snberk103
Apr 13, 12:03 PM
I would prefer the cheaper and more effective way; profiling.
Also, you can't say security has been working well-- look at the number of incidences of things going through security accidentally via negligence (knives, guns, etc)-- while there's no official numbers, the anecdotal evidence is quite moving.
Actually, there is documented evidence (which I'm not going to look up, because it supports your contention). The TSA does publish numbers (though buried deep in their reports) on the number of times undercover agents are able to slip weapons through security on training/testing runs. The number is quite high, if you look at it in a "Sky is falling way". But that is the incomplete picture.
Suppose, just for argument's sake, you actually have a 50/50 chance of slipping something through security. Is that "good enough" to mount an operation? Consider that there are at least a dozen people involved, to support just one operative. You can try to separate them into cells - but that doesn't mean that they are entirely hidden... it just gives them time to try to escape while their links are followed. Plus, there is a lot of money involved.
Do you risk those 12 people, plus a large chunk of scarce resources, on a venture that only has a 50/50 chance of getting something onto the plane. (we haven't even considered that most bombs on planes lately have not gone off properly, eg. shoe bomber and underwear bomber)... or that if the intent is to forcibly take over the plane there might be sky marshall - or just a plane load of passengers who are not going to sit idly by.
So you try and reduce that risk by making the plan more "fool proof" and sophisticated - but this adds complexity ...and complex things/plans breakdown and require more resources and more people. More people means adding people with doubts, and the chances of leaking. Plus more resources, which brings attention to the operation. And as you add more people and resources, the "downside" to being caught gets bigger, so you try to reduce that risk by making it even more "foolproof".
If you are one of the 12+ people supporting the operative, and you have a 50/50 chance of being caught and spending a very long and nasty session in jail - even before you get your day in court - and you have no chance of the "ultimate reward" .... don't you think you might start having doubts, and talking to people? Sometimes the wrong people?
I don't buy for a minute all of the stories of traffic cops stopping a car for a routine check and finding "bad things" that were going to be used. The intelligence services have, imho, a pretty good idea of what is happening in these groups, and use these innocent looking traffic stops (and other coincidental discoveries) so that their undercover agents aren't suspected.
That is the value, imo, of the security checks. The barriers are are high enough to get the "bad" operations big and cumbersome, and to make the plans too complex to escape notice by the authorities. It's the planning and organization of getting past the security checks that the authorities are looking for. Once that "bad thing" is in the airport, the authorities have already lost most of the game. Then the security screening is just a last ditch attempt to catch something.
The real danger is the single lone-wolf person with a grudge, who hasn't planned in advance, and doesn't really care if they get caught. They have a 50/50 chance of getting through because the only security layer at that point is the security checkpoint. The intelligence services will not have picked them up, nor will the no-fly list incidentally.
.... all of this is just mho, of course..... read the later john lecarre though, for more chilling details....
Also, you can't say security has been working well-- look at the number of incidences of things going through security accidentally via negligence (knives, guns, etc)-- while there's no official numbers, the anecdotal evidence is quite moving.
Actually, there is documented evidence (which I'm not going to look up, because it supports your contention). The TSA does publish numbers (though buried deep in their reports) on the number of times undercover agents are able to slip weapons through security on training/testing runs. The number is quite high, if you look at it in a "Sky is falling way". But that is the incomplete picture.
Suppose, just for argument's sake, you actually have a 50/50 chance of slipping something through security. Is that "good enough" to mount an operation? Consider that there are at least a dozen people involved, to support just one operative. You can try to separate them into cells - but that doesn't mean that they are entirely hidden... it just gives them time to try to escape while their links are followed. Plus, there is a lot of money involved.
Do you risk those 12 people, plus a large chunk of scarce resources, on a venture that only has a 50/50 chance of getting something onto the plane. (we haven't even considered that most bombs on planes lately have not gone off properly, eg. shoe bomber and underwear bomber)... or that if the intent is to forcibly take over the plane there might be sky marshall - or just a plane load of passengers who are not going to sit idly by.
So you try and reduce that risk by making the plan more "fool proof" and sophisticated - but this adds complexity ...and complex things/plans breakdown and require more resources and more people. More people means adding people with doubts, and the chances of leaking. Plus more resources, which brings attention to the operation. And as you add more people and resources, the "downside" to being caught gets bigger, so you try to reduce that risk by making it even more "foolproof".
If you are one of the 12+ people supporting the operative, and you have a 50/50 chance of being caught and spending a very long and nasty session in jail - even before you get your day in court - and you have no chance of the "ultimate reward" .... don't you think you might start having doubts, and talking to people? Sometimes the wrong people?
I don't buy for a minute all of the stories of traffic cops stopping a car for a routine check and finding "bad things" that were going to be used. The intelligence services have, imho, a pretty good idea of what is happening in these groups, and use these innocent looking traffic stops (and other coincidental discoveries) so that their undercover agents aren't suspected.
That is the value, imo, of the security checks. The barriers are are high enough to get the "bad" operations big and cumbersome, and to make the plans too complex to escape notice by the authorities. It's the planning and organization of getting past the security checks that the authorities are looking for. Once that "bad thing" is in the airport, the authorities have already lost most of the game. Then the security screening is just a last ditch attempt to catch something.
The real danger is the single lone-wolf person with a grudge, who hasn't planned in advance, and doesn't really care if they get caught. They have a 50/50 chance of getting through because the only security layer at that point is the security checkpoint. The intelligence services will not have picked them up, nor will the no-fly list incidentally.
.... all of this is just mho, of course..... read the later john lecarre though, for more chilling details....
Eraserhead
Oct 29, 05:36 AM
Say good bye to programs like InsomniaX/Sleepless and other hacks.
I mention the two first apps because they were relying on the 10.4.8 source code to see what has broken the software from 10.4.7
The front page on macrumors says (for this article) that the source is available to anyone with an Apple account, this is really clever, as it's free to get the access but when you sign up for a developer account you have to agree not to share the software as it's "pre-release" and that's breaking the NDA. Basically if OSX86 Project stick 10.4.8 online now they have to get the source from an Apple developer account, so if OSX86 stick this source on their site Apple can make them pull it, AND developers can still get the access they need, it's a win-win situation.
Pirates can still also get the source at stick it on Bit Torrent trackers but they cannot get the publicity except in black hat circles so Apple cares less, as there's nothing they can ever do about that.
Being in IT, I have seen MS's progression on OS's and let me tell you this - they turned their heads to piracy in the NT/9x/2k days. Why? They wanted marketshare. They were willing to forgo some sales for the tie and lock in to Windows. Then once it's firmly entrenched in business and homes, they started to crack down. Makes sense - you are hooked on their software and have your stuff firmly entrenched with no migration out path and now you have to pay. It's like the crack dealer that gives you your first few hits free only to hook you later once you can't quit.
That's the sole reason for activation. Has little to do with piracy although they will claim that.
I'd doubt Apple would do a WGA thing as they are not looking for world domination and control like Microsoft.
Exactly, just what everyone else does on Piracy (just like Apple)
I mention the two first apps because they were relying on the 10.4.8 source code to see what has broken the software from 10.4.7
The front page on macrumors says (for this article) that the source is available to anyone with an Apple account, this is really clever, as it's free to get the access but when you sign up for a developer account you have to agree not to share the software as it's "pre-release" and that's breaking the NDA. Basically if OSX86 Project stick 10.4.8 online now they have to get the source from an Apple developer account, so if OSX86 stick this source on their site Apple can make them pull it, AND developers can still get the access they need, it's a win-win situation.
Pirates can still also get the source at stick it on Bit Torrent trackers but they cannot get the publicity except in black hat circles so Apple cares less, as there's nothing they can ever do about that.
Being in IT, I have seen MS's progression on OS's and let me tell you this - they turned their heads to piracy in the NT/9x/2k days. Why? They wanted marketshare. They were willing to forgo some sales for the tie and lock in to Windows. Then once it's firmly entrenched in business and homes, they started to crack down. Makes sense - you are hooked on their software and have your stuff firmly entrenched with no migration out path and now you have to pay. It's like the crack dealer that gives you your first few hits free only to hook you later once you can't quit.
That's the sole reason for activation. Has little to do with piracy although they will claim that.
I'd doubt Apple would do a WGA thing as they are not looking for world domination and control like Microsoft.
Exactly, just what everyone else does on Piracy (just like Apple)
WestonHarvey1
Jul 21, 09:30 AM
Oh my god...
did Apple seriously just make pointing fingers apart of their campaign?
I thought they were above that!
I understand that it's unfair that the other companies do that and all, but Apple really doesn't need to stoop to their level, do they?
They're not stooping. They are defending their product by demonstrating that the issue is not unique to their phone. I think most people instinctively knew this before the iPhone - telling someone that holding a phone a certain way might reduce the signal would have resulted in a shoulder shrug. Of course it will, it's a radio.
The N1 can't maintain a 3G signal when touched, period. Yet it didn't cause this kind of outcry because it wasn't from Apple.
did Apple seriously just make pointing fingers apart of their campaign?
I thought they were above that!
I understand that it's unfair that the other companies do that and all, but Apple really doesn't need to stoop to their level, do they?
They're not stooping. They are defending their product by demonstrating that the issue is not unique to their phone. I think most people instinctively knew this before the iPhone - telling someone that holding a phone a certain way might reduce the signal would have resulted in a shoulder shrug. Of course it will, it's a radio.
The N1 can't maintain a 3G signal when touched, period. Yet it didn't cause this kind of outcry because it wasn't from Apple.
heehee
Apr 29, 02:32 PM
Please make iOS more like OS X, not the other way around.
The reason why I won't buy an ipad is because of iOS.
The reason why I won't buy an ipad is because of iOS.
donbluto
Aug 2, 05:09 AM
The fewer the people in a nation, the easier it is to say they are the best or the worst in certain things.
So a ratio isn't necessarily a ratio, then? It depends on the population size?
So a ratio isn't necessarily a ratio, then? It depends on the population size?
Mitthrawnuruodo
Aug 2, 05:44 AM
You New York is New York, part of the USA.That's why I said local government... you have that in the US, too, you know... :rolleyes:
Saying that you are small, rich and well educated... And then you even say, you are technologically advanced?
Have you been to Singapore, Kuwait, Japan? I can name a few more places, but let's keep the list short. No I haven't been to any of those places. But what has that to do with anything...? :confused:
Again, this is not a contest, and I didn't even say we were the most technological advanced population in the world, nor the richest.
Just that we as population in general are rich and technologically advanced. Or don't you agree with that?
Saying that you are small, rich and well educated... And then you even say, you are technologically advanced?
Have you been to Singapore, Kuwait, Japan? I can name a few more places, but let's keep the list short. No I haven't been to any of those places. But what has that to do with anything...? :confused:
Again, this is not a contest, and I didn't even say we were the most technological advanced population in the world, nor the richest.
Just that we as population in general are rich and technologically advanced. Or don't you agree with that?
sundancekid
Jan 14, 08:16 PM
Hey bad news is better than no news. I'd bet Gizmodo will get a few more hits out of this and maybe ces will attract some more people to see what will happen next year. It may be in the end one of the better things to have happened to this event. (Just a different way of looking at it)
wrlsmarc
Jul 21, 12:09 PM
The attention paid to this by the press is way overblown and, in my opinion, borders on irresponsible reporting to sell clicks and pages. I have an iPhone 4 and 3GS. Have done side by side comparisons of signal quality and the ability to maintain calls in low signal areas. The iPhone 4 beats my 3GS every call.
Yes I can touch the lower left hand side of the phone and cause signal loss. However, it is also an area that is so small, I can easily avoid. I also use a bumper occasionally. With the bumper, I can't make the signal do much. I do prefer to have a naked iPhone and have no concerns carrying and using it that way.
I for one am very happy with the iPhone 4. It is fast, really fast. It does not drop calls where my 3GS did. The battery life is far superior to any smartphone I have owned. I download a variety of applications without fear. I play my music or Pandora when I work out. I use Facetime.....
Apple has a right to defend themselves. If you look at their choice of antenna design, they placed the antenna as far away from the head as possible. That makes me happy. I am also pleased with SAR values relative to other smartphones.
I guess this makes me a fanboy. But I join the majority that say this is a great phone.
Yes I can touch the lower left hand side of the phone and cause signal loss. However, it is also an area that is so small, I can easily avoid. I also use a bumper occasionally. With the bumper, I can't make the signal do much. I do prefer to have a naked iPhone and have no concerns carrying and using it that way.
I for one am very happy with the iPhone 4. It is fast, really fast. It does not drop calls where my 3GS did. The battery life is far superior to any smartphone I have owned. I download a variety of applications without fear. I play my music or Pandora when I work out. I use Facetime.....
Apple has a right to defend themselves. If you look at their choice of antenna design, they placed the antenna as far away from the head as possible. That makes me happy. I am also pleased with SAR values relative to other smartphones.
I guess this makes me a fanboy. But I join the majority that say this is a great phone.
JGowan
Oct 10, 09:07 PM
:: Comments removed due to my stupidity :: Thanks for the info/tip, though, iMeowbot!!
The Phazer
May 3, 03:02 PM
Users can of course work around carrier restrictions with methods known as "sideloading" that allow users to install apps through unapproved sources, but most casual users are undoubtedly sticking to mainstream, authorized marketplaces such as the Android Market for their needs.
Hmm, I find this highly doubtful to be honest. Aside from anyone who's bought a locked down Android phone that doesn't allow sideloading, I would expect that nearly everyone uses it.
Phazer
Hmm, I find this highly doubtful to be honest. Aside from anyone who's bought a locked down Android phone that doesn't allow sideloading, I would expect that nearly everyone uses it.
Phazer
paradox00
Apr 25, 12:54 PM
So that is fine, I dont think people will care if they skip 5. Why are you adamant that they wont skip 5?
Why are you so adamant that they will use 4S instead of 5?
-The 3GS had an identical appearance to the 3G, but with upgraded internals, hence the S.
-A 3.7" iPhone would not have an identical appearance to the iPhone 4 by virtue of the screen size alone, so there would be no reason to simply add an S.
-3G is a feature description, adding an S might make some sense there as it could also be considered a "feature description". 4 is a revision number, why would they add an S to that? 4.5 or 5 would make more sense.
-The iPhone 4 and iOS 4 were launched in the same time frame, it makes sense for the numbers on each to match up. What's next? iPhone 5 and iOS 5 of course. I don't know why they'd stray from matching revision numbers so quickly after finally achieving them.
-If they plan on calling the phone after this 6, why would they skip 5, which sounds like a bigger upgrade than 4S?
As far as I'm concerned, 4S is the least likely name possible for the next iPhone. iPhone 5, 4G (LTE), 4.5 (very unlikely), and plain "iPhone" all have a much greater chance than 4S (with 5 being the most likely). I just spent way to much time on this minor issue though.
Why are you so adamant that they will use 4S instead of 5?
-The 3GS had an identical appearance to the 3G, but with upgraded internals, hence the S.
-A 3.7" iPhone would not have an identical appearance to the iPhone 4 by virtue of the screen size alone, so there would be no reason to simply add an S.
-3G is a feature description, adding an S might make some sense there as it could also be considered a "feature description". 4 is a revision number, why would they add an S to that? 4.5 or 5 would make more sense.
-The iPhone 4 and iOS 4 were launched in the same time frame, it makes sense for the numbers on each to match up. What's next? iPhone 5 and iOS 5 of course. I don't know why they'd stray from matching revision numbers so quickly after finally achieving them.
-If they plan on calling the phone after this 6, why would they skip 5, which sounds like a bigger upgrade than 4S?
As far as I'm concerned, 4S is the least likely name possible for the next iPhone. iPhone 5, 4G (LTE), 4.5 (very unlikely), and plain "iPhone" all have a much greater chance than 4S (with 5 being the most likely). I just spent way to much time on this minor issue though.
rovex
Mar 19, 05:30 PM
http://gifjes.web-log.nl/photos/uncategorized/hahaha.gif
and the way you express yourself practically shows me why people 'diss' all your gadgets.
you Americans have some ridiculous proverbs/figure of speeches that no other Anglophones around the world can even attempt to understand.
And the English language's inception was here in England so why do Americans spell rumours 'rumors'? And there are an abundance of similar examples.
and the way you express yourself practically shows me why people 'diss' all your gadgets.
you Americans have some ridiculous proverbs/figure of speeches that no other Anglophones around the world can even attempt to understand.
And the English language's inception was here in England so why do Americans spell rumours 'rumors'? And there are an abundance of similar examples.
Surf Monkey
Mar 17, 05:38 AM
Wow and you cannot judge a person's character by a mistake a cashier made in a store!!!
No, you judge a person's character by how he reacts to a mistake a cashier makes. But you already knew that.
No, you judge a person's character by how he reacts to a mistake a cashier makes. But you already knew that.
obeygiant
Apr 15, 02:26 PM
How is "gay history" different than regular history? lol
nosen
Sep 25, 11:25 AM
That is good to know, because 1.1.2 runs like crap on a Quad with a 6800GT and 8GB of RAM. Unacceptable, really.
I think something might be wrong with your install. I run Aperture on my MBP and it runs really well. It's definitely an easier workflow than my previous, which was iView --> ACR --> Photoshop.
I think something might be wrong with your install. I run Aperture on my MBP and it runs really well. It's definitely an easier workflow than my previous, which was iView --> ACR --> Photoshop.
shokunin
Sep 28, 05:35 PM
In an age where architect and design firms are just starting to apply to Apple's design principles to the building of homes, Steve Jobs has gone and designed the iPhone of houses.
WTH? Whoever wrote this clearly doesn't have any idea about what has been going on in architecture in, oh, the past 150 years. I met Peter Bohlin last year and we got to talking about his design strategies. He's been doing similar work throughout his career, even before BCJ (then Bohlin Powell) was founded in 1965. Check out Japanese architecture from the past 1,500 years.
+1 to charliex5. Apple inspiring architects, well that's kind of funny, possibly when we have Unibody construction homes.
WTH? Whoever wrote this clearly doesn't have any idea about what has been going on in architecture in, oh, the past 150 years. I met Peter Bohlin last year and we got to talking about his design strategies. He's been doing similar work throughout his career, even before BCJ (then Bohlin Powell) was founded in 1965. Check out Japanese architecture from the past 1,500 years.
+1 to charliex5. Apple inspiring architects, well that's kind of funny, possibly when we have Unibody construction homes.
Sun Baked
Mar 23, 07:04 PM
LOL, if you really feel that bad about it my PayPal address is rtdgoldfish@gmail.com. I won't say no. :DYou'd probably only say no if some of the people expected to "borrow" your body for that $5 a pop. ;)
---
Likely somebody that knew you had it and wanted it, hence the targeted break in. :(
And since it seems like a neighbor took it, it shows that they are an idiot.
Time to break out the video camera for evidence.
Edit: if a kid took it, sue the parents if they do not make good on damages and return the merchandise. Should only need that video tape for a small claims case.
---
Likely somebody that knew you had it and wanted it, hence the targeted break in. :(
And since it seems like a neighbor took it, it shows that they are an idiot.
Time to break out the video camera for evidence.
Edit: if a kid took it, sue the parents if they do not make good on damages and return the merchandise. Should only need that video tape for a small claims case.
mozmac
Oct 19, 11:41 AM
I've bought and sold quite a bit of AAPL over the years since, but always held onto my original stake. My cost basis is around $4 a share. Now I can't afford to sell it!
I was 14 back in 1997 when AAPL was sitting around $12. I told my parents and my uncle to dump tons of money into it because it was going up. They didn't really listen to me. My parents did put a little in by buying two shares for each of us kids (6 in total) for Christmas. Since then they've split a few times and are now sitting at around $80. I'm loving it. I've bought more since, but like you, I'm still holding onto my original stake, which is at 6 shares now, thanks to splits.
I was 14 back in 1997 when AAPL was sitting around $12. I told my parents and my uncle to dump tons of money into it because it was going up. They didn't really listen to me. My parents did put a little in by buying two shares for each of us kids (6 in total) for Christmas. Since then they've split a few times and are now sitting at around $80. I'm loving it. I've bought more since, but like you, I'm still holding onto my original stake, which is at 6 shares now, thanks to splits.
steviem
Mar 13, 12:35 PM
Apple used to innovate, right now they have acheived the goal of any capitalist company, they've hit the big time with the iPhone and are resting on their laurels.
Notebooks / Computers, these aren't innovative, infact the PowerPC was innovative, OSX 10.1 was innovative but now... it's got to a point where they don't innovate, Intel does; Nvidia does; AMD does, apple are a box maker using the same components as everyone else.
Apple A series mobile processors, these are innovated by ARM (spun off from Acorn, a british company). Again they don't innovate.
Where they DO innovate is the idea of a vertical system where typically companies have gone to a horizontal view. The innovation is to capture you with something (be it a Apple TV, iMac, iPhone, iPod) and get you into their vertical structure. The innovation comes at creating a market for all possible user needs within this vertical structure, e.g. Movies, Music, Apps... where they can't make it themselves they take a cut from other developers (30% split).
What is innovation?
Apple have done a lot since the PowerPC. In fact, especially in the laptop area, Apple were severly lacking in innovation with the iBook and PowerBook. PowerBook to original MacBook Pro, not a lot changed, but let's look at what has changed since the first MacBook to now.
Apple has found a way of manufacturing beautiful Aluminium cases out of a block of aluminium. During my day job, I work with Dell D-series, E-Series laptops and Macbook Pros. Admittedly, we get less Apple hardware with failure than we do with the Dells, and the 2-3 year old Dells are dropping like flies due to their Nvidia graphics chipsets failing. Last week I had 6 Dell laptops fail and had to replace their motherboards. Which leads me onto another of Apple's innovations. Component layouts. Yes, Apple use the same components as other PCs, they did during the late PowerPC era too (save the processor) and the way they engineer the layout and cooling is just of a much higher quality than Dell, where the parts do seem to be more cobbled together.
Then let's look at 2007. Yes there were Blackberry and Windows Mobile phones around first, but the innovation that Apple made was making smartphones useful to more people. They also helped create an entire new software development industry, in the background they had a tablet, unlike any Tablet PCs, but too hard to make into a product at the time.
Apple are great at taking something already there and making it work either in other applications or making the entire package in a way that their competitors just get confused on how to combat. Look at how Motorola desgined the Xoom, Samsung Designed the Galaxy Tab 10, there's something lacking in these designs in the entire packages. Yes they will be great against the original iPad and its original OS, but look at Garageband and iMovie. The iPad is geting powerful enough to be a device to create on. That is innovation.
I'm not talking about the lower levels of computing. I'm talking about the parts of computing that End Users, who will never see an IDE in their entire lives. This is where computing is being redefined. They're shifting the way people use the "input. Process. Output.Store".
Notebooks / Computers, these aren't innovative, infact the PowerPC was innovative, OSX 10.1 was innovative but now... it's got to a point where they don't innovate, Intel does; Nvidia does; AMD does, apple are a box maker using the same components as everyone else.
Apple A series mobile processors, these are innovated by ARM (spun off from Acorn, a british company). Again they don't innovate.
Where they DO innovate is the idea of a vertical system where typically companies have gone to a horizontal view. The innovation is to capture you with something (be it a Apple TV, iMac, iPhone, iPod) and get you into their vertical structure. The innovation comes at creating a market for all possible user needs within this vertical structure, e.g. Movies, Music, Apps... where they can't make it themselves they take a cut from other developers (30% split).
What is innovation?
Apple have done a lot since the PowerPC. In fact, especially in the laptop area, Apple were severly lacking in innovation with the iBook and PowerBook. PowerBook to original MacBook Pro, not a lot changed, but let's look at what has changed since the first MacBook to now.
Apple has found a way of manufacturing beautiful Aluminium cases out of a block of aluminium. During my day job, I work with Dell D-series, E-Series laptops and Macbook Pros. Admittedly, we get less Apple hardware with failure than we do with the Dells, and the 2-3 year old Dells are dropping like flies due to their Nvidia graphics chipsets failing. Last week I had 6 Dell laptops fail and had to replace their motherboards. Which leads me onto another of Apple's innovations. Component layouts. Yes, Apple use the same components as other PCs, they did during the late PowerPC era too (save the processor) and the way they engineer the layout and cooling is just of a much higher quality than Dell, where the parts do seem to be more cobbled together.
Then let's look at 2007. Yes there were Blackberry and Windows Mobile phones around first, but the innovation that Apple made was making smartphones useful to more people. They also helped create an entire new software development industry, in the background they had a tablet, unlike any Tablet PCs, but too hard to make into a product at the time.
Apple are great at taking something already there and making it work either in other applications or making the entire package in a way that their competitors just get confused on how to combat. Look at how Motorola desgined the Xoom, Samsung Designed the Galaxy Tab 10, there's something lacking in these designs in the entire packages. Yes they will be great against the original iPad and its original OS, but look at Garageband and iMovie. The iPad is geting powerful enough to be a device to create on. That is innovation.
I'm not talking about the lower levels of computing. I'm talking about the parts of computing that End Users, who will never see an IDE in their entire lives. This is where computing is being redefined. They're shifting the way people use the "input. Process. Output.Store".
swarmster
Jan 9, 05:33 PM
Everyone please be careful opening Quicktime (to do an "open url..." as MacRumors recommends)! If you have it set to load the 'content guide' on startup, there's a spoiler image waiting for you.
(Yeah, I know, I should have disabled it a long time ago.)
(Yeah, I know, I should have disabled it a long time ago.)
balamw
Apr 28, 07:37 PM
I first started a new project in order to avoid confusion and made some changes, the result is what I think " a working timer " with start, stop and reset buttons.
Maybe now you can go back and realize that you could have saved yourself and the rest of us a lot of time and effort by adhering to the recommendations from the links I posted. (Seriously, read them.)
Be specific. Be complete. Post complete, compilable code that demonstrates your problem. (If you need to, make a separate toy app, divide and conquer).
This is part of the "step back" that everyone was telling you to do early on, and is a basic skill for all kinds of troubleshooting. By breaking down the problem and explaining it to someone else you will often get an epiphany of your own. Like:
If I see the code now it seems a bit obvious why the timer never stopped before.
If the solution was handed to you it wouldn't (a) be that obvious [because you wouldn't understand it] and (b) wouldn't be exactly what you want.
For obvious reasons I'm not posting it and if some of you wonder why, it's for same reasons nobody posted the complete working code despite being able to make a timer in less than 3 minutes. (yes, I know it's because you think it would not help me and I understand)
I still don't think you understand the give and take of being a full participant in a forum like this.
It's your choice alone whether to add to the general knowledge pool or not. That's very different than responding to an ill-defined request for code.
For example, here's a thread I started earlier this month: http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1133446 I was playing with some code from various tutorials that was no longer functional, found a way to fix it and chose to give that solution back to the 'net and it was immediately useful for another user.
B
Maybe now you can go back and realize that you could have saved yourself and the rest of us a lot of time and effort by adhering to the recommendations from the links I posted. (Seriously, read them.)
Be specific. Be complete. Post complete, compilable code that demonstrates your problem. (If you need to, make a separate toy app, divide and conquer).
This is part of the "step back" that everyone was telling you to do early on, and is a basic skill for all kinds of troubleshooting. By breaking down the problem and explaining it to someone else you will often get an epiphany of your own. Like:
If I see the code now it seems a bit obvious why the timer never stopped before.
If the solution was handed to you it wouldn't (a) be that obvious [because you wouldn't understand it] and (b) wouldn't be exactly what you want.
For obvious reasons I'm not posting it and if some of you wonder why, it's for same reasons nobody posted the complete working code despite being able to make a timer in less than 3 minutes. (yes, I know it's because you think it would not help me and I understand)
I still don't think you understand the give and take of being a full participant in a forum like this.
It's your choice alone whether to add to the general knowledge pool or not. That's very different than responding to an ill-defined request for code.
For example, here's a thread I started earlier this month: http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1133446 I was playing with some code from various tutorials that was no longer functional, found a way to fix it and chose to give that solution back to the 'net and it was immediately useful for another user.
B
Blorzoga
May 3, 10:27 PM
Interesting how none of the scenes in the ad uses a white iPad.
toddybody
May 2, 11:27 AM
Some facts for the learning challenged.
1. The original DB was set at 2MB. Of ASCII text. As "engineers" you would think Apple would understand and know how "large" that cache is. They claim they didn't realize how much data could be stored in 2MB.
2. This was brought to their attention over a year ago - not a week ago.
3. The file should have always been encrypted.
4. Those getting pissy at people who are calling Apple out on this or are blaming the customer since Apple has it in their EULA that they collect data so it's no big deal should consider that if the switch to turn of Data Roaming FAILED and people were charged up the wazoo - people would be demanding refunds for that data and would demand a fix.
So don't get all pissy for people who just think that the Location Services on/off switch should actually work. Having it NOT work is actually a violation of the EULA so many of the posters here are using as a defense.
I'm glad that the OS is being fixed. I'm glad Apple got caught/are responding to "bugs" that they obviously missed during QA.
+1
I dont know why people on MR seem hellbent on defending Apple no matter the situation (literally)...its honestly pathetic.
1. The original DB was set at 2MB. Of ASCII text. As "engineers" you would think Apple would understand and know how "large" that cache is. They claim they didn't realize how much data could be stored in 2MB.
2. This was brought to their attention over a year ago - not a week ago.
3. The file should have always been encrypted.
4. Those getting pissy at people who are calling Apple out on this or are blaming the customer since Apple has it in their EULA that they collect data so it's no big deal should consider that if the switch to turn of Data Roaming FAILED and people were charged up the wazoo - people would be demanding refunds for that data and would demand a fix.
So don't get all pissy for people who just think that the Location Services on/off switch should actually work. Having it NOT work is actually a violation of the EULA so many of the posters here are using as a defense.
I'm glad that the OS is being fixed. I'm glad Apple got caught/are responding to "bugs" that they obviously missed during QA.
+1
I dont know why people on MR seem hellbent on defending Apple no matter the situation (literally)...its honestly pathetic.
Mord
Apr 28, 12:59 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
Really? That doesn't matter? Well then why don't we have men compete in all the women's events at the Olympics? Oh wait, it does matter
I'm not defending the attackers. I think it was terrible. Horrifying video. It's hard to believe people are like this.
I do think this whole "biology doesn't matter, it's how you feel in your heart" nonsense is obviously nonsense.
He has every right to dress like a girl. I don't even mind if he uses a female bathoom. But those things don't make someone female. The characteristics that allow doctors to assign genders to new-borns do not change as people get older.
HAHAHA, funny, you happened to pick the *worst* possible example there, Transsexuals can and do compete in the Olympics, as long as they've been taking hormones that bring them to the typical range for their gender for a period of 2 years before competing. People do change gender physically.
I'm not going to bother to repeat myself with a detailed argument, feel free to read back through my discussion with MattSepeta.
Really? That doesn't matter? Well then why don't we have men compete in all the women's events at the Olympics? Oh wait, it does matter
I'm not defending the attackers. I think it was terrible. Horrifying video. It's hard to believe people are like this.
I do think this whole "biology doesn't matter, it's how you feel in your heart" nonsense is obviously nonsense.
He has every right to dress like a girl. I don't even mind if he uses a female bathoom. But those things don't make someone female. The characteristics that allow doctors to assign genders to new-borns do not change as people get older.
HAHAHA, funny, you happened to pick the *worst* possible example there, Transsexuals can and do compete in the Olympics, as long as they've been taking hormones that bring them to the typical range for their gender for a period of 2 years before competing. People do change gender physically.
I'm not going to bother to repeat myself with a detailed argument, feel free to read back through my discussion with MattSepeta.
No comments:
Post a Comment