Drinahn
Sep 12, 08:04 AM
or even a blogged feed? i was pretty impressed with macrumor's coverage of the WWDC last month, tho i guess we are not getting similar coverage today :(
Doubt it. WWDC people can pay to get a seat - it's how it works. This event is a media only invite thing. I suspect that the guys at MacRumors aren't high on Apple's invite list. :-)
Wow, it's been over a year since I logged in here. o.O
Doubt it. WWDC people can pay to get a seat - it's how it works. This event is a media only invite thing. I suspect that the guys at MacRumors aren't high on Apple's invite list. :-)
Wow, it's been over a year since I logged in here. o.O
KnightWRX
May 1, 06:22 PM
Interesting...there are 3 files called "MobileTestIPhone.html", "MobileTestIPhoneRetina.html", and MobileTestIPad.html with accompanying Javascript and CSS files in Safari's Resources folder:
Typing an address into the address field doesn't do anything but perhaps something is forthcoming.
The "missing plug-in" is "application/x-mobile-test"
In when Steve introduced the iPhone, he told us how "web applications" were going to be the future for the device. This is probably just a way to test those web applications you can write for iOS devices (the capability is still there, just not used very much in favor of native applications).
Typing an address into the address field doesn't do anything but perhaps something is forthcoming.
The "missing plug-in" is "application/x-mobile-test"
In when Steve introduced the iPhone, he told us how "web applications" were going to be the future for the device. This is probably just a way to test those web applications you can write for iOS devices (the capability is still there, just not used very much in favor of native applications).
roadbloc
Mar 14, 04:23 AM
Wait a while.
I'm still waiting for Laptops to kill Desktops like everyone said they were going to in the early 2000's.
iPads will sell. So will Laptops. So will Desktops. So will Servers. The iPad will not, and simply cannot replace them all. It's impossible.
I'm still waiting for Laptops to kill Desktops like everyone said they were going to in the early 2000's.
iPads will sell. So will Laptops. So will Desktops. So will Servers. The iPad will not, and simply cannot replace them all. It's impossible.
Cassie
Jan 13, 03:44 AM
And white text is not the best choice, because the background of MacRumors isn't white, it is color #FAFAFA. Get with the program people.
I beg to differ.:)
I beg to differ.:)
more...
smacsteve
Jan 15, 11:49 PM
I was very disappointed with the keynote. I have no need for an :apple:TV, I am slightly upset that the iPod touch update costs money. The time capsule may be interesting, but nothing I plan on getting anytime soon. I did get excited when the MacBook air was introduced, but then after the keynote when I was checking prices on the BTO parts to see how long until I would have enough money to buy it I realized that it had a glossy screen which I will never buy so what would have been an otherwise almost perfect powerbook 12" replacement was ruined.
I don't think this was meant to be a replacement for the 12" PowerBook that so many have been longing for. I think that we could still see a 13.3" MBP that would be better suited for a power user on the go. Remember that this is a consumer event and we could see something at WWDC or another event to bring back this long awaited item.
I don't think this was meant to be a replacement for the 12" PowerBook that so many have been longing for. I think that we could still see a 13.3" MBP that would be better suited for a power user on the go. Remember that this is a consumer event and we could see something at WWDC or another event to bring back this long awaited item.
chrmjenkins
Dec 13, 12:33 PM
Not that I believe the rumor, but the phone being LTE only will simply mean that there's one version between the AT&T and verizon phones that supports CDMA and GSM networks. Instead, there will be a CDMA/LTE phone and a GSM 3G phone. Thus, AT&T's LTE network being infantile/non-existent throws a wrench in that.
That being said, I highly doubt an early 2011 verizon iphone. LTE, doubly so. If it's coming for Verizon, it will be unveiled/launch the same time as the AT&T iphone 5.
That being said, I highly doubt an early 2011 verizon iphone. LTE, doubly so. If it's coming for Verizon, it will be unveiled/launch the same time as the AT&T iphone 5.
more...
fivepoint
Mar 3, 09:45 PM
I heard somewhere that federal employees are not able to collectively bargain for their benefits package. If this is true, why are recent states' attempts to restrict unionized bargaining seen as being so draconian, and why isn't there an outcry to give federal employees the same "rights"?
That's true regarding federal employees. It's being labeled as draconian because that's how union thugs get their message across. They need to scare people in order to get their way. Scare or intimidate... and thankfully they aren't powerful enough to intimidate all of us at this point. Not that they aren't trying:
https://fbcdn-profile-a.akamaihd.net/hprofile-ak-snc4/188078_139173095668_4256766_n.jpg
"... Meticulous attention should be paid to the special relationships and obligations of public servants to the public itself and to the government. All Government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service. It has its distinct and insurmountable limitations ... The very nature and purposes of Government make it impossible for ... officials ... to bind the employer ... The employer is the whole people, who speak by means of laws enacted by their representatives ...
"Particularly, I want to emphasize my conviction that militant tactics have no place in the functions of any organization of government employees. Upon employees in the federal service rests the obligation to serve the whole people ... This obligation is paramount ... A strike of public employees manifests nothing less than an intent ... to prevent or obstruct ... Government ... Such action, looking toward the paralysis of Government ... is unthinkable and intolerable." -Franklin D. Roosevelt, President of the United States, and Progressive/Liberal Hero
That's true regarding federal employees. It's being labeled as draconian because that's how union thugs get their message across. They need to scare people in order to get their way. Scare or intimidate... and thankfully they aren't powerful enough to intimidate all of us at this point. Not that they aren't trying:
https://fbcdn-profile-a.akamaihd.net/hprofile-ak-snc4/188078_139173095668_4256766_n.jpg
"... Meticulous attention should be paid to the special relationships and obligations of public servants to the public itself and to the government. All Government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service. It has its distinct and insurmountable limitations ... The very nature and purposes of Government make it impossible for ... officials ... to bind the employer ... The employer is the whole people, who speak by means of laws enacted by their representatives ...
"Particularly, I want to emphasize my conviction that militant tactics have no place in the functions of any organization of government employees. Upon employees in the federal service rests the obligation to serve the whole people ... This obligation is paramount ... A strike of public employees manifests nothing less than an intent ... to prevent or obstruct ... Government ... Such action, looking toward the paralysis of Government ... is unthinkable and intolerable." -Franklin D. Roosevelt, President of the United States, and Progressive/Liberal Hero
Bonte
Jan 6, 02:25 AM
Yeah, it is kind of wierd, considering this is MacRumours, where mostly everyone comes to find out about Apple stuff before it is actually announced :rolleyes:
Yeah but hearing the full specs the day before spoils the whole thing, as of today i'm not visiting Mac news sites. Now just hope i don't get an e-mail with all the new stuff. :rolleyes:
Yeah but hearing the full specs the day before spoils the whole thing, as of today i'm not visiting Mac news sites. Now just hope i don't get an e-mail with all the new stuff. :rolleyes:
more...
Platform
Sep 26, 07:36 AM
Great news, now put the update up on the server...I want it :D
Cassie
Oct 10, 07:55 PM
The 6g? I don't know. Maybe it'll be like a PDA, with iPhone capibilites,and CompactMac OS 1.0 :D
Actually, that would be pretty neat. An iPod/iPhone/PDA? C'mon, you've gotta admit that would be cool!
I really don't care about any video features and such. Hell, add an Intel Core Duo 2 processor, for all I care! Just as long as it still plays music, I'm happy.:)
Actually, that would be pretty neat. An iPod/iPhone/PDA? C'mon, you've gotta admit that would be cool!
I really don't care about any video features and such. Hell, add an Intel Core Duo 2 processor, for all I care! Just as long as it still plays music, I'm happy.:)
more...
Ugg
Apr 16, 08:33 PM
Why does it matter that he was gay? I thought that gay people where supposed to be the same as everyone else. Did his being gay give him some sort of super powers to break codes?
George Washington was a very tall man. From all accounts, most people had to literally look up to him. Not telling students that he was a very, very tall man, would seem to be sort of silly. Physical presence has a huge impact on how people are perceived.
Turing was gay during a time when gay acts were illegal. He would be chemically castrated, have his security clearance revoked and for years his accomplishments were tarnished by his "criminal behaviour". It wasn't until 2009 that the British Government apologized for its demonization of Turing.
So on behalf of the British government, and all those who live freely thanks to Alan's work I am very proud to say: we're sorry, you deserved so much better.
So, Mr Kramer, can you honestly tell me that Turing's homosexuality and the way he was treated is historically irrelevant?
George Washington was a very tall man. From all accounts, most people had to literally look up to him. Not telling students that he was a very, very tall man, would seem to be sort of silly. Physical presence has a huge impact on how people are perceived.
Turing was gay during a time when gay acts were illegal. He would be chemically castrated, have his security clearance revoked and for years his accomplishments were tarnished by his "criminal behaviour". It wasn't until 2009 that the British Government apologized for its demonization of Turing.
So on behalf of the British government, and all those who live freely thanks to Alan's work I am very proud to say: we're sorry, you deserved so much better.
So, Mr Kramer, can you honestly tell me that Turing's homosexuality and the way he was treated is historically irrelevant?
CalBoy
Apr 14, 10:50 PM
I understand the point you are trying to make (re: enhanced security measures] but technically those two incidents had nothing to do with the TSA since they both flew from non-USA airports - that is, the TSA didn't screen them at all.
While this is true, we can't allow that technicality to wipe the slate clean. Our security as a whole is deficient, even if the TSA on its own might not be responsible for these two particular failures. Our tax dollars are still going to the our mutual safety so we should expect more.
I guess that depends on how you define "not much trouble". We can't know the actual number, since we will never know many actually get through. But they are catching over half the weapons that their own agents try to smuggle through on test/training runs. So that counts as being "some trouble". How much "trouble" is enough? Read my post above about how much risk a "bad person" organization is willing to take on 50/50 odds. My late father made his career "gaming" situations, so I have a bit of a passing knowledge of it. I am certain that the TSA has "gamed" the odds, and the TSA believe that they have reached a reasonable balance between costing the public time, money, and indignities - and - ensuring a reasonable level of safety for the flying public. They may be wrong.... but I would bet money that, to the best of their ability, they believe they have reached a balance.
Well when a fanatic is willing to commit suicide because he believes that he'll be rewarded in heaven, 50/50 odds don't seem to be all that much of a deterrent. What's worse is that we've only achieved that with a lot of our personal dignity, time, and money. I don't think we can tolerate much more. We should be expecting more for the time, money, and humiliation we're putting ourselves (and our 6 year-old children) through.
If this is the TSA's best effort and what it believes is the best balance, I want a new TSA.
OK, then why are hijackings down? I have my working hypothesis. I cited some evidence to support it. If you don't agree, then it is up to you to state an alternative one that is supported by more than unsupported statements.
I am not saying the TSA (or in my case CATSA) is perfect or haven't mucked things up sometimes. I'm just saying that I believe that they have been mostly responsible for a dramatic drop in airline hijackings. I cited some statistics. Now it's your turn.....
Your statistics don't unequivocally prove the efficacy of the TSA though. They only show that the TSA employs a cost-benefit method to determine what measures to take.
Since you believe in the efficacy of the TSA so much, the burden is yours to make a clear and convincing case, not mine. I can provide alternative hypotheses, but I am in no way saying that these are provable at the current moment in time. I'm only saying that they are rational objections to your theory.
My hypothesis is essentially the same as Lisa's: the protection is coming from our circumstances rather than our deliberative efforts.
Terrorism is a complex thing. My bet is that as we waged wars in multiple nations, it became more advantageous for fanatics to strike where our military forces were. Without having to gain entry into the country, get past airport security (no matter what odds were), or hijack a plane, terrorists were able to kill over 4,000 Americans in Iraq and nearly 1,500 in Afghanistan. That's almost twice as many as were killed on 9/11.
If I were the leader of a group intent on killing Americans and Westerners in general, I certainly would go down that route rather than hijack planes.
ps there is no proof that it wasn't Lisa's rock. There are some very weird causal relationships in the world. Like shooting wolves causes the Aspen to die off in Wyoming. Or .... overfishing the Salmon in the Pacific changes the mix of trees along the rivers of the BC coast.....
It's pretty clear that it was not the rock. Ecosystems are constantly finding new equilibriums; killing off an herbivore's primary predator should cause a decline in vegetation. That is not surprising, nor is it difficult to prove (you can track all three populations simultaneously). There is also a causal mechanism at work that can explain the effect without the need for new assumptions (Occam's Razor).
The efficacy of the TSA and our security measures, on the other hand, are quite complex and are affected by numerous causes. Changes in travel patterns, other nations' actions, and an enemey's changing strategy all play a big role. You can't ignore all of these and pronounce our security gimmicks (and really, that's what patting down a 6 year-old is) to be so masterfully effective.
While this is true, we can't allow that technicality to wipe the slate clean. Our security as a whole is deficient, even if the TSA on its own might not be responsible for these two particular failures. Our tax dollars are still going to the our mutual safety so we should expect more.
I guess that depends on how you define "not much trouble". We can't know the actual number, since we will never know many actually get through. But they are catching over half the weapons that their own agents try to smuggle through on test/training runs. So that counts as being "some trouble". How much "trouble" is enough? Read my post above about how much risk a "bad person" organization is willing to take on 50/50 odds. My late father made his career "gaming" situations, so I have a bit of a passing knowledge of it. I am certain that the TSA has "gamed" the odds, and the TSA believe that they have reached a reasonable balance between costing the public time, money, and indignities - and - ensuring a reasonable level of safety for the flying public. They may be wrong.... but I would bet money that, to the best of their ability, they believe they have reached a balance.
Well when a fanatic is willing to commit suicide because he believes that he'll be rewarded in heaven, 50/50 odds don't seem to be all that much of a deterrent. What's worse is that we've only achieved that with a lot of our personal dignity, time, and money. I don't think we can tolerate much more. We should be expecting more for the time, money, and humiliation we're putting ourselves (and our 6 year-old children) through.
If this is the TSA's best effort and what it believes is the best balance, I want a new TSA.
OK, then why are hijackings down? I have my working hypothesis. I cited some evidence to support it. If you don't agree, then it is up to you to state an alternative one that is supported by more than unsupported statements.
I am not saying the TSA (or in my case CATSA) is perfect or haven't mucked things up sometimes. I'm just saying that I believe that they have been mostly responsible for a dramatic drop in airline hijackings. I cited some statistics. Now it's your turn.....
Your statistics don't unequivocally prove the efficacy of the TSA though. They only show that the TSA employs a cost-benefit method to determine what measures to take.
Since you believe in the efficacy of the TSA so much, the burden is yours to make a clear and convincing case, not mine. I can provide alternative hypotheses, but I am in no way saying that these are provable at the current moment in time. I'm only saying that they are rational objections to your theory.
My hypothesis is essentially the same as Lisa's: the protection is coming from our circumstances rather than our deliberative efforts.
Terrorism is a complex thing. My bet is that as we waged wars in multiple nations, it became more advantageous for fanatics to strike where our military forces were. Without having to gain entry into the country, get past airport security (no matter what odds were), or hijack a plane, terrorists were able to kill over 4,000 Americans in Iraq and nearly 1,500 in Afghanistan. That's almost twice as many as were killed on 9/11.
If I were the leader of a group intent on killing Americans and Westerners in general, I certainly would go down that route rather than hijack planes.
ps there is no proof that it wasn't Lisa's rock. There are some very weird causal relationships in the world. Like shooting wolves causes the Aspen to die off in Wyoming. Or .... overfishing the Salmon in the Pacific changes the mix of trees along the rivers of the BC coast.....
It's pretty clear that it was not the rock. Ecosystems are constantly finding new equilibriums; killing off an herbivore's primary predator should cause a decline in vegetation. That is not surprising, nor is it difficult to prove (you can track all three populations simultaneously). There is also a causal mechanism at work that can explain the effect without the need for new assumptions (Occam's Razor).
The efficacy of the TSA and our security measures, on the other hand, are quite complex and are affected by numerous causes. Changes in travel patterns, other nations' actions, and an enemey's changing strategy all play a big role. You can't ignore all of these and pronounce our security gimmicks (and really, that's what patting down a 6 year-old is) to be so masterfully effective.
more...
hob
Jan 9, 03:32 PM
[snipped]
fishmoose
Apr 15, 04:36 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; sv-se) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
I think Apple will be able to get the right deals in the end get Steve Jobs pissed enough at the labels and they'll come around he usually gets his way, one way or another.
I think Apple will be able to get the right deals in the end get Steve Jobs pissed enough at the labels and they'll come around he usually gets his way, one way or another.
more...
psycoswimmer
Nov 23, 05:01 PM
Does anyone know if you have to go to a store to get the discounts? Can you order from the online Apple store? There's no way I'll be able to get to an Apple Store tomorrow.
leekohler
Apr 22, 11:19 AM
we'll see how france looks when the interest on their debt exceeds their GDP. Paid vacation has to end sometime
Well, ours is not much better. We just never get anything for it. At least the French do.
Oh wait. Sorry- corporations and big oil have gotten quite a bit of money out of it.
Well, ours is not much better. We just never get anything for it. At least the French do.
Oh wait. Sorry- corporations and big oil have gotten quite a bit of money out of it.
more...
croooow
Apr 6, 01:26 PM
With respect, you clearly don't work in advertising...
You say that like it's a good thing to work in advertising. Follow Bill Hicks' advice. :cool:
You say that like it's a good thing to work in advertising. Follow Bill Hicks' advice. :cool:
Patrick J
Apr 15, 04:03 PM
In the second picture, it seems like whoever was doing the editing couldn't quite get the text in the right position. It looks completely off, kinda in a downward slant to the right.
http://www.cheeplinux.com/images/bugfeaturemug.jpe
http://www.cheeplinux.com/images/bugfeaturemug.jpe
vincenz
Apr 5, 06:26 PM
Only Apple... :apple:
Popeye206
Apr 5, 04:44 PM
Seems silly... would be useful if you got coupons or something special out of the Ads.
Silly App.
Silly App.
TheAshMan
Jul 22, 07:34 AM
I'm sorry, but these video stunts are just bogus and have no credibility. Clearly on 3 of them the person holding the phone is applying a lot of vice-like pressure and squeezing the phones as hard as possible. You can see the arm shaking from applying so much force and the thumb turns red. Do they think people are that stupid? That is far removed from realistic usage of the phones, whereas the problem with the iPhone 4 is just touching it in a certain spot.
Apple is making it worse because instead of just being honest and forthcoming, they are now lying and trying to distract from the real issue. People will be understanding and wouldn't care if Apple would just be contrite, educate people about facts and make an attempt to rectify the situation. They did that by giving away the bumpers and sharing the data about dropped calls which helps their case that it is still a great phone, but everything else they have done damages their brand. Their attempt to mislead people from the facts is not helping.
Apple is making it worse because instead of just being honest and forthcoming, they are now lying and trying to distract from the real issue. People will be understanding and wouldn't care if Apple would just be contrite, educate people about facts and make an attempt to rectify the situation. They did that by giving away the bumpers and sharing the data about dropped calls which helps their case that it is still a great phone, but everything else they have done damages their brand. Their attempt to mislead people from the facts is not helping.
*LTD*
Apr 22, 04:23 PM
How do you feel about being tracked and information stored without your knowledge? Oh wait, it's ok, Uncle Stevie knows what's best.
Why would I really care, either way? What am I doing (or what's anyone doing) that is really *that* interesting to "big brother"? As long as no one messes with my credit (note: *all* of your creditors can access your credit record at any time, as well as bill collectors) it makes no difference.
Of course, if you just murdered someone or knocked off a bank, you might have cause for concern.
My iPhone is tracking me all the time and *possibly* sending that data back to Apple (except it isn't, see below.) Ok. SO WHAT?? Hey Apple, have fun tracking me doing the groceries and visiting grandma. Look, I'm heading to the dry cleaners! OMG! Really folks, as long as no one is recording you while you're taking a dump, your life won't change in any meaningful way.
Here's the reality of this non-issue:
Apple is not actually collecting this data, and this hidden file is neither new nor secret.
Sorry.
Why would I really care, either way? What am I doing (or what's anyone doing) that is really *that* interesting to "big brother"? As long as no one messes with my credit (note: *all* of your creditors can access your credit record at any time, as well as bill collectors) it makes no difference.
Of course, if you just murdered someone or knocked off a bank, you might have cause for concern.
My iPhone is tracking me all the time and *possibly* sending that data back to Apple (except it isn't, see below.) Ok. SO WHAT?? Hey Apple, have fun tracking me doing the groceries and visiting grandma. Look, I'm heading to the dry cleaners! OMG! Really folks, as long as no one is recording you while you're taking a dump, your life won't change in any meaningful way.
Here's the reality of this non-issue:
Apple is not actually collecting this data, and this hidden file is neither new nor secret.
Sorry.
MacBoobsPro
Jan 5, 03:41 PM
it would be great if apple would put up a video feed of the keynote live.
If it was live you wouldnt get all the split screen editing etc. It would be quite a linear and boring presentation.
Editing the feed can give emphasis to certain aspects and also cut out anything that goes wrong.
If it was live you wouldnt get all the split screen editing etc. It would be quite a linear and boring presentation.
Editing the feed can give emphasis to certain aspects and also cut out anything that goes wrong.
res1233
Mar 25, 04:10 AM
Odd choice of words. "Behemoth" is most often used to describe something that that it is so large that it is unpleasant. And "major behemoth" is redundant.
My Nerdar has gone off.
My Nerdar has gone off.