*LTD*
Apr 23, 06:09 PM
Read the first line.
Hack the computers, not the iPhones.
In which case nearly *all* your personal data is vulnerable. Cell tower tracking is not a special case, and relatively not especially more dangerous or compromising than anything else you've got stored on your computer.
Again, there's no egregious violation taking place here, and it's not especially worse than any other way to keep tabs on someone.
Let's reserve the lynching for when we actually find out what this tracking data is for specifically and how widespread the issue is with other companies (i.e., Google, MS, etc.)
If there is no actual cause for concern to the average person (which there really isn't), I fail to see that need to take a flip over it.
Anyway, that's all Il'll post about this for now. I really don't have a lot more to say. This topic is already way off-course, mostly my fault.
You must not read many of LTD's posts.
Admiring a winner is *very* wrong. Sorry.
Apple makes a lot of the competition look pretty damn stupid on a continual basis, but you can't call attention to it too often, because you'll end up stepping one someone's toes.
My view is: wear thicker boots.
The latest in my rogues gallery of idiots is RIM (first prize for laying the Playbook egg.)
Hack the computers, not the iPhones.
In which case nearly *all* your personal data is vulnerable. Cell tower tracking is not a special case, and relatively not especially more dangerous or compromising than anything else you've got stored on your computer.
Again, there's no egregious violation taking place here, and it's not especially worse than any other way to keep tabs on someone.
Let's reserve the lynching for when we actually find out what this tracking data is for specifically and how widespread the issue is with other companies (i.e., Google, MS, etc.)
If there is no actual cause for concern to the average person (which there really isn't), I fail to see that need to take a flip over it.
Anyway, that's all Il'll post about this for now. I really don't have a lot more to say. This topic is already way off-course, mostly my fault.
You must not read many of LTD's posts.
Admiring a winner is *very* wrong. Sorry.
Apple makes a lot of the competition look pretty damn stupid on a continual basis, but you can't call attention to it too often, because you'll end up stepping one someone's toes.
My view is: wear thicker boots.
The latest in my rogues gallery of idiots is RIM (first prize for laying the Playbook egg.)
fyrefly
Apr 29, 02:39 PM
Whew!! They also brought Safari's "Drag Image to Desktop to save Image File" back in this Preview Build. :D
In previous Lion Builds, dragging an image to the desktop resulted in a Safari Link file to the Image's location on the web.
In previous Lion Builds, dragging an image to the desktop resulted in a Safari Link file to the Image's location on the web.
kresh
Oct 28, 07:23 PM
I don't think there are many out there who think all software should be free. I think these OSS advocates just want as much free stuff as possible, for many reasons.
People want OSS because it spurs innovation. Keep in mind that OS X is built on OSS, and that's one of the reasons it's more secure and more powerful than windows.
That's not to mention the fact that Apple has taken OS X from infancy to the mature OS that it is today at a record pace. This is, in no small part, due to the FREE code they're "stealing."
Apple doesn't sell operating systems for profit, they sell HARDWARE. These people over at OSx86 are trying to create a product that doesn't really exist: OS X on BIOS hardware.
That's just rationalization and obfuscation. Apple is not using anything outside of licensing stipulations. The GUI belongs to Apple. They are not giving OSx86 a license to Aqua thus it is theft.
That fact just can't be gotten around.
And to all those who seem to believe that Apple just has to open OSX up to run on any hardware or they will be doomed, you are ignoring history.
Apple wen't down the road of the clones and it damn near put them out of business. It would be sheer stupidity to go down that road again and expect a different result.
If Apple opens OSX to any hardware, just how will they compete? They could not compete against the cloners because they were smaller and could adapt new hardware alot more quickly.
Apple would quickly see their hardware sales dry up, those sales lost to the Dells, Acers, HP, and the whole litanany of bargin basement hardware assemblers.
If you really think Apple can't survive unless they open up OSX, explain how they would compete and win, don't just make a broad unsubstantiated demand that they open it up.
And who cares about marketshare anyway? 80% of the market is made up of almost zero margin hardware sales, how much of that does Apple really want.
/end rant
People want OSS because it spurs innovation. Keep in mind that OS X is built on OSS, and that's one of the reasons it's more secure and more powerful than windows.
That's not to mention the fact that Apple has taken OS X from infancy to the mature OS that it is today at a record pace. This is, in no small part, due to the FREE code they're "stealing."
Apple doesn't sell operating systems for profit, they sell HARDWARE. These people over at OSx86 are trying to create a product that doesn't really exist: OS X on BIOS hardware.
That's just rationalization and obfuscation. Apple is not using anything outside of licensing stipulations. The GUI belongs to Apple. They are not giving OSx86 a license to Aqua thus it is theft.
That fact just can't be gotten around.
And to all those who seem to believe that Apple just has to open OSX up to run on any hardware or they will be doomed, you are ignoring history.
Apple wen't down the road of the clones and it damn near put them out of business. It would be sheer stupidity to go down that road again and expect a different result.
If Apple opens OSX to any hardware, just how will they compete? They could not compete against the cloners because they were smaller and could adapt new hardware alot more quickly.
Apple would quickly see their hardware sales dry up, those sales lost to the Dells, Acers, HP, and the whole litanany of bargin basement hardware assemblers.
If you really think Apple can't survive unless they open up OSX, explain how they would compete and win, don't just make a broad unsubstantiated demand that they open it up.
And who cares about marketshare anyway? 80% of the market is made up of almost zero margin hardware sales, how much of that does Apple really want.
/end rant
toromac
Apr 9, 03:56 PM
um just walked into my local Best buy and bought a 16gb ipad 2 Wifi in black. they had like 7 or 8 of each model. interesting... maybe they�re not participating in this so called promotion.
more...
MacRumors
Sep 12, 07:17 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
Apple's iTunes Music Store has gone down and has been replaced with a black screen with the simple words:
It's Showtime
The iTunes Store is being updated
Apple is widely expected to deliver an iTunes Movie service today at their media event.
Apple's iTunes Music Store has gone down and has been replaced with a black screen with the simple words:
It's Showtime
The iTunes Store is being updated
Apple is widely expected to deliver an iTunes Movie service today at their media event.
macenforcer
Nov 23, 05:56 PM
You would be better off getting an ipod from Target with the 10% off for getting a target credit card. Apple sales suck.
more...
toddybody
Apr 29, 01:11 PM
Oh the waiting game...
tveric
Oct 5, 01:28 AM
Methinks you don't have a good grasp of public key encryption. (Or at least how it's supposed to work).
The encryption key is the one that is top secret because it's the one you keep private, and is the one which would allow DoubleTwist (or anyone else) to masquerade as iTS. The decryption key, by it's very nature, is vulnerable and in effect "public" (since it must be on the client machine, so it can be discovered). There is a flaw in the FairPlay system that Jon has exploited before (as I mentioned earlier in the thread) which has to do with the fact that the files are personalized locally on the client machine, so if they can fool iTunes into personalizing third party files, they're in like Flynn. (This also has the effect of making a private key or equivalent available on the system which may be the chink in FairPlay's armor).
Essentially, the FairPlay system is one that implies a certain amount of trust. Once you authorize a machine all of the purchased tracks from that account on the machines can be decrypted. Even if they are not on the machine at the time of the authorization and the machine is not on the network at the time (I have played back encrypted videos on DVD-R on my iBook while it was not on the 'net.)
I don't know how often it needs to "phone home" so you can't just load up 5 machines with protected content, detach them from the network and deactivate all of your machines at iTMS... Then spend the next year working on 5 more systems...
B
good lord, if anyone actually got through reading all this, can there be any doubt left that all consumers want is DRM-free content??? There's a simple rule that exists - the more complicated the DRM you put on your content, the less likely that people are going to buy it. Hence, people are downloading music and movies for free, and ripping Netflix DVDs to their hard drives to burn their own copies.
You can't put the genie back in the bottle. Until there's DRM-free movies and music for sale online, so-called pirated downloads will continue to dwarf legal downloads. End of story.
The encryption key is the one that is top secret because it's the one you keep private, and is the one which would allow DoubleTwist (or anyone else) to masquerade as iTS. The decryption key, by it's very nature, is vulnerable and in effect "public" (since it must be on the client machine, so it can be discovered). There is a flaw in the FairPlay system that Jon has exploited before (as I mentioned earlier in the thread) which has to do with the fact that the files are personalized locally on the client machine, so if they can fool iTunes into personalizing third party files, they're in like Flynn. (This also has the effect of making a private key or equivalent available on the system which may be the chink in FairPlay's armor).
Essentially, the FairPlay system is one that implies a certain amount of trust. Once you authorize a machine all of the purchased tracks from that account on the machines can be decrypted. Even if they are not on the machine at the time of the authorization and the machine is not on the network at the time (I have played back encrypted videos on DVD-R on my iBook while it was not on the 'net.)
I don't know how often it needs to "phone home" so you can't just load up 5 machines with protected content, detach them from the network and deactivate all of your machines at iTMS... Then spend the next year working on 5 more systems...
B
good lord, if anyone actually got through reading all this, can there be any doubt left that all consumers want is DRM-free content??? There's a simple rule that exists - the more complicated the DRM you put on your content, the less likely that people are going to buy it. Hence, people are downloading music and movies for free, and ripping Netflix DVDs to their hard drives to burn their own copies.
You can't put the genie back in the bottle. Until there's DRM-free movies and music for sale online, so-called pirated downloads will continue to dwarf legal downloads. End of story.
more...
unsaltedrhino
Sep 12, 06:49 AM
The local NBC morning news here was also reporting it as fact a couple days ago.
As did Channel 4 news about half an hour ago.
As did Channel 4 news about half an hour ago.
paradox00
May 3, 04:14 PM
They are offering you more bandwidth to use a higher bandwidth service like tethering.
The consideration is very clear. Thanks for quoting the premise for contract law, but claiming there is no consideration there is ridiculous.
People who tether use more bandwidth, so the cost associated with their usage is more expensive. The carriers can either charge those people for tethering or they can raise the price for EVERYONE.
They choose to charge the people who tether. It is a perfectly reasonable choice on their part.
Hey a cable line comes into my house with all the channels on it. I can just jimmy off a filter and get all the channels without paying any more. They are already delivering it to my house, why can't I just get all of them since they are there anyways and I am paying for cable right?
You are not paying for tethering unless you are paying for tethering. The math is simple. People who tether use more bandwidth. Wireless providers set their data prices based on AVERAGE usage. Tethering makes the average usage go up, so the revenue to cover those costs has to come from somewhere.
So they can either charge EVERYONE more or charge the people who tether more.. Again they choose the later.
I'd agree with you that there may be consideration with unlimited data plans as you might be using your phone outside the scope of what they initially envisioned when they offered you unlimited data, but those are largely a thing of the past now.
With regards to tiered pricing, what you're suggesting is that you're not entitled to the data you paid for should you choose to use some of it for tethering. If you paid for 2 GB a month, you can damn well get 2 GB a month. 2 GB a month was the consideration they offered you. It's none of your concern if the carrier sold it to you with the assumption that you'd only use 500 MB a month. They can't charge you more because your tethering makes you more likely to approach the 2 GB cap they offered you. You aren't legally obligated to pay twice for that same 2 GB of consideration if you want to use a tethering app.
Any concerns carriers have with bandwidth use can be addressed through their data plans, which they have full control of. They are not within their rights to start dictating what apps can or can't access data on your phone. Even if tethering apps generate a lot of data use, charging specifically for tethering is just a stopgap for a larger problem with their data plan pricing structure. Tethering apps are just one type of many high bandwidth apps. Are they going to start charging for all of them? Do you think that's reasonable?
Today your wireless ISP charges extra for tethering, tomorrow it will charge extra to access Netflix, and perhaps later on, your local ISP will want in on the action and start charge per device connected to your router. This segmented path of internet service is not a path I want to go down. The moment data becomes more than just data, and becomes data by application or use, is the day that consumers lose.
The consideration is very clear. Thanks for quoting the premise for contract law, but claiming there is no consideration there is ridiculous.
People who tether use more bandwidth, so the cost associated with their usage is more expensive. The carriers can either charge those people for tethering or they can raise the price for EVERYONE.
They choose to charge the people who tether. It is a perfectly reasonable choice on their part.
Hey a cable line comes into my house with all the channels on it. I can just jimmy off a filter and get all the channels without paying any more. They are already delivering it to my house, why can't I just get all of them since they are there anyways and I am paying for cable right?
You are not paying for tethering unless you are paying for tethering. The math is simple. People who tether use more bandwidth. Wireless providers set their data prices based on AVERAGE usage. Tethering makes the average usage go up, so the revenue to cover those costs has to come from somewhere.
So they can either charge EVERYONE more or charge the people who tether more.. Again they choose the later.
I'd agree with you that there may be consideration with unlimited data plans as you might be using your phone outside the scope of what they initially envisioned when they offered you unlimited data, but those are largely a thing of the past now.
With regards to tiered pricing, what you're suggesting is that you're not entitled to the data you paid for should you choose to use some of it for tethering. If you paid for 2 GB a month, you can damn well get 2 GB a month. 2 GB a month was the consideration they offered you. It's none of your concern if the carrier sold it to you with the assumption that you'd only use 500 MB a month. They can't charge you more because your tethering makes you more likely to approach the 2 GB cap they offered you. You aren't legally obligated to pay twice for that same 2 GB of consideration if you want to use a tethering app.
Any concerns carriers have with bandwidth use can be addressed through their data plans, which they have full control of. They are not within their rights to start dictating what apps can or can't access data on your phone. Even if tethering apps generate a lot of data use, charging specifically for tethering is just a stopgap for a larger problem with their data plan pricing structure. Tethering apps are just one type of many high bandwidth apps. Are they going to start charging for all of them? Do you think that's reasonable?
Today your wireless ISP charges extra for tethering, tomorrow it will charge extra to access Netflix, and perhaps later on, your local ISP will want in on the action and start charge per device connected to your router. This segmented path of internet service is not a path I want to go down. The moment data becomes more than just data, and becomes data by application or use, is the day that consumers lose.
more...
pmhacker
Apr 29, 09:47 PM
I hate the changes. I actually liked the slider. Graphically it was much nicer and obviously would work better with a future touch screen.
I wish they would have gotten rid of that horrible faux leather top on ical.
I wish they would have gotten rid of that horrible faux leather top on ical.
Eidorian
Nov 16, 03:03 PM
And one more thing....
Introducing the Macbook mini AMD edition!
AMD 4x4 processors at 2.6ghz
Nvidia 4x4 compatible chipset
AMD x1950 graphics w/ 512 memory
12in sxga screen
Superdrive
2 gigs memory standard
Liquid Nitrogen not included...
:pSome Dvorak love.
more...
Peace And Love Logo. (Peace~Love/Light~Unity); (Peace~Love/Light~Unity). Swampdonkey. Apr 24, 11:44 AM. Hi, I am using pic-in-pic full screen dissolves in
Peace And Love Logo. Peace and love. Peace and love. themadchemist. Jul 24, 07:49 PM. just took a look, and these guys have an interesting story about Apple
more...
with a lil#39; peace of love
peace middot; Peace And Love
more...
Peace And Love Logo. choice Bing for Peace and love; choice Bing for Peace and love. parapup. Apr 27, 04:45 PM
Barefoot~Peace and Love!
peace and love logo. quot;Peace and Love in God#39;s; quot;Peace and Love in God#39;s Handquot;. rxse7en. Jul 28, 08:37 AM. News Flash.
Introducing the Macbook mini AMD edition!
AMD 4x4 processors at 2.6ghz
Nvidia 4x4 compatible chipset
AMD x1950 graphics w/ 512 memory
12in sxga screen
Superdrive
2 gigs memory standard
Liquid Nitrogen not included...
:pSome Dvorak love.
more...
Georgie
Jan 5, 03:00 PM
Why did Apple do away with live feeds of the event? That seems like a good idea. What are they trying to avoid?
scott523
Nov 24, 12:44 AM
Hm maybe they loaded in the prices and everything then they'll 'flick the switch' on the prices once Black Friday officially begins?
more...
gangzoom
Mar 17, 05:49 PM
I get the opposite, every one I know these days seem to have a iPhone, or Mac..i've been using Macs since the days of the MacPlus, and remember the the time when people use to stare at me blankly when i tried to explain to them why my computer running system 6.5 cannot run "PC" programs :p
Personally I much preferred it when Apple had no market share :cool: I miss the days of Ramdoubler, conflicting extensions, apple file exchange and overpriced SCSI drives :)
Personally I much preferred it when Apple had no market share :cool: I miss the days of Ramdoubler, conflicting extensions, apple file exchange and overpriced SCSI drives :)
TequilaBoobs
Nov 27, 05:00 PM
If you purchased an item that was listed as a Black Friday Apple sale items at one of the Apple Retail Stores, I urge you to check you receipt to see if you got the sale price. I was at the Apple Chicago Michigan Ave. Store on Friday and purchased two sale items (the Nike+ ipod adapter and the Ingroove Neoprene sleeve for the Macbook). While both items were listed as sale items on the in store flyer and on the Apple web site, when I checked out with an Apple associate using a handheld terminal I was charged the FULL PRICE of these items.:eek: Since I discovered this when I got home, I called the Apple Store to request a refund. after a bit of an arguement, i was told i would get a refund in a few days. Today I got a refund on the Nike+ item, but not on the Ingroove sleeve. Looks like I will be calling the apple store again. :mad:
I can only imagine the thousands of people who thought that they were getting an item at the sale price and were actually charged full price.:mad:
i think it only happened to you.:confused:
I can only imagine the thousands of people who thought that they were getting an item at the sale price and were actually charged full price.:mad:
i think it only happened to you.:confused:
more...
whooleytoo
Jan 8, 09:17 AM
Just think, could WWDC 2007 be the first keynote we all watch on our big screen TVs, streaming over iTV?
I wonder, would it be possible to introduce an element of P2P technology to spread the load of live keynote broadcasts? Obviously, streaming isn't as suited to P2P as file downloads, but it still could help.
I wonder, would it be possible to introduce an element of P2P technology to spread the load of live keynote broadcasts? Obviously, streaming isn't as suited to P2P as file downloads, but it still could help.
dejo
May 2, 01:09 PM
I read somewhere that congress wants to know why NSA has a security expert over at Apple...
NSA does not have a security expert at Apple. Apple has a security expert who used to be with the NSA. Big difference.
NSA does not have a security expert at Apple. Apple has a security expert who used to be with the NSA. Big difference.
skye12
Oct 6, 10:39 AM
The 30% figure was for users in the NYC METRO area. People just don't read anything anymore except snippets and headlines.
Also, very recently another frequency spectrum was rolled out in certain markets, Including NYC which should improve
performance.
Verizon has its own problems too. And iphone users actually surf the net lol.
Also, very recently another frequency spectrum was rolled out in certain markets, Including NYC which should improve
performance.
Verizon has its own problems too. And iphone users actually surf the net lol.
Yannick
Oct 17, 09:53 AM
yawn! the disc is dead.
(dying, at least.)
I personnally don't agree. Movies you can buy and download still have poorer resolution, only one language, no bonus. Plus it takes so much room on your hard drive! You end up having to burn them anyway on a disc, or having to buy two huge hard drives for backup/safety purpose in case your hard drive dies. I own something like 150 DVD. That's about 1 TB (2 TB if you backup)� You really can't compare it to the music situation. Movies on DVD are cheaper than music CD. I get brand new DVDs through internet for an average of 7 � ($8.77). For me to buy a movie on iTunes, it would have to sell for 3 or 4 � ($4 or $5) to be worth it.
(dying, at least.)
I personnally don't agree. Movies you can buy and download still have poorer resolution, only one language, no bonus. Plus it takes so much room on your hard drive! You end up having to burn them anyway on a disc, or having to buy two huge hard drives for backup/safety purpose in case your hard drive dies. I own something like 150 DVD. That's about 1 TB (2 TB if you backup)� You really can't compare it to the music situation. Movies on DVD are cheaper than music CD. I get brand new DVDs through internet for an average of 7 � ($8.77). For me to buy a movie on iTunes, it would have to sell for 3 or 4 � ($4 or $5) to be worth it.
unlinked
May 4, 10:15 AM
You clearly don't know much about the medical world. Here's one link just to get things going:
http://www.healthcareitnews.com/news/physician-mobile-use-grows-45-percent
Oh, and here's the story about a hospital that just ordered 1800 iPads...
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/story/2011/04/20/ottawa-ipads-hospital374.html
The first link seems to be saying 4% of doctors read their email on an ipad. Do you think that really matches up with what the advertisement says, is that ground breaking?
http://www.healthcareitnews.com/news/physician-mobile-use-grows-45-percent
Oh, and here's the story about a hospital that just ordered 1800 iPads...
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/story/2011/04/20/ottawa-ipads-hospital374.html
The first link seems to be saying 4% of doctors read their email on an ipad. Do you think that really matches up with what the advertisement says, is that ground breaking?
LEStudios
Oct 6, 10:14 PM
Wait, you mean that grass on the other side isn't actually greener it's just painted green?!?!?! ;)
Welcome to the real world! :D
Welcome to the real world! :D
urbanslaughter
Oct 6, 10:43 AM
I have to say, when I first heard about the iPhone I let my Verizon account go, because I knew I wanted to get the iPhone. Well AT&T sucks up in my part of the woods. We have terrible coverage. My girlfriend uses Verizon - let's just say, I can't wait for Verizon to start offering the iPhone.
Branskins
Apr 29, 09:46 PM
Versions seems to work a lot faster. It has animated stars!!!!
No comments:
Post a Comment