Lollypop
Sep 12, 01:08 AM
I realize that, but there are more major studios that are not on that list owned by Disney than there are on the list. But maybe it will work out like the TV downloads have, as some have suggested, starting with just a few and adding more. The problem is, Apple does not currently dominate that market; there are other players right now that are equally strong with their video download services. It seems that the market seems to favor having a dominant player, like Windows for OS and iTMS for music downloads. This could leave the door open for Microsoft to dominate this market if Apple doesn't ramp up its selection quickly.
The iTMS had competition when it started, and it still does... if apple makes it easy and cheap to do movies, like they did with music the will give their competitors a run for their money... also remember, when the iTMS started it didnt have anything else of offer, now its got a lot of music, videos, podcasts and and and... resulting in a lot of content, the movie library can start out small and grow.
The iTMS had competition when it started, and it still does... if apple makes it easy and cheap to do movies, like they did with music the will give their competitors a run for their money... also remember, when the iTMS started it didnt have anything else of offer, now its got a lot of music, videos, podcasts and and and... resulting in a lot of content, the movie library can start out small and grow.
tdhurst
Jan 12, 09:08 PM
Thats a loaded demand since you already agreed with my later statement that they need to learn how to vet online sources like they do print sources. I can list off any number of magazines or whatnot that would do such things if given the chance, though. It isn't like gizmodo invented pranking, guys.
If given a chance? What does that mean?
You think if Wired had done this they wouldn't have been banned?
If given a chance? What does that mean?
You think if Wired had done this they wouldn't have been banned?
PatrickCocoa
Apr 5, 04:24 PM
anyone that would download this app is a complete moron
Challenge Accepted!
Challenge Accepted!
EricNau
Jan 12, 12:25 AM
they didn't release iwork and ilife probably b/c of Amazon putting it up on their website early
Actually, I believe it wasn't released at MacWorld for two reasons...
1) Time. They keynote ran about 2 hours as is (already above the average). Introducing two new software suites would easily add another 45 minutes (making the event much too long).
2) The focus was clearly the iPhone, and Jobs didn't want anything to steal its glory.
It makes much more sense to introduce the iPhone at MacWorld and have a separate event for Leopard, iLife, and iWork.
Actually, I believe it wasn't released at MacWorld for two reasons...
1) Time. They keynote ran about 2 hours as is (already above the average). Introducing two new software suites would easily add another 45 minutes (making the event much too long).
2) The focus was clearly the iPhone, and Jobs didn't want anything to steal its glory.
It makes much more sense to introduce the iPhone at MacWorld and have a separate event for Leopard, iLife, and iWork.
more...
balamw
Apr 27, 08:07 PM
I have found a tutorial where you can start, stop and reset a timer, I could use that, but I want a datePicker to select time and the tutorial doesn't show that. Here is the link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5jmTQi98vec&feature=related
Divide and conquer.
Where he makes the counter count backwards from 600 by hardcoding the initial value in the label, make that a variable that is tied to the datePicker of your choice.
If you want to do it in baby steps, first use two labels one for the input and one for the display to input the starting time and then replace the input one with your datePicker.
B
Divide and conquer.
Where he makes the counter count backwards from 600 by hardcoding the initial value in the label, make that a variable that is tied to the datePicker of your choice.
If you want to do it in baby steps, first use two labels one for the input and one for the display to input the starting time and then replace the input one with your datePicker.
B
iGary
Sep 25, 06:39 PM
nothing strange happend
http://img57.imageshack.us/img57/9180/picture2jz1.th.png (http://img57.imageshack.us/my.php?image=picture2jz1.png)
Macbook Pro 2.0 - 2 GB Ram
That's prolly why.
I think the UB version is running much better on Intel.
I tried it out on a MBP and a Mac Pro and a new Imac and had much better performance that with my own machine.
http://img57.imageshack.us/img57/9180/picture2jz1.th.png (http://img57.imageshack.us/my.php?image=picture2jz1.png)
Macbook Pro 2.0 - 2 GB Ram
That's prolly why.
I think the UB version is running much better on Intel.
I tried it out on a MBP and a Mac Pro and a new Imac and had much better performance that with my own machine.
more...
mrial
Dec 13, 10:38 AM
Dont underestimate the power of marketing. They might have this LTE/CDMA combo where the LTE is not all that functional but is there only for the publicity. Think about the splash of the FIRST 4G iPhone!
escapehere
Oct 29, 06:16 AM
Are we talking about the FreeBSD license or the NetBSD license. The NetBSD license isn't free and that is what OSX is based off of and apple paid to use the license.
OSX is based off FreeBSD and mach. Apple may have taken some code from NetBSD over the years but FreeBSD is the predominate source for the BSD layer. It's pretty common knowledge, it even used to be mentioned on Apple's website, although I don't know if it still is.
The NetBSD licence is a BSD-style licence. That's a free licence. FreeBSD and NetBSD often use each other's code for various things. View the licences for yourself:
http://www.freebsd.org/copyright/freebsd-license.html
http://www.netbsd.org/Goals/redistribution.html
If Apple did use any NetBSD code, they may possibly have made a donation to the NetBSD foundation but they certainly didn't "pay" for a licence.
OSX is based off FreeBSD and mach. Apple may have taken some code from NetBSD over the years but FreeBSD is the predominate source for the BSD layer. It's pretty common knowledge, it even used to be mentioned on Apple's website, although I don't know if it still is.
The NetBSD licence is a BSD-style licence. That's a free licence. FreeBSD and NetBSD often use each other's code for various things. View the licences for yourself:
http://www.freebsd.org/copyright/freebsd-license.html
http://www.netbsd.org/Goals/redistribution.html
If Apple did use any NetBSD code, they may possibly have made a donation to the NetBSD foundation but they certainly didn't "pay" for a licence.
more...
swingerofbirch
Sep 25, 02:19 PM
I was hoping for at least version 1.6.
1.5 is a little too little, a little too late.
1.5 is a little too little, a little too late.
solvs
Jan 15, 01:33 AM
Blogging isn't journalism,
No, but there are some who are trying to be taken seriously. They had a press pass. As has been repeated multiple times, this hurts the entire blogging industry (and it is an industry) who cover things as journalists. This isn't some old lady down the street, this is a tech blog that's a business itself that has been built up over the years in an attempt to be taken seriously and get press access to just events and products to test for their articles. That's all been destroyed with one stupid act, which they're now trying to turn into an act of defiance. They made some interesting points in the last spiel, but it doesn't change the fact that if they want to be taken seriously, and they claim to want to be, at least more than those who are bought or don't ask the tough questions, this isn't going to help.
So when they do try to post something serious, and they have, is it any wonder if we won't trust them or believe them, or even care?
No, but there are some who are trying to be taken seriously. They had a press pass. As has been repeated multiple times, this hurts the entire blogging industry (and it is an industry) who cover things as journalists. This isn't some old lady down the street, this is a tech blog that's a business itself that has been built up over the years in an attempt to be taken seriously and get press access to just events and products to test for their articles. That's all been destroyed with one stupid act, which they're now trying to turn into an act of defiance. They made some interesting points in the last spiel, but it doesn't change the fact that if they want to be taken seriously, and they claim to want to be, at least more than those who are bought or don't ask the tough questions, this isn't going to help.
So when they do try to post something serious, and they have, is it any wonder if we won't trust them or believe them, or even care?
more...
kuebby
Apr 6, 12:28 PM
Well I'm glad it's free, I'd hate to pay $.99 to look at ads.
Much Ado
Jan 12, 03:46 AM
They are BLOGGERS. There are no rules in blogging. There are no codes of ethics.
As soon as you start advertising on your blog and maintain a healthy stream for revenue from hits, you become more than just a blog. They owe it to themselves to be professional for the sake of their reputations, and they just screwed that up royally.
As soon as you start advertising on your blog and maintain a healthy stream for revenue from hits, you become more than just a blog. They owe it to themselves to be professional for the sake of their reputations, and they just screwed that up royally.
more...
quigleybc
Sep 9, 06:49 PM
I'm not ashasmed that our country was unprepared to deal with this
i am.
The blame will go straight to the top. Straight to George. He should have cut short his vacation on the ranch and been on a plane on day 1. This arguement will go around and around in circles, but look, people could have been saved if the administration had not cut funds to FEMA and redirected them to the war in Iraq. There were multiple interviews before the hurricane with people saying that the levy's would not hold if the hurricane hit hard. If Bill could get impeached because he got head, then is it unreasonable to hold George acountable for this? Am I the only one who feels this way?
guess so. This is my opinion, and I am entitled to it.
i am.
The blame will go straight to the top. Straight to George. He should have cut short his vacation on the ranch and been on a plane on day 1. This arguement will go around and around in circles, but look, people could have been saved if the administration had not cut funds to FEMA and redirected them to the war in Iraq. There were multiple interviews before the hurricane with people saying that the levy's would not hold if the hurricane hit hard. If Bill could get impeached because he got head, then is it unreasonable to hold George acountable for this? Am I the only one who feels this way?
guess so. This is my opinion, and I am entitled to it.
Carouser
Mar 17, 12:30 PM
I think its the kid's responsibility here. The OP had every intention of paying for his purchase, but the cashier dropped the ball big time. When you take on a job, you assume the responsibilities that come with it. Making a mistake that big will have consequences. I would hate to have someone that makes mistakes like that working for me.
In other words, you think if someone else makes a mistake and you find out about it, there is zero problem with exploiting that mistake and bragging about it, it's totally free and clear. I would hate to have someone with an attitude like that employing other people.
Maybe one day someone can take advantage of your spouse or grandmother; I'm sure you'll be first in line to tell them it was their fault for making a mistake in the first place (which every person in the world does; that's why they're called 'mistakes').
The OP 'had every intention of paying for his purchase' until he knew he could get away with not paying for it.
In other words, you think if someone else makes a mistake and you find out about it, there is zero problem with exploiting that mistake and bragging about it, it's totally free and clear. I would hate to have someone with an attitude like that employing other people.
Maybe one day someone can take advantage of your spouse or grandmother; I'm sure you'll be first in line to tell them it was their fault for making a mistake in the first place (which every person in the world does; that's why they're called 'mistakes').
The OP 'had every intention of paying for his purchase' until he knew he could get away with not paying for it.
more...
egret
Jul 21, 09:35 AM
Show me another phone that can drop calls from just the position of one finger. Nokia have their problems at the moment, but their reception has always been rock solid.
As for people being surprised at Apple's childishness, have you forgotten about the douchetastic "I'm a Mac campaign".
Apple is doing what they need to do to defend themselves against the smear job put out by the haters in the media and tech sites aligned against them.
You would fight back to if it were your....well you probably wouldnt.
As for people being surprised at Apple's childishness, have you forgotten about the douchetastic "I'm a Mac campaign".
Apple is doing what they need to do to defend themselves against the smear job put out by the haters in the media and tech sites aligned against them.
You would fight back to if it were your....well you probably wouldnt.
marco114
Oct 6, 12:26 PM
I have lived in 4 different rural markets and regularly travel between them. Currently, in NC, Verizon is everywhere since they bought out a couple providers like Rural Cellular and I forget the other one.
When I left Verizon, they had full bar 3G coverage at my house. They had just upgraded about 3 months before I went with an iPhone. With AT&T, I need to drive almost 20 miles to even find 3G coverage.
With Verizon, I had a Palm Treo 700 and it was very rare to see even the analog signal at all.
If Apple would make the iPhone for Verizon, i'd switch back in a blink, even if I had to pay early termination, it's that bad. I typically lose between 20-40% of my calls. There is several dead zones too, that I can't even drive down without losing it.
When I left Verizon, they had full bar 3G coverage at my house. They had just upgraded about 3 months before I went with an iPhone. With AT&T, I need to drive almost 20 miles to even find 3G coverage.
With Verizon, I had a Palm Treo 700 and it was very rare to see even the analog signal at all.
If Apple would make the iPhone for Verizon, i'd switch back in a blink, even if I had to pay early termination, it's that bad. I typically lose between 20-40% of my calls. There is several dead zones too, that I can't even drive down without losing it.
more...
dukebound85
Mar 5, 03:40 PM
they aren't
mkrishnan
Sep 7, 10:12 PM
I've never heard myself say "Yo, Yo, wut up dude?" either...
God, I hope not! :eek: ;) :D
No, I downloaded it from somewhere else.
*wink wink, nudge nudge*
Say no more! :p
God, I hope not! :eek: ;) :D
No, I downloaded it from somewhere else.
*wink wink, nudge nudge*
Say no more! :p
Winni
Mar 29, 07:20 AM
Good. I'm all in favor of Apple adding more incentives for devs to embrace the Mac App store. As a consumer I really like the idea of an App Store that makes buying and installing as easy as one click as well as fostering competition between comparable apps.
Yes, the AppStore makes it (too) easy to comfortably spend money.
But as a consumer, I HATE the fact that I cannot sell the software that I purchased in the AppStore once I don't need or want it anymore. You know, this is my LEGAL RIGHT here in Germany, and with stuff bought from the AppStore, I don't have the possibility to execute this right because the AppStore does not have an option to transfer licenses to a new owner.
Valve's Steam platform has the same limitation, so sadly this is not unique to Apple's store.
This is why DRMed content should always be boycotted. DRM is not about granting the customer certain rights, it is exclusively about restricting his rights. In this case even to the extent to deny a customer his legal rights.
I don't have a problem with traditional license keys. That's a copy protection mechanism that I can tolerate. Activation procedures are already problematic (they are unreliable at best), but to dongle software to a specific user account in an online store without enabling the user to transfer that software to a different account should be prohibited by law.
It'll be their loss, especially since competitors like MS will follow suit and introduce a similar distribution model. Eventually everyone will be in the game, for the the simple reason that they'd like to duplicate Apple's success.
1. You intentionally ignored the point that referred to Apple's Terms of Service. For example, applications like VMWare Fusion, Parallels Desktop or even SuperDuper! could never be distributed through the Mac AppStore because they belong in a category that Apple does not ALLOW in their AppStore. As a matter of fact, even their own Xcode violates their TOS. But they wouldn't be Apple if the same rules also applied to themselves...
2. There won't be a Microsoft AppStore for Windows INTEGRATED INTO WINDOWS. EVER. Why? Because they can't for LEGAL reasons. Anti-trust lawsuits, anyone? Microsoft would only get away with that if they implemented a "choose your AppStore" program that would let the people choose which online store they want to use - just like they had to do it for the web browsers. I think that Apple should also be forced to do the same. After all, there is at least one other "AppStore" for the Mac out there that is even OLDER than Apple's own AppStore, and Apple misuses their power to drive those guys out of business. People stopped using Netscape when Internet Explorer came pre-installed on the operating system. Now people will not even try to look for another online store when the AppStore and iTunes are pre-installed on their computers. The same thing. The same rules should apply to Apple as they obviously apply to Microsoft.
Yes, the AppStore makes it (too) easy to comfortably spend money.
But as a consumer, I HATE the fact that I cannot sell the software that I purchased in the AppStore once I don't need or want it anymore. You know, this is my LEGAL RIGHT here in Germany, and with stuff bought from the AppStore, I don't have the possibility to execute this right because the AppStore does not have an option to transfer licenses to a new owner.
Valve's Steam platform has the same limitation, so sadly this is not unique to Apple's store.
This is why DRMed content should always be boycotted. DRM is not about granting the customer certain rights, it is exclusively about restricting his rights. In this case even to the extent to deny a customer his legal rights.
I don't have a problem with traditional license keys. That's a copy protection mechanism that I can tolerate. Activation procedures are already problematic (they are unreliable at best), but to dongle software to a specific user account in an online store without enabling the user to transfer that software to a different account should be prohibited by law.
It'll be their loss, especially since competitors like MS will follow suit and introduce a similar distribution model. Eventually everyone will be in the game, for the the simple reason that they'd like to duplicate Apple's success.
1. You intentionally ignored the point that referred to Apple's Terms of Service. For example, applications like VMWare Fusion, Parallels Desktop or even SuperDuper! could never be distributed through the Mac AppStore because they belong in a category that Apple does not ALLOW in their AppStore. As a matter of fact, even their own Xcode violates their TOS. But they wouldn't be Apple if the same rules also applied to themselves...
2. There won't be a Microsoft AppStore for Windows INTEGRATED INTO WINDOWS. EVER. Why? Because they can't for LEGAL reasons. Anti-trust lawsuits, anyone? Microsoft would only get away with that if they implemented a "choose your AppStore" program that would let the people choose which online store they want to use - just like they had to do it for the web browsers. I think that Apple should also be forced to do the same. After all, there is at least one other "AppStore" for the Mac out there that is even OLDER than Apple's own AppStore, and Apple misuses their power to drive those guys out of business. People stopped using Netscape when Internet Explorer came pre-installed on the operating system. Now people will not even try to look for another online store when the AppStore and iTunes are pre-installed on their computers. The same thing. The same rules should apply to Apple as they obviously apply to Microsoft.
SynPiekarza
Mar 28, 02:28 PM
I do not think this is a bad move. I mean, Apple seems to believe (and so do I) that App Store will eventually be the best way to distribute apps for developers and to buy/get them for consumers. All they need to do now is get it up to speed. So they force developers to submit their apps to the App Store.
About "App Store only apps on Mac OS X", hmm.. I don't think Apple will make the same mistake twice. They once fell back because of lack of software for their system. They will be forced to have App Store rules flexible enough so that users can easily find all sufficient apps there. If they can't install them, they will switch platforms. If they do, Apple loses.
Either way, the user kind of wins so I wouldn't worry too much about it ;)
About "App Store only apps on Mac OS X", hmm.. I don't think Apple will make the same mistake twice. They once fell back because of lack of software for their system. They will be forced to have App Store rules flexible enough so that users can easily find all sufficient apps there. If they can't install them, they will switch platforms. If they do, Apple loses.
Either way, the user kind of wins so I wouldn't worry too much about it ;)
JTR7
Sep 29, 12:00 PM
Some people obviously want their homes to feel like a home rather than a hotel.
If we're speculating, maybe those with private baths for each bedroom care more about their guests/kids than you? A person who gives everyone equal convenience to his or her own bedroom shows that they don't think they deserve better than others. It's a bit hypocritical to criticize someone's opinions on this house by criticizing his or her house.
I like the house, but as others have said, I'd at least offer baths for individual bedrooms.
If we're speculating, maybe those with private baths for each bedroom care more about their guests/kids than you? A person who gives everyone equal convenience to his or her own bedroom shows that they don't think they deserve better than others. It's a bit hypocritical to criticize someone's opinions on this house by criticizing his or her house.
I like the house, but as others have said, I'd at least offer baths for individual bedrooms.
anonymouz1828
Apr 15, 12:51 PM
I am waiting for a resistant case to cracks and drops. However .. no flash .. i cant take that .. it is really getting bored with same stuff ... change more. Otherwise will start to look for some htc.
mars526
Apr 25, 03:07 PM
iPhone
iPhone 3G
iPhone 3GS
iPhone 4
iPhone 4S
iPhone 4G
iPhone 4GS
...
Design change every 2 years. Speed bump up next year after design change. Communication technology change every 4 years.
iPhone 3G
iPhone 3GS
iPhone 4
iPhone 4S
iPhone 4G
iPhone 4GS
...
Design change every 2 years. Speed bump up next year after design change. Communication technology change every 4 years.
peharri
Oct 31, 09:34 AM
The thin veneer is off the vast majority of people that clamor for OSS.
Whenever I hear the OSS crowd scream "Software should be FREE!" I translate that to mean "I refuse to pay someone for their work, thus I will STEAL it"!
I don't blame Apple. The OSS community abused what they had and turned to piracy by stealing the GUI. Kudos Apple.
What on Earth are you talking about? What are people stealing in the Arn's summary? The modified code isn't capable of running OS X, and until they closed the source, Darwin worked on most generic x86 platforms anyway.
Someone fixes a lack of functionality that existed in previous public versions and you call it "stealing"? WTF?
Whenever I hear the OSS crowd scream "Software should be FREE!" I translate that to mean "I refuse to pay someone for their work, thus I will STEAL it"!
I don't blame Apple. The OSS community abused what they had and turned to piracy by stealing the GUI. Kudos Apple.
What on Earth are you talking about? What are people stealing in the Arn's summary? The modified code isn't capable of running OS X, and until they closed the source, Darwin worked on most generic x86 platforms anyway.
Someone fixes a lack of functionality that existed in previous public versions and you call it "stealing"? WTF?