Jako7286
Apr 28, 03:53 PM
They look the same to me in the picture. The white one is tipped slightly so that you see the front face surface a little. I think this makes the difference in appearance.
Ditto. And if they are different, it's definitely NOT 2mm (1mm per side) like the post says. If anything, it's a quarter of a mm each side MAX.
Ditto. And if they are different, it's definitely NOT 2mm (1mm per side) like the post says. If anything, it's a quarter of a mm each side MAX.
pmz
May 4, 09:29 AM
Thanks for calling me a liar. My date moved, without explanation, as quoted in the story. The only thing I can personally think of is dropping a third line from the family plan. Other than that, and thanks to autopay, my bill for the remaining two iPhones on the plan is rather expensive, and always paid in full and on time, so the other argument is invalid as well.
This post makes zero sense, and neither did your original claims.
This post makes zero sense, and neither did your original claims.
splashnader
Jan 27, 07:36 PM
$9.99 taxes in, couldn't say no to that.
http://www.blu-rayaanbieding.nl/discs/youthinrevolt.jpg
I missed seeing it in theaters. That's a great deal for the price.
http://www.blu-rayaanbieding.nl/discs/youthinrevolt.jpg
I missed seeing it in theaters. That's a great deal for the price.
rstansby
Jun 6, 04:43 PM
Yeah, "accidentally," sure. :rolleyes: The price and the buttons on the app store are clearly labeled. You don't just "accidentally" purchase this. It's only believable if the kid is still an infant and randomly tap on stuff, but 11 year old? Come on. :rolleyes: Besides, there's an option to restrict the ability to install apps on the OS.
As many people have mentioned in this thread, once you enter your password to download one app, there is a short window when you are not required to enter it again to download another app.
As many people have mentioned in this thread, once you enter your password to download one app, there is a short window when you are not required to enter it again to download another app.
L I G H T I N G
Apr 23, 10:07 PM
Its unsure if the deal will go through and what type of stipulations will happen. As a proud T-mo customer. I do not want this deal from hell. I love my low prices I don't need an iPhone I am happy with my current phone.
There are many things that stand in the way of this deal. It may make the market a lot less competitive. It would also almost remove sprint and make it a two horse race with AT&T and Verizon having over 60% of the American Market.
It is also quite possible that if AT&T does purchase T-Mobile, T-mobile will exist solely as a subsidiary of AT&T similar to Sprint and Virgin Mobile. Its clear that AT&T is purchasing towers not customer base.
Many of the Android users are going to migrate over to Sprint and Verizon due to the of the inability to side load on AT&Ts network and the restriction of upload download speeds.
Agreed, I'd rather keep AT&T separate and just jailbreak/unlock iPhone to use on T-mobile.
That way -low prices with T-Mobile plus the functionality of iPhone
There are many things that stand in the way of this deal. It may make the market a lot less competitive. It would also almost remove sprint and make it a two horse race with AT&T and Verizon having over 60% of the American Market.
It is also quite possible that if AT&T does purchase T-Mobile, T-mobile will exist solely as a subsidiary of AT&T similar to Sprint and Virgin Mobile. Its clear that AT&T is purchasing towers not customer base.
Many of the Android users are going to migrate over to Sprint and Verizon due to the of the inability to side load on AT&Ts network and the restriction of upload download speeds.
Agreed, I'd rather keep AT&T separate and just jailbreak/unlock iPhone to use on T-mobile.
That way -low prices with T-Mobile plus the functionality of iPhone
ender78
Oct 18, 05:13 PM
I'm thinking the same thing. Can anyone find the appropriate quote from, say, last year's MWSF? I know i've been waiting since then for the exciting new products he promised: intel conversions don't count, nor do new casings and better batteries for iPods. The MacBook counts as a new product and the sales achieved by it could put it into the exciting category. iTV may fit but it's not coming out til next year. So what did Steve promise for 06? And what fits that bill?
We'll lets see, we're looking at significant performance upgrades for the same $$$ as well as a successful transition [lets give Apple credit where credit it due]. Apple may have added about a million new Mac users this quarter [that is a significant number]. I have friends who would NEVER has considered Macs in the past coming to me for advice on their next purchase.
The iTV, and especially the iPhone could be breakout products. I am anxiously anticipating both.
We'll lets see, we're looking at significant performance upgrades for the same $$$ as well as a successful transition [lets give Apple credit where credit it due]. Apple may have added about a million new Mac users this quarter [that is a significant number]. I have friends who would NEVER has considered Macs in the past coming to me for advice on their next purchase.
The iTV, and especially the iPhone could be breakout products. I am anxiously anticipating both.
iTravis
Apr 22, 05:52 PM
Hopefully they use a different type of material for the back. Matte perhaps? This wouldn't be that bad, to be honest. Bigger screen, faster and a revamp of iOS 5 is all I really want.
I'm sure Apple won't disappoint & I'm almost certain they will not use this kind of material for the phone.
I'm sure Apple won't disappoint & I'm almost certain they will not use this kind of material for the phone.
840quadra
Dec 3, 03:56 PM
So, we are going to see even more of this message board trolling and FUD. There are many obvious 'newbie' troll posts. But, I am also seeing some 'moles' trolling too. Some of them showed up many months ago and are now regulars. What they are doing is providing newbie support.
The newbie comes on with a troll post, and bam, he gets a regular, or two to give legitimacy to the disinformation. The thread is off and running. Another tactic I notice is the thread subject troll. The subject line is written to be very negative, but then the first post is very much toned down, sometimes even apologetic, "Sorry for venting, I know this is rare...", that type of stuff. The damage is done and no one is aware it was a disinformation attack.
The stakes are high and MS has been found guilty in court of doing the things I am describing. This is not the ranting of a paranoid. I happen to know a considerable amount about disinformation and the tactics involved. With a little work, you can see the same things. Look at the post history for those making anti-Apple posts. The critical eye can discern the inconsistencies in what they write.
I can understand the feelings behind what you are saying, and do appreciate that point of view. I however however, am not sure that I can really see anyone doing hopeless FUD spreading on this particular thread. You seem to be (like a few others) concerned that those of us who have security concerns, have given up on Apple, and want to work with these 3rd party groups to provide us with security solutions. I don't see many people on this thread with that attitude, I see concerned users like myself, that want to see that Apple heads up security themselves.
To me the poll and question "After the Month of Kernel Bugs, are you concerned about Mac OS X security?" was interpreted by me as ..
Yes I am concerned about Mac OS X security. Meaning, I am concerned about my operating system security in general.
For whatever reason, I believe that anyone that voted Yes, is being interpreted by some people as it meaning "Yes I am concerned about Mac OS X security, as it is a hopelessly unsecured operating system, god save us, the world is going to end!".
Perhaps a few of the people who said yes may think that, but don't assume all of us are like that! Please feel free to look into my post history, not that it is any of your business anyway. You will find that I am a true Apple and Mac fan through and through!
The newbie comes on with a troll post, and bam, he gets a regular, or two to give legitimacy to the disinformation. The thread is off and running. Another tactic I notice is the thread subject troll. The subject line is written to be very negative, but then the first post is very much toned down, sometimes even apologetic, "Sorry for venting, I know this is rare...", that type of stuff. The damage is done and no one is aware it was a disinformation attack.
The stakes are high and MS has been found guilty in court of doing the things I am describing. This is not the ranting of a paranoid. I happen to know a considerable amount about disinformation and the tactics involved. With a little work, you can see the same things. Look at the post history for those making anti-Apple posts. The critical eye can discern the inconsistencies in what they write.
I can understand the feelings behind what you are saying, and do appreciate that point of view. I however however, am not sure that I can really see anyone doing hopeless FUD spreading on this particular thread. You seem to be (like a few others) concerned that those of us who have security concerns, have given up on Apple, and want to work with these 3rd party groups to provide us with security solutions. I don't see many people on this thread with that attitude, I see concerned users like myself, that want to see that Apple heads up security themselves.
To me the poll and question "After the Month of Kernel Bugs, are you concerned about Mac OS X security?" was interpreted by me as ..
Yes I am concerned about Mac OS X security. Meaning, I am concerned about my operating system security in general.
For whatever reason, I believe that anyone that voted Yes, is being interpreted by some people as it meaning "Yes I am concerned about Mac OS X security, as it is a hopelessly unsecured operating system, god save us, the world is going to end!".
Perhaps a few of the people who said yes may think that, but don't assume all of us are like that! Please feel free to look into my post history, not that it is any of your business anyway. You will find that I am a true Apple and Mac fan through and through!
sunfast
Aug 15, 02:20 PM
Also we need proper MSN intergration in iChat. NO-ONE USES iCHAT UP HERE!!!
if only. if only. but I can't see it happening. it's such a shame because I'd love to be able to use iChat
if only. if only. but I can't see it happening. it's such a shame because I'd love to be able to use iChat
vader_slri
Apr 18, 09:53 AM
Very true. Plus, turbo mode is mostly marketing hype. It should be called turbo fraud. It doesn't work the way it's advertised, ie, most of the time when you need it to. So, what you're really getting is a 1.4 GHZ computer that's advertised as a 2.3 GHZ one. That's taking marketing hype to the extreme. The only way I would buy a computer with one of Intel's turbo hyped CPU's is if the bottom score met my needs. I would never rely on the hyped theoretical upper score in making my decision and in this case 1.4 GHZ doesn't cut it for me.
Intel's marketing only specifies the base processor speed, not the turbo speed. For example, the i5-2537M under discussion here is advertised as a 1.4GHz chip. Guess what? Its base clock speed is 1.4GHz. It can turbo up to 2.3GHz but it is in no way advertised as being a 2.3GHz chip. Here is the product sheet directly from Intel:
http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=54619&processor=i5-2537M&spec-codes=SR03W
Intel's marketing only specifies the base processor speed, not the turbo speed. For example, the i5-2537M under discussion here is advertised as a 1.4GHz chip. Guess what? Its base clock speed is 1.4GHz. It can turbo up to 2.3GHz but it is in no way advertised as being a 2.3GHz chip. Here is the product sheet directly from Intel:
http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=54619&processor=i5-2537M&spec-codes=SR03W
rorschach
Apr 14, 03:30 PM
Open a stock app, like Messages or Photos.
Watch the animation, look at how the icons fly off to the edges of the screen and the app you pressed zooms forward from the centre of the screen and into full screen view. That, is the animation for launching an app.
Now try it on, for example, Infinity Blade, Engadget, TUAW, Dead Space, Final Fantasy 3 (basically 99.9% of third party apps). Notice that when you press the app icon, it dulls as normal, but then the app immediately appears on screen. No home screen icons zooming off to the edges of the screen, no app you are loading zooming forward from the centre of the screen to fill the entire viewable area.
Only once the app has been loaded, and is in the memory, can you open/close the app and get the animation as normal.
No doubt you'll say you don't have that on your phone, but there you go.
You're not alone. This happens for me too, including with this update. Even after a reboot. It didn't do it with any of the 4.0.x releases either. It started with 4.2 I think. Tap an app icon, freezes for a second, then the app appears with no animation. Or a very choppy animation.
I've tried both rebooting and restoring (as a new phone). I had less than a gigabyte free so I tried freeing up some space thinking that might help and even with ~2GB free it still does it.
Watch the animation, look at how the icons fly off to the edges of the screen and the app you pressed zooms forward from the centre of the screen and into full screen view. That, is the animation for launching an app.
Now try it on, for example, Infinity Blade, Engadget, TUAW, Dead Space, Final Fantasy 3 (basically 99.9% of third party apps). Notice that when you press the app icon, it dulls as normal, but then the app immediately appears on screen. No home screen icons zooming off to the edges of the screen, no app you are loading zooming forward from the centre of the screen to fill the entire viewable area.
Only once the app has been loaded, and is in the memory, can you open/close the app and get the animation as normal.
No doubt you'll say you don't have that on your phone, but there you go.
You're not alone. This happens for me too, including with this update. Even after a reboot. It didn't do it with any of the 4.0.x releases either. It started with 4.2 I think. Tap an app icon, freezes for a second, then the app appears with no animation. Or a very choppy animation.
I've tried both rebooting and restoring (as a new phone). I had less than a gigabyte free so I tried freeing up some space thinking that might help and even with ~2GB free it still does it.
YoNeX
Nov 6, 09:33 AM
Just FYI.
The "private" beta that's being circulated is a very old beta in the development stage. VMware has big plans, and is working closely with Apple to have a true Mac look and feel.
Things VMware Final version will do:
Be 100% Free
Support Adjusting how many processors you use.
64bit support and optimization
Drag and drop into the VM window (just try dragging a file off your desktop into the VM now)
***And full support to use your bootcamp volume. So you don't have to have two disks anymore or one for Virtual Machine, and another for bootcamp with full video accelerations. You can just run your bootcamp volume right inside of VMware for those times when you don't want to reboot, and just need to do work. That way you only have one copy of windows on your machine! No VM needed!
**Support for "Virtual Appliances" which VMware has a bunch of on their site. Thousands of companies make ready-made Virtual Machines, that you can download and run in VMware, such as a lamp server, special build of RedHat, or a Ubuntu for graphics, or a mail server, or anything you can imagine, there are over 100,000 Virtual Appliances available on the VMware site, and you can create your own "Virtual Appliance" and share it with your friends!
I don't know about the free part though. If its just a player (like the current Beta), I can see that being free. But if they add all those extra features I don't see it being free at all. But then again, Macs aren't targeted towards the Corporations, so they might just make one version with a lot of features and not charge as much as VMware Workstation (for Windows).
Yes, the current version is really buggy.
The "private" beta that's being circulated is a very old beta in the development stage. VMware has big plans, and is working closely with Apple to have a true Mac look and feel.
Things VMware Final version will do:
Be 100% Free
Support Adjusting how many processors you use.
64bit support and optimization
Drag and drop into the VM window (just try dragging a file off your desktop into the VM now)
***And full support to use your bootcamp volume. So you don't have to have two disks anymore or one for Virtual Machine, and another for bootcamp with full video accelerations. You can just run your bootcamp volume right inside of VMware for those times when you don't want to reboot, and just need to do work. That way you only have one copy of windows on your machine! No VM needed!
**Support for "Virtual Appliances" which VMware has a bunch of on their site. Thousands of companies make ready-made Virtual Machines, that you can download and run in VMware, such as a lamp server, special build of RedHat, or a Ubuntu for graphics, or a mail server, or anything you can imagine, there are over 100,000 Virtual Appliances available on the VMware site, and you can create your own "Virtual Appliance" and share it with your friends!
I don't know about the free part though. If its just a player (like the current Beta), I can see that being free. But if they add all those extra features I don't see it being free at all. But then again, Macs aren't targeted towards the Corporations, so they might just make one version with a lot of features and not charge as much as VMware Workstation (for Windows).
Yes, the current version is really buggy.
appleguy123
Apr 29, 01:34 PM
Thanks. The waiting sucks.
I’m amazed how well AppleGuy was able to pick the two WW’s.
:D being a god so often has its advantages, beside humilating Moyank.
It's actually kind of weird, I'm a terrible judge of character in real life, but I'm pretty good at telling when people are hiding something online. Maybe if mscriv were here he could tell me why. For a fee.
I hope your other scan goes well. :)
I’m amazed how well AppleGuy was able to pick the two WW’s.
:D being a god so often has its advantages, beside humilating Moyank.
It's actually kind of weird, I'm a terrible judge of character in real life, but I'm pretty good at telling when people are hiding something online. Maybe if mscriv were here he could tell me why. For a fee.
I hope your other scan goes well. :)
MagnusVonMagnum
Nov 20, 10:40 AM
If you don't address those very good reasons, your argument won't be very convincing. We do not want the CPU suck, the identity leaking, the UI inconsistencies, and the very real risk of "zero day" Adobe bugs.
Whom am I trying to convince? Illogical and irrational people who worship Steve Jobs and hate what he hates? Such people will not care or listen to any form of reason. That's why the word fanatic is in fanboy. No, I talk about an option to turn Flash on or off at will and you find it offensive to even offer an option. That is irrational at best.
Everything you fear would be avoided if someone just turned Flash OFF (or it could default to off and have to be turned on). I've said since the first post the word OPTION. You don't seem to comprehend that word or understand why those of us that would want the choice of having Flash are not asking you to give up anything in the process. You could always turn it off if it were present. We cannot turn it on if it's not present.
In other words, you are not competent to carry on a rational discussion. You're just here to vent.
No, I just don't see any point in trying to carry on a logical, rational discussion with someone whose "argument" is based purely on emotion. If it weren't, you wouldn't object to an option for those of us that don't agree with Steve Jobs point of view because an option satisfies all your arguments against having Flash because you can always just leave it OFF. It cannot do harm if it's off no matter how paranoid you may become about having it on your device.
Many millions of people have Flash installed on their Macs (let alone those using Windows and Linux) and they could remove it. They know that if they do, some web sites will cease to function properly and thus they leave it on. The security concerns you mentioned will be addressed as all security bugs are in both OSX and Windows.
Users of those 120M+ devices don't have to hope. They are already free of Flash!
Free of Flash? You say that in a tone that sounds like they're free of slavery or something. No, what they're free of is the ability to access millions of web sites that require Flash to view them or much of their content and I do not see that as a good thing. But my point of view doesn't require you to see it. I said from the first post I wanted an option to use Flash. You could still choose to turn it off if it were there. I cannot turn on what is not present nor should I have to buy some absurd 3rd party converter that requires their web site to be running to use it.
The analogy makes no sense. Nobody is forcing you to use any Apple product.
And so that makes it OK for him to behave as he does? A lot of us like Apple products, but we would like them a lot better if Steve would just stick to making the products unfettered instead of trying to force his opinions and world view on people in the process. He doesn't like Flash so he decides for everyone they should not use Flash. What if Steve decided iOS shall no longer support MP3 files, only AAC? I suppose you would accept that as OK too? Update iOS and your MP3s no longer function. Yes, that would be just wonderful if they did that. After all, AAC is superior to MP3, so why should Apple support a legacy inferior heavily pirated format? By your logic, they should not.
If you really want the "full web experience" of zero-day Adobe bugs, get an Android phone. Note: Android phones were vulnerable to the last zero-day Adobe bug. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt)
I don't want a phone period guy. I only want and use an iPod Touch. Is there an Android iPod Touch? Android didn't exist when Apple made the claims of accessing the full Internet either and it doesn't make that any less a lie.
The fact that I can't catch zero-day Adobe attacks on my iPhone is a great reason to praise Apple's decision.
You act as if Apple has no vulnerabilities to attack. That is extremely naive to the point of emotionalism once again. In fact it's just the opposite. Apple's security is rated as bad compared to Windows and only the fact that there are so few Mac users compared to Windows has saved it thus far. As the popularity of iOS devices has exploded, it's inevitable that it will start attracting malware. It's only a matter of time. Will you wish you never bought an iPhone on that day or will you recognize that companies simply have to find and patch vulnerabilities. Apple has patched numerous security flaws in OSX over the years. Should we plug our ears and say there is no such thing?
Do tell: what exact sites are you talking about? What exact legacy flash applications are running on those sites to which you can find no substitute?
A quick search (you do know how to do that don't you?) reveals offhand a few example sites that don't use HTML5 video (which could and may in the future, but that doesn't help someone today):
Gametrailers
GiantBomb
Vimeo
Playstation Blog
Stiq of Joy
Engadget
Try some of these effects on this site this with HTML5:
http://superior-web-solutions.com/
Maybe read this article on Flash. Most HTML5 is just a video player. Flash isn't just a video player and it didn't even start as one.
http://www.andrewgreig.com/2010/06/html5-is-not-a-flash-replacement-and-shouldnt-be-seen-that-way/
Perhaps you want an open standard? So when does Apple stop requiring Quicktime on their web sites? :rolleyes:
Nobody is holding a gun to your head. Nobody is holding you hostage.
If you don't like the choices that Apple made, then ditch your iOS device and get an Android. Simple.
No, they're just boring me to death with emotional arguments why everyone should either worship Steve Jobs or leave the platform and get an Android instead similar to the "love OSX or leave it" arguments the fanboys regularly produce.
This is the first little lie in your rant. The iOS users don't find it inconvenient. If Flash were so damn important to them, they would have bought some device that could run Flash.
The fact that you think my statement is a "lie" based on a subjective opinion tells me you cannot even tell fact from fiction let alone lies from opinions. Trying to see someone else's point of view is completely foreign to you. You view the world through tinted lenses. What you say is akin to if you don't like something about OSX, go buy a Windows machine, as if there aren't any compromises along the way on that platform either (not to mention having to replace possibly thousands and thousands of dollars worth of software for a given platform to do so). Not liking something about a given platform and wanting to change it doesn't mean another platform is more viable in ALL areas or that a person may wish to spend a lot of money to make that change just because of that one issue. Perhaps you'd like to send me a free Android phone to replace my aging 1st Gen iPod Touch that I bought before Android even existed? I'd happily consider such an offer. Of course I'll need replacement apps as well.
The people who bought those 120M+ devices disagree with you.
You seem to forge that I and others that actually want Flash are part of those people dude. Get over yourself. Just because you don't like Flash doesn't mean the rest of us have hatred for it. Some of us simply don't like our iPhones, iPads and iPod Touches crippled for no reason. Besides, how you try to turn my initial argument that I'd prefer to see an option to use Flash for those of us that want it rather than no option into this flipping crusade against all things Apple and Flash alike is beyond me. You are making mountains out of mole hills and lies out of opinions. For what? I can't make you see things the way I see them. I never wanted to try. That's why I said OPTION. But you would deny everyone who wants that option to have it just like Steve Jobs. Steve does it because he's a control freak (he was once ousted from Apple for this very reason). I imagine you do it because you love Apple. Sadly, I actually prefer Steve's reason.
This is the second little lie. Apple did provide a choice: they approved the SkyFire App. They didn't have to do that.
Didn't they? It doesn't violate their rules for an app so how could they not approve it without being outright liars? Oh wait. They have done that before so I can see your point. ;)
Apple has also announced they will approve Flash Apps using Adobe's cross-compiler for iOS. If there actually are crucial Flash apps -- you haven't named a single specific one so far -- the owners of those apps should be able to easily cross-compile their apps for the iOS App Store.
Apple formerly announced they would NOT support it. Why did they change their minds? Could it have something to do with the Justice Department starting an investigation into anti-trust behaviors by Apple policies? Noooo....it couldn't be that. Apple is allowed to single out companies it doesn't like and compete with to just willy-nilly throw specifically into their license agreements.
And that is the third little lie. Flash is a proprietary and legacy platform. It's on the way down now.
I say if you don't have Flash you don't have the full Internet and you call that a "lie" based on the above quote? What freaking UNIVERSE do you live in??????? ROTFLMAO. You cannot tell a statement of fact from an idea in your head that somehow says that the "full internet" doesn't include sites that use "propriety" formats. Come on man. That position not only ignore reality it even invalidiates Apple's own web site as being part of the "full Internet" !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You need to try harder. Calling someone a liar when they are obviously stating facts and/or opinions just makes you look immature.
because accusing someone of lying when it's obvious
Even Adobe has acknowledged that a Flash-only choice is a bankrupt strategy (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999). After websites start offering their content with an open standard, you've gotta ask: what exactly is the value in continuing to prop up Flash?
First of all, you are the one that is calling it a "bankrupt strategy". I see nothing in that thread by Adobe that even addresses the matter. Adobe is simply trying to sell products and if they can easily sell more products to Apple users by providing an easy way to convert their hard work Flash sites into HTML5, they are going to do so and laugh all the way to the bank. That in NO WAY invalidates the fact that there are still plenty of Flash only sites out there and plenty of flash uses (e.g. Flash games) that HTML5 is no simple substitute for regardless. Until the Internet is Flash free, there is going to be a need and a will by people to have the option to view Flash.
The mere fact that this Skyfire app has raked in over $1 MILLION in sales already shows just how big that will is. Yet you reject the desire to be able to use Flash web sites as meaningless and unnecessary while the thread title alone proves you wrong.
Jayalalitha wins from
Jayalalitha and the AIADMK
AIADMK List – (160
AIADMK head J Jayalalitha
AIADMK supremo Jayalalithaa
Whom am I trying to convince? Illogical and irrational people who worship Steve Jobs and hate what he hates? Such people will not care or listen to any form of reason. That's why the word fanatic is in fanboy. No, I talk about an option to turn Flash on or off at will and you find it offensive to even offer an option. That is irrational at best.
Everything you fear would be avoided if someone just turned Flash OFF (or it could default to off and have to be turned on). I've said since the first post the word OPTION. You don't seem to comprehend that word or understand why those of us that would want the choice of having Flash are not asking you to give up anything in the process. You could always turn it off if it were present. We cannot turn it on if it's not present.
In other words, you are not competent to carry on a rational discussion. You're just here to vent.
No, I just don't see any point in trying to carry on a logical, rational discussion with someone whose "argument" is based purely on emotion. If it weren't, you wouldn't object to an option for those of us that don't agree with Steve Jobs point of view because an option satisfies all your arguments against having Flash because you can always just leave it OFF. It cannot do harm if it's off no matter how paranoid you may become about having it on your device.
Many millions of people have Flash installed on their Macs (let alone those using Windows and Linux) and they could remove it. They know that if they do, some web sites will cease to function properly and thus they leave it on. The security concerns you mentioned will be addressed as all security bugs are in both OSX and Windows.
Users of those 120M+ devices don't have to hope. They are already free of Flash!
Free of Flash? You say that in a tone that sounds like they're free of slavery or something. No, what they're free of is the ability to access millions of web sites that require Flash to view them or much of their content and I do not see that as a good thing. But my point of view doesn't require you to see it. I said from the first post I wanted an option to use Flash. You could still choose to turn it off if it were there. I cannot turn on what is not present nor should I have to buy some absurd 3rd party converter that requires their web site to be running to use it.
The analogy makes no sense. Nobody is forcing you to use any Apple product.
And so that makes it OK for him to behave as he does? A lot of us like Apple products, but we would like them a lot better if Steve would just stick to making the products unfettered instead of trying to force his opinions and world view on people in the process. He doesn't like Flash so he decides for everyone they should not use Flash. What if Steve decided iOS shall no longer support MP3 files, only AAC? I suppose you would accept that as OK too? Update iOS and your MP3s no longer function. Yes, that would be just wonderful if they did that. After all, AAC is superior to MP3, so why should Apple support a legacy inferior heavily pirated format? By your logic, they should not.
If you really want the "full web experience" of zero-day Adobe bugs, get an Android phone. Note: Android phones were vulnerable to the last zero-day Adobe bug. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt)
I don't want a phone period guy. I only want and use an iPod Touch. Is there an Android iPod Touch? Android didn't exist when Apple made the claims of accessing the full Internet either and it doesn't make that any less a lie.
The fact that I can't catch zero-day Adobe attacks on my iPhone is a great reason to praise Apple's decision.
You act as if Apple has no vulnerabilities to attack. That is extremely naive to the point of emotionalism once again. In fact it's just the opposite. Apple's security is rated as bad compared to Windows and only the fact that there are so few Mac users compared to Windows has saved it thus far. As the popularity of iOS devices has exploded, it's inevitable that it will start attracting malware. It's only a matter of time. Will you wish you never bought an iPhone on that day or will you recognize that companies simply have to find and patch vulnerabilities. Apple has patched numerous security flaws in OSX over the years. Should we plug our ears and say there is no such thing?
Do tell: what exact sites are you talking about? What exact legacy flash applications are running on those sites to which you can find no substitute?
A quick search (you do know how to do that don't you?) reveals offhand a few example sites that don't use HTML5 video (which could and may in the future, but that doesn't help someone today):
Gametrailers
GiantBomb
Vimeo
Playstation Blog
Stiq of Joy
Engadget
Try some of these effects on this site this with HTML5:
http://superior-web-solutions.com/
Maybe read this article on Flash. Most HTML5 is just a video player. Flash isn't just a video player and it didn't even start as one.
http://www.andrewgreig.com/2010/06/html5-is-not-a-flash-replacement-and-shouldnt-be-seen-that-way/
Perhaps you want an open standard? So when does Apple stop requiring Quicktime on their web sites? :rolleyes:
Nobody is holding a gun to your head. Nobody is holding you hostage.
If you don't like the choices that Apple made, then ditch your iOS device and get an Android. Simple.
No, they're just boring me to death with emotional arguments why everyone should either worship Steve Jobs or leave the platform and get an Android instead similar to the "love OSX or leave it" arguments the fanboys regularly produce.
This is the first little lie in your rant. The iOS users don't find it inconvenient. If Flash were so damn important to them, they would have bought some device that could run Flash.
The fact that you think my statement is a "lie" based on a subjective opinion tells me you cannot even tell fact from fiction let alone lies from opinions. Trying to see someone else's point of view is completely foreign to you. You view the world through tinted lenses. What you say is akin to if you don't like something about OSX, go buy a Windows machine, as if there aren't any compromises along the way on that platform either (not to mention having to replace possibly thousands and thousands of dollars worth of software for a given platform to do so). Not liking something about a given platform and wanting to change it doesn't mean another platform is more viable in ALL areas or that a person may wish to spend a lot of money to make that change just because of that one issue. Perhaps you'd like to send me a free Android phone to replace my aging 1st Gen iPod Touch that I bought before Android even existed? I'd happily consider such an offer. Of course I'll need replacement apps as well.
The people who bought those 120M+ devices disagree with you.
You seem to forge that I and others that actually want Flash are part of those people dude. Get over yourself. Just because you don't like Flash doesn't mean the rest of us have hatred for it. Some of us simply don't like our iPhones, iPads and iPod Touches crippled for no reason. Besides, how you try to turn my initial argument that I'd prefer to see an option to use Flash for those of us that want it rather than no option into this flipping crusade against all things Apple and Flash alike is beyond me. You are making mountains out of mole hills and lies out of opinions. For what? I can't make you see things the way I see them. I never wanted to try. That's why I said OPTION. But you would deny everyone who wants that option to have it just like Steve Jobs. Steve does it because he's a control freak (he was once ousted from Apple for this very reason). I imagine you do it because you love Apple. Sadly, I actually prefer Steve's reason.
This is the second little lie. Apple did provide a choice: they approved the SkyFire App. They didn't have to do that.
Didn't they? It doesn't violate their rules for an app so how could they not approve it without being outright liars? Oh wait. They have done that before so I can see your point. ;)
Apple has also announced they will approve Flash Apps using Adobe's cross-compiler for iOS. If there actually are crucial Flash apps -- you haven't named a single specific one so far -- the owners of those apps should be able to easily cross-compile their apps for the iOS App Store.
Apple formerly announced they would NOT support it. Why did they change their minds? Could it have something to do with the Justice Department starting an investigation into anti-trust behaviors by Apple policies? Noooo....it couldn't be that. Apple is allowed to single out companies it doesn't like and compete with to just willy-nilly throw specifically into their license agreements.
And that is the third little lie. Flash is a proprietary and legacy platform. It's on the way down now.
I say if you don't have Flash you don't have the full Internet and you call that a "lie" based on the above quote? What freaking UNIVERSE do you live in??????? ROTFLMAO. You cannot tell a statement of fact from an idea in your head that somehow says that the "full internet" doesn't include sites that use "propriety" formats. Come on man. That position not only ignore reality it even invalidiates Apple's own web site as being part of the "full Internet" !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You need to try harder. Calling someone a liar when they are obviously stating facts and/or opinions just makes you look immature.
because accusing someone of lying when it's obvious
Even Adobe has acknowledged that a Flash-only choice is a bankrupt strategy (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999). After websites start offering their content with an open standard, you've gotta ask: what exactly is the value in continuing to prop up Flash?
First of all, you are the one that is calling it a "bankrupt strategy". I see nothing in that thread by Adobe that even addresses the matter. Adobe is simply trying to sell products and if they can easily sell more products to Apple users by providing an easy way to convert their hard work Flash sites into HTML5, they are going to do so and laugh all the way to the bank. That in NO WAY invalidates the fact that there are still plenty of Flash only sites out there and plenty of flash uses (e.g. Flash games) that HTML5 is no simple substitute for regardless. Until the Internet is Flash free, there is going to be a need and a will by people to have the option to view Flash.
The mere fact that this Skyfire app has raked in over $1 MILLION in sales already shows just how big that will is. Yet you reject the desire to be able to use Flash web sites as meaningless and unnecessary while the thread title alone proves you wrong.
Fotek2001
Aug 17, 09:51 AM
Uhm, is it me, or do i see more and more inconsistencies in the ui?
the buttons on the spotlight window or nothing like the buttons on the preview window for example..and i wonder why.
not that tiger is that consistent...
Don't forget this is a preview. I don't think we're seeing the full picture yet.
the buttons on the spotlight window or nothing like the buttons on the preview window for example..and i wonder why.
not that tiger is that consistent...
Don't forget this is a preview. I don't think we're seeing the full picture yet.
arnop
Nov 8, 09:25 AM
Two tickets for the UEFA CHampion's League final in Wembley next year :)
Cinch
Jul 11, 06:00 PM
wireless (Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, Wi-Max whatever)? I used to think that this was a cool thing to have in an iPod. an iPod with internet radio capability sounds like a really cool idea. I'm lukewarm about now.
We already have wired music share libraries on our computers (college campus). I just don't have the motivation to explore other's music library. I turn my sharing off, quite frankly I'm embarrass to let the world know what I'm listening to most of the time:D .
The next step? An iPod phone. It should do two simple simple simple simple things (1) act like a basic phone you contacts, missed calls, dial calls etc and (2) behaves like a 4GB Nano. yeah I know, Motorolo Rokr didn't meet the challenge.
Cinch
We already have wired music share libraries on our computers (college campus). I just don't have the motivation to explore other's music library. I turn my sharing off, quite frankly I'm embarrass to let the world know what I'm listening to most of the time:D .
The next step? An iPod phone. It should do two simple simple simple simple things (1) act like a basic phone you contacts, missed calls, dial calls etc and (2) behaves like a 4GB Nano. yeah I know, Motorolo Rokr didn't meet the challenge.
Cinch
Jason Beck
Apr 10, 02:30 AM
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5146/5602392616_299b977b87_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/dailymatador/5602392616/)
Camera Canon EOS REBEL T2i
Exposure 0.005 sec (1/200)
Aperture f/9.0
Focal Length 35 mm
ISO Speed 100
This photo made me thirsty for some Sprite. That is a cool tree right there. Liking the colors on it alot. Could care less about the fountain. : )
Camera Canon EOS REBEL T2i
Exposure 0.005 sec (1/200)
Aperture f/9.0
Focal Length 35 mm
ISO Speed 100
This photo made me thirsty for some Sprite. That is a cool tree right there. Liking the colors on it alot. Could care less about the fountain. : )
plinden
Oct 19, 01:27 AM
Don't know if this has been posted elsewhere, but Apple's pc share has grown to 6.1% in the US; we trail by 0.3 percentage points for third place.
10% is in sight. Perhaps by the end of 2007!
http://appleinsider.com/article.php?id=2158
Hmm, interesting. 4.8% -> 6.1% in the US in one quarter. And if their figures for the world wide sales are correct, 2.4% -> 2.7% worldwide.
10% is in sight. Perhaps by the end of 2007!
http://appleinsider.com/article.php?id=2158
Hmm, interesting. 4.8% -> 6.1% in the US in one quarter. And if their figures for the world wide sales are correct, 2.4% -> 2.7% worldwide.
twoodcc
Oct 16, 11:44 PM
I'm running it on my air as fast as I can... but I'm stuck on this Astropulse thats taking 200 hours to complete :(
are you really folding on an air?
I will have to try it when I get home tonight.
let us know how it goes
are you really folding on an air?
I will have to try it when I get home tonight.
let us know how it goes
epmadsen
Apr 30, 06:01 PM
Great! Commoditize an art form and degrade it even further.
It's bad enough we've already hacked music apart by turning it digital, now we're treating it like soda pop. Everything is a bargain bin price war.
It's bad enough we've already hacked music apart by turning it digital, now we're treating it like soda pop. Everything is a bargain bin price war.
Full of Win
Apr 11, 03:03 PM
I have a feeling the next version of FCP will be more affordable, something a bit more expensive than FCE is. And then Apple will K.O. FCE.
Haven't heard of any official live streams but maybe a rouge one will pop up on Justin.tv or ustream or wait for something official on Apple's site.
So basically, the new FCP is becoming the next FCE for prosumers and Apple is abandoning the professional market.
Haven't heard of any official live streams but maybe a rouge one will pop up on Justin.tv or ustream or wait for something official on Apple's site.
So basically, the new FCP is becoming the next FCE for prosumers and Apple is abandoning the professional market.
obeygiant
Mar 8, 07:25 AM
I wonder how Emilio Estevez is doing during all this..
kevin.rivers
Jul 28, 10:57 AM
DRM is a evil necessity - and one that isn't going to go away - we must live with
I would be able to use more than one music store... and from my point of view - is a great benefit. If one music store doesn't have the music I want to buy - maybe another does?
( And please, don't tell me to burn -> rip - its slow and unconvenient )
I am by no means saying DRM is not necessary. This is what some people hate though. I understand it is necessary and have no problem with it. I personally choose to buy and rip. Mainly because of quality.
DRM is great. I am just giving another side of the argument.
I would be able to use more than one music store... and from my point of view - is a great benefit. If one music store doesn't have the music I want to buy - maybe another does?
( And please, don't tell me to burn -> rip - its slow and unconvenient )
I am by no means saying DRM is not necessary. This is what some people hate though. I understand it is necessary and have no problem with it. I personally choose to buy and rip. Mainly because of quality.
DRM is great. I am just giving another side of the argument.
No comments:
Post a Comment