gregorsamsa
Aug 26, 07:17 AM
in my experience, their support has always sucked..even from day 1 with my first PowerMac G5 back in 2004.
Let's see...
PowerMac G5 arrived with a defective superdrive, miscalibrated fans. The genius 'couldn't hear the fans', and accidentally put the repair in someone else's name, so when I tried to pick it up, I had to haggle to get it. Oh, and when I did finally get it, the superdrive was still broken. Super...
Cinema Display arrived with 7 dead pixels...I know this is a touchy issue, but the problem with their support regarding it was that none of them knew the actual number to replace it at. The phone people told me 5, the store (after the 45 minute drive there) told me 15, and another rep (who finally replaced it) told me 3.
iMac G5 had a defective power supply on arrival--would shut off randomly, some times not turning on. They refused to acknowledge this the first time we were there...the second time we were there...third time...fourth time they gave in--by saying "we'll keep it overnight." They still.."couldn't find a problem." When they gave it back, it worked for..two weeks, then the fans started being wonky. They couldn't hear that the first or second visit, on the third visit they took it overnight, "couldn't hear any audible issue", but it shutdown on them. I guess taking our word for it, they replaced the fan assembly, logic board, and power supply. Worked for a month, now it still shuts down.
MacBook Pro had the defective battery (random shutdowns), now fixed. Also, I had the screen buzz (now fixed), CPU A Whine (now fixed). They basically fixed all the issues in this machine, but were four days over their expected return time.
I'm not saying their support is totally crap, but they're certainly not consistent in performance, technical knowledge, friendliness, or even coverage. I was talking to a friend about "what I'd do if I were Steve Jobs," and the first thing we agreed on was to fire the entire AppleCare department, and all the genius', because they all seem to suck.
But hey, my iBook G4 and MacBook are fine...
You, & some others here, have obviously had more than your fair share of bad luck with Apple. Customers paying good money rightly expect to receive faultless products every time. When they don't, it's understandable they're peeved off. In this respect, Apple must do better.
Many others, however, swear by Apple's general reliability & quality of products. (My iBook, bought only last October, is used at least a few hours almost daily. So far, no problems whatsoever!). Fact is, statistics consistently prove Apple still to be one of the best computer manufacturers when it comes to longevity of their products.
PS. I'm not an Apple fanboy. My next computer (a 15.4" laptop) may not even be another Apple. But I'm 100% sure I will buy another Apple computer in future, not least because of the general high quality I know I can expect from Apple compared to many PC manufacturers, & a wonderful OS to boot! - But, then again, if Apple's QC was to deteriorate significantly, & get a consistently growing number of customer complaints...
Let's see...
PowerMac G5 arrived with a defective superdrive, miscalibrated fans. The genius 'couldn't hear the fans', and accidentally put the repair in someone else's name, so when I tried to pick it up, I had to haggle to get it. Oh, and when I did finally get it, the superdrive was still broken. Super...
Cinema Display arrived with 7 dead pixels...I know this is a touchy issue, but the problem with their support regarding it was that none of them knew the actual number to replace it at. The phone people told me 5, the store (after the 45 minute drive there) told me 15, and another rep (who finally replaced it) told me 3.
iMac G5 had a defective power supply on arrival--would shut off randomly, some times not turning on. They refused to acknowledge this the first time we were there...the second time we were there...third time...fourth time they gave in--by saying "we'll keep it overnight." They still.."couldn't find a problem." When they gave it back, it worked for..two weeks, then the fans started being wonky. They couldn't hear that the first or second visit, on the third visit they took it overnight, "couldn't hear any audible issue", but it shutdown on them. I guess taking our word for it, they replaced the fan assembly, logic board, and power supply. Worked for a month, now it still shuts down.
MacBook Pro had the defective battery (random shutdowns), now fixed. Also, I had the screen buzz (now fixed), CPU A Whine (now fixed). They basically fixed all the issues in this machine, but were four days over their expected return time.
I'm not saying their support is totally crap, but they're certainly not consistent in performance, technical knowledge, friendliness, or even coverage. I was talking to a friend about "what I'd do if I were Steve Jobs," and the first thing we agreed on was to fire the entire AppleCare department, and all the genius', because they all seem to suck.
But hey, my iBook G4 and MacBook are fine...
You, & some others here, have obviously had more than your fair share of bad luck with Apple. Customers paying good money rightly expect to receive faultless products every time. When they don't, it's understandable they're peeved off. In this respect, Apple must do better.
Many others, however, swear by Apple's general reliability & quality of products. (My iBook, bought only last October, is used at least a few hours almost daily. So far, no problems whatsoever!). Fact is, statistics consistently prove Apple still to be one of the best computer manufacturers when it comes to longevity of their products.
PS. I'm not an Apple fanboy. My next computer (a 15.4" laptop) may not even be another Apple. But I'm 100% sure I will buy another Apple computer in future, not least because of the general high quality I know I can expect from Apple compared to many PC manufacturers, & a wonderful OS to boot! - But, then again, if Apple's QC was to deteriorate significantly, & get a consistently growing number of customer complaints...
brianus
Sep 14, 01:10 PM
This is NEW because it is on a 3 hour weekday morning telecast. That makes it NEW and NEWS. Nothing about content. I NEVER watch American Idol. You are judgemental.
Well he did kind of have a point there at the end. You could stand to tone down your use of enormous, colored type if you don't want your posts "judged" as having an emotional content beyond their actual words.
Well he did kind of have a point there at the end. You could stand to tone down your use of enormous, colored type if you don't want your posts "judged" as having an emotional content beyond their actual words.
Blue Velvet
Mar 23, 06:11 AM
Libya is more like Bosnia than Iraq. A moment of force has the potential to change the scope of the conflict, hopefully for the positive, in a way that a full-blown invasion would merely complicate. That's the central part that fivepoint, who is merely interested in making another partisan screed, is ignoring.
Well exactly. Far easier to tag together some buzzwords, maybe pull something from FoxNews than it is to think critically about the issue. This inane comparison between coalition numbers was also picked up by Steve M.:
Fox Nation huffily declares that "Bush Had 2 Times More Coalition Partners in Iraq Than Obama Has in Libya." Bush's thirty-nation list, of course, included such global powers as Azerbaijan, Estonia, Latvia, and Uzbekistan, and didn't include the likes of, y'know, Germany and France.
But if we're going to play games like this, in the run-up to the war, how many coalition partners did Bush attract per week? The Libyan uprising started just about a month ago and Obama's coalition is fifteen nations. When do you date the start of the "Iraq crisis" the Bushies manufactured? The Axis of Evil speech, fourteen months before the war began? The Battle of Tora Bora, a month before that? The first administration meetings on Iraq regime change, mere days after Bush's inauguration, and more than two years before the Iraq War started? By that standard, Bush barely acquired one coalition partner a month! Obama obtained more than three partners a week!
I'm reminded of the 2000 electoral maps that measured Bush's vote by geography, as if winning a county with more jackrabbits than people was the equivalent of winning a county full of apartment buildings.
http://nomoremister.blogspot.com/2011/03/well-if-were-going-to-be-ridiculous.html
Meanwhile, Juan Cole lays out ten reasons why this is not like Iraq:
Here are the differences between George W. Bush�s invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the current United Nations action in Libya:
1. The action in Libya was authorized by the United Nations Security Council. That in Iraq was not. By the UN Charter, military action after 1945 should either come as self-defense or with UNSC authorization. Most countries in the world are signatories to the charter and bound by its provisions.
2. The Libyan people had risen up and thrown off the Qaddafi regime, with some 80-90 percent of the country having gone out of his hands before he started having tank commanders fire shells into peaceful crowds. It was this vast majority of the Libyan people that demanded the UN no-fly zone. In 2002-3 there was no similar popular movement against Saddam Hussein.
3. There was an ongoing massacre of civilians, and the threat of more such massacres in Benghazi, by the Qaddafi regime, which precipitated the UNSC resolution. Although the Saddam Hussein regime had massacred people in the 1980s and early 1990s, nothing was going on in 2002-2003 that would have required international intervention.
4. The Arab League urged the UNSC to take action against the Qaddafi regime, and in many ways precipitated Resolution 1973. The Arab League met in 2002 and expressed opposition to a war on Iraq. (Reports of Arab League backtracking on Sunday were incorrect, based on a remark of outgoing Secretary-General Amr Moussa that criticized the taking out of anti-aircraft batteries. The Arab League reaffirmed Sunday and Moussa agreed Monday that the No-Fly Zone is what it wants).
5. None of the United Nations allies envisages landing troops on the ground, nor does the UNSC authorize it. Iraq was invaded by land forces.
6. No false allegations were made against the Qaddafi regime, of being in league with al-Qaeda or of having a nuclear weapons program. The charge is massacre of peaceful civilian demonstrators and an actual promise to commit more such massacres.
7. The United States did not take the lead role in urging a no-fly zone, and was dragged into this action by its Arab and European allies. President Obama pledges that the US role, mainly disabling anti-aircraft batteries and bombing runways, will last �days, not months� before being turned over to other United Nations allies.
8. There is no sectarian or ethnic dimension to the Libyan conflict, whereas the US Pentagon conspired with Shiite and Kurdish parties to overthrow the Sunni-dominated Baathist regime in Iraq, setting the stage for a prolonged and bitter civil war.
9. The US has not rewarded countries such as Norway for entering the conflict as UN allies, but rather a genuine sense of outrage at the brutal crimes against humanity being committed by Qaddafi and his forces impelled the formation of this coalition. The Bush administration�s �coalition of the willing� in contrast was often brought on board by what were essentially bribes.
10. Iraq in 2002-3 no longer posed a credible threat to its neighbors. A resurgent Qaddafi in Libya with petroleum billions at his disposal would likely attempt to undermine the democratic experiments in Tunisia and Egypt, blighting the lives of millions.
http://www.juancole.com/2011/03/top-ten-ways-that-libya-2011-is-not-iraq-2003.html
Well exactly. Far easier to tag together some buzzwords, maybe pull something from FoxNews than it is to think critically about the issue. This inane comparison between coalition numbers was also picked up by Steve M.:
Fox Nation huffily declares that "Bush Had 2 Times More Coalition Partners in Iraq Than Obama Has in Libya." Bush's thirty-nation list, of course, included such global powers as Azerbaijan, Estonia, Latvia, and Uzbekistan, and didn't include the likes of, y'know, Germany and France.
But if we're going to play games like this, in the run-up to the war, how many coalition partners did Bush attract per week? The Libyan uprising started just about a month ago and Obama's coalition is fifteen nations. When do you date the start of the "Iraq crisis" the Bushies manufactured? The Axis of Evil speech, fourteen months before the war began? The Battle of Tora Bora, a month before that? The first administration meetings on Iraq regime change, mere days after Bush's inauguration, and more than two years before the Iraq War started? By that standard, Bush barely acquired one coalition partner a month! Obama obtained more than three partners a week!
I'm reminded of the 2000 electoral maps that measured Bush's vote by geography, as if winning a county with more jackrabbits than people was the equivalent of winning a county full of apartment buildings.
http://nomoremister.blogspot.com/2011/03/well-if-were-going-to-be-ridiculous.html
Meanwhile, Juan Cole lays out ten reasons why this is not like Iraq:
Here are the differences between George W. Bush�s invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the current United Nations action in Libya:
1. The action in Libya was authorized by the United Nations Security Council. That in Iraq was not. By the UN Charter, military action after 1945 should either come as self-defense or with UNSC authorization. Most countries in the world are signatories to the charter and bound by its provisions.
2. The Libyan people had risen up and thrown off the Qaddafi regime, with some 80-90 percent of the country having gone out of his hands before he started having tank commanders fire shells into peaceful crowds. It was this vast majority of the Libyan people that demanded the UN no-fly zone. In 2002-3 there was no similar popular movement against Saddam Hussein.
3. There was an ongoing massacre of civilians, and the threat of more such massacres in Benghazi, by the Qaddafi regime, which precipitated the UNSC resolution. Although the Saddam Hussein regime had massacred people in the 1980s and early 1990s, nothing was going on in 2002-2003 that would have required international intervention.
4. The Arab League urged the UNSC to take action against the Qaddafi regime, and in many ways precipitated Resolution 1973. The Arab League met in 2002 and expressed opposition to a war on Iraq. (Reports of Arab League backtracking on Sunday were incorrect, based on a remark of outgoing Secretary-General Amr Moussa that criticized the taking out of anti-aircraft batteries. The Arab League reaffirmed Sunday and Moussa agreed Monday that the No-Fly Zone is what it wants).
5. None of the United Nations allies envisages landing troops on the ground, nor does the UNSC authorize it. Iraq was invaded by land forces.
6. No false allegations were made against the Qaddafi regime, of being in league with al-Qaeda or of having a nuclear weapons program. The charge is massacre of peaceful civilian demonstrators and an actual promise to commit more such massacres.
7. The United States did not take the lead role in urging a no-fly zone, and was dragged into this action by its Arab and European allies. President Obama pledges that the US role, mainly disabling anti-aircraft batteries and bombing runways, will last �days, not months� before being turned over to other United Nations allies.
8. There is no sectarian or ethnic dimension to the Libyan conflict, whereas the US Pentagon conspired with Shiite and Kurdish parties to overthrow the Sunni-dominated Baathist regime in Iraq, setting the stage for a prolonged and bitter civil war.
9. The US has not rewarded countries such as Norway for entering the conflict as UN allies, but rather a genuine sense of outrage at the brutal crimes against humanity being committed by Qaddafi and his forces impelled the formation of this coalition. The Bush administration�s �coalition of the willing� in contrast was often brought on board by what were essentially bribes.
10. Iraq in 2002-3 no longer posed a credible threat to its neighbors. A resurgent Qaddafi in Libya with petroleum billions at his disposal would likely attempt to undermine the democratic experiments in Tunisia and Egypt, blighting the lives of millions.
http://www.juancole.com/2011/03/top-ten-ways-that-libya-2011-is-not-iraq-2003.html
ratinakage
Apr 8, 07:43 AM
It makes total sense to hold back the units for the following reason:
Day 1: Someone calls up BestBuy to find out if they have the iPad2. They reply, "yes we have a very small amount in stock". Customer arrives at the store and they are all sold out but they are told that there will be a few more on sale tomorrow. Customer picks up some random crap like a DVD, mouse or whatever.
Day 2: Customer arrives at the store and they are all sold out but they are told that there will be a few more on sale tomorrow. Customer maybe picks up some other random crap and leaves.
Day 3: [Same as Day 2]
Day 4: [Same as Day 3] etc...
If you just release a few each day, customers will keep coming back in hope of finding one and possibly buy some other small items while in the store. If you sell them all out and have nothing for weeks, you will have no customers coming to the store. BB knows that the iPad2 is in short supply and that they will have no trouble shifting the stock if they need to so they are happy to sit on it and keep a steady flow of customers coming through the store.
Day 1: Someone calls up BestBuy to find out if they have the iPad2. They reply, "yes we have a very small amount in stock". Customer arrives at the store and they are all sold out but they are told that there will be a few more on sale tomorrow. Customer picks up some random crap like a DVD, mouse or whatever.
Day 2: Customer arrives at the store and they are all sold out but they are told that there will be a few more on sale tomorrow. Customer maybe picks up some other random crap and leaves.
Day 3: [Same as Day 2]
Day 4: [Same as Day 3] etc...
If you just release a few each day, customers will keep coming back in hope of finding one and possibly buy some other small items while in the store. If you sell them all out and have nothing for weeks, you will have no customers coming to the store. BB knows that the iPad2 is in short supply and that they will have no trouble shifting the stock if they need to so they are happy to sit on it and keep a steady flow of customers coming through the store.
MikeD23nu
Apr 6, 06:26 PM
I just got my low end 13" MacBook Air with 4GB of RAM today too. Should I keep it?
Me too! It's killing me...don't know what to do.
Me too! It's killing me...don't know what to do.
mkruck
Apr 6, 04:41 PM
Don't understand that there needs to be a pissing contest about Xoom OR ipad.
Why are the Xoom guys even here on a Mac site, to tell us THEIR device is better?
Let's even assume they are right.
Go buy your Xoom and be happy if it does what you want No harm, no foul.
The Apple users buy Apple until something better comes along also as long as it does what they want.
They love the possible integration with their other devices and when that comes to Xoom or something else is better they will switch.
Technology pace is amazingly fast and nobody knows what is next.
Perhaps Xoom owners are on here because we own multiple devices and like all of them. Just because I'm using an Android device doesn't mean that I'm forever barred from reading and posting on a Mac forum.
Reading through the existing 8 pages, most of the Xoom owners aren't saying their device is better; rather, they're (we're) providing comments around what Android can do. To be quite honest, the defensive and snarky comments are coming from those that are not Xoom owners. Really makes me wonder why they are so defensive and strident, you know? Deflection? Insecurity? Projecting?
Yes, I'm being a smartass, no one needs to get their panties in a wad.
Why are the Xoom guys even here on a Mac site, to tell us THEIR device is better?
Let's even assume they are right.
Go buy your Xoom and be happy if it does what you want No harm, no foul.
The Apple users buy Apple until something better comes along also as long as it does what they want.
They love the possible integration with their other devices and when that comes to Xoom or something else is better they will switch.
Technology pace is amazingly fast and nobody knows what is next.
Perhaps Xoom owners are on here because we own multiple devices and like all of them. Just because I'm using an Android device doesn't mean that I'm forever barred from reading and posting on a Mac forum.
Reading through the existing 8 pages, most of the Xoom owners aren't saying their device is better; rather, they're (we're) providing comments around what Android can do. To be quite honest, the defensive and snarky comments are coming from those that are not Xoom owners. Really makes me wonder why they are so defensive and strident, you know? Deflection? Insecurity? Projecting?
Yes, I'm being a smartass, no one needs to get their panties in a wad.
toughboy
Aug 26, 04:11 PM
If the power consumption is the same... does that mean that the Merom and the current chips suck the same amount energy while going full throttle?
If the above is true, if you turned down the Merom to match the speed of the current chips, wouldn't the Merom be drawing 20% less power?
In other words if the Merom and the current chip were both going 60 mph down the freeway, would the Merom be drawing less power?
Am I missing something here (such as the basics of electricity, the basic way that chips work, etc.)?
512ke
Maybe its just efficiency... As days past and R&D continues to evolve, chips will be more efficient and they'll produce more power for less energy..
If the above is true, if you turned down the Merom to match the speed of the current chips, wouldn't the Merom be drawing 20% less power?
In other words if the Merom and the current chip were both going 60 mph down the freeway, would the Merom be drawing less power?
Am I missing something here (such as the basics of electricity, the basic way that chips work, etc.)?
512ke
Maybe its just efficiency... As days past and R&D continues to evolve, chips will be more efficient and they'll produce more power for less energy..
Magrathea
Apr 6, 11:15 PM
Youre aware the newest mbp (high end) 15, and 17 haveva 1gb graphics memory, right?
Yes but not Nvidia so I don't think they can use the CUDA think. correct my if I'm wrong where PP gurus.
Yes but not Nvidia so I don't think they can use the CUDA think. correct my if I'm wrong where PP gurus.
powers74
Apr 11, 06:22 PM
Doesn't this make sense? I think I'm close, I'm sure I forgot something / not perfectly accurate, but this seems like what Apple is shooting for. Makes sense to me...
Jan: iPhone (like original)
Mar: iPad
May: iMac/MacPro
June/Jul: Software
Sept: iPods
Nov: Laptops
Jan: iPhone (like original)
Mar: iPad
May: iMac/MacPro
June/Jul: Software
Sept: iPods
Nov: Laptops
Erasmus
Jul 21, 11:55 PM
So I read in this thread that Kentsfield and Clovertown ARE compatible with Conroe and Woodcrest sockets (respectively) (Cloverton or Clovertown?)
Hope for upgrading an iMac to Quad Core is kindled! At least if Apple releases Conroe iMacs.
BTW, In my opinion, one thing a person should never, ever say is some computer has too much power, and that it will never be needed. So when 128 core CPUs come out in ~10 years time, will we still be considering dual core CPUs as fast enough for our use?
I seem to remember that when the original DOS operating system was created, its RAM was limited. I can't remember exactly to how much, but it was decided that people would never use more than a few kilobytes of memory. Now we are arguing that Mac should provide no less than a gigabyte! Now we are moving to 64 bit processing, with its capability to address a few exobytes, or millions of Terabytes of storage, it seems impossible that we will ever need 128bit computing. But, no doubt, one day we will.
When we will be able to download our entire lives, and even conciousness into a computer, as is said to happen in about 40 years (very much looking forward to), I dare say it will take a lot of memory to do, and even more processing power to manage effectively, especially if we wanted to "live" inside computers, as we will no doubt want to do someday.
So as a conclusion to my most recent rant, Please, never tell me a computer is too powerfu, has too many cores, or has too much storage capacity. If it is there to be used, it will be used. It always is.
Hope for upgrading an iMac to Quad Core is kindled! At least if Apple releases Conroe iMacs.
BTW, In my opinion, one thing a person should never, ever say is some computer has too much power, and that it will never be needed. So when 128 core CPUs come out in ~10 years time, will we still be considering dual core CPUs as fast enough for our use?
I seem to remember that when the original DOS operating system was created, its RAM was limited. I can't remember exactly to how much, but it was decided that people would never use more than a few kilobytes of memory. Now we are arguing that Mac should provide no less than a gigabyte! Now we are moving to 64 bit processing, with its capability to address a few exobytes, or millions of Terabytes of storage, it seems impossible that we will ever need 128bit computing. But, no doubt, one day we will.
When we will be able to download our entire lives, and even conciousness into a computer, as is said to happen in about 40 years (very much looking forward to), I dare say it will take a lot of memory to do, and even more processing power to manage effectively, especially if we wanted to "live" inside computers, as we will no doubt want to do someday.
So as a conclusion to my most recent rant, Please, never tell me a computer is too powerfu, has too many cores, or has too much storage capacity. If it is there to be used, it will be used. It always is.
moebius
Mar 22, 08:36 PM
Probably someone mentioned before, but "a tablet for professionals" named PLAYbook?
I smell an identity crisis.
I smell an identity crisis.
jkane08
Apr 5, 05:40 PM
Would be grand if all this hype was for iMovie. :)
iMovie just had a refresh... and that's consumer level.. this is a pro-market meetup..
extremely excited for new FCP though! it's well overdue
iMovie just had a refresh... and that's consumer level.. this is a pro-market meetup..
extremely excited for new FCP though! it's well overdue
toddybody
Apr 6, 11:04 AM
well speaking only for myself.. i suck at typing, so having this feature at night helps. and being an owner of 2 MB Pros, i've been spoiled by the backlit keys
Most Def. Im not the "dont ever look at the keyboard cause Im so damn good" typer. A backlit keyboard would be very welcomed.
Most Def. Im not the "dont ever look at the keyboard cause Im so damn good" typer. A backlit keyboard would be very welcomed.
BruinJohn
Sep 19, 02:40 AM
So, the shipping says 5-7 days for all the MacBooks, and 24 hours for the MBP. I think that means the MacBooks are getting refreshed next week. Either that, or the MacBooks are selling like crazy so its hard for Apple to keep up with demand. But the MBP have been out longer, and need a refresh. Just change them all Apple, and put the current models on sale. I'd love to get a white MB for around $900!
Burnsey
Mar 20, 11:13 PM
Well, you see, it is not about the one-man-one-vote thing. That works just fine. You just have to make sure you keep the wrong men from voting.
The problem is your not voting for a leader, you're just voting for the new mouthpiece.
The problem is your not voting for a leader, you're just voting for the new mouthpiece.
bushman4
Apr 11, 10:00 PM
No IPHONE5 in june-july watch the stock drop and the negative impact on Apple overall not just the stock price
Denarius
Mar 24, 07:34 PM
I believe a lot of the anti-Obama crap spewed by the Tea Party and Republicans is based more on his race than his party.
Why? Being the same race as a prominent figure of another party has never stopped people attacking those figures viciously in the past. Such is the nature of politics.
By all means correct me if I'm wrong, but I didn't see much evidence of people crying racism on their behalf on the occasions that Condoleeza Rice or Colin Powell were being criticised by other parties.
Why? Being the same race as a prominent figure of another party has never stopped people attacking those figures viciously in the past. Such is the nature of politics.
By all means correct me if I'm wrong, but I didn't see much evidence of people crying racism on their behalf on the occasions that Condoleeza Rice or Colin Powell were being criticised by other parties.
inhrntlyunstabl
Apr 27, 09:52 AM
This is a lie
Keeping a database of our general location is logging our location. :mad: Does Apple really think this double talk, where they say they keep a database of location but don't log the location is going to fly?
At least our overlord will now, I hope, stop collecting location data when location services are turned off. It's a disgrace that it took a media storm to shame them into action.
A white truck just drove by my house. Was this your truck? How is me looking outside the window and seeing some anonymous truck tracking that individual's location?!
Grow up and get smart!
Keeping a database of our general location is logging our location. :mad: Does Apple really think this double talk, where they say they keep a database of location but don't log the location is going to fly?
At least our overlord will now, I hope, stop collecting location data when location services are turned off. It's a disgrace that it took a media storm to shame them into action.
A white truck just drove by my house. Was this your truck? How is me looking outside the window and seeing some anonymous truck tracking that individual's location?!
Grow up and get smart!
yg17
Apr 27, 08:59 AM
Before yesterday?
In before the election.
In before the election.
aafuss1
Aug 6, 05:31 PM
Why sell a new keyboard for front row, if you can sell a new Mac to the same person? Including the sensor in the Cinema Displays would enable Apple to sell more of their display, on which they probably have a very good profit margin (when you compare to other manufacturers).
They could also just put it into the tower. Even if that is under the desk, it might not be that much of a problem. In my experience the sensor responds very nicely to the remote even if the line of sight between them is somewhat obstructed.
However the best solution I think, was suggested by someone on these forums. I don't know, whether it has been quoted here already, because I did not go through all the messages. This poster suggested to combine the sensor with an external iSight. That could be connected to any monitor and would probably have a good IR reception because of beeing on top of the monitor and thus very exposed.
Apple would make the IR and iSight work on XP-first under Boot Camp and on PC's
They could also just put it into the tower. Even if that is under the desk, it might not be that much of a problem. In my experience the sensor responds very nicely to the remote even if the line of sight between them is somewhat obstructed.
However the best solution I think, was suggested by someone on these forums. I don't know, whether it has been quoted here already, because I did not go through all the messages. This poster suggested to combine the sensor with an external iSight. That could be connected to any monitor and would probably have a good IR reception because of beeing on top of the monitor and thus very exposed.
Apple would make the IR and iSight work on XP-first under Boot Camp and on PC's
reflex
Sep 19, 07:51 AM
Maybe I'm missing something here, but I'd of thought buying the latest and fastest computer every year would be the first thing a 'pro-user' would do with his money.
I can't speak for everyone, but there are a few considerations apart from speed:
- the available funds
- the ability to deduct the purchase from taxes
- having to reinstall everything on the new computer
Speed is nice, but when a two year old laptop is mostly fast enough (in my case), then why buy a new one after only a year?
I usually buy a new laptop about every two years. This is a relatively nice trade off between my desire to have the latest of everything and actually getting any work done.
I can't speak for everyone, but there are a few considerations apart from speed:
- the available funds
- the ability to deduct the purchase from taxes
- having to reinstall everything on the new computer
Speed is nice, but when a two year old laptop is mostly fast enough (in my case), then why buy a new one after only a year?
I usually buy a new laptop about every two years. This is a relatively nice trade off between my desire to have the latest of everything and actually getting any work done.
hulugu
Mar 22, 01:02 AM
This makes me want to go have lunch at the Cafe My Lai.
Oh wow, I didn't catch that until now.
Oh wow, I didn't catch that until now.
Butters
Aug 6, 01:14 PM
i don't care about see-through windows. I want something that works.
see-through windows are SOOOO jaguar
see-through windows are SOOOO jaguar
SevenInchScrew
Dec 14, 12:25 AM
Click for HUGE-size
http://imgur.com/q3woJ.jpg
http://imgur.com/9hFqL.jpg
http://imgur.com/4RFKo.jpg
http://imgur.com/mBrb3.jpg
http://imgur.com/duAaM.jpg
http://imgur.com/8yROf.jpg
http://imgur.com/pWuXW.jpg
http://imgur.com/q3woJ.jpg
http://imgur.com/9hFqL.jpg
http://imgur.com/4RFKo.jpg
http://imgur.com/mBrb3.jpg
http://imgur.com/duAaM.jpg
http://imgur.com/8yROf.jpg
http://imgur.com/pWuXW.jpg
No comments:
Post a Comment