nagromme
Oct 12, 02:48 PM
I would love to have a red iPod, but I don't know why we would ever give money to help fight AIDS on a continent where the people take NO precautions to prevent themselves from getting AIDS...
Pretending that your trolling is real:
Money to fight AIDS includes educational efforts so people WILL take precautions.
Just like the educational efforts we have here in the US, where people are not lifetime monogamous :)
PS, "we" wouldn't be giving the money, Apple would. "We" would just get a new color iPod :)
There are many wonderful things about the African people, but there were also many wonderful things about the Dinosaurs, the Dodo bird, and numerous others.
I assume you're not really equating natural selection and genetic evolution, with cultural factors like education.
Because they're actually not the same thing, nor do they work the same.
For instance, here's an interesting fact: dying is necessary for natural selection to work. Dying is NOT necessary for education to work.
So you see, there's an option that involves less dying and suffering. That's what you may be overlooking in your zeal :)
By your logic, why help anyone, when letting them die will make people "smarter and wiser?" Why, children who get hurt on skateboards and behind the wheel should be turned away from hospitals. We would create a super race worthy of the 3rd Reich :o
(Need I mention that much of mathematics, astronomy, and science came from "rudimentary" and "archaic" African scientists who were far ahead of their European counterparts? I'm guessing whatever you have been reading may have omitted some parts of history :) )
Pretending that your trolling is real:
Money to fight AIDS includes educational efforts so people WILL take precautions.
Just like the educational efforts we have here in the US, where people are not lifetime monogamous :)
PS, "we" wouldn't be giving the money, Apple would. "We" would just get a new color iPod :)
There are many wonderful things about the African people, but there were also many wonderful things about the Dinosaurs, the Dodo bird, and numerous others.
I assume you're not really equating natural selection and genetic evolution, with cultural factors like education.
Because they're actually not the same thing, nor do they work the same.
For instance, here's an interesting fact: dying is necessary for natural selection to work. Dying is NOT necessary for education to work.
So you see, there's an option that involves less dying and suffering. That's what you may be overlooking in your zeal :)
By your logic, why help anyone, when letting them die will make people "smarter and wiser?" Why, children who get hurt on skateboards and behind the wheel should be turned away from hospitals. We would create a super race worthy of the 3rd Reich :o
(Need I mention that much of mathematics, astronomy, and science came from "rudimentary" and "archaic" African scientists who were far ahead of their European counterparts? I'm guessing whatever you have been reading may have omitted some parts of history :) )
jsoto
Apr 28, 03:24 PM
Congrats!:D
miles01110
Mar 23, 04:17 PM
Personally I find it hard to believe that so drunk as to warrant avoiding a checkpoint will be collected enough to use the app effectively in the first place.
swingerofbirch
Oct 12, 01:10 PM
Granted, this is a good thing.
But does anyone else find it ironic that the iPods in question are being made by people who according to media reports could use this type of financial subsidization as well?
But does anyone else find it ironic that the iPods in question are being made by people who according to media reports could use this type of financial subsidization as well?
Maccus Aurelius
Oct 27, 04:38 PM
I support GreenPeace All the way!
So we can all assume you also support their haphazard attempts to save the environment, and the fact that they are indeed an incongruent entity with logic, reason, and good taste. They target apple, knowing full well other manufacturers have a generous share of toxic substances in their products (spare us the propeganda greenpeace, we know what LCD's and CRT screens contain).
Greenpeace is the sort that would assume a factory is producing an alarming amount of toxic waste if they happen to spot a dead bird on the roof of the building.
So we can all assume you also support their haphazard attempts to save the environment, and the fact that they are indeed an incongruent entity with logic, reason, and good taste. They target apple, knowing full well other manufacturers have a generous share of toxic substances in their products (spare us the propeganda greenpeace, we know what LCD's and CRT screens contain).
Greenpeace is the sort that would assume a factory is producing an alarming amount of toxic waste if they happen to spot a dead bird on the roof of the building.
gnasher729
May 1, 02:12 AM
I was wondering why so many people are so opposed to Apple offering Blu-Ray as a BTO option. I have read where Steve Jobs spoke negatively about Blu-Ray, I wonder if these same people would be all gung-ho for BR if Jobs had spoken positively about it? I realize that he is a very smart man, but he isn't God! I always thought that BR would have been a great thing to have on a Mac for things like backing up your iTunes library. Imagine that, being able to back up your entire iTunes library on two or three BR discs. That would have been really nice. I read somewhere the other day that they either have or are getting ready to have BR discs that have a 100GB capacity. What in the world would have been wrong with that?
Some people seem actively opposed, which is of course strange. My opinion: For backups, I wouldn't trust an optical drive. My iTunes library is backed up automatically as part of my Time Machine backup to an external drive, which is a lot lot faster than BluRay and I would trust it ten times more; it is fast because it is an incremental backup, and hard drives are faster anyway.
For playing BluRay disks, the content industry puts completely ridiculous demands on the OS and the hardware. Windows goes with these restrictions, Apple doesn't, Linux probably just can't. You need signed drivers, the OS only accepting signed drivers, and huge penalties if anything happened that allowed access to the unencrypted video stream.
Some people seem actively opposed, which is of course strange. My opinion: For backups, I wouldn't trust an optical drive. My iTunes library is backed up automatically as part of my Time Machine backup to an external drive, which is a lot lot faster than BluRay and I would trust it ten times more; it is fast because it is an incremental backup, and hard drives are faster anyway.
For playing BluRay disks, the content industry puts completely ridiculous demands on the OS and the hardware. Windows goes with these restrictions, Apple doesn't, Linux probably just can't. You need signed drivers, the OS only accepting signed drivers, and huge penalties if anything happened that allowed access to the unencrypted video stream.
milescortez
Mar 22, 05:23 PM
GeekBoner here.
ender land
Apr 10, 11:01 AM
Sounds like a pretty convincing reason to move to Sweden if you are an American.
cwt1nospam
Dec 31, 10:23 AM
It makes sense. iProducts are increasingly becoming ubiquitous, therefore they will become more profitable for malware developers to attack. It's not a McAfee sales pitch so much as it's stating the obvious. Same with Android.
No, it doesn't. The only way your iPhone/iPad/iPod Touch is vulnerable to these things is if YOU jailbreak it. Even then, the number of jail broken IOS devices is and will remain too small a target to go after. This is why Apple has a walled garden, and why the Android model is destined to follow the PC down the virus/botnet hell hole. It's also why AV vendors would prefer that you bought Android or Windows mobile.
No, it doesn't. The only way your iPhone/iPad/iPod Touch is vulnerable to these things is if YOU jailbreak it. Even then, the number of jail broken IOS devices is and will remain too small a target to go after. This is why Apple has a walled garden, and why the Android model is destined to follow the PC down the virus/botnet hell hole. It's also why AV vendors would prefer that you bought Android or Windows mobile.
ethana
May 3, 12:38 PM
I stopped by my local Apple store and had a similar experience. Actually, it was a bit worse... they still had the old iMacs out and when I asked about the new ones, I was told "What new iMacs?"
LOL. That's kind of unusual for Apple.
LOL. That's kind of unusual for Apple.
M2M
Apr 11, 06:55 AM
Because the 3rd party device could be in your neighbours house so your neighbour can see or hear anything that is played through AirPlay from your devices without you knowing. And you might be playing stuff that you wouldn't want your neighbour to see.
Only if i set my neighbors device as a speaker in iTunes...which would happen not too often without me knowing.
Only if i set my neighbors device as a speaker in iTunes...which would happen not too often without me knowing.
rstansby
Apr 19, 11:21 PM
The logo on the center of the record, not the album artwork. The Beatle's logo looks like an apple to me, Apple's logo looks like an apple to me. We both know if the sides were reversed, Apple would have filed a suit.
Apple Corps (owned by the The Beatles) did sue Apple.
So there you have it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps_v_Apple_Computer
Apple Corps (owned by the The Beatles) did sue Apple.
So there you have it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps_v_Apple_Computer
yg17
Apr 25, 06:31 AM
I'm not saying that my speed was legal, but after she brakechecked me, she dropped her speed to under 55mph which is illegal at least in portions of Michigan; there's a thing called a minimum speed limit.
-Don
2 wrongs don't make a right.
EDIT: @ Rodimus - Had she hit me when I slammed on the brakes, she would have been at fault. All I have to do is tell the cop that I thought I saw an animal run across the road. She is supposed to keep enough distance to be able to stop if I slam on the brakes. Doesn't matter than I cut her off, she has to prove that I did, and she also has to prove that I slammed on the breaks with malice.
-Don
Lying to the cops. Wonderful idea.
-Don
2 wrongs don't make a right.
EDIT: @ Rodimus - Had she hit me when I slammed on the brakes, she would have been at fault. All I have to do is tell the cop that I thought I saw an animal run across the road. She is supposed to keep enough distance to be able to stop if I slam on the brakes. Doesn't matter than I cut her off, she has to prove that I did, and she also has to prove that I slammed on the breaks with malice.
-Don
Lying to the cops. Wonderful idea.
lmalave
Sep 26, 02:04 PM
I hate to say this folks, but even an iPhone wouldn't be worth having to deal with Cingular's godawful service. Reception is poor in areas where it's supposed to be good and even when you have good reception, you get dropped calls due to network error/rejected/dropped. I've had Cingular for a while now, and I am preparing to drop it with eagerness, even if that means a $200 contract termination fee. I want to slug that twat who says Cingular has the least dropped calls, because it's a ********* LIE.
Settle down Beavis....
Hellooooooooo...reception is going to depend on your specific location!!! I'd have to Google what the latest survey results are, but I'll bet ranking of overall national average quality of coverage is:
1) Verizon Wireless
2) Cingular
3) T-Mobile
4) Sprint
..so I'll bet that on a national basis, Cingular is not as good as Verizon Wireless, but certainly not the worse.
Also, are you using the older phones that they are trying to phase out? If you are, then I sympathize with you and I think that those Cingular customers got a raw deal. But realize that Cingular did NOT really fully integrate the Cingular and AT&T networks, and that a new phone like the iPhone will probably get quite good reception on average (as per my guesstimate rankings above)
Settle down Beavis....
Hellooooooooo...reception is going to depend on your specific location!!! I'd have to Google what the latest survey results are, but I'll bet ranking of overall national average quality of coverage is:
1) Verizon Wireless
2) Cingular
3) T-Mobile
4) Sprint
..so I'll bet that on a national basis, Cingular is not as good as Verizon Wireless, but certainly not the worse.
Also, are you using the older phones that they are trying to phase out? If you are, then I sympathize with you and I think that those Cingular customers got a raw deal. But realize that Cingular did NOT really fully integrate the Cingular and AT&T networks, and that a new phone like the iPhone will probably get quite good reception on average (as per my guesstimate rankings above)
cube
Apr 23, 02:08 PM
I am curious about something. Intel is apparently having difficulty dealing with ATI, which is owned by AMD. Is this a problem for Apple that is limited to notebooks only? It seems like the new MBP doesn't have this same problem, except in the 13" model. Is this problem going to affect Apple's desktop machines? Or is it only limited to the very small laptops and perhaps the Mac Mini? I am just curious because it doesn't appear that the MBP 15 & 17" are effected. I do hope that this makes sense. I have been waiting to see the next versions of the Mac Book and the iMac. I would like to have a portable and I don't care or need a laptop that is a quarter of an inch in thickness or if it weighs a pound more than a Mac Book Air.
Intel doesn't have a problem "dealing with ATI". The problem is that the integrated graphics in Sandy Bridge are inside the CPU, so if you put an alternative chipset with integrated graphics you're paying for stuff that you don't use, and the whole point of integrated graphics is to reduce costs.
Also, NVIDIA is prohibited by Intel to make new chipsets for Intel CPUs that have an integrated memory controller.
Intel doesn't have a problem "dealing with ATI". The problem is that the integrated graphics in Sandy Bridge are inside the CPU, so if you put an alternative chipset with integrated graphics you're paying for stuff that you don't use, and the whole point of integrated graphics is to reduce costs.
Also, NVIDIA is prohibited by Intel to make new chipsets for Intel CPUs that have an integrated memory controller.
4God
Aug 28, 12:07 PM
I'll bet we see a Mini refresh tomorrow.
Warbrain
Apr 20, 10:04 AM
I'd rather have none at all. This is a file being stored. It's big bad news.
Of course that's the ideal answer but an impossible answer. So again, Google or your device/computer?
Of course that's the ideal answer but an impossible answer. So again, Google or your device/computer?
mex4eric
Apr 22, 05:09 PM
If Apple has this expectation, they had better at least sell an appropriate adapter/hub. I've long thought a thin, form-matching hub that connects to all of the ports on one side of an Apple portable would be a great idea. If Apple can make a 2- or even 3-port USB hub off of the Thunderbolt port (especially if a Mini Display-Port is also available) for ~$50, that would be golden for this type of MBA plan.
Hey, they could build a little hub with a cord that plugs into the TB port and provide a few USB 1,2,3 ports, maybe a firewire port, plus a glowing Apple logo on top and call it an iHub.
Hey, they could build a little hub with a cord that plugs into the TB port and provide a few USB 1,2,3 ports, maybe a firewire port, plus a glowing Apple logo on top and call it an iHub.
to1986
Apr 4, 11:51 AM
I hope this was in self defence. There is no other reason for him shooting the guy in the head. I hope he has an excuse, otherwise he may find himself in prison for a long time.
GGJstudios
Mar 19, 02:17 PM
Malware includes computer viruses, worms, trojan horses, spyware and other malicious and unwanted software or programs. The idea that OSX and/or Unix/Linux based operating systems is free from such threats is absurd.
No one has presented the idea that Mac OS X is free from all malware threats. Since your reading comprehension might need some help, I'll repeat my statement again:
there is no Mac malware in the wild that can't be avoided with some common sense and prudent action on the part of the user.
Viruses for Mac OS X don't exist, so antivirus isn't needed to protect against them.
Trojans for Mac OS X do exist, but can be avoided by the user being careful what they install, so antivirus isn't needed to protect against them.
Meanwhile, the answer on here to avoiding potential pitfalls in things like Flash is to (surprise), not install or use it. Hey guys, don't power on your computers and you will always be safe! :rolleyes:
I use Flash all the time and have never had any issues with it.
Even Apple themselves regularly release security updates. WTF is the point of a security update if there's no possible threat to OSX?
Again, no one has said there are not threats to Mac OS X; only that those threats don't require any AV software to defend against them.
Just because a threat is less likely than on other systems does not mean that it does not exist. Yet people on here won't even admit that much.
Either you're not reading or not comprehending the posts that have been made. No one is saying that NO threats exist; only that those threats can be avoided by the user without the need for AV software.
Only a fanboy would take a post that suggests that a false sense of security can lead to dangerous behavior that might be a liability in the future (good advice in almost any market/situation) and twist it into "Boy you're ignorant; we are INVULNERABLE! OSX cannot be hacked or attacked! It's impossible!
Who are you referring to? I haven't seen anyone say such things in this thread or any other.
"fanboy"
Again, who are you referring to? I'm not a fanboy, or a boy of any kind. I have no allegiance or loyalty to any brand or manufacturer (except Harley-Davidson, but for very different reasons). It's amusing to see how people try to bash Apple or Macs for the wrong reasons, then resort to calling people "fanboys" when their arguments aren't accepted. Apple and Macs have plenty of weaknesses. Attack one of the legitimate ones and you'll have sensible people agree with you. Make a case against Apple or John Deere or Mattel or Coca-Cola or any other company that isn't based in fact, and you'll get resistance. That doesn't make those who oppose such a case "fanboys".
Malware includes computer viruses, worms, trojan horses, spyware and other malicious and unwanted software or programs. The idea that OSX and/or Unix/Linux based operating systems is free from such threats is absurd.
No one has presented the idea that Mac OS X is free from all malware threats. Since your reading comprehension might need some help, I'll repeat my statement again:
there is no Mac malware in the wild that can't be avoided with some common sense and prudent action on the part of the user.
Viruses for Mac OS X don't exist, so antivirus isn't needed to protect against them.
Trojans for Mac OS X do exist, but can be avoided by the user being careful what they install, so antivirus isn't needed to protect against them.
Meanwhile, the answer on here to avoiding potential pitfalls in things like Flash is to (surprise), not install or use it. Hey guys, don't power on your computers and you will always be safe! :rolleyes:
I use Flash all the time and have never had any issues with it.
Even Apple themselves regularly release security updates. WTF is the point of a security update if there's no possible threat to OSX?
Again, no one has said there are not threats to Mac OS X; only that those threats don't require any AV software to defend against them.
Just because a threat is less likely than on other systems does not mean that it does not exist. Yet people on here won't even admit that much.
Either you're not reading or not comprehending the posts that have been made. No one is saying that NO threats exist; only that those threats can be avoided by the user without the need for AV software.
Only a fanboy would take a post that suggests that a false sense of security can lead to dangerous behavior that might be a liability in the future (good advice in almost any market/situation) and twist it into "Boy you're ignorant; we are INVULNERABLE! OSX cannot be hacked or attacked! It's impossible!
Who are you referring to? I haven't seen anyone say such things in this thread or any other.
No one has presented the idea that Mac OS X is free from all malware threats. Since your reading comprehension might need some help, I'll repeat my statement again:
there is no Mac malware in the wild that can't be avoided with some common sense and prudent action on the part of the user.
Viruses for Mac OS X don't exist, so antivirus isn't needed to protect against them.
Trojans for Mac OS X do exist, but can be avoided by the user being careful what they install, so antivirus isn't needed to protect against them.
Meanwhile, the answer on here to avoiding potential pitfalls in things like Flash is to (surprise), not install or use it. Hey guys, don't power on your computers and you will always be safe! :rolleyes:
I use Flash all the time and have never had any issues with it.
Even Apple themselves regularly release security updates. WTF is the point of a security update if there's no possible threat to OSX?
Again, no one has said there are not threats to Mac OS X; only that those threats don't require any AV software to defend against them.
Just because a threat is less likely than on other systems does not mean that it does not exist. Yet people on here won't even admit that much.
Either you're not reading or not comprehending the posts that have been made. No one is saying that NO threats exist; only that those threats can be avoided by the user without the need for AV software.
Only a fanboy would take a post that suggests that a false sense of security can lead to dangerous behavior that might be a liability in the future (good advice in almost any market/situation) and twist it into "Boy you're ignorant; we are INVULNERABLE! OSX cannot be hacked or attacked! It's impossible!
Who are you referring to? I haven't seen anyone say such things in this thread or any other.
"fanboy"
Again, who are you referring to? I'm not a fanboy, or a boy of any kind. I have no allegiance or loyalty to any brand or manufacturer (except Harley-Davidson, but for very different reasons). It's amusing to see how people try to bash Apple or Macs for the wrong reasons, then resort to calling people "fanboys" when their arguments aren't accepted. Apple and Macs have plenty of weaknesses. Attack one of the legitimate ones and you'll have sensible people agree with you. Make a case against Apple or John Deere or Mattel or Coca-Cola or any other company that isn't based in fact, and you'll get resistance. That doesn't make those who oppose such a case "fanboys".
Malware includes computer viruses, worms, trojan horses, spyware and other malicious and unwanted software or programs. The idea that OSX and/or Unix/Linux based operating systems is free from such threats is absurd.
No one has presented the idea that Mac OS X is free from all malware threats. Since your reading comprehension might need some help, I'll repeat my statement again:
there is no Mac malware in the wild that can't be avoided with some common sense and prudent action on the part of the user.
Viruses for Mac OS X don't exist, so antivirus isn't needed to protect against them.
Trojans for Mac OS X do exist, but can be avoided by the user being careful what they install, so antivirus isn't needed to protect against them.
Meanwhile, the answer on here to avoiding potential pitfalls in things like Flash is to (surprise), not install or use it. Hey guys, don't power on your computers and you will always be safe! :rolleyes:
I use Flash all the time and have never had any issues with it.
Even Apple themselves regularly release security updates. WTF is the point of a security update if there's no possible threat to OSX?
Again, no one has said there are not threats to Mac OS X; only that those threats don't require any AV software to defend against them.
Just because a threat is less likely than on other systems does not mean that it does not exist. Yet people on here won't even admit that much.
Either you're not reading or not comprehending the posts that have been made. No one is saying that NO threats exist; only that those threats can be avoided by the user without the need for AV software.
Only a fanboy would take a post that suggests that a false sense of security can lead to dangerous behavior that might be a liability in the future (good advice in almost any market/situation) and twist it into "Boy you're ignorant; we are INVULNERABLE! OSX cannot be hacked or attacked! It's impossible!
Who are you referring to? I haven't seen anyone say such things in this thread or any other.
sord
Sep 10, 08:31 PM
No, PowerBook G7 on Monday's keynote
I don't know about a G7, but PowerBook G5s for sure!!!
I don't know about a G7, but PowerBook G5s for sure!!!
xPismo
Sep 26, 09:51 AM
No iPhone for me then. Cingular blows.
No iPhone for me neither. But really, unless it was out-of-the-park good, there was no change I get one anyway.
Is anyone else getting a bit tired of all this apple branding outside of the computer space? I mean, a phone? Why o why SJ? :confused:
No iPhone for me neither. But really, unless it was out-of-the-park good, there was no change I get one anyway.
Is anyone else getting a bit tired of all this apple branding outside of the computer space? I mean, a phone? Why o why SJ? :confused:
FoxMcCloud
Mar 22, 01:46 PM
I reckon Mac Pro will get Ivy Bridge Xeon...
Squire
Sep 1, 10:30 AM
I suspect we'll get ourselves all twisted 'bout this, tune in only to see iPod HiFi v 2.0 instead..
Good point. That's also what I'm "expecting" so I'm not disappointed. Actually, I'm not really in the market for anything that Apple has right now so a totally new product would be nice.
-Squire
Good point. That's also what I'm "expecting" so I'm not disappointed. Actually, I'm not really in the market for anything that Apple has right now so a totally new product would be nice.
-Squire
No comments:
Post a Comment