infidel69
Apr 19, 11:51 AM
Apple keeps burning bridges and eventually it's going to come back to bite them in the ass. Samsung is holding all the cards here. Apple needs Samsung but Samsung doesn't need Apple. I wouldn't be surprised if Sammy has some unexpected production issues with ipad parts here shortly.
powermac_daddy
Aug 23, 08:19 PM
nice.... good job.
apple got too much money anyway.
who cares
apple got too much money anyway.
who cares
jouster
May 3, 09:16 PM
iRacing with Bootcamp and x-plane should be amazing w/ this set-up ;-)
And Trackir...
And Trackir...
barneygumble
Jul 17, 07:43 PM
All i can say is that i will buy a Core 2 Duo iMac when they come out and my parents will be buying a Core 2 Duo tower if such a thing is introduced (not mac pro):)
joejacjaac
Apr 25, 07:51 AM
Personally, I really would like to see all day battery life from the new MBA instead of cpu upgrade. That would make the air a must buy.
motulist
Apr 25, 03:30 PM
Good. The unibody design was never great, it was just so-so. The AlBook powerbook that preceded it had a MUCH better design.
AaronEdwards
Apr 20, 01:00 PM
Still they store it and can access it - nobody except my touches my iPhone and my Laptop. I actually enjoyed looking at the map. Nobody can access it on they fly on the road.
What's true for you, isn't true for everybody else.
What's true for you, isn't true for everybody else.
peharri
Sep 18, 07:33 AM
OK. hang on. back the f&6king truck up.
maybe we're backwards here. but i have NEVER, EVER heard of ANY kind of phone service where INCOMING calls are anything BUT free (excluding reverse-charge, obviously).
No, that's not true, though the way it's presented often makes you think it is.
Sprint and a company called MetroPCS are one of the few companies in the entire world where incoming calls are in practice are "at no extra charge" (unless those calls are long distance.)
That is, someone can call someone with a Sprint phone on a "free unlimited incoming" plan, and NEITHER PARTY will be charged (subject to restrictions, namely that mobile party isn't roaming, and the caller has unlimited outgoing calls to at the very least the mobile party's area/exchange code. This is the default with US landlines.)
(I'm being picky with words here, because it's even worse than how I'm describing. I'm not aware of a single phone company in the entire world that offers free calls of any description save for 911/112/999 type calls. Every phone company in the world at the very least requires you pay a subscription fee before receiving any kind of unmetered service. Ok, I note the complaints I'm being picky and everyone "knows" what "free" means, but I think the word "free" is overused.)
Most other operators in the US offer unlimited airtime at nights, weekends, and often when calls are placed between mobiles on the same network, so the other networks also provide incoming calls "at no extra charge" for a specific subset of incoming calls.
Now, you're probably not in the US, which explains your confusion as to why someone would be wording this as it was, but don't think that because where you are the callee doesn't pay for incoming calls, that this means the calls are free. They're not. They're paid for by the caller, often at absurdly high rates. Do you never make calls to mobiles?
You are just as likely to be receiving a call as making one to a mobile phone (ie regardless of who pays, YOU are likely to pay it. You receive calls on your cellphone, and you call people who have cellphones), so when considering the total cost of ownership, the price of incoming calls, whether paid for by the caller or callee, makes a difference in terms of the use of mobile phones.
Because this is likely to descend to a debate on the subject of "Caller pays" or "Mobile user pays", the US system makes it harder to have a workable low-budget pay-as-you-go system, but once service-spends exceed around $40 a month, the provided tariffs are generally much, much, better value than that provided outside of the US. So there's a higher barrier to entry, but once you can afford it, even the most avid talkers can use it as their default phone. A typical tariff in the US is $50 a month for unlimited nights, weekends, and calls between same-network mobiles, plus 500 minutes for other call types. A typical tariff in the UK appears to be something approximating to 20-70c a minute for outgoing calls (the lower end for same network or landline calls, higher for calls to mobiles), with calls charged by the second and no, practical, monthly minimum call spends and everyone paying just for the calls they make. Someone who doesn't use a mobile phone very often would appreciate the latter, someone who wants to use it instead of a landline would appreciate the former.
maybe we're backwards here. but i have NEVER, EVER heard of ANY kind of phone service where INCOMING calls are anything BUT free (excluding reverse-charge, obviously).
No, that's not true, though the way it's presented often makes you think it is.
Sprint and a company called MetroPCS are one of the few companies in the entire world where incoming calls are in practice are "at no extra charge" (unless those calls are long distance.)
That is, someone can call someone with a Sprint phone on a "free unlimited incoming" plan, and NEITHER PARTY will be charged (subject to restrictions, namely that mobile party isn't roaming, and the caller has unlimited outgoing calls to at the very least the mobile party's area/exchange code. This is the default with US landlines.)
(I'm being picky with words here, because it's even worse than how I'm describing. I'm not aware of a single phone company in the entire world that offers free calls of any description save for 911/112/999 type calls. Every phone company in the world at the very least requires you pay a subscription fee before receiving any kind of unmetered service. Ok, I note the complaints I'm being picky and everyone "knows" what "free" means, but I think the word "free" is overused.)
Most other operators in the US offer unlimited airtime at nights, weekends, and often when calls are placed between mobiles on the same network, so the other networks also provide incoming calls "at no extra charge" for a specific subset of incoming calls.
Now, you're probably not in the US, which explains your confusion as to why someone would be wording this as it was, but don't think that because where you are the callee doesn't pay for incoming calls, that this means the calls are free. They're not. They're paid for by the caller, often at absurdly high rates. Do you never make calls to mobiles?
You are just as likely to be receiving a call as making one to a mobile phone (ie regardless of who pays, YOU are likely to pay it. You receive calls on your cellphone, and you call people who have cellphones), so when considering the total cost of ownership, the price of incoming calls, whether paid for by the caller or callee, makes a difference in terms of the use of mobile phones.
Because this is likely to descend to a debate on the subject of "Caller pays" or "Mobile user pays", the US system makes it harder to have a workable low-budget pay-as-you-go system, but once service-spends exceed around $40 a month, the provided tariffs are generally much, much, better value than that provided outside of the US. So there's a higher barrier to entry, but once you can afford it, even the most avid talkers can use it as their default phone. A typical tariff in the US is $50 a month for unlimited nights, weekends, and calls between same-network mobiles, plus 500 minutes for other call types. A typical tariff in the UK appears to be something approximating to 20-70c a minute for outgoing calls (the lower end for same network or landline calls, higher for calls to mobiles), with calls charged by the second and no, practical, monthly minimum call spends and everyone paying just for the calls they make. Someone who doesn't use a mobile phone very often would appreciate the latter, someone who wants to use it instead of a landline would appreciate the former.
markw10
Sep 14, 10:39 AM
I'd love to see a headless mac, something cheaper than the Mac pro but more expandable and powerful than the Mac Mini.
dizastor
Sep 19, 01:31 PM
imagine how good it would be doing if they had more than disney on board.
juicedropsdeuce
Apr 25, 01:29 PM
...and you think most people who buy a MBP won't swap out the drive for a 7200RPM drive or an SSD and max out their memory?
Intelligent...no genius level thinking!
Great. Since Apple puts that crap hard drive in there, instead of simply using the computer someone has to go through all that trouble to get what they paid for (i7 processor)? Are you for real? That sounds great. I'm sure all those random people who buy from the Apple Store also buy the Apple torx screwdriver kit and get to work when they get home. :rolleyes:
Intelligent...no genius level thinking!
Great. Since Apple puts that crap hard drive in there, instead of simply using the computer someone has to go through all that trouble to get what they paid for (i7 processor)? Are you for real? That sounds great. I'm sure all those random people who buy from the Apple Store also buy the Apple torx screwdriver kit and get to work when they get home. :rolleyes:
newdeal
Apr 22, 11:21 AM
It doesnt need cpu that badly but could use ipad level battery life
reflex
Aug 31, 03:35 PM
If they don't announce/release new MacBooks, my plans are severely screwed.
Same here, although I'd probably just get a current Macbook if that's the case. I decided I won't wait beyond Paris Expo.
Although I might still be tempted to buy a MBP if Apple offered a 160GB hd for a reasonable or it were easy to put one in there.
Same here, although I'd probably just get a current Macbook if that's the case. I decided I won't wait beyond Paris Expo.
Although I might still be tempted to buy a MBP if Apple offered a 160GB hd for a reasonable or it were easy to put one in there.
amac4me
Aug 28, 12:16 PM
I think Apple will try to get these out prior to the Paris expo. Why give up sales to announce the product at a later date?
teme
Sep 13, 04:37 AM
Fullscreen touchscreen video iPod is going to be the biggest change to iPod since the 1st generation iPod was released, so I'm not surprised that it is taking so long. All the previous generations have just included some smaller updates (click-wheel, color screen, smaller size, new features etc).
I'll probably buy the 80GB version before Christmas. I have waited for a large capacity for a long time, and the new model seems to be great (although it's not that fullscreen 6G iPod). It has a good battery life, large capacity, nice new features... enough "new" to replace my old 30GB iPod, bought in 2003.
I'll probably buy the 80GB version before Christmas. I have waited for a large capacity for a long time, and the new model seems to be great (although it's not that fullscreen 6G iPod). It has a good battery life, large capacity, nice new features... enough "new" to replace my old 30GB iPod, bought in 2003.
Wolfpup
Jan 13, 10:30 AM
Even at that level it's a real PITA. Seriously, not only it pops up way too often, but it slows down installations. Some older computers and netbooks just freeze for several minutes after trying to open large installers, while UAC is analyzing or something.
Regarding the first point, that's not true at all. There's no reason you should be seeing it in normal use on a day to day basis. It's the same as in OS X. Regarding the latter...I haven't had that happen, but I did see on GOG.com they mentioned that it can take a while with large installers on some systems with that on.
Regarding the first point, that's not true at all. There's no reason you should be seeing it in normal use on a day to day basis. It's the same as in OS X. Regarding the latter...I haven't had that happen, but I did see on GOG.com they mentioned that it can take a while with large installers on some systems with that on.
ciTiger
Apr 11, 07:52 AM
Apple will fix it soon...
JAT
Oct 27, 03:29 PM
I'd guess because we now live in an era, often associated with the Bush era, where crushing all dissent is considered no biggie by a large section of the fear-controlled, TV-addled masses?
Perhaps Google Earth could help you out. London is not in any area under control of Mr. Bush. Perhaps you are thinking of London, Ohio?
Perhaps Google Earth could help you out. London is not in any area under control of Mr. Bush. Perhaps you are thinking of London, Ohio?
munkery
Apr 10, 04:17 PM
What exactly do you mean? Do you mean changing the default app for opening a file type, using the Get Info window? Or do you mean some modification to the app itself? If the former, it works the same in L and SL. I haven't tried the latter yet.
"Get Info" any of the softwares that came on your Mac by default, such as Safari, Mail, iTunes, etc. At the bottom of the "Get Info" screen, what users have write privileges to the app bundle?
In Leopard, both system and admin have write privileges. So, malware could modify these app bundles as a vector to hide payloads with user level access in admin accounts. Privilege escalation would still be required for more serious exploitation, such as rootkit installation.
In Snow Leopard, only system has write privileges. This represents a security improvement in SL. Apps installed via the Mac App Store also only have system with write privileges.
"Get Info" any of the softwares that came on your Mac by default, such as Safari, Mail, iTunes, etc. At the bottom of the "Get Info" screen, what users have write privileges to the app bundle?
In Leopard, both system and admin have write privileges. So, malware could modify these app bundles as a vector to hide payloads with user level access in admin accounts. Privilege escalation would still be required for more serious exploitation, such as rootkit installation.
In Snow Leopard, only system has write privileges. This represents a security improvement in SL. Apps installed via the Mac App Store also only have system with write privileges.
kryca
Apr 23, 07:09 AM
I still don't get why there is still no mention of built-in 3G support. For a device as mobile as the MBA, it's beyond me why it's still missing.
The clunky UMTS USB sticks are difficult to handle on the go, particulary on Rev C and earlier they usually don't even fit without an USB extension cable. :-(
But maybe I'm missing something here :-)
The clunky UMTS USB sticks are difficult to handle on the go, particulary on Rev C and earlier they usually don't even fit without an USB extension cable. :-(
But maybe I'm missing something here :-)
roadbloc
Mar 29, 02:59 PM
Ok but didn't someone say that CMD + Drag does the same for files?
Yes. Which was also mentioned that cmd+drag is very inconvenient and a hassle to deal with the majority of the time (or at least in my opinion.)
Why Apple just doesn't just enable cmd-x in Finder is beyond me. It would make my life just a little easier at times.
Yes. Which was also mentioned that cmd+drag is very inconvenient and a hassle to deal with the majority of the time (or at least in my opinion.)
Why Apple just doesn't just enable cmd-x in Finder is beyond me. It would make my life just a little easier at times.
Silencio
Oct 12, 01:18 PM
I'll probably come of sounding like a jerk and opening a HUGE can of worms with this, BUT...
I'm glad somebody else was thinking what I was thinking! Why do we constantly have to place a line between men and women, black and white, American and everyone else. If we actually want equality and unity and all those wonderful things, I think it's about time we stop dilineating between groups of people.
It can't be both ways... if women/minorities want equality in the work place, or government, or in society as a whole, there can't also be inequality in the world when it comes to things like this... men and women, black and white, straight and gay - they have to be equal across the board, or not at all. We can't have it both ways.
Maybe because all across the globe, women and children are hugely disadvantaged economically and socially in comparison to men? People who need more help should get more help. People who don't need help shouldn't complain about it. As much as I want it to happen, "equality" is never going to happen in this world, at least the way it's currently structured.
"Empathy" is a four-letter word in America, sadly.
I'm glad somebody else was thinking what I was thinking! Why do we constantly have to place a line between men and women, black and white, American and everyone else. If we actually want equality and unity and all those wonderful things, I think it's about time we stop dilineating between groups of people.
It can't be both ways... if women/minorities want equality in the work place, or government, or in society as a whole, there can't also be inequality in the world when it comes to things like this... men and women, black and white, straight and gay - they have to be equal across the board, or not at all. We can't have it both ways.
Maybe because all across the globe, women and children are hugely disadvantaged economically and socially in comparison to men? People who need more help should get more help. People who don't need help shouldn't complain about it. As much as I want it to happen, "equality" is never going to happen in this world, at least the way it's currently structured.
"Empathy" is a four-letter word in America, sadly.
Chimera
Sep 5, 01:46 PM
My nano is already on eBay awaiting a nice metal clad 8GB version, I hope they do an andonised black one though to match my other gadgets.
Wolfpup
Jan 14, 11:25 AM
You should have a unique identifier (password) attached to authentication mechanism (UAC in Windows). So, Windows users should run as standard users. But, using a standard account in Windows causes issues with some software, such as some online games, that require admin accounts (or "run as administrator"; superuser) to function.
Maybe theoretically you should do that, but I don't know anyone that actually does on Windows or OS X. In both cases you aren't actually running with your full powers all the time, and get prompted to escalate if something needs admin access.
Many online games on Windows 7 still require running as Administrator (superuser privileges) to function. This requires setting the "Properties" to allow "run as Administrator" or turning off UAC. This is risky as the games connect to remote servers and download content. Trojans are installed without authentication if accessed with superuser privileges. This example, using online games, shows the problem with how software is being written for Windows.
Commercial software shouldn't be installing malware...I mean tons of it now has all kinds of DRM that is arguably malware, but...
While I'd rather run something without giving it full access to the system, ultimately you're trusting the publisher either way.
The issue with online games found in Windows is not problematic on Mac OS X given that software for Mac is written following the guidelines of the principle of least privilege (https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Principle_of_least_privilege) more so than Windows software.
Be that as it may, that's not a problem with the OS. If games are prompting for admin access though, my guess is it's because they're installing DRM, which on either OS is going to demand mucking about in the system.
I'm opposed to most forms of DRM for a variety of reasons (and also opposed to thieves), but this has nothing to do with Windows.
Mac OS X is much better insulated from Malware.
Why?
Vulnerabilities in those components in Mac OS X are attributed as OS X vulnerabilities because OS X includes them by default so this artificially inflates the number of vulnerabilities in OS X when looking at vulnerability comparisons.
I really doubt they double count things like that, given they're counted separately. I suppose there might be some validity to it if they did.
These components have worse security in Windows. How these vulnerabilities manifest in Windows is through Internet Explorer.
Maybe theoretically you should do that, but I don't know anyone that actually does on Windows or OS X. In both cases you aren't actually running with your full powers all the time, and get prompted to escalate if something needs admin access.
Many online games on Windows 7 still require running as Administrator (superuser privileges) to function. This requires setting the "Properties" to allow "run as Administrator" or turning off UAC. This is risky as the games connect to remote servers and download content. Trojans are installed without authentication if accessed with superuser privileges. This example, using online games, shows the problem with how software is being written for Windows.
Commercial software shouldn't be installing malware...I mean tons of it now has all kinds of DRM that is arguably malware, but...
While I'd rather run something without giving it full access to the system, ultimately you're trusting the publisher either way.
The issue with online games found in Windows is not problematic on Mac OS X given that software for Mac is written following the guidelines of the principle of least privilege (https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Principle_of_least_privilege) more so than Windows software.
Be that as it may, that's not a problem with the OS. If games are prompting for admin access though, my guess is it's because they're installing DRM, which on either OS is going to demand mucking about in the system.
I'm opposed to most forms of DRM for a variety of reasons (and also opposed to thieves), but this has nothing to do with Windows.
Mac OS X is much better insulated from Malware.
Why?
Vulnerabilities in those components in Mac OS X are attributed as OS X vulnerabilities because OS X includes them by default so this artificially inflates the number of vulnerabilities in OS X when looking at vulnerability comparisons.
I really doubt they double count things like that, given they're counted separately. I suppose there might be some validity to it if they did.
These components have worse security in Windows. How these vulnerabilities manifest in Windows is through Internet Explorer.