digitalbiker
Aug 25, 09:03 PM
Ask me, phone support has been pretty lousy for years (at least since 1996 or whenever they instituted the stupid 90-day support rule that doesn't mirror the 1 year warranty.)
After reading through this thread, doesn't it concern everyone that so many of us have dealt with customer support over the past couple years.
What ever happened to quality control? I am not sure I have ever bought one Apple product since 1996 that I didn't end up calling Apple Customer support because something was wrong.
I remember buying a lot of computers, Apple II's, original macs, Commodore 64's, Amigas, Dells, etc. that never once required a phone call. Now everything I buy from Apple breaks or needs a repair prior to it's warranty running out. I have also had two machines and an ipod go completely bad after the warranty expired.
After reading through this thread, doesn't it concern everyone that so many of us have dealt with customer support over the past couple years.
What ever happened to quality control? I am not sure I have ever bought one Apple product since 1996 that I didn't end up calling Apple Customer support because something was wrong.
I remember buying a lot of computers, Apple II's, original macs, Commodore 64's, Amigas, Dells, etc. that never once required a phone call. Now everything I buy from Apple breaks or needs a repair prior to it's warranty running out. I have also had two machines and an ipod go completely bad after the warranty expired.
daneoni
Aug 27, 05:12 PM
Again, come on now...... it's not a question of whether people grasp it. It's question of who finds it funny and who doesn't. It's possible to "grasp" a joke and still not find it funny once it has been done to death. Just because someone doesn't think it is funny doesn't mean you have to insult their intelligence by saying they just don't "grasp" it.
No, you're putting words in my mouth. People can be intelligent and still not get the essence of a reoccuring joke.
No, you're putting words in my mouth. People can be intelligent and still not get the essence of a reoccuring joke.
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.
*LTD*
Apr 27, 10:49 AM
And once again people give Apple a pass for something that is clearly an issue.
If you're a criminal or a paranoid psycho, then yeah . . . it might be an issue. Even then, its rather useless to actually pinpoint someone's location.
Damn. some of you guys are *really* reaching here.
If you're a criminal or a paranoid psycho, then yeah . . . it might be an issue. Even then, its rather useless to actually pinpoint someone's location.
Damn. some of you guys are *really* reaching here.
guzhogi
Jul 14, 07:11 PM
Re-read the article.
It says there will be three available slots - 2 4x and 1 8x. These are the slots that will not be used by factory-bundled devices.
The bundled ATI X1800/X1900 video card will be in a 16x slot. It probably won't physically fit anywhere else!
4 slots. 3 unused. Not 3 total.
Most PCs don't have more slots, either. Sure you can find a few counter-examples, but 6-slot systems are not common. And with the exception of the PM 9500/9600, Apple has never shipped a 6-slot system. (The Quadra 950 had 5. Everything else shipped with 4 or less.)
You seem to think that a Pro system must have the capability of accepting every hardware device ever invented. (And how do you do this without making the case six feet tall?)
Dual video cards are only used by gamers. I doubt gamers are going to be interested in buying one of these, for the same reason they don't buy other Macs - the software comes out for other platforms first.
As for FC interfaces, they can work fine in any of the available slots. And there's no need for audio cards when you've got S/PDIF optical audio in/out.
Remember also that a studio won't be doing both video and audio editing on the same console! The people who are expert at one job are not going to be expert at the other. And if your studio is so strapped for cash that the different editors have to share a single computer, then you're in pretty sad shape!
I don't think you realize what you're asking for. A system that is capable of performing all possible tasks at once is just unrealistic. Nobody will ever equip a system like that, because no user will have those kinds of requirements.
Even in the PC world, where more slots are common, you almost never find a system that has actually filled all those slots with devices.
You're probably right about the slots, but I never said that it had to do everything at once. Just saying that it is my understanding that Apple is trying to make this a workstation (or at least that's what the rumor sites make it out to be) and it might as well have as much power as possible.
Also, as for the sound card, what about sound in? Some musicians might want MIDI in/out. I know, a lot of MIDI instruments come w/ USB now, but some musicians might want MIDI. Also, gamers aren't the only ones who might want/need to use 2+ graphics cards. What about CAD designers? Some of their stuff is pretty graphic intensive. Plus, since MacTels can run Windows, gamers might buy Macs, too. Just saying that some people might want this stuff, not necesarily everyone. To be honest, I don't care. Different strokes for different folks.
On a completely different note, I wonder what the Intel xServes will be like, along with new xServe RAIDs. If I read Apple's xServe RAID site, correctly, it uses ATA/100, not SATA. I wonder if/when Apple would upgrade? If I'm right (correct me if I'm wrong) SATA II has a max transfer rate of 3 Gb/s (or 750 MB/s), though I've also heard 300 MB/s. ATA/100's is 100 MB/s. Also, Western Digital's Raptor X is a 10,000 RPM drive and only has a SATA interface while all the ATA/100 drives I've seen are just 7200 RPM. People who need high bandwidth might want this.
It says there will be three available slots - 2 4x and 1 8x. These are the slots that will not be used by factory-bundled devices.
The bundled ATI X1800/X1900 video card will be in a 16x slot. It probably won't physically fit anywhere else!
4 slots. 3 unused. Not 3 total.
Most PCs don't have more slots, either. Sure you can find a few counter-examples, but 6-slot systems are not common. And with the exception of the PM 9500/9600, Apple has never shipped a 6-slot system. (The Quadra 950 had 5. Everything else shipped with 4 or less.)
You seem to think that a Pro system must have the capability of accepting every hardware device ever invented. (And how do you do this without making the case six feet tall?)
Dual video cards are only used by gamers. I doubt gamers are going to be interested in buying one of these, for the same reason they don't buy other Macs - the software comes out for other platforms first.
As for FC interfaces, they can work fine in any of the available slots. And there's no need for audio cards when you've got S/PDIF optical audio in/out.
Remember also that a studio won't be doing both video and audio editing on the same console! The people who are expert at one job are not going to be expert at the other. And if your studio is so strapped for cash that the different editors have to share a single computer, then you're in pretty sad shape!
I don't think you realize what you're asking for. A system that is capable of performing all possible tasks at once is just unrealistic. Nobody will ever equip a system like that, because no user will have those kinds of requirements.
Even in the PC world, where more slots are common, you almost never find a system that has actually filled all those slots with devices.
You're probably right about the slots, but I never said that it had to do everything at once. Just saying that it is my understanding that Apple is trying to make this a workstation (or at least that's what the rumor sites make it out to be) and it might as well have as much power as possible.
Also, as for the sound card, what about sound in? Some musicians might want MIDI in/out. I know, a lot of MIDI instruments come w/ USB now, but some musicians might want MIDI. Also, gamers aren't the only ones who might want/need to use 2+ graphics cards. What about CAD designers? Some of their stuff is pretty graphic intensive. Plus, since MacTels can run Windows, gamers might buy Macs, too. Just saying that some people might want this stuff, not necesarily everyone. To be honest, I don't care. Different strokes for different folks.
On a completely different note, I wonder what the Intel xServes will be like, along with new xServe RAIDs. If I read Apple's xServe RAID site, correctly, it uses ATA/100, not SATA. I wonder if/when Apple would upgrade? If I'm right (correct me if I'm wrong) SATA II has a max transfer rate of 3 Gb/s (or 750 MB/s), though I've also heard 300 MB/s. ATA/100's is 100 MB/s. Also, Western Digital's Raptor X is a 10,000 RPM drive and only has a SATA interface while all the ATA/100 drives I've seen are just 7200 RPM. People who need high bandwidth might want this.
fraserdrew
Aug 6, 04:12 PM
Vista is also 6 months out, prob more. This is no different then when Apple released 10.0. There WAS a reason 10.1 was free to 10.0 users. Microsoft will get this cleaned up over the 18+ months it takes Apple to come out with 10.6. Leopard has to go the distance and I two have been using Vista inhouse since early Alpha's for internal app testing. Its come a long way. It still has a long way to go still but the core IS there. MS simply needs to bug fix the heck out of it. Which will happen within 2-4 months of release with SP1 and then SP2 another 6 months after that.
I'm not a long time apple user, and don't know about the classic to OS X transition, but i do know that 2 service packs and bug fixes every month did nothing to XP, hence my move to OS X. So, ok i assumed that this will be the same case with vista, but considering the fact that (i think) concept viruses have already been written, and that microsoft really are up against the clock; i think that for at least the first year vista will be hellish.
After that, ok, maybe things will change, but it seems to me that this isn't the biggest upgrade ever (i'm an end user, and mainly use PC's for web-browsing and school work, so i haven't seen any major good things in vista) and microsoft have struggled to get it out. (sorry kinda off topic)
I'm not a long time apple user, and don't know about the classic to OS X transition, but i do know that 2 service packs and bug fixes every month did nothing to XP, hence my move to OS X. So, ok i assumed that this will be the same case with vista, but considering the fact that (i think) concept viruses have already been written, and that microsoft really are up against the clock; i think that for at least the first year vista will be hellish.
After that, ok, maybe things will change, but it seems to me that this isn't the biggest upgrade ever (i'm an end user, and mainly use PC's for web-browsing and school work, so i haven't seen any major good things in vista) and microsoft have struggled to get it out. (sorry kinda off topic)
Gatesbasher
Mar 31, 09:06 PM
Yeah! That's what'll happen!
Or they'll do further research and realize that the implications in this SINGLE ARTICLE might not be 100% true.
To the everyday user this means NOTHING as they have no knowledge of what open truly means, and therefore can't take advantage of it.
To the users who actually have the knowhow to utilize open source operating systems, this might mean a minor hinderance, but not a complete game changer.
And for clarification, the former is the vast majority.
Did no one notice the obvious bias in this article? It's slanted, and the author clearly thinks that Google has been wrong this entire time.
The everyday user has been buying Android phones in large numbers because they're cheap and are available on more carriers. This is not about everyday users, it's about the Fandroids who have been screaming "'Open' good, 'closed' bad!!" at the top of their lungs for the last three years.
I stand by my three groups: 1�indiscriminate Apple-haters (like you), 2�people who just want a team to root for: "Go Android!!" Right or wrong, and 3�the true believers in the open-source religion.
Now as I said before, the only truly "open" phones would be FreeRunners that Stallman assembles in his Mom's basement from components gleaned from dumpsters and hands out for free, so I have no idea what new savior they'll turn to to save them from the tyrant Jobs. Be funny if it was Microsoft!
And no, I see no "bias" in the article�I think you're using the Rupert Murdoch definition: "Facts I don't want anybody to hear."
Or they'll do further research and realize that the implications in this SINGLE ARTICLE might not be 100% true.
To the everyday user this means NOTHING as they have no knowledge of what open truly means, and therefore can't take advantage of it.
To the users who actually have the knowhow to utilize open source operating systems, this might mean a minor hinderance, but not a complete game changer.
And for clarification, the former is the vast majority.
Did no one notice the obvious bias in this article? It's slanted, and the author clearly thinks that Google has been wrong this entire time.
The everyday user has been buying Android phones in large numbers because they're cheap and are available on more carriers. This is not about everyday users, it's about the Fandroids who have been screaming "'Open' good, 'closed' bad!!" at the top of their lungs for the last three years.
I stand by my three groups: 1�indiscriminate Apple-haters (like you), 2�people who just want a team to root for: "Go Android!!" Right or wrong, and 3�the true believers in the open-source religion.
Now as I said before, the only truly "open" phones would be FreeRunners that Stallman assembles in his Mom's basement from components gleaned from dumpsters and hands out for free, so I have no idea what new savior they'll turn to to save them from the tyrant Jobs. Be funny if it was Microsoft!
And no, I see no "bias" in the article�I think you're using the Rupert Murdoch definition: "Facts I don't want anybody to hear."
skunk
Mar 3, 11:57 AM
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.On the other hand, people can live without morality, which is prescribed by outside influences, and live ethically, which is according to one's own lights.
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?Why would any government - how could any government - legislate your feelings? You can feel what you like, just do not dress up your personal feelings as "truths" which others should acquiesce in.
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.You may think they are "immoral", but your "morality" is yours, not anyone else's.
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?What do you think?
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?Why would any government - how could any government - legislate your feelings? You can feel what you like, just do not dress up your personal feelings as "truths" which others should acquiesce in.
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.You may think they are "immoral", but your "morality" is yours, not anyone else's.
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?What do you think?
Snowy_River
Jul 28, 03:26 PM
Dan=='s mockup is something that I had considered before, I remember talking about it with Yvan 256 at some point as something like "the return of the Cube." I think it's a pretty good design, the guts of the Mini are so packed as it is, an expanded case would allow for a substantial upgrade in components, including the oft clamored for dedicated GPU.
Another way Apple could do it is just to elongate the Mini's case to make it just as svelte vertically, only slightly wider. Could you take a run at that one Dan==? ;)
Okay, I did some tinkering myself, just for kicks, and here's what I came up with. I thought that we were talking about a computer that was somewhere between a Mac Mini and a Mac Pro (Power Mac), so I thought, maybe the style should be a combination of the two. Let me know what you think.
It's not a Mac Plus... It's a Mac++!
http://www.ghwphoto.com/Mac++1.PNGhttp://www.ghwphoto.com/Mac++2.PNG
Another way Apple could do it is just to elongate the Mini's case to make it just as svelte vertically, only slightly wider. Could you take a run at that one Dan==? ;)
Okay, I did some tinkering myself, just for kicks, and here's what I came up with. I thought that we were talking about a computer that was somewhere between a Mac Mini and a Mac Pro (Power Mac), so I thought, maybe the style should be a combination of the two. Let me know what you think.
It's not a Mac Plus... It's a Mac++!
http://www.ghwphoto.com/Mac++1.PNGhttp://www.ghwphoto.com/Mac++2.PNG
Silentwave
Jul 20, 09:07 PM
Well..I wonder if Apple indeed comes up with the Mac Pro update using even the top-of-the-line Xeon, who's gonna buy one knowing that a quad-core processor is coming up in the near future? I mean, I would hold off buying a Woodcrest machine if there's a quad-core is coming up next year..
I know people will always say that "if you need one, buy one. Don't wait for new machines." But hey, it's a 2 grand machine!
Perhaps we won't be seeing a Woodcrest Mac Pro at this year's WWDC at all. Perhaps we'll be seeing a quad-core Mac Pro proto-type that will be available in Novemeber or something like that:D !
I don't know what intel's pricing will be on the Clovertowns....it is possible that Woodcrest will take a price dive when clovertown comes out and clovertown would take its place, or it is possible clovertown will be more expensive. Kentsfield is I think supposed to be an Extreme Edition?
I know people will always say that "if you need one, buy one. Don't wait for new machines." But hey, it's a 2 grand machine!
Perhaps we won't be seeing a Woodcrest Mac Pro at this year's WWDC at all. Perhaps we'll be seeing a quad-core Mac Pro proto-type that will be available in Novemeber or something like that:D !
I don't know what intel's pricing will be on the Clovertowns....it is possible that Woodcrest will take a price dive when clovertown comes out and clovertown would take its place, or it is possible clovertown will be more expensive. Kentsfield is I think supposed to be an Extreme Edition?
cjc81
Sep 19, 11:31 AM
I don't think you've got anything to worry about there...
Looks like your order is going to be delayed, in your favour =)
Looks like your order is going to be delayed, in your favour =)
jonharris200
Aug 5, 04:53 PM
I think that that we'll have to wait for Paris for the iMac update and new iPods.
France would be a stunning choice of location for the launch of something that's iTunes related! I'm sure that that irony hasn't escaped Jobs & Co in their product scheduling. ;)
France would be a stunning choice of location for the launch of something that's iTunes related! I'm sure that that irony hasn't escaped Jobs & Co in their product scheduling. ;)
mdntcallr
Sep 13, 10:30 AM
this is pretty neat news.
means people like me can buy a mac pro tower with the 2.0 ghz core. good video card.
then upgrade later on when i have more money. that and it will be powerful as hell.
super nice!
means people like me can buy a mac pro tower with the 2.0 ghz core. good video card.
then upgrade later on when i have more money. that and it will be powerful as hell.
super nice!
dbwie
Apr 27, 10:39 AM
They cannot pinpoint YOU because data is sent anonymously. They can roughly pinpoint A phone, but don't know whose phone it is because the data is sent anonymously (aka without identifying information)
I think it's not as bad as what the media would have you believe, BUT it is worse than what Apple wants you to think.
Sure, cell towers could be up to 100 miles away. And when I ran the mapping tool and plotted my locations, and zoom in far enough, I do indeed see a grid of cell towers as opposed to actual locations where I've been standing. All anyone could know is that I've been "somewhere" in the vicinity.
(And this isn't new. Some time ago I came upon a car crash and called 911 on my cell phone to report it. They were able to get the location to send emergency services just by where I was calling from. It wasn't 100% accurate -- they asked if I was near a major intersection and I told them it was about a block from there.)
However, if it's also tracking wifi hotspots, those can pinpoint you pretty closely. Most people stay within 30-50 feet of their wireless router, and the ones you spend the most time connected to will be the ones at home, at work, and and at your friends' houses.
I think it's not as bad as what the media would have you believe, BUT it is worse than what Apple wants you to think.
Sure, cell towers could be up to 100 miles away. And when I ran the mapping tool and plotted my locations, and zoom in far enough, I do indeed see a grid of cell towers as opposed to actual locations where I've been standing. All anyone could know is that I've been "somewhere" in the vicinity.
(And this isn't new. Some time ago I came upon a car crash and called 911 on my cell phone to report it. They were able to get the location to send emergency services just by where I was calling from. It wasn't 100% accurate -- they asked if I was near a major intersection and I told them it was about a block from there.)
However, if it's also tracking wifi hotspots, those can pinpoint you pretty closely. Most people stay within 30-50 feet of their wireless router, and the ones you spend the most time connected to will be the ones at home, at work, and and at your friends' houses.
iStudentUK
Apr 11, 11:26 AM
They should stick to the June update each year. I know it may not be their fault but Apple need to keep the iPhone up to date, otherwise they will lose ground. Mobile phones are very competitive.
iGary
Aug 25, 05:19 PM
So a happy ending, but a disgracefully long wait to get to it.
Usually the case. My situation played out over only a month, really, but it was several visits to the Apple Store and hours on the phone with useless "product specialists."
Usually the case. My situation played out over only a month, really, but it was several visits to the Apple Store and hours on the phone with useless "product specialists."
Some_Big_Spoon
Aug 27, 01:19 AM
BTO's
The update time for Apple's store is 9am EST? I was under the impression that it was 9am PST. I'm behind the times! (pun intended, I suppose)
Is the 7-10 days for BTO iMacs? Or stock ones?
The update time for Apple's store is 9am EST? I was under the impression that it was 9am PST. I'm behind the times! (pun intended, I suppose)
Is the 7-10 days for BTO iMacs? Or stock ones?
Iconoclysm
Apr 20, 04:14 PM
Copying is copying. If someone else came out with an iProduct you can bet that Apple would slap a lawsuit on them. The Apple record logo was around for several years before Apple computer. I'm sure Jobs knew of the Beatles, he was a long haired hippie back in the 70's. So the logo could have been influenced by the Beatles.
Copying is not copying when you don't even know about what was done before...and we know the story about what influenced Apple, the alphabet. And the logo isn't even the same - it's the name that the suit was over, not the logo. Knowing about the record label wasn't on the front page of the newspaper, this was the 1970's...there was no internet, it's more than just a little possible that Jobs did not know this. And you're assuming that logo was everywhere, and you're wrong.
Copying is not copying when you don't even know about what was done before...and we know the story about what influenced Apple, the alphabet. And the logo isn't even the same - it's the name that the suit was over, not the logo. Knowing about the record label wasn't on the front page of the newspaper, this was the 1970's...there was no internet, it's more than just a little possible that Jobs did not know this. And you're assuming that logo was everywhere, and you're wrong.
fatfish
Aug 7, 09:06 PM
When I first saw this feature I thought great. I do regular back ups, but some of my AW docs keep corrupting (probably something to do with keep duplicating the same old document and modifying rather than starting anew). Time Machine will help me no end. I was also thrilled that windows had nothing like this........ until I read through these posts.
Then it seemed very similar to what was coming in Vista and I felt a bit dissapointed that Apple had made such a point about M$ copying them, but seemed to do the same themselves with Time Machine.
However on closer examination this is not the case and my confidence in Apple's innovative skills is restored.
Firstly, there has always been back up and restore apps, so if you want to take this copying thing to a ridiculous level, of course you can do. Copying in my book is when an app does and looks the same (just like the screenshots in the presentation, safari RSS/IE7 RSS, ical/M$ calender etc). It appears to me Time Machine does much more than anything before it and has it's own unique UI to boot.
Secondly, I would imagine work on Time machine started long before a beta of Vista was released, even if the two utilities were more or less identical it would be coincidence not copying.
Thirdly, it seems quite clear that Vista's restore (whatever it's called) will not do what Time machine will do. Ultimately you may well be able to restore any deleted or modified file in Vista, but it doesn't appear to occur with the same ease or functionality.
If I create a file, modify it and move it several times, rename it, convert it, modify it some more, move it several times and finally delete it, I rather suspect it would be an absolute nightmare to recover in Vista, whereas it seems that Time Machine would have little problem.
I don't see how it is possible in Vista to perform the recovery with either the same simplicity or pizzaz as Time Machine. Perhaps if M$ had not abandoned their intended file system for Vista it might have been possible, but as it is I doubt it.
Finally it does not appear that Vista has the option to restore within a database application (i.e. iphoto, mail, address book), no doubt if you understand how a particular database works, the possibility exists to restore a particular photo, but let's not pretend it will be easy or anywhere near the experience of time machine.
And finally, finally, although I agree the UI may appear a little childish, this is exactly the sort of thing that makes it so easy to use.
Then it seemed very similar to what was coming in Vista and I felt a bit dissapointed that Apple had made such a point about M$ copying them, but seemed to do the same themselves with Time Machine.
However on closer examination this is not the case and my confidence in Apple's innovative skills is restored.
Firstly, there has always been back up and restore apps, so if you want to take this copying thing to a ridiculous level, of course you can do. Copying in my book is when an app does and looks the same (just like the screenshots in the presentation, safari RSS/IE7 RSS, ical/M$ calender etc). It appears to me Time Machine does much more than anything before it and has it's own unique UI to boot.
Secondly, I would imagine work on Time machine started long before a beta of Vista was released, even if the two utilities were more or less identical it would be coincidence not copying.
Thirdly, it seems quite clear that Vista's restore (whatever it's called) will not do what Time machine will do. Ultimately you may well be able to restore any deleted or modified file in Vista, but it doesn't appear to occur with the same ease or functionality.
If I create a file, modify it and move it several times, rename it, convert it, modify it some more, move it several times and finally delete it, I rather suspect it would be an absolute nightmare to recover in Vista, whereas it seems that Time Machine would have little problem.
I don't see how it is possible in Vista to perform the recovery with either the same simplicity or pizzaz as Time Machine. Perhaps if M$ had not abandoned their intended file system for Vista it might have been possible, but as it is I doubt it.
Finally it does not appear that Vista has the option to restore within a database application (i.e. iphoto, mail, address book), no doubt if you understand how a particular database works, the possibility exists to restore a particular photo, but let's not pretend it will be easy or anywhere near the experience of time machine.
And finally, finally, although I agree the UI may appear a little childish, this is exactly the sort of thing that makes it so easy to use.
Horst
Aug 28, 10:49 AM
Just my 0.02 regarding Apple's customer service :
I buy Apple computers in the hope never to need any support by the manufacturer. Two times I had issues ( broken hinge on TiBook, 1st. gen. ACD 23" with severe color tint ) and Apple wouldn't even acknowledge such a problem exists. Needless to say, those faults are well documented as inherent design flaws of the products mentioned.
That's Apple Germany, mind you - I would never even try to contact Apple US for possible issues with the computers I bought and use over there, as customer protection in the US is virtually non-existent.
I'm a professional user, and received exceptional online and phone support by other companies for 300$ products, but no service whatsoever for 20k+ of Apple products.
I know Apple is not catering to pros, but still ....
I buy Apple computers in the hope never to need any support by the manufacturer. Two times I had issues ( broken hinge on TiBook, 1st. gen. ACD 23" with severe color tint ) and Apple wouldn't even acknowledge such a problem exists. Needless to say, those faults are well documented as inherent design flaws of the products mentioned.
That's Apple Germany, mind you - I would never even try to contact Apple US for possible issues with the computers I bought and use over there, as customer protection in the US is virtually non-existent.
I'm a professional user, and received exceptional online and phone support by other companies for 300$ products, but no service whatsoever for 20k+ of Apple products.
I know Apple is not catering to pros, but still ....
awesomebase
Mar 31, 07:16 PM
I would add I never understand the comparison of Smartphones running Android to smartphones running IOS.
Neither Google or Apple sell their phone operating systems, and the Android spectrum is made up of 50 handsets from 10 different manufacturers who are in direct competition with each other. They are not one big group working together to take on Apple. It makes absolutely zero sense to make that kind of comparison.
It is just as weird as loping off iPod and iPad IOS users...
If people want to compare smartphones, then compare actual sales of individual smartphones, each which only use one OS. People should not draw meaningless lines in the sand lumping all android based handsets together, because they are not together other than they run android. They might as well compare black phones to white phones.
I imagine if you made a chart of the top selling smartphones in the last 5 years, it would consist of the iPhone 4, the iPhone 3GS, the iPhone 3G and the iPhone.
Why not group smartphones by what kind of graphics chip they have or what type of memory chip they use? The OS is irrelevant. Nobody in the smartphone business is directly making money off any of these oses, it is a stupid way to categorize smart phones.
Of course it happens because if they didn't lump them together it would look absurd with Apple totally dominating the smart phone market with their latest phone every year while 100 android commodity phones all have tiny market shares just to get replaced by the next one.
How does HTC running android OS benefit or relate to a Motorola phone running android? It does not, at all.
From an engineering perspective and from a manufacturer's perspective, you're correct. But from an investment's perspective your argument doesn't work. Investors are concerned about Google's ability to profit from this and they compare "Platforms" to get an idea about where people are trending to. That is why despite BB growing, their stock is actually going to be in the trash in a couple of years if not sooner. Their "OS" is basically worthless... people don't value it as much as Android or iOS and as the phones that run those platforms continue to drop in price and become more capable, BB has no choice but to practically give their phones away to make their numbers (albeit at carrier-subsidized prices, but their prices and margins get severely eroded over time).
Just wanted to point that out... your logic is correct, just not applicable to all scenarios...
Neither Google or Apple sell their phone operating systems, and the Android spectrum is made up of 50 handsets from 10 different manufacturers who are in direct competition with each other. They are not one big group working together to take on Apple. It makes absolutely zero sense to make that kind of comparison.
It is just as weird as loping off iPod and iPad IOS users...
If people want to compare smartphones, then compare actual sales of individual smartphones, each which only use one OS. People should not draw meaningless lines in the sand lumping all android based handsets together, because they are not together other than they run android. They might as well compare black phones to white phones.
I imagine if you made a chart of the top selling smartphones in the last 5 years, it would consist of the iPhone 4, the iPhone 3GS, the iPhone 3G and the iPhone.
Why not group smartphones by what kind of graphics chip they have or what type of memory chip they use? The OS is irrelevant. Nobody in the smartphone business is directly making money off any of these oses, it is a stupid way to categorize smart phones.
Of course it happens because if they didn't lump them together it would look absurd with Apple totally dominating the smart phone market with their latest phone every year while 100 android commodity phones all have tiny market shares just to get replaced by the next one.
How does HTC running android OS benefit or relate to a Motorola phone running android? It does not, at all.
From an engineering perspective and from a manufacturer's perspective, you're correct. But from an investment's perspective your argument doesn't work. Investors are concerned about Google's ability to profit from this and they compare "Platforms" to get an idea about where people are trending to. That is why despite BB growing, their stock is actually going to be in the trash in a couple of years if not sooner. Their "OS" is basically worthless... people don't value it as much as Android or iOS and as the phones that run those platforms continue to drop in price and become more capable, BB has no choice but to practically give their phones away to make their numbers (albeit at carrier-subsidized prices, but their prices and margins get severely eroded over time).
Just wanted to point that out... your logic is correct, just not applicable to all scenarios...
Teddy's
Jul 27, 12:32 PM
at last, I may be able to build a system that will run Vista well!
EEEEEEEEEWWWWW!!!!!
EEEEEEEEEWWWWW!!!!!
merk850
Jul 28, 03:01 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.....
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.....
mccldwll
Apr 27, 08:50 AM
No it's not.
And I think MOST people aren't blowing anything out of proportion. Being concerned about tracking information/privacy issues is important. Most people (stop generalizing just because some on this board are) are NOT over-reacting but were calling for deeper investigation into the issue.
Yes, it is. It's hardly tracking if distant towers are also logged. It's a minor issue. Logs need to be deleted after a short period of time. It will be done.
And I think MOST people aren't blowing anything out of proportion. Being concerned about tracking information/privacy issues is important. Most people (stop generalizing just because some on this board are) are NOT over-reacting but were calling for deeper investigation into the issue.
Yes, it is. It's hardly tracking if distant towers are also logged. It's a minor issue. Logs need to be deleted after a short period of time. It will be done.