skunk
Mar 1, 10:46 AM
Lee, you should already know my answer to that question. It's an emphatic "no." Nor do I support the gay rights movement.Why not? Whether gays are treated equally under the Constitution has absolutely nothing to do with how you feel about them. Whether you grant them the human dignity of being treated equally has absolutely nothing to do with your Catholic dogma. You are making excuses.
I don't tell others what to do, but that doesn't mean I think it's all right for them do everything they want to do. I'll share my opinions with others if they're willing to hear them. I don't want to control anyone, and I will not be a codependent caregiver. I refuse to protect others from negative consequences when they need to learn from them.Another red herring: nobody is asking you to be a caregiver, simply to stop pontificating about something you clearly know very little about. You are simply broadcasting your prejudices to no useful effect: you are not going to make anyone heterosexual by trashing their feelings and their very nature, you are just going to add to their discomfiture.
My parents, especially my Mom, hated to see me do some foolish things when I was a boy.What a pity you did not learn from her to keep your own counsel.
I believe that people with same-sex attractions are endangering themselves at least physically when they have sex with each other.Feeble. Do you pontificate about sky-diving too?
Knowing is one thing. Having strong evidence is something else. Even if Dr. Gould doesn't know that the Ancient Greeks thought sodomy was repugnant, he probably knew a lot about the history of Ancient Greece. To accurately interpret Plato's writings, he needed to know about Ancient Greek Society and Ancient Greek culture.I have read many of Plato's dialogues, in Greek, and studied - and continue to study - Ancient Greek culture in depth. Your Dr Gould is bringing his own prejudices to the table. He should know better.
When the Lysis begins, a boy of about 13 is stands outside the Lyceum, telling everyone about the boy he's in love with. But the dialogue was about friendship, not about homosexuality.Homosexual friendship. Right.
I don't tell others what to do, but that doesn't mean I think it's all right for them do everything they want to do. I'll share my opinions with others if they're willing to hear them. I don't want to control anyone, and I will not be a codependent caregiver. I refuse to protect others from negative consequences when they need to learn from them.Another red herring: nobody is asking you to be a caregiver, simply to stop pontificating about something you clearly know very little about. You are simply broadcasting your prejudices to no useful effect: you are not going to make anyone heterosexual by trashing their feelings and their very nature, you are just going to add to their discomfiture.
My parents, especially my Mom, hated to see me do some foolish things when I was a boy.What a pity you did not learn from her to keep your own counsel.
I believe that people with same-sex attractions are endangering themselves at least physically when they have sex with each other.Feeble. Do you pontificate about sky-diving too?
Knowing is one thing. Having strong evidence is something else. Even if Dr. Gould doesn't know that the Ancient Greeks thought sodomy was repugnant, he probably knew a lot about the history of Ancient Greece. To accurately interpret Plato's writings, he needed to know about Ancient Greek Society and Ancient Greek culture.I have read many of Plato's dialogues, in Greek, and studied - and continue to study - Ancient Greek culture in depth. Your Dr Gould is bringing his own prejudices to the table. He should know better.
When the Lysis begins, a boy of about 13 is stands outside the Lyceum, telling everyone about the boy he's in love with. But the dialogue was about friendship, not about homosexuality.Homosexual friendship. Right.
gnasher729
Apr 27, 08:59 AM
You mean to tell me that Apple, a company that seems to release fairly solid software, "neglected" to test that when disabling an option called LOCATION SERVICES, that it actually disabled location checking properly? Are some of you really so Jobsian?
Call a spade a spade. There's no possible chance this was a mistake. They got caught. They should not be given a pass over it. If a user opts to disable Location Services, they were working under the false impression that their location was no longer being tracked. Seems mighty shifty to me. Doesn't matter how much data might have been user-identifiable. This sounds like something Google would do, not Apple.
You can think what you want. I develop software for a living. This file is not a "feature", and it isn't and never was present intentionally to store your location data. It is a very, very useful collection of data that in some situations makes your phone work faster and save power. Location Services are disabled when you disable them, and enabled when you enable them. Whoever tested this was testing exactly that: That Location Services does its best to find your location when it is enabled, and that it absolutely refuses to look for your location when it is disabled. That's what enabling/disabling location services means. Nobody at Apple ever cared about this file. It wasn't on anyone's radar before people had their paranoia attack.
This file recorded locations of WiFi and cell towers, but only the last time that you have been at each place. Exactly what is needed to improve Location Services. All your history, which would have been much more useful to track you, is deleted. Your actual location, which is known to your phone, and which would have been much more useful to track you, is deleted. All because it didn't serve the purpose of this file, which isn't and never was to track you.
Call a spade a spade. There's no possible chance this was a mistake. They got caught. They should not be given a pass over it. If a user opts to disable Location Services, they were working under the false impression that their location was no longer being tracked. Seems mighty shifty to me. Doesn't matter how much data might have been user-identifiable. This sounds like something Google would do, not Apple.
You can think what you want. I develop software for a living. This file is not a "feature", and it isn't and never was present intentionally to store your location data. It is a very, very useful collection of data that in some situations makes your phone work faster and save power. Location Services are disabled when you disable them, and enabled when you enable them. Whoever tested this was testing exactly that: That Location Services does its best to find your location when it is enabled, and that it absolutely refuses to look for your location when it is disabled. That's what enabling/disabling location services means. Nobody at Apple ever cared about this file. It wasn't on anyone's radar before people had their paranoia attack.
This file recorded locations of WiFi and cell towers, but only the last time that you have been at each place. Exactly what is needed to improve Location Services. All your history, which would have been much more useful to track you, is deleted. Your actual location, which is known to your phone, and which would have been much more useful to track you, is deleted. All because it didn't serve the purpose of this file, which isn't and never was to track you.
shawnce
Nov 28, 07:05 PM
I think it is crazy for everyone to think that the music industry is greedy when it getting squeezed out of all of their revenue streams. So, Apple makes hundreds of millions off of their back on the itunes site, and a billion off of iPod sales, and they cannot share in the wealth? Huh?
Apple pays the record labels for every song sold via iTMS, a vast majority of the "99 cents" for a song goes to the record labels (or direct to independent artist). iTMS is providing a new sales channel with effectively zero cost to the record labels (one that avoids manufacturing, shipping and stocking of physical units). This is a totally NEW revenue stream that arguable provides the record labels more bang for their buck then prior revenue streams and it is arguable more secure from copyright violations then prior revenue streams (FairPlay DRM). It also more directly connects customers with music (easy to do impulse purchases, etc.).
Now for the other half of your statement... just why should record companies get money for every iPod sold? This type of thinking is in some ways similar to demanding that paint manufactures should get a cut of the profits of every paint brush sold.
As a side note... I support the record companies/artist going after major copyright violators using legal proceedings.
Apple pays the record labels for every song sold via iTMS, a vast majority of the "99 cents" for a song goes to the record labels (or direct to independent artist). iTMS is providing a new sales channel with effectively zero cost to the record labels (one that avoids manufacturing, shipping and stocking of physical units). This is a totally NEW revenue stream that arguable provides the record labels more bang for their buck then prior revenue streams and it is arguable more secure from copyright violations then prior revenue streams (FairPlay DRM). It also more directly connects customers with music (easy to do impulse purchases, etc.).
Now for the other half of your statement... just why should record companies get money for every iPod sold? This type of thinking is in some ways similar to demanding that paint manufactures should get a cut of the profits of every paint brush sold.
As a side note... I support the record companies/artist going after major copyright violators using legal proceedings.
gugy
Aug 6, 02:25 PM
It's not relevant, the marks are registered in different fields of activity...if these guys are real, they don't have a case anyway.
very true.
I just think is funny the stupid mentality of a reseller threatening of a lawsuit against their major product provider. Even if Mac Pro wins the suit (very unlikely) Apple could just stop providing products to them and basically killing their business or making them switch to a PC.
This is just is just as stupid as the Tiger Direct suit. So I would love to see Mac Pro being slapped in the face at the same way.
The truth must be that this post was just a joke just to have us debating about it. The real Mac Pro doesn't even care about this issue.
very true.
I just think is funny the stupid mentality of a reseller threatening of a lawsuit against their major product provider. Even if Mac Pro wins the suit (very unlikely) Apple could just stop providing products to them and basically killing their business or making them switch to a PC.
This is just is just as stupid as the Tiger Direct suit. So I would love to see Mac Pro being slapped in the face at the same way.
The truth must be that this post was just a joke just to have us debating about it. The real Mac Pro doesn't even care about this issue.
bretm
Jul 20, 10:39 AM
Ive already trademarked "OctoCore" and "CoreOcto";)
Just keep saying it to yourself. After about the 12th time it just starts rolling off your tongue...
El OchoCoro
Just keep saying it to yourself. After about the 12th time it just starts rolling off your tongue...
El OchoCoro
yoak
Apr 6, 06:59 AM
Hmm we have a Blu Ray burner in our duplication bay in 3 years and approx 1500 hrs of Broadcast HD TV it has only been used so editors can take home personal projects to screen them.
Really do not see the need for Blu Ray at all there are so many other better suited formats.
It all depends on what you do for a living I suppose. I can see wedding video makers would want to deliver blu-ray.
I don�t do weddings, but I would at least like to have the option to easily make a Blu-Ray longer than 20min . Now every time we give people a HD format of what we have done, we usually end up with an Apple TV HD file and that�s a very compressed HD file IMHO.
Really do not see the need for Blu Ray at all there are so many other better suited formats.
It all depends on what you do for a living I suppose. I can see wedding video makers would want to deliver blu-ray.
I don�t do weddings, but I would at least like to have the option to easily make a Blu-Ray longer than 20min . Now every time we give people a HD format of what we have done, we usually end up with an Apple TV HD file and that�s a very compressed HD file IMHO.
bpaluzzi
Mar 22, 01:37 PM
This is just a preview of the future, Android based tablets will clean the iPads clock. Apple made the so-called iPad 2 as a 1.5. Low res camera, not enough RAM, and low res screen. It's going to be a verrrry long 2012 for Apple. Sure it's selling like hot cakes now, but when buyers see tablets that they don't have to stand inline for, that have better equipment and are cheaper ... Apples house of cards will come crashing down around them.
The only strength that Apple has is the app ecosystem; which is why they are going after Amazon for spiting on the sidewalk. They know the world of hurt coming their way.
Phew, I was beginning to get worried that you hadn't chimed in with your "opinion" yet. Given that everything you've said in the last six months or so has been absolutely wrong, I'll consider your post a guarantee of the iPad's success. Buy buy buy! ;-)
The only strength that Apple has is the app ecosystem; which is why they are going after Amazon for spiting on the sidewalk. They know the world of hurt coming their way.
Phew, I was beginning to get worried that you hadn't chimed in with your "opinion" yet. Given that everything you've said in the last six months or so has been absolutely wrong, I'll consider your post a guarantee of the iPad's success. Buy buy buy! ;-)
leekohler
Apr 27, 03:38 PM
Yes, I think Obama is a horrible president. That doesn't mean he was born in Kenya. Enough with the overly dramatic defense mechanisms. Just because you love the guy doesn't mean you get to live in a fairlytale world where he has no flaws, or he can't be questioned or criticized in the least. Why not focus on figuring out why the document is weird so we can all move on!?!? Do you just have fun laying down baseless attacks for no reason instead? It's a simple question - aimed at graphic artists who know what they're talking about (not you) - so why even discuss it other than to disrupt this issue, misdirect the conversation, and accuse me lying?
The drama is just amazing from you. If this were a movie you would be cleaning up on Oscar night. I have criticized Obama many times in this forum and even started a lot of threads criticizing him. He's not my favorite either, but you have nothing but vitriol for the guy.
Why are you focusing on why the document is weird even after it's been explained to you?
perhaps the Design & Graphics forum would have been a better place to post a technical question about layers in PDF documents.
Because that would not have been dramatic enough.
The drama is just amazing from you. If this were a movie you would be cleaning up on Oscar night. I have criticized Obama many times in this forum and even started a lot of threads criticizing him. He's not my favorite either, but you have nothing but vitriol for the guy.
Why are you focusing on why the document is weird even after it's been explained to you?
perhaps the Design & Graphics forum would have been a better place to post a technical question about layers in PDF documents.
Because that would not have been dramatic enough.
rovex
Apr 11, 02:30 PM
Does Arn write every single article on this forum?
lord patton
Aug 16, 11:31 PM
(sideshow bob)The Power PC...The!!!(/sideshow bob)
Bravo.
I don't know what ROFL stands for, but from context-clues, I'm thinking it means pretty damn funny. In which case, ROFL, dude.
Bravo.
I don't know what ROFL stands for, but from context-clues, I'm thinking it means pretty damn funny. In which case, ROFL, dude.
swingerofbirch
Aug 26, 07:40 PM
I'm sure the GPU will also be bumped, at the very least. The MBP will probably also see some things that the MB has like a user-removable hard drive and magnetic latch. The CPU and GPU alone make it worth getting the new one, IMO.
Also, I'll say it one last time (yea right) - the imac should not and will not get a mobile processor. It only got Yonah because there was no alternative. It had a real desktop processor when one was available on the PPC side (G5), and it will have a real desktop processor now that one is available on the intel side (Conroe). Leave merom for what it was meant for - laptops.
I agree with you wholeheartedly.
But, I guess they COULD have put a pentium d in them...didnt they have dual cores?
Also, I'll say it one last time (yea right) - the imac should not and will not get a mobile processor. It only got Yonah because there was no alternative. It had a real desktop processor when one was available on the PPC side (G5), and it will have a real desktop processor now that one is available on the intel side (Conroe). Leave merom for what it was meant for - laptops.
I agree with you wholeheartedly.
But, I guess they COULD have put a pentium d in them...didnt they have dual cores?
appleguy123
Feb 28, 06:42 PM
Got me on "ignore", have you? :p
I could never ignore you. :D
I actually had something typed up to refute it, but it wasn't consistent with what I actually believe or do on the PRSI(and didn't want it used for quote mining against me :) ), so I deleted it. Then I saw that more people were quoting that, so I had to officially resign the point.
I could never ignore you. :D
I actually had something typed up to refute it, but it wasn't consistent with what I actually believe or do on the PRSI(and didn't want it used for quote mining against me :) ), so I deleted it. Then I saw that more people were quoting that, so I had to officially resign the point.
leekohler
Apr 28, 05:44 PM
all want to know is was why it always has to go to name calling..be it..wacko christians, teabaggers or racists conservatives..it seems like every thread any of the liberals on the forum posts always goes to calling names at whatever group it is that they have a problem with today.
Well, you tell me what we're supposed to call people who do things like this? Sane, sensible people? They aren't. I for one am not going to treat a bunch of idiots in tin foil hats like they're respectable. Same goes for people who wish to deny me rights. I'm sorry, they have not earned my respect.
Well, you tell me what we're supposed to call people who do things like this? Sane, sensible people? They aren't. I for one am not going to treat a bunch of idiots in tin foil hats like they're respectable. Same goes for people who wish to deny me rights. I'm sorry, they have not earned my respect.
mdelvecchio
Mar 31, 03:56 PM
Keep in mind that Google tightening up Android and forcing handset makers to adhere to certain guidelines is primarily a problem for the *handset makers* and carriers--but not consumers.
not when Google blocks handset makers from releasing innovations that would be good for consumers but bad for google. they may have tried to do such strong-arming -- a geo-services company claims it was shut-out by the makers due to google not wanting makers to license optional alternatives to google services.
not when Google blocks handset makers from releasing innovations that would be good for consumers but bad for google. they may have tried to do such strong-arming -- a geo-services company claims it was shut-out by the makers due to google not wanting makers to license optional alternatives to google services.
Multimedia
Jul 28, 04:57 PM
I am a new Mac owner. I just bought my new 20 " iMac and I am learing aout the upcomming conference and possible new product releases. I
Would appreciate any thoughts on my question.
I am considering returning the new 20" I just bought in the 14 day period and taking the 10% hit and waitning to see if the iMac gets updated and I will repurchase. What is the likelyhood that the version I have will be updated. I would be bummed if I just bought it and I am at the end of a cycle. The $160 fee would actuallly be worth it to me to get thte latest. I would have to return it prior to the conference to stay within the 14 days but i may not want to loose out on lthe chance to get the latest.
Any thoughts on this 20 " model be increased with a new processor??
Thanks,
New Mac owner.....merk850
dont take it back.
I dont think that the difference will be that much, with the new systems.
If your happy with its performance then keep it.
A mild CPU boost isnt all that, and I doubt that the video cards will be upped that much.
I wouldnt take the hit in money lost, cause you can always sell it later down the line and get the lastest and greatest thats really a must buy.I respectfully disagree. I say take it back and be ready for a much faster iMac Core 2 Duo. You want the latest, take it back. It won't be the latest for many more weeks. Core 2 Duo will be the latest for two more years.
Would appreciate any thoughts on my question.
I am considering returning the new 20" I just bought in the 14 day period and taking the 10% hit and waitning to see if the iMac gets updated and I will repurchase. What is the likelyhood that the version I have will be updated. I would be bummed if I just bought it and I am at the end of a cycle. The $160 fee would actuallly be worth it to me to get thte latest. I would have to return it prior to the conference to stay within the 14 days but i may not want to loose out on lthe chance to get the latest.
Any thoughts on this 20 " model be increased with a new processor??
Thanks,
New Mac owner.....merk850
dont take it back.
I dont think that the difference will be that much, with the new systems.
If your happy with its performance then keep it.
A mild CPU boost isnt all that, and I doubt that the video cards will be upped that much.
I wouldnt take the hit in money lost, cause you can always sell it later down the line and get the lastest and greatest thats really a must buy.I respectfully disagree. I say take it back and be ready for a much faster iMac Core 2 Duo. You want the latest, take it back. It won't be the latest for many more weeks. Core 2 Duo will be the latest for two more years.
![britney spears femme fatale deluxe edition mediafire. #10 → Britney Spears - Femme Fatale (Deluxe Edition) (2011) FLAC. Category: [Music] | Published by: mrriver92 on](http://i19.fastpic.ru/big/2011/0414/42/baa1596465a0608ce44d37c14e600642.jpg "#10 → Britney Spears - Femme Fatale (Deluxe Edition) (2011) FLAC. Category: [Music] | Published by: mrriver92 on")
jaxstate
Jul 27, 11:27 AM
MacPro
Leopard
iTunes Movie store
Asteroid
Al Nano up to 8G
MacPro
MBP, iMac processor update
Leopard Preview
I think those are the most likely marbles.
Leopard
iTunes Movie store
Asteroid
Al Nano up to 8G
MacPro
MBP, iMac processor update
Leopard Preview
I think those are the most likely marbles.
RawBert
Apr 6, 02:10 PM
Apple doesn't need competition the way the PC me-too companies do. Apple has had its eye on the tablet space for over half a decade with no competition to speak of, but they produced a world-class 1.0 version of the iPad anyway. They have a vision of the future and are forging ahead regardless of what the copycats are doing. They are not going to stagnate as long as Steve is around.
Time to drop the tired "I sure like having competition for Apple" cliche. Ths ain't Microsoft were talking about.
Amen. Preach on!
Time to drop the tired "I sure like having competition for Apple" cliche. Ths ain't Microsoft were talking about.
Amen. Preach on!
marksman
Mar 22, 11:29 PM
Someone give Android's UI and Playbook's UI huge recognition so Apple will change it's old grid-like UI.
I am not sure you are using "UI" correctly.
The iPad two does have some shortcomings, few of which are worth going to to here. However, the OS of these devices IS crucial and we are beginning to see iOS creaking slightly. In terms of looks and notifications,
I get the notification thing, but I keep seeing some people talking about the look of the interface of IOS being dated and I don't get it. It seems like a very young and inexperienced viewpoint. Wanting change solely for the sake of change. The UI for IOS works very well. I don't want it changed just because some people are bored of looking at it. This is something you realize as you get older and more experienced in life. Change just for the sake of change is not a great deal, most of the time.
Change for the sake of improved usability and function? I am all for it. Change of the UI just because they have used the same basic look for the UI for 5 years? No not really.
I can assure that doubling the 256MB of the first iPad is not enough for people that need a lot of multitask, like me.
Here I don't think you understand how "multitasking" works on IOS devices.
It is not really possible to do a "lot" of multi-tasking. There are only a certain number of APIs that can be used concurrently. Having a bunch of apps listed in the fast task switcher is not multi-tasking and it does not require more ram.
Android phones are selling more than iPhone.
iPhone has started a market, competitors are improving it.
iPad has started a market, competitors are improving it.
The problem is Android becomes the brand and all these hardware makers become a commodity. People who have an android phone look to get a new android phone. They don't look to get an upgrade to their current phone because no upgrade exists, because the hardware makers just come up with new dumb names for products six times a year.
On the other hand someone with an iPhone is going to upgrade to another iPhone and so on. The brand and name builds on itself. This only becomes a bigger advantage for Apple as time goes on... And as others have noted it is silly to compare the userbase of a free OS that is installed on 100s of different hardware products, and that of the market leader which has a massive market share advantage over the next biggest competitive handset, which is the iPhone.
People who own a Motorola Suxit V or a HTC Yourmomma have NOTHING in common other than they both might be running some variation (probably different) of the Android OS. Compared to two people owning iPhones, even different model iPhones, where the experience will be very similar and comparable.
If you just can't recognize how multitask works better with 1GB RAM and true background apps (QNX, Honeycomb), then you deserve to use a limited thing like an iPad.
If you don't like your battery life, you got a point. Perhaps you can just always have a long extension cord and then you got a real winner!
I've only bought the first iPad because there were no competitors at that time (and I hate netbooks), but now things are different. To be honest, A LOT different.
At this point and time there are still no real competitors. There is one copycat device out there that is inferior, and a couple more potentially coming out soon... but nothing is guaranteed.
People said that the iPhone was going to be the best phone out there, but the market is showing something different.
People say the iPad is the best tablet out there, but it seems that the market is going to show something different.
I think the market clearly shows the iPhone is the best phone out there. There is no other phone that comes anywhere close to selling as much as the iPhone. The iPad is worse, and will pretty much stay that way as all of the competitors are just clones of the iPad, and they don't have the advantage of a protected Verizon environment to move their product. They will have to compete against the iPad 2 for every sale they make.
With the shortages of iPad2's out there, and international sales about to start up, probably making it worse, if the Xoom, G Tabs and Playbooks are "close enough" (particularly for folks that are not avid Apple followers), they could get quite a few sales. At least that is my opinion. (And like everyone I have an @$$-hole too.):)
This is a good point. The supply chain deficit is really the only chance these clone machines have of making inroads. I suspect the supply issue will be resolved before anyone else gets to market though, so the only one who will benefit from it is the Xoom.
I am not sure you are using "UI" correctly.
The iPad two does have some shortcomings, few of which are worth going to to here. However, the OS of these devices IS crucial and we are beginning to see iOS creaking slightly. In terms of looks and notifications,
I get the notification thing, but I keep seeing some people talking about the look of the interface of IOS being dated and I don't get it. It seems like a very young and inexperienced viewpoint. Wanting change solely for the sake of change. The UI for IOS works very well. I don't want it changed just because some people are bored of looking at it. This is something you realize as you get older and more experienced in life. Change just for the sake of change is not a great deal, most of the time.
Change for the sake of improved usability and function? I am all for it. Change of the UI just because they have used the same basic look for the UI for 5 years? No not really.
I can assure that doubling the 256MB of the first iPad is not enough for people that need a lot of multitask, like me.
Here I don't think you understand how "multitasking" works on IOS devices.
It is not really possible to do a "lot" of multi-tasking. There are only a certain number of APIs that can be used concurrently. Having a bunch of apps listed in the fast task switcher is not multi-tasking and it does not require more ram.
Android phones are selling more than iPhone.
iPhone has started a market, competitors are improving it.
iPad has started a market, competitors are improving it.
The problem is Android becomes the brand and all these hardware makers become a commodity. People who have an android phone look to get a new android phone. They don't look to get an upgrade to their current phone because no upgrade exists, because the hardware makers just come up with new dumb names for products six times a year.
On the other hand someone with an iPhone is going to upgrade to another iPhone and so on. The brand and name builds on itself. This only becomes a bigger advantage for Apple as time goes on... And as others have noted it is silly to compare the userbase of a free OS that is installed on 100s of different hardware products, and that of the market leader which has a massive market share advantage over the next biggest competitive handset, which is the iPhone.
People who own a Motorola Suxit V or a HTC Yourmomma have NOTHING in common other than they both might be running some variation (probably different) of the Android OS. Compared to two people owning iPhones, even different model iPhones, where the experience will be very similar and comparable.
If you just can't recognize how multitask works better with 1GB RAM and true background apps (QNX, Honeycomb), then you deserve to use a limited thing like an iPad.
If you don't like your battery life, you got a point. Perhaps you can just always have a long extension cord and then you got a real winner!
I've only bought the first iPad because there were no competitors at that time (and I hate netbooks), but now things are different. To be honest, A LOT different.
At this point and time there are still no real competitors. There is one copycat device out there that is inferior, and a couple more potentially coming out soon... but nothing is guaranteed.
People said that the iPhone was going to be the best phone out there, but the market is showing something different.
People say the iPad is the best tablet out there, but it seems that the market is going to show something different.
I think the market clearly shows the iPhone is the best phone out there. There is no other phone that comes anywhere close to selling as much as the iPhone. The iPad is worse, and will pretty much stay that way as all of the competitors are just clones of the iPad, and they don't have the advantage of a protected Verizon environment to move their product. They will have to compete against the iPad 2 for every sale they make.
With the shortages of iPad2's out there, and international sales about to start up, probably making it worse, if the Xoom, G Tabs and Playbooks are "close enough" (particularly for folks that are not avid Apple followers), they could get quite a few sales. At least that is my opinion. (And like everyone I have an @$$-hole too.):)
This is a good point. The supply chain deficit is really the only chance these clone machines have of making inroads. I suspect the supply issue will be resolved before anyone else gets to market though, so the only one who will benefit from it is the Xoom.
Bill McEnaney
Mar 3, 10:05 AM
And I don't see the point in being sexually attracted to anyone of the opposite sex, but since society tells me it's "normal" I live with it nonetheless. It's all a matter of perception and experience. You have yours, I have mine and they're both normal to us.
Sure, different people have different experiences. That's partly why some people feel same-sex attractions and why others feel opposite-sex attractions. Macaroony doesn't see any point in opposite-sex attractions. I don't see any point in same-sex attractions. Here are two videos that explain what I believe about why some people feel same-sex attractions. I think the speaker works for NARTH.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFAJXvxcGrk&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UziWSdC8Zhw&feature=related
Pedophilia is immoral - no matter man or woman. Please do not put both homosexuality and pedophilia into the same boat. There are plenty of grown men who abuse underage girls, it's when they happen to be gay that elevates the problem and lazily ties it to homosexuality.
Just as no one chooses to feel same-sex attractions, no one chooses to be a pedophile. I know some pedophiles. But some pedophiles do choose to molest children. I don't want to conflate pedophilia and immoral actions that some pedophiles do because they're pedophiles.
Many people ignore the difference between homosexuality and homosexual acts. Many Christians insist that homosexuality is immoral. But homosexuality is a property, not an action. Nor is it a sin of omission. Homosexuality the property is morally indifferent. Homosexual acts are, I think, immoral. An action can be immoral, even if someone doesn't deserve any blame for doing it.
No, I shouldn't put homosexuality and pedophilia in the same boat. I mentioned the Catholic Church's homosexual-abuse because skunk seems to think my opinions about sexual morality are feelings, not beliefs that are either true or false. Even psychotherapists I've talked with have agreed that feelings are neither truths nor falsehoods. Feelings are neither of those, but there are truths about feelings and there are falsehoods about them. If I only feel that homosexual acts are immoral, should some government outlaw feeling that way?
The phrase "a fact" is ambiguous. It can mean "a truth." It can also mean "a set of actual set of circumstances." There are truths about feelings, and there are feelings about truths. But my feelings aren't truths. Even if moral relativism is true, there are still objective truths about whether some society or other considers some action morally acceptable. And some relativists still hold a self-inconsistent belief when they believe that since every belief is relative to some context or other, there's no such thing as absolute truth. In one sense of the phrase "absolute truth," a truth is absolute when it's true about every context. In that sense of the phrase "absolute truth," I imply a self-contradiction myself when I say that since every truth is relative to some context or other, I imply that it's an absolute truth that there's no absolute truth.
In another sense of the phrase "absolute truth," a truth is absolute when it's true whether anyone believes it or not. Even if I'm mistaken when I believe that homosexual sex is gravely immoral, it's still true that either they're moral or not moral.
Too often, people who feel same-sex attractions suffer needlessly partly because they, others, or both ignore important distinctions. Unfortunately, people often ignore them when their feelings determine too much of what those people believe.
Immoral behavior continues partly because of moral relativism. Instead of conforming our minds to reality, we try to conform reality to our minds. Moral relativists talk as though an action is moral if and only if someone believes that it's moral. Some moral relativists even insist that if you believe that homosexual acts are morally acceptable, and I believe they're immoral, then we're both right. A moral relativist might say the same about the morality or immorality of gay-bashing. But someone is right when he thinks that gay-bashing is morally right, should a court punish him for gay-bashing someone?
Sure, different people have different experiences. That's partly why some people feel same-sex attractions and why others feel opposite-sex attractions. Macaroony doesn't see any point in opposite-sex attractions. I don't see any point in same-sex attractions. Here are two videos that explain what I believe about why some people feel same-sex attractions. I think the speaker works for NARTH.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFAJXvxcGrk&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UziWSdC8Zhw&feature=related
Pedophilia is immoral - no matter man or woman. Please do not put both homosexuality and pedophilia into the same boat. There are plenty of grown men who abuse underage girls, it's when they happen to be gay that elevates the problem and lazily ties it to homosexuality.
Just as no one chooses to feel same-sex attractions, no one chooses to be a pedophile. I know some pedophiles. But some pedophiles do choose to molest children. I don't want to conflate pedophilia and immoral actions that some pedophiles do because they're pedophiles.
Many people ignore the difference between homosexuality and homosexual acts. Many Christians insist that homosexuality is immoral. But homosexuality is a property, not an action. Nor is it a sin of omission. Homosexuality the property is morally indifferent. Homosexual acts are, I think, immoral. An action can be immoral, even if someone doesn't deserve any blame for doing it.
No, I shouldn't put homosexuality and pedophilia in the same boat. I mentioned the Catholic Church's homosexual-abuse because skunk seems to think my opinions about sexual morality are feelings, not beliefs that are either true or false. Even psychotherapists I've talked with have agreed that feelings are neither truths nor falsehoods. Feelings are neither of those, but there are truths about feelings and there are falsehoods about them. If I only feel that homosexual acts are immoral, should some government outlaw feeling that way?
The phrase "a fact" is ambiguous. It can mean "a truth." It can also mean "a set of actual set of circumstances." There are truths about feelings, and there are feelings about truths. But my feelings aren't truths. Even if moral relativism is true, there are still objective truths about whether some society or other considers some action morally acceptable. And some relativists still hold a self-inconsistent belief when they believe that since every belief is relative to some context or other, there's no such thing as absolute truth. In one sense of the phrase "absolute truth," a truth is absolute when it's true about every context. In that sense of the phrase "absolute truth," I imply a self-contradiction myself when I say that since every truth is relative to some context or other, I imply that it's an absolute truth that there's no absolute truth.
In another sense of the phrase "absolute truth," a truth is absolute when it's true whether anyone believes it or not. Even if I'm mistaken when I believe that homosexual sex is gravely immoral, it's still true that either they're moral or not moral.
Too often, people who feel same-sex attractions suffer needlessly partly because they, others, or both ignore important distinctions. Unfortunately, people often ignore them when their feelings determine too much of what those people believe.
Immoral behavior continues partly because of moral relativism. Instead of conforming our minds to reality, we try to conform reality to our minds. Moral relativists talk as though an action is moral if and only if someone believes that it's moral. Some moral relativists even insist that if you believe that homosexual acts are morally acceptable, and I believe they're immoral, then we're both right. A moral relativist might say the same about the morality or immorality of gay-bashing. But someone is right when he thinks that gay-bashing is morally right, should a court punish him for gay-bashing someone?
NightFox
Apr 19, 01:37 PM
why? iphones outselling itouches by so much makes sense to me.
Just really basing it on my own experience - I'm the only one of my close friends/family to own an iPhone, but I can count 5 iPod Touches in that same group. Also thought their would be a lot of iPod Touches owned by children rather than iPhones.
Just really basing it on my own experience - I'm the only one of my close friends/family to own an iPhone, but I can count 5 iPod Touches in that same group. Also thought their would be a lot of iPod Touches owned by children rather than iPhones.
georgethomas
Apr 7, 09:54 AM
haha u cant stop technology from growing. ;)
fenderbass146
Apr 8, 12:51 AM
I am in the Geek Squad at a Best Buy, and at least at my store there is no such thing happening, nor have we ever been instructed to tell a customer that we don't have a certain product, unless it's unreleased such as new movies etc,,, but once something is released, if we have it we sell it.
Multimedia
Nov 28, 06:30 PM
I would make sure to NEVER buy another piece of music published by them if they were to extort this from Steve which I highly doubt. If I were Steve I would laugh in their face and call them INSANE to their face as well. Like setting up a toll booth on the railroad tracks of a 200MPH MagLev Train.
kdarling
Apr 20, 09:17 AM
The key thing here from Apple's standpoint is "Trade Dress".
No one will ever confuse a Samsung F700 with an iPhone. Now way. No how.
However the Galaxy devices are so close to Apple's products in appearance and design, it's very hard to tell them apart. THAT is the problem.
It's ony a problem if the customer can't tell the Samsung is not an Apple device at point of sale.
As for the tablets, I think it'd be pretty hard to confuse a Tab with an iPad, or think that the Tab is made by Apple.
As for the phones, who knows. I have a Fascinate (Verizon Galaxy) and the stock live koi pond wallpaper kind of gives it away, but then I know that Apple doesn't allow that. The big "Samsung" printed on the front is also a major cue.
In either case, Apple could have to come up with proof that normal consumers are actually confused between the products.
Why are you always anti-apple in every
other thread?
When you bash him instead of giving arguments, you lost already. Too many immature kids around here crying "troll" instead of using their brain.
Samsung has no honor.
It seems their problem is that they had access to Apple's design and so were able to copy more closely than is usually the case with Apple competitors.
That's a silly accusation. Why would Apple give Samsung access to their design? They buy parts from them, not cases or software.
The iPhone has been out for years. Plenty of time for Samsung to adopt rounded corners without having any secret info.
Now, if the Galaxy had looked like an iPhone 4.... :)
No one will ever confuse a Samsung F700 with an iPhone. Now way. No how.
However the Galaxy devices are so close to Apple's products in appearance and design, it's very hard to tell them apart. THAT is the problem.
It's ony a problem if the customer can't tell the Samsung is not an Apple device at point of sale.
As for the tablets, I think it'd be pretty hard to confuse a Tab with an iPad, or think that the Tab is made by Apple.
As for the phones, who knows. I have a Fascinate (Verizon Galaxy) and the stock live koi pond wallpaper kind of gives it away, but then I know that Apple doesn't allow that. The big "Samsung" printed on the front is also a major cue.
In either case, Apple could have to come up with proof that normal consumers are actually confused between the products.
Why are you always anti-apple in every
other thread?
When you bash him instead of giving arguments, you lost already. Too many immature kids around here crying "troll" instead of using their brain.
Samsung has no honor.
It seems their problem is that they had access to Apple's design and so were able to copy more closely than is usually the case with Apple competitors.
That's a silly accusation. Why would Apple give Samsung access to their design? They buy parts from them, not cases or software.
The iPhone has been out for years. Plenty of time for Samsung to adopt rounded corners without having any secret info.
Now, if the Galaxy had looked like an iPhone 4.... :)