firsttube
Sep 13, 09:40 PM
seems as if the clickwheel being at the very bottom would make it a bit easier to drop, no?
�algiris
Dec 30, 09:15 AM
What else can they say. Moving on.
DJMastaWes
Jul 17, 04:18 PM
Alternative temporary plan is buy the refurb 1.83 GHz MacBook for $949 now then sell it for about the same when the 2.33 GHz Merom MacBook Pros ships. I would think any almost new MacBook will sell for the same price as refurb or worst case $50 less until the Merom MacBooks ship - which could be at the same time as the MBP but more likely by November. :)
I don't want to buy and sell for a month use.
If the chip is comeing out on staurday (23rd) doesnt that mean that they MBPs will chip the 7th? seeing as how the chip would already be out...
I don't want to buy and sell for a month use.
If the chip is comeing out on staurday (23rd) doesnt that mean that they MBPs will chip the 7th? seeing as how the chip would already be out...
CBGFilms
Mar 22, 02:21 PM
Spitting out disks! I had problems with the slot loading drives in my Mac Mini and Macbook Pros. It was greatly improved with a $10 DVD/CD cleaning kit. Worth giving a shot...
Thanks for that! I might give it a go, thanks.
Thanks for that! I might give it a go, thanks.
munkery
Mar 19, 04:35 PM
A few examples: Look up Leap-A and Inqtana-A on OSX (very real OSX worms), MusMinim-A (recent trojan).
Leap-a required authentication to infect and spread via iChat given that iChat is owned by System but is only run with user privileges. It did NOT achieve privilege escalation via exploitation.
Inqtana-a was a proof of concept that could only modify the user level of the system because didn't achieve privilege escalation via exploitation. Malware can NOT install rootkits or keyloggers that can hook into apps owned by System (such as Safari, Mail, & etc) with only user level access.
MusMinim-a is also a beta proof of concept based of a legitimate piece of software ported from Windows (http://www.darkcomet-rat.com/). It requires authentication to install given that it does NOT achieve privilege escalation via exploitation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_malware#Threats (List of Malware threats on Linux; why not pretend they don't even exist?)
You do realize most of those are proof-of-concepts generated through research. Most were never present in the wild and did NOT achieve privilege escalation via exploitation. Two that were in the wild are Bliss (1997 - ineffective as did not include privilege escalation) and Stoag (1996). https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Linuxvirus
It sounds good at first except for one giant pothole of a flaw. I mean why do things that are difficult to trace when you can just set up a sign on a server somewhere that says "Here's my bank account! Come and arrest me!" (i.e. the money is being redirected...follow the money trail!) :rolleyes:
You do realize that the redirection of ad revenue is one of the primary means of profit generation of what has been referred to as the most advanced Windows rootkit. BTW, some variants achieve privilege escalation via exploitation (see the second link).
http://www.brighthub.com/internet/google/articles/66090.aspx
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/11/16/tdl_rootkit_does_64_bit_windows/
Trojans are particularly a problem since a lot of programs ask for root password permission to be installed (including Apple software).
Untrue. Mac apps rarely ask for authentication to install if you install the app in the appropriate folder for the user account type.
Leap-a required authentication to infect and spread via iChat given that iChat is owned by System but is only run with user privileges. It did NOT achieve privilege escalation via exploitation.
Inqtana-a was a proof of concept that could only modify the user level of the system because didn't achieve privilege escalation via exploitation. Malware can NOT install rootkits or keyloggers that can hook into apps owned by System (such as Safari, Mail, & etc) with only user level access.
MusMinim-a is also a beta proof of concept based of a legitimate piece of software ported from Windows (http://www.darkcomet-rat.com/). It requires authentication to install given that it does NOT achieve privilege escalation via exploitation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_malware#Threats (List of Malware threats on Linux; why not pretend they don't even exist?)
You do realize most of those are proof-of-concepts generated through research. Most were never present in the wild and did NOT achieve privilege escalation via exploitation. Two that were in the wild are Bliss (1997 - ineffective as did not include privilege escalation) and Stoag (1996). https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Linuxvirus
It sounds good at first except for one giant pothole of a flaw. I mean why do things that are difficult to trace when you can just set up a sign on a server somewhere that says "Here's my bank account! Come and arrest me!" (i.e. the money is being redirected...follow the money trail!) :rolleyes:
You do realize that the redirection of ad revenue is one of the primary means of profit generation of what has been referred to as the most advanced Windows rootkit. BTW, some variants achieve privilege escalation via exploitation (see the second link).
http://www.brighthub.com/internet/google/articles/66090.aspx
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/11/16/tdl_rootkit_does_64_bit_windows/
Trojans are particularly a problem since a lot of programs ask for root password permission to be installed (including Apple software).
Untrue. Mac apps rarely ask for authentication to install if you install the app in the appropriate folder for the user account type.
mac.rumors
Apr 30, 10:51 PM
Call me clumsy or whatever, but I hate the 'corners': I accidentally trigger them all the time on a frien's machine. Mostly because I use the Apple menu a lot. I DO miss the old mouse's side buttons/center button!
Isn't this and your quoted post by JMP the same - MacOS X related troll in an iMac update thread?
Isn't this and your quoted post by JMP the same - MacOS X related troll in an iMac update thread?
chasemac
Aug 24, 02:21 AM
At least this gets it all out of the way, hey.
Stu
____________________________________
Phantom Rouge (http://phantom-rouge.co.uk) - The Artwork of Eleanor Hirst
Unless your not paying attention hey?:)
Stu
____________________________________
Phantom Rouge (http://phantom-rouge.co.uk) - The Artwork of Eleanor Hirst
Unless your not paying attention hey?:)
iMikeT
Oct 27, 04:40 PM
This is just what we need, more hippies....
Eraserhead
Apr 11, 03:22 AM
55 miles to the gallon isn't even abnormal, a lot of standard hatchbacks/small family cars do that and more.
55 miles per US gallon ;). Thats 70 miles per imperial gallon as US gallons are smaller.
55 miles per US gallon ;). Thats 70 miles per imperial gallon as US gallons are smaller.
thadgarrison
Sep 19, 03:30 PM
I think this is a result of people testing out the service. You can't possibly quantify how successful this will be until it's been around long enough for the "newness" to wear off and for real-world usage to begin.
125,000 downloads really isn't that big of a number. Especially considering the mass media coverage of the announcement and the vast number of people using iTunes.
The jury is still way out.
125,000 downloads really isn't that big of a number. Especially considering the mass media coverage of the announcement and the vast number of people using iTunes.
The jury is still way out.
AidenShaw
Sep 10, 11:53 PM
They ... are using buffered memory (slow)
Have you seen the benchmarks?
The Xeon systems scream, even with the "slow" memory.
While some contrived tests showed real latency issues with the FB-DIMM memory, for real-life applications the faster busses and large L2 caches make it a non-issue.
Focus on *system* performance, not on a particular detail.
Have you seen the benchmarks?
The Xeon systems scream, even with the "slow" memory.
While some contrived tests showed real latency issues with the FB-DIMM memory, for real-life applications the faster busses and large L2 caches make it a non-issue.
Focus on *system* performance, not on a particular detail.
chrmjenkins
Apr 14, 02:55 PM
Well, it would surprise me. USB3.0 and Thunderbolt will come included in Intel''s Ivy Bridge. Apple would have to add more hardware and disable USB 3.0 to make it 2.0 only. Makes zero cents.
Who are you to comment on the potential profitability of said move?
Who are you to comment on the potential profitability of said move?
Squonk
Sep 26, 08:52 AM
Include all the functionality of the Apple remote to allow the iPhone to drive your iTV and Front Row.
"Mom, hold on a second, I need to change the channel..." :D
"Mom, hold on a second, I need to change the channel..." :D
ely
Oct 27, 01:29 PM
I mentioned it in the other thread, but Apple is sponsoring a tech recycling event for schools and the public throughout Hawaii this week.
Also, thanks for the Apple environment link. Didn't know about the 10% discount on iPods when turning in an old one. With no educational discounts on iPods anymore, that's a pretty decent deal.
Also, thanks for the Apple environment link. Didn't know about the 10% discount on iPods when turning in an old one. With no educational discounts on iPods anymore, that's a pretty decent deal.
milo
Sep 5, 05:58 PM
Yes I have..The only difference is I'm including the recording part.
The recording can be done by the computer. What reason is there to have it done where the TV is located?
The recording can be done by the computer. What reason is there to have it done where the TV is located?
ryanw
Mar 30, 11:26 AM
By that argument, aren't windows and office generic terms???
swissmann
Apr 4, 12:23 PM
How about the whole incident being avoided by people being honest and working for what you want. In this case no robbery, no need for a guard, no guns, no death. Ideally we shouldn't need locks on our doors or guards in the first place (unrealistic I know).
I do think most people are good though. My local Apple store had a door lock malfunction one morning and a dozen people were inside roaming around looking at things before management came to open the store. Nothing was stolen.
I do think most people are good though. My local Apple store had a door lock malfunction one morning and a dozen people were inside roaming around looking at things before management came to open the store. Nothing was stolen.
relimw
Sep 14, 10:11 AM
New version of Aperture!.. Saweeet
or more likely a new Apple iSLR
16 Megapixels
full frame sensor
Adaptive lens mount supports all Canon and Nikon Lenses
60gb removeable 1.8" hard drive
3" OLED screen
...
And all for a low, low price of $599.
or more likely a new Apple iSLR
16 Megapixels
full frame sensor
Adaptive lens mount supports all Canon and Nikon Lenses
60gb removeable 1.8" hard drive
3" OLED screen
...
And all for a low, low price of $599.
unobtainium
Apr 22, 02:25 AM
I have no idea how this would be useful. Buffer times, connection loss, no WiFi around, these are all problems that will prevent this from working.
What's wrong with storing music on hard drives locally?
Yeah, my sentiments exactly. This seems pretty useless, at least for me. I can't get too excited about it.
What's wrong with storing music on hard drives locally?
Yeah, my sentiments exactly. This seems pretty useless, at least for me. I can't get too excited about it.
quagmire
Apr 25, 10:24 AM
Holy crap. I just finished reading the thread. Please stay off the road. You did this **** in your moms E60 M5 with 500 HP? I know where this story is heading. Soon you will take that car to an abandoned airport with 3 of your friends which then you will flip it and kill you and your friends. Or you will do that 155 MPH in a neighborhood. These two examples are true stories of 16-18 year olds kids with an E60 M5 who shared the exact same attitude as you and did those stunts. Please do not drive, learn to fly, etc until you gain the maturity to handle these machines.
You will respond to my post saying that you will never do what those people did. That you're a safe driver and claim you will never do that. Guess what pal? Those kids also claimed the exact same thing. Now four people are dead and the other is screwed.
You will respond to my post saying that you will never do what those people did. That you're a safe driver and claim you will never do that. Guess what pal? Those kids also claimed the exact same thing. Now four people are dead and the other is screwed.
BornAgainMac
Aug 23, 05:53 PM
May be Apple also figured if they settle now, may be Creative could use this precedence to sue Microsoft and other competitors over their UI and make them pay for licenses too.
That would put a nice hit on the smaller competitors. Nice move, Apple!
That would put a nice hit on the smaller competitors. Nice move, Apple!
r1ch4rd
Apr 25, 06:08 AM
OP - I got bored reading all of the posts on here, but here are my 2 cents.
If you ask me, you are completely in the wrong. Here in the UK the law would agree and you would lose your license. If you had been going a little faster it's an instant ban even on an empty road.
However, the legal side doesn't matter. It's not going to be much comfort to you who is right or wrong when someone hits you from behind and gives you whiplash (or worse!).
The speed limit is there for a reason. It's to protect you and those around you when something goes wrong. Don't act like it will never happen to you, because it might!
I recently aquaplaned during wet weather. It was my own fault, I was going too fast, but I wasn't over the speed limit. Luckily I was able to control the car and came to a stop slightly off the road. Any faster, I could have hit another driver or gone into the crash barrier. It's scary how quickly you can lose control (you can really feel the steering going and the back end shifting out!).
Try to learn from what others here are telling you rather than leaving it to experience later.
My Dad was a fireman. To this day he won't speak to me about some aspects of his job (in particular, car accidents) because of just how horrific they can be!
If you ask me, you are completely in the wrong. Here in the UK the law would agree and you would lose your license. If you had been going a little faster it's an instant ban even on an empty road.
However, the legal side doesn't matter. It's not going to be much comfort to you who is right or wrong when someone hits you from behind and gives you whiplash (or worse!).
The speed limit is there for a reason. It's to protect you and those around you when something goes wrong. Don't act like it will never happen to you, because it might!
I recently aquaplaned during wet weather. It was my own fault, I was going too fast, but I wasn't over the speed limit. Luckily I was able to control the car and came to a stop slightly off the road. Any faster, I could have hit another driver or gone into the crash barrier. It's scary how quickly you can lose control (you can really feel the steering going and the back end shifting out!).
Try to learn from what others here are telling you rather than leaving it to experience later.
My Dad was a fireman. To this day he won't speak to me about some aspects of his job (in particular, car accidents) because of just how horrific they can be!
guet
Nov 14, 01:53 AM
You can go to church and pray instead of going to court, if you'd like, but for those of us that believe in the legal system, we take solace in the fact that things really aren't black and white, and yet there is a framework in place that let's us try and figure these things out.
Congratulations on responding cogently to the trollish insults from 'aristotle' (a strange choice of name given his beliefs and style of argument).
It is not "streaming" the icon data, it is copied over and displayed superimposed on another icon which is presumably an internal OS X bundle.
You clearly have no idea what you're talking about here, and I see you've now shifted the argument over to app icons rather than computer images. App icons are also used in many many places outside of an app - if they are used to portray that app in some way, most people see that as fair.
Following your argument to its logical conclusion, Apple is infringing by using icons in the dock, or the display of running applications, and many other desktop apps which use the icon of another program for informational purposes are also infringing other people's copyright. I'd call that fair use, and useful for the customer as well, most developers would agree.
It's possible some copyright troll could try to sue someone for it, as in spite of your protestations, it is a grey area, however I feel as a customer and developer that it is wrong for Apple to abuse their position of power and try to dictate petty little rules like this to developers. The development experience on the iPhone is great, but having experienced the approval process for iPhone, I can say it is an unmitigated failure, on its own terms. That is all.
PS Please stop trying to argue about law with a lawyer, and trying to claim the English legal system (which has nothing to do with this judgment) is based on 'Judeo-christian' law - it is not.
I'm not going to defend Apple because NO BODY on this forum knows the exact circumstances of the situation.
Given the myriad other examples of Apple's woeful treatment of app store developers, I think it's fair to discuss this one as yet another example of them messing their developers around. It also has important consequences for Apple and iPhone users.
Congratulations on responding cogently to the trollish insults from 'aristotle' (a strange choice of name given his beliefs and style of argument).
It is not "streaming" the icon data, it is copied over and displayed superimposed on another icon which is presumably an internal OS X bundle.
You clearly have no idea what you're talking about here, and I see you've now shifted the argument over to app icons rather than computer images. App icons are also used in many many places outside of an app - if they are used to portray that app in some way, most people see that as fair.
Following your argument to its logical conclusion, Apple is infringing by using icons in the dock, or the display of running applications, and many other desktop apps which use the icon of another program for informational purposes are also infringing other people's copyright. I'd call that fair use, and useful for the customer as well, most developers would agree.
It's possible some copyright troll could try to sue someone for it, as in spite of your protestations, it is a grey area, however I feel as a customer and developer that it is wrong for Apple to abuse their position of power and try to dictate petty little rules like this to developers. The development experience on the iPhone is great, but having experienced the approval process for iPhone, I can say it is an unmitigated failure, on its own terms. That is all.
PS Please stop trying to argue about law with a lawyer, and trying to claim the English legal system (which has nothing to do with this judgment) is based on 'Judeo-christian' law - it is not.
I'm not going to defend Apple because NO BODY on this forum knows the exact circumstances of the situation.
Given the myriad other examples of Apple's woeful treatment of app store developers, I think it's fair to discuss this one as yet another example of them messing their developers around. It also has important consequences for Apple and iPhone users.
aswitcher
Sep 6, 03:51 PM
Ship times on the Airport Extreme have been pushed back 1-3 weeks. Anyone else notice?
No. iSights are also quit delayed.
No. iSights are also quit delayed.