SchneiderMan
Apr 11, 05:55 PM
Purchased Gidly via Godaddy :)
http://img858.imageshack.us/img858/6214/gidly.png
http://img858.imageshack.us/img858/6214/gidly.png
mw360
Apr 6, 10:05 AM
I see your point, but I think that it's quite uncharitable to question the motives of individuals but let apple have a pass. They are in the position to do whatever they want, and there's no way that they WOULD reimburse those whose apps were rejected for the same function, but my point is that they shouldn't have rejected those apps at all. It's hypocritical of them to reject an app for a reason, and then when they get desperate for their iAd program to catch on more with advertisers (which apparently aren't as excited for the platform as Apple had hoped) they change their mind and create their own app.
And besides, an ad impression is an ad impression. The only iAds that I click on are accidental. If people want to download an app to see what an iAd looks like, they are also getting the best of what the advertisers had hoped for: the chance to make somebody want to use their product. They pay for the option of changing somebody's mind, not to actually do it. They pay to put the advertisement in partial view. Not to actually sell products directly.
It doesn't matter who makes the app, if they are putting the ads in front of people, they deserve the money. That goes for Apple or any of the several individuals that have already created such apps.
With respect, you clearly don't work in advertising. You pay to put ads in front of the right people, not just anyone. Especially not competing advertisers and agencies. Why do you think Google (a) makes so much advertising revenue and (b) collects so much data about its users? Coincidence?
Secondly individuals are just as greedy as corporations, and generally get to operate outside of the spotlight. Apple has a lot to lose if its iAd platform is seen to be poorly targeting users, but an App developer has a lot to gain from indiscriminate iAd spamming. So in this case, yes, for the sake of self interest I'd expect Apple to reimburse advertisers for clicks inside their iAd app, and I'd expect an independent developer of a similar app to laugh all the way to the bank.
I never said btw I'd expect Apple to reimburse developers for their time on rejected apps. Or if I did I didn't mean it.
And besides, an ad impression is an ad impression. The only iAds that I click on are accidental. If people want to download an app to see what an iAd looks like, they are also getting the best of what the advertisers had hoped for: the chance to make somebody want to use their product. They pay for the option of changing somebody's mind, not to actually do it. They pay to put the advertisement in partial view. Not to actually sell products directly.
It doesn't matter who makes the app, if they are putting the ads in front of people, they deserve the money. That goes for Apple or any of the several individuals that have already created such apps.
With respect, you clearly don't work in advertising. You pay to put ads in front of the right people, not just anyone. Especially not competing advertisers and agencies. Why do you think Google (a) makes so much advertising revenue and (b) collects so much data about its users? Coincidence?
Secondly individuals are just as greedy as corporations, and generally get to operate outside of the spotlight. Apple has a lot to lose if its iAd platform is seen to be poorly targeting users, but an App developer has a lot to gain from indiscriminate iAd spamming. So in this case, yes, for the sake of self interest I'd expect Apple to reimburse advertisers for clicks inside their iAd app, and I'd expect an independent developer of a similar app to laugh all the way to the bank.
I never said btw I'd expect Apple to reimburse developers for their time on rejected apps. Or if I did I didn't mean it.
DaveDaveDave
Apr 29, 03:24 PM
And people kept telling me that OSX and iOS weren't going to merge in any meaningful manner for years ahead, if ever. Yeah right. I'd bet the one after this has them nearly fully merged and I mean towards iOS for the most part. OSX will be dumbed down to the lowest common brain cell and you won't be able to get free/open software anymore. It'll have to come through the App Store or not at all. Wait and see. That is the point I'll be moving on.
There's a huge difference between merging in concepts of the UI, user-friendly software distribution, media access and what you describe.
It is very unlikely that Apple's engineering and marketing would destroy what they've worked to build for so long, IMHO. How are you so certain that they'll be bringing all the bad stuff along with the good stuff? Seriously - do you really think that Apple's talent are as utterly foolish that you make them out to be?
There's a huge difference between merging in concepts of the UI, user-friendly software distribution, media access and what you describe.
It is very unlikely that Apple's engineering and marketing would destroy what they've worked to build for so long, IMHO. How are you so certain that they'll be bringing all the bad stuff along with the good stuff? Seriously - do you really think that Apple's talent are as utterly foolish that you make them out to be?
dethmaShine
May 2, 12:37 PM
My only question is:
If there was a study that was conducted some time back [more than 2 months back] and got Apple to investigate the issue seriously, why did Apple wait for another study OR another media non-sense to acknowledge the bugs and report to the consumers?
Why did Apple not rectify the problem before? Did Apple already knew about these features or are they simply getting with this crap by calling them "bugs"?
To be honest, this is probably the first time I'm feeling that Apple was trying to play with the consumers privacy and trust. I think Apple just fooled us.
-deth
If there was a study that was conducted some time back [more than 2 months back] and got Apple to investigate the issue seriously, why did Apple wait for another study OR another media non-sense to acknowledge the bugs and report to the consumers?
Why did Apple not rectify the problem before? Did Apple already knew about these features or are they simply getting with this crap by calling them "bugs"?
To be honest, this is probably the first time I'm feeling that Apple was trying to play with the consumers privacy and trust. I think Apple just fooled us.
-deth
Willis
Apr 15, 07:54 PM
Not a bad design... images are shoddy but, I wouldn't mind my next iPhone to be like that
firsttube
Sep 12, 08:39 AM
I just came here to post this info. I'll include the image in my post. Too bad it doesn't list a price. Looks like the rumors of it ONLY including Disney movies are wrong.
http://static.flickr.com/95/241496992_e86c8584c0_d.jpg
please read the thread....
http://static.flickr.com/95/241496992_e86c8584c0_d.jpg
please read the thread....
aaronazevedo
Apr 15, 11:52 PM
Real what? Real fakes? Yes they are real fakes.
Real photos of real items, sitting on real tables in China. For real.
If the unit is aluminum, and if it passes testing who knows. I'm someone has made a bogus prototype to stir up this discussion, who knows.
I'm just commenting on the real vs. rendering. I voted real.
Real photos of real items, sitting on real tables in China. For real.
If the unit is aluminum, and if it passes testing who knows. I'm someone has made a bogus prototype to stir up this discussion, who knows.
I'm just commenting on the real vs. rendering. I voted real.
bcslay
Sep 12, 03:04 AM
well, I can see that it wouldn't be fast enough for unbuffered video, but if the receiving piece of hardware could decode h.264, then it would be fast enough, right? I can stream h.264 from apples website wirelessly.
fun173
May 3, 01:51 PM
This sucks. I don't want to have to pay Verizon an extra $20 a month on top of an already expensive phone bill to do this crap. Will this affect using PDAnet on a jail broken iPhone?
Plymouthbreezer
Oct 25, 05:07 PM
Obviously, you can understand the confusion.
:rolleyes:
:rolleyes:
ozred
Mar 17, 06:18 PM
iPhone 4's are everywhere here in CA. They used to be unique, now the only comment is... "oh you have the one with a bad antenna."
Steve's denial might work for him and his lemmings, but the general public is more aware than any Apple enthusiast would care to admit. Me? I simply reach into my other pocket and show them my new HTC Inspire, those are the popular phones where I live.
Public perception overrides how the phone actually performs every time. It's human nature.
Steve's denial might work for him and his lemmings, but the general public is more aware than any Apple enthusiast would care to admit. Me? I simply reach into my other pocket and show them my new HTC Inspire, those are the popular phones where I live.
Public perception overrides how the phone actually performs every time. It's human nature.
mcmadhatter
Oct 17, 08:53 AM
As soon as someone creates a dual format drive all this fuss will die down. It was the same with DVD +/- . Give it a year and NEC will have a dual format drives for both computers and players and no-one will have to decide.
George Knighton
Apr 23, 02:28 PM
How is "gay history" different than regular history? lol
The same way Black History is different, I guess.
I don't mind.
The same way Black History is different, I guess.
I don't mind.
snberk103
Apr 13, 12:53 PM
When was the last time a European or Japanese plane were hijacked before 9/11? That's an ambiguous statistic. Nobody was hijacking planes before and nobody's hijacked planes since.
1980s - Aer Ligus Dublin - London; Air France Frankfurt - Paris; Rio Airways Killen, Texas - Dallas, Texas; TWA Athens - Beirut; Egypt Air Athens - Cairo; Malev Hungarian Airlines Prague - ?? ;
1990s - Lufthansa Frankfort - Cairo; FedEx flight Memphis - ??; Air Malta Malta - Turkey; All Nippon (domestic flight);
I've only listed those flights that departed from a European (and one Japanese) airport.... not European airlines that departed from non-European airports. After 9/11 there were still a number of hijackings, but the closest they come to European departure points are Nicosia, and Tirana. Though there was one from a Mexican Airport and one from a Caribbean airport. The Mexican hijacking was by a man threatening a bomb, but I don't think they actually found one.
Nobody hijacks Israeli planes either, and they're subject to much more terrorist attention than we are.
I'm not sure of your point. But the Israelis use a different screening model, plus they need to look after only a handful of airports domestically. At airports internationally they screen passengers themselves after the local authorities have screened the passengers.... so everybody gets screened twice, and in two different ways.
In fact, TSA has twice failed to stop a bomber on a plane since 9/11. Both the shoe bomber and the underwear bomber were stopped by passengers.
TSA's measures aren't working, but a measure of common sense can easily mitigate the damage of someone smuggling a boxcutter or knife on to a plane.
And how may people have the TSA found? And how many people have not even bothered to try, because they were afraid of getting caught?
1980s - Aer Ligus Dublin - London; Air France Frankfurt - Paris; Rio Airways Killen, Texas - Dallas, Texas; TWA Athens - Beirut; Egypt Air Athens - Cairo; Malev Hungarian Airlines Prague - ?? ;
1990s - Lufthansa Frankfort - Cairo; FedEx flight Memphis - ??; Air Malta Malta - Turkey; All Nippon (domestic flight);
I've only listed those flights that departed from a European (and one Japanese) airport.... not European airlines that departed from non-European airports. After 9/11 there were still a number of hijackings, but the closest they come to European departure points are Nicosia, and Tirana. Though there was one from a Mexican Airport and one from a Caribbean airport. The Mexican hijacking was by a man threatening a bomb, but I don't think they actually found one.
Nobody hijacks Israeli planes either, and they're subject to much more terrorist attention than we are.
I'm not sure of your point. But the Israelis use a different screening model, plus they need to look after only a handful of airports domestically. At airports internationally they screen passengers themselves after the local authorities have screened the passengers.... so everybody gets screened twice, and in two different ways.
In fact, TSA has twice failed to stop a bomber on a plane since 9/11. Both the shoe bomber and the underwear bomber were stopped by passengers.
TSA's measures aren't working, but a measure of common sense can easily mitigate the damage of someone smuggling a boxcutter or knife on to a plane.
And how may people have the TSA found? And how many people have not even bothered to try, because they were afraid of getting caught?
617arg
Sep 28, 01:41 PM
this is one of the worst titles for a story I have read. It also sounds like whoever wrote the story has no knowledge of anything that's been happening in architecture for about a century.
Clean, modern design? Must be influenced by the iPhone! :rolleyes:
Clean, modern design? Must be influenced by the iPhone! :rolleyes:
Al Coholic
May 4, 09:02 AM
Anyone know what's the app being used in the "to a CEO" part?
It's called, "Calculate My Year End Bonus". (App Store - 99 cents)
And I'll buy one when it comes with...
I'll buy one when it does something useful - like run an unhindered version of OSX or it can recognize handwriting.
You're getting negative votes on your post just because people here know that Apple will never do that, but I think I have to agree with you. I mean I own the iPad 1 now and love it, but I'd love it even more if I could write on it with a pen.
And you're getting negative votes because you agree with somebody who is getting negative votes. :D The iDrones here are all of the same mind. They walk around with that glazed look in their eyes and just blink at you when somebody who has a need suggests it be incorporated into the function of the iPad. I've learned that most Apple lemmings here are predictable and boring.
The iPad needs handwriting tech. It's a logical and natural desire/wish. Why would anyone NOT want that? Especially if Apple insists on showing that stupid baby ultrasound over� and over� I don't know any medical staff that actually uses one on the job. You simply can't input information on the thing while on the go and holding it in your other hand. (I actually don't know anyone that uses the iPad except from a comfy chair or couch).
Apple is still waiting for the market to figure out where this thing belongs. So far it looks like it's ideal for toddlers, facebookers and tweeters. Wake me when it can actually do something to save me time so I can pass that along to my family, friends and other more important things.
It's called, "Calculate My Year End Bonus". (App Store - 99 cents)
And I'll buy one when it comes with...
I'll buy one when it does something useful - like run an unhindered version of OSX or it can recognize handwriting.
You're getting negative votes on your post just because people here know that Apple will never do that, but I think I have to agree with you. I mean I own the iPad 1 now and love it, but I'd love it even more if I could write on it with a pen.
And you're getting negative votes because you agree with somebody who is getting negative votes. :D The iDrones here are all of the same mind. They walk around with that glazed look in their eyes and just blink at you when somebody who has a need suggests it be incorporated into the function of the iPad. I've learned that most Apple lemmings here are predictable and boring.
The iPad needs handwriting tech. It's a logical and natural desire/wish. Why would anyone NOT want that? Especially if Apple insists on showing that stupid baby ultrasound over� and over� I don't know any medical staff that actually uses one on the job. You simply can't input information on the thing while on the go and holding it in your other hand. (I actually don't know anyone that uses the iPad except from a comfy chair or couch).
Apple is still waiting for the market to figure out where this thing belongs. So far it looks like it's ideal for toddlers, facebookers and tweeters. Wake me when it can actually do something to save me time so I can pass that along to my family, friends and other more important things.
Rodimus Prime
Apr 22, 06:57 PM
Whereas I agree with your post entirely, I get the feeling that you wouldn't be saying this if Apple were the only ones not to collect such data. You have bashed Google many times for the amount of data it collects, but as soon as Apple is to be seen to be doing it, it's all cool. A "non-issue.":rolleyes:
some how I think the only reason he is saying that is because Apple is the one doing it.
If it was anyone else LTD would be bashing it like no tomorrow.
My issue with it is the fact that it does not let you opt out. It would be one thing to freely give away that infomation. It is another not to be even given the option to opt out. On top of that the way Apple is doing it is even worse.
Google and Apple are in the wrong I feel. I just feel Apple is even more wrong than Google. Google at least only stores the last 50 cell towers and 200 wifi compared to Apple which keeps all of it locally.
some how I think the only reason he is saying that is because Apple is the one doing it.
If it was anyone else LTD would be bashing it like no tomorrow.
My issue with it is the fact that it does not let you opt out. It would be one thing to freely give away that infomation. It is another not to be even given the option to opt out. On top of that the way Apple is doing it is even worse.
Google and Apple are in the wrong I feel. I just feel Apple is even more wrong than Google. Google at least only stores the last 50 cell towers and 200 wifi compared to Apple which keeps all of it locally.
rdowns
Apr 12, 06:21 PM
What a joke this illusion of airport security is.
Video shows young girl receiving full pat-down from TSA (http://www.boston.com/travel/blog/2011/04/video_shows_you.html)
The TSA's pat-down policy has been widely criticized, but a video that popped up on YouTube today illustrates the possibly absurd levels to which agents take the process.
Here's a clip of what is said to be a six-year-old girl receiving a full pat-down from a TSA agent, who then apparently leads her to another area of the security checkpoint to perform a drug test. It's not clear whether the girl's parents elected not to put their child through a body scan, however the opening moments of the video do show a woman, believed to be the girl's mother, asking the TSA agent, "Can't you just re-scan her?"
Video shows young girl receiving full pat-down from TSA (http://www.boston.com/travel/blog/2011/04/video_shows_you.html)
The TSA's pat-down policy has been widely criticized, but a video that popped up on YouTube today illustrates the possibly absurd levels to which agents take the process.
Here's a clip of what is said to be a six-year-old girl receiving a full pat-down from a TSA agent, who then apparently leads her to another area of the security checkpoint to perform a drug test. It's not clear whether the girl's parents elected not to put their child through a body scan, however the opening moments of the video do show a woman, believed to be the girl's mother, asking the TSA agent, "Can't you just re-scan her?"
samcraig
May 2, 02:34 PM
Common sense to a programmer is not all ways the same same a common sense to a user. :confused:
The code is working as intented, but the design is flawed. A switch that prevents applications from calling a service is functionally the same as disabling the service; except in this case. In this case they intentional left the service running, without considering the consequences of the cache continuing to update.
The common sense I referred to is that an on/off switch doesn't need to be explained to a user. Off = Off. On = On.
The code is NOT working as intended. Apple even said so. Turning it off wasn't supposed to continue the recording of locations.
That's like the old joke that a broken clock is still right twice a day.
Look - they're fixing it. They know it was an issue (now for certain). That's really what matters here.
The code is working as intented, but the design is flawed. A switch that prevents applications from calling a service is functionally the same as disabling the service; except in this case. In this case they intentional left the service running, without considering the consequences of the cache continuing to update.
The common sense I referred to is that an on/off switch doesn't need to be explained to a user. Off = Off. On = On.
The code is NOT working as intended. Apple even said so. Turning it off wasn't supposed to continue the recording of locations.
That's like the old joke that a broken clock is still right twice a day.
Look - they're fixing it. They know it was an issue (now for certain). That's really what matters here.
milo
Sep 12, 09:48 AM
Actually I believe it was 3... if my memory is holding true... it was...
The Office, Desperate Housewives, and Lost.
Nope. The office was later, initial release was all ABC and Disney.
Desperate Housewives, Lost, Night Stalker, That�s So Raven, The Suite Life of Zack & Cody
The Office, Desperate Housewives, and Lost.
Nope. The office was later, initial release was all ABC and Disney.
Desperate Housewives, Lost, Night Stalker, That�s So Raven, The Suite Life of Zack & Cody
3N16MA
Apr 5, 04:27 PM
Celebration of advertising? Seriously?
Mystikal
Mar 17, 01:10 PM
Yeah that employee probably lost his job dude.
DeSnousa
Apr 13, 04:44 PM
Oh yeah thanks to your help in getting the SMP client and giving the GPU client a go, I am now in the top 20 producers. Not bad considering when a few years back I had only an iBook and I was producing 48 points a day and did that for over a year!
I don't know how long I will be able to sustain that rate though might have to drop back.
I don't know how long I will be able to sustain that rate though might have to drop back.
kdarling
Oct 9, 11:53 AM
Users get less dropped calls (if any) on Verizon than AT&T, partly because Verizon uses CDMA. Put simply:
When a CDMA cell phone switches between towers, it does what is called a "soft handoff". It stays connected to the last tower even as it switches to using the next one.
When a GSM cell phone switches between towers, it does what is called a "hard handoff". It drops the connection to the last tower, and then switches to the next one. If the next connection fails, the call fails.
When a CDMA cell phone switches between towers, it does what is called a "soft handoff". It stays connected to the last tower even as it switches to using the next one.
When a GSM cell phone switches between towers, it does what is called a "hard handoff". It drops the connection to the last tower, and then switches to the next one. If the next connection fails, the call fails.
No comments:
Post a Comment