPhone 4. If they do it in the future, it will have a different design.
this is true and one of my main gripes: they had the opportunity to enlarge the screen back when they redesigned the whole damn phone. they drew a line in the sand with the 3.5" screen and i doubt they'll change it any time soon. plus, the longer they wait, the more foolish they'll look when they finally do get around to it.
rstansby
Apr 15, 05:31 PM
I doubt this is real, but I think it is beautiful.
Thomas Veil
Apr 22, 04:00 PM
I wonder if Thomas Veil will sign this one (with his real name)?You better believe it. Already been to an anti-SB5 rally, too.
iMeowbot
Sep 12, 12:30 AM
Maybe, but to impact the market, you need a critical mass. Didn't iTMS have 200,000-300,000 songs when it opened?
Yes, but there was hardly any content at all when they started offering videos.
Yes, but there was hardly any content at all when they started offering videos.
AppleScruff1
Apr 8, 02:30 PM
Best Buy knows who D:apple:ddy is... They know who's keeping that company afloat and relevant in todays chaotic economy.
They wouldn't do anything to jeopardize a business relationship they NEED.
Again they know who D:apple:ddy is.
Do you really think that Apple sales are a significant part of BB revenue? BB could tell Apple to shove it and it would have no effect on their bottom line.
They wouldn't do anything to jeopardize a business relationship they NEED.
Again they know who D:apple:ddy is.
Do you really think that Apple sales are a significant part of BB revenue? BB could tell Apple to shove it and it would have no effect on their bottom line.
rhett7660
Apr 21, 11:14 AM
Will we be able to see who voted on our posts? That would be very interesting!
CalBoy
Apr 15, 04:21 PM
As I said, I understood the point you were trying to make. But.... you can't take two non-TSA incidents and use those to make a case against the TSA specifically. All you can do is say that increased security, similar to what the TSA does, can be shown to not catch everything. I could just as easily argue that because the two incidents (shoe and underwear bombers) did not occur from TSA screenings then that is proof the TSA methods work. I could, but I won't because we don't really know that is true. Too small a sample to judge.
Well actually we know the TSA methods don't work because both of the incidents were from European airports that mirror what the TSA does. Added to the number of weapons that make it through TSA checkpoints, it's easy to see that the TSA does in fact not work to the extent that it is expected to.
Did you not read my post above? Or did you not understand it? Or did I not write clearly? I'll assume the 3rd. Past history is that bombs are not put on planes by lone wolf fanatics. They are placed there by a whole operation involving a number of people... perhaps a dozen, maybe? The person carrying the bomb may be a brainwashed fool (though, surprisingly - often educated) - but the support team likely aren't fools. The team includes dedicated individuals who have specialized training and experience that are needed to mount further operations. The bomb makers, the money people, the people who nurture the bomb carrier and ensure that they are fit (mentally) to go through with a suicide attack. These people, the support crew, are not going to like 50/50 odds.
I understood your rather simplistic attempt at game theory just fine. The problem remains that one side is not a rational actor. The command portion of terrorists have virtually nothing to lose with a botched attempt, and neither does the fanatic patsy. A 50/50 ratio isn't good enough for our security because the downside for both command and patsy are much smaller than the upside (from their perspective). The chances of failure need to be much higher in order to effectively deter terrorists.
You are right. There has been a cost to dignity, time and money. Most of life is. People are constantly balancing personal and societal security/safety against personal freedoms. In this case what you think is only part of the balance between society and security. You feel it's too far. I can't argue. I don't fly anymore unless I have to. But, I also think that what the TSA (and CATSA, & the European equivalents) are doing is working. I just don't have to like going through it.
Sacrificing these things is appropriate when there is a tangible gain. There hasn't been much of a tangible gain with TSA, and this is coming from the head of Israeli Security. We're paying a lot and getting almost nothing in return. Every year there's a new "standard" put out there to make it seem like TSA is doing something, but time and again security experts have lambasted TSA and its efforts as a dog and pony show.
Your own opinion of flying should be an example of how ridiculous things have gotten. If people now become disgruntled and irritated every time they fly, for perhaps marginal gains in security, then our methods have failed.
Give the man/woman/boy a cigar! There is no way to prove it, other than setting controlled experiments in which make some airports security free, and others with varying levels of security. And in some cases you don't tell the travelling public which airports have what level (if any) of security - but you do tell the bad guys/gals.
It is difficult to prove, but you can make an educated guess about what the cause is. Other than the correlational evidence, there is no other good data to suggest that TSA has actually been effective. In no field is correlation enough to establish anything but correlation.
I cited a sharp drop-off in hijackings at a particular moment in history. Within the limits of a Mac Rumours Forum, that is as far as I'm going to go. If you an alternative hypothesis, you have to at least back it up with something. My something trumps your alternative hypothesis - even if my something is merely a pair of deuces - until you provide something to back up your AH.
No, that's not how it works. If you want to assert your idea as correct, the burden is on you to show that it is correct. I am going to try to poke holes in your reasoning, and it's up to you to show that my criticisms are invalid on the bases of logic and evidence.
So far you've only cited correlation, which is not sufficient evidence for causation. You ignored my criticism based on military intervention, changing travel patterns, etc, and only want to trumpet your belief that correlation is enough. It's not. If you don't want to do more on Mac Rumors, then don't post anymore on this topic concerning this line of discussion.
Well actually we know the TSA methods don't work because both of the incidents were from European airports that mirror what the TSA does. Added to the number of weapons that make it through TSA checkpoints, it's easy to see that the TSA does in fact not work to the extent that it is expected to.
Did you not read my post above? Or did you not understand it? Or did I not write clearly? I'll assume the 3rd. Past history is that bombs are not put on planes by lone wolf fanatics. They are placed there by a whole operation involving a number of people... perhaps a dozen, maybe? The person carrying the bomb may be a brainwashed fool (though, surprisingly - often educated) - but the support team likely aren't fools. The team includes dedicated individuals who have specialized training and experience that are needed to mount further operations. The bomb makers, the money people, the people who nurture the bomb carrier and ensure that they are fit (mentally) to go through with a suicide attack. These people, the support crew, are not going to like 50/50 odds.
I understood your rather simplistic attempt at game theory just fine. The problem remains that one side is not a rational actor. The command portion of terrorists have virtually nothing to lose with a botched attempt, and neither does the fanatic patsy. A 50/50 ratio isn't good enough for our security because the downside for both command and patsy are much smaller than the upside (from their perspective). The chances of failure need to be much higher in order to effectively deter terrorists.
You are right. There has been a cost to dignity, time and money. Most of life is. People are constantly balancing personal and societal security/safety against personal freedoms. In this case what you think is only part of the balance between society and security. You feel it's too far. I can't argue. I don't fly anymore unless I have to. But, I also think that what the TSA (and CATSA, & the European equivalents) are doing is working. I just don't have to like going through it.
Sacrificing these things is appropriate when there is a tangible gain. There hasn't been much of a tangible gain with TSA, and this is coming from the head of Israeli Security. We're paying a lot and getting almost nothing in return. Every year there's a new "standard" put out there to make it seem like TSA is doing something, but time and again security experts have lambasted TSA and its efforts as a dog and pony show.
Your own opinion of flying should be an example of how ridiculous things have gotten. If people now become disgruntled and irritated every time they fly, for perhaps marginal gains in security, then our methods have failed.
Give the man/woman/boy a cigar! There is no way to prove it, other than setting controlled experiments in which make some airports security free, and others with varying levels of security. And in some cases you don't tell the travelling public which airports have what level (if any) of security - but you do tell the bad guys/gals.
It is difficult to prove, but you can make an educated guess about what the cause is. Other than the correlational evidence, there is no other good data to suggest that TSA has actually been effective. In no field is correlation enough to establish anything but correlation.
I cited a sharp drop-off in hijackings at a particular moment in history. Within the limits of a Mac Rumours Forum, that is as far as I'm going to go. If you an alternative hypothesis, you have to at least back it up with something. My something trumps your alternative hypothesis - even if my something is merely a pair of deuces - until you provide something to back up your AH.
No, that's not how it works. If you want to assert your idea as correct, the burden is on you to show that it is correct. I am going to try to poke holes in your reasoning, and it's up to you to show that my criticisms are invalid on the bases of logic and evidence.
So far you've only cited correlation, which is not sufficient evidence for causation. You ignored my criticism based on military intervention, changing travel patterns, etc, and only want to trumpet your belief that correlation is enough. It's not. If you don't want to do more on Mac Rumors, then don't post anymore on this topic concerning this line of discussion.
getalifemacfans
Jan 10, 02:40 AM
[QUOTE=getalifemacfans;4722504]
it dont have mms
you cant send messages to more then one at a time.
it is not possible to download contacts from sim
its more difficult to call,set up contacts and so on compare to sony/nokia
i have all of these on my iphone, albeit not out of the box....but if your serious about your iphone, you should be jailbreaking it anyway, the amount of apps that will make your phone YOURS is relentless and modding is the way to go.
not sure why you think its more difficult to call, set up contacts etc, strange comment....
Yeah i talked with some iphone users and they said compare to nokia/ sony its something more harder to organize(not the biggest problem but it can be anoying maybe).Maybe thats strange but if it is a fact then it is a fact.
Maybe the jailbraking makes it more complete.hehe.But think of this you must jailbrake it to make it function proper.its like those guys who tried to make a computer out of apple tv(the cheapest apple computer yet..lol).But it still can't record video with that camera and thats a minimum for todays cellies(think about all the fun you're missing)
But if apple release a second iphone with some bether specs i will forgive apple and buy it:)(and eat my own words..)
it dont have mms
you cant send messages to more then one at a time.
it is not possible to download contacts from sim
its more difficult to call,set up contacts and so on compare to sony/nokia
i have all of these on my iphone, albeit not out of the box....but if your serious about your iphone, you should be jailbreaking it anyway, the amount of apps that will make your phone YOURS is relentless and modding is the way to go.
not sure why you think its more difficult to call, set up contacts etc, strange comment....
Yeah i talked with some iphone users and they said compare to nokia/ sony its something more harder to organize(not the biggest problem but it can be anoying maybe).Maybe thats strange but if it is a fact then it is a fact.
Maybe the jailbraking makes it more complete.hehe.But think of this you must jailbrake it to make it function proper.its like those guys who tried to make a computer out of apple tv(the cheapest apple computer yet..lol).But it still can't record video with that camera and thats a minimum for todays cellies(think about all the fun you're missing)
But if apple release a second iphone with some bether specs i will forgive apple and buy it:)(and eat my own words..)
No comments:
Post a Comment