NebulaClash
Mar 28, 11:09 AM
The Antenna issue goes away if you use a case, or you hold the phone so that the bottom left black line isnt covered by skin.
I'm not even using a case on my iPhone 4, and yet I'm not having antenna issues. I feel sorry for people who get sucked into anti-Apple propaganda articles. They miss out while being fearful of FUD.
I'm not even using a case on my iPhone 4, and yet I'm not having antenna issues. I feel sorry for people who get sucked into anti-Apple propaganda articles. They miss out while being fearful of FUD.
zombierunner
Mar 31, 03:34 AM
What everybody would like to know, is Safari any snappier?
it better be because frankly chrome is kicking safari's ass right now .. safari needs to "big up" on chrome .... roar.
it better be because frankly chrome is kicking safari's ass right now .. safari needs to "big up" on chrome .... roar.
knucles
Sep 17, 01:22 AM
don't you think that is logic the realease of 24' displays?????'''
if imac have 24'; should acd get 23'??????????is coming soon
if imac have 24'; should acd get 23'??????????is coming soon
holycat
Sep 15, 09:18 PM
What u All expect for the new mAcbook pro?
mAybe something unexpected??suprise??
is that possible to have blue-ray ROM??hehehe..:eek: :eek:
mAybe something unexpected??suprise??
is that possible to have blue-ray ROM??hehehe..:eek: :eek:
kiljoy616
Apr 20, 12:42 AM
So this is more of the Snow Leopard like refresh not much changed but what a difference it made ;) I for one will be upgrading to a much faster dual core :D better video and of course an antenna that does not have the grip of death thingy.
I am sure someone will vice grip the iPhone 4S (5) to death even if they fix the problem out of obsession. :)
I am sure someone will vice grip the iPhone 4S (5) to death even if they fix the problem out of obsession. :)
vendettabass
Aug 5, 05:41 AM
Leopard (iChat integration with MSN Messenger )
I'd kill for this!!! I hate osx msn messenger :(!
I'd kill for this!!! I hate osx msn messenger :(!
Eidorian
Aug 11, 10:05 AM
Well, I bought my iMac Core Duo this Wednesday. Yes, AFTER Tuesday. I kinda needed it since I've waited since June for a new Mac. I'd be computerless otherwise. No worries, my boss wants first dibs on buying it off of me next year. :D
Dr_Maybe
Aug 2, 03:38 PM
In Apple will withdraw the iPod. Nobody needs it any more. Nobody wants it. A huge, useless, glowing apple will be all anyone will want.
Funny :D
<confused applause />
Funny :D
<confused applause />
brayhite
Apr 25, 10:53 AM
Ok, here's the information that's actually known about the consolidated.db file:
1) It records the locations of nearby wi-fi access points and cell towers.
2) When location services were originally added to the iPhone, the file had a different name and was stored in a different location. (It was moved as part of the multi-tasking updates.)
3) The purpose of the file has been explicitly spelled out by Apple *from the beginning*. It is used *by* location services to calculate your current position in order to be able to display your position faster than would be possible solely using GPS. (It's part of the Assisted GPS process.)
4) There is absolutely no evidence that the file's contents are ever transmitted to anyone. It exists on the iPhone, and in the backup(s) of said iPhone.
So why all the hub-bub? The info stays stored ON YOUR PHONE. Anyone who is freaking out (like the user who said he didn't want anyone to be able to take his phone in his office and see his 6 month history of locations) better be deleting ALL emails, ALL past calls, ALL recent text messages, ALL Safari website visits, etc.
Those are just about as revealing as knowing your approximate location and travel patterns.
And to reinforce what someone else said: if you TRULY care about the info being locally stored, don't use the internet. Period. Stop posting here.
1) It records the locations of nearby wi-fi access points and cell towers.
2) When location services were originally added to the iPhone, the file had a different name and was stored in a different location. (It was moved as part of the multi-tasking updates.)
3) The purpose of the file has been explicitly spelled out by Apple *from the beginning*. It is used *by* location services to calculate your current position in order to be able to display your position faster than would be possible solely using GPS. (It's part of the Assisted GPS process.)
4) There is absolutely no evidence that the file's contents are ever transmitted to anyone. It exists on the iPhone, and in the backup(s) of said iPhone.
So why all the hub-bub? The info stays stored ON YOUR PHONE. Anyone who is freaking out (like the user who said he didn't want anyone to be able to take his phone in his office and see his 6 month history of locations) better be deleting ALL emails, ALL past calls, ALL recent text messages, ALL Safari website visits, etc.
Those are just about as revealing as knowing your approximate location and travel patterns.
And to reinforce what someone else said: if you TRULY care about the info being locally stored, don't use the internet. Period. Stop posting here.
McGiord
Apr 9, 08:31 PM
Suppose subtraction precedes addition, like this: 4-5+6, then the answer would be 5 not -7.
WTF?
One thing is the rules and mnemonic things invented in some school system, and other is how to properly use your brain to do some math.
Algebraically speaking the expression that you used as a reference will always result in 5.
Mac OS X cannot be wrong on this:
WTF?
One thing is the rules and mnemonic things invented in some school system, and other is how to properly use your brain to do some math.
Algebraically speaking the expression that you used as a reference will always result in 5.
Mac OS X cannot be wrong on this:
Benjy91
Mar 30, 09:36 PM
Yes I did, it was still grayed out.
Not greyed out on my friend's sat next to me.
Not greyed out on my friend's sat next to me.
TequilaBoobs
Nov 25, 09:19 PM
i hope apple comes out with a shoe phone, something the pink panther or inspector gadget would use.
RebelScum
Apr 20, 09:06 AM
1)So I'll have fun with a Galaxy S2 while the gullible remain in denial.
Hurm
So if I said the Galaxy S feels like it was made by Fisher Price, in that it feels cheap, too light, over-designed, kind of goofy-looking, and therefore a monumental piece of crap when coupled with Android's battery-sucking OS and Samsung's baffling UI, would you take that as a statement of fact, or just another cue that everything is subjective?
Not that I hate Android phones. Far from it. My wife has one. She thinks it's "neat". I agree. She also thinks the battery life is a PITA and the inability to sync on a Mac is just plain stupid. I, again, agree.
EDIT: I just watched a review for the Galaxy S2. The only thing new I took away from it was "Wow, there might be something to this Apple/Samsung lawsuit after all."
Hurm
So if I said the Galaxy S feels like it was made by Fisher Price, in that it feels cheap, too light, over-designed, kind of goofy-looking, and therefore a monumental piece of crap when coupled with Android's battery-sucking OS and Samsung's baffling UI, would you take that as a statement of fact, or just another cue that everything is subjective?
Not that I hate Android phones. Far from it. My wife has one. She thinks it's "neat". I agree. She also thinks the battery life is a PITA and the inability to sync on a Mac is just plain stupid. I, again, agree.
EDIT: I just watched a review for the Galaxy S2. The only thing new I took away from it was "Wow, there might be something to this Apple/Samsung lawsuit after all."
Kieranic
Mar 30, 12:18 AM
I bet it won't be long until a third party developer creates an app for it. I will consider Apple's offering (if there is one) before deciding to dedicate to this one since I need something like this.
drir1990
Apr 20, 01:33 AM
I'd love to see a three tier release. 3gs at the budget end, iPhone 4 in the midrange and the 5 at the top end.
Looking forward to whatever enhancements Apple bring with it.
I don't see that happening. Apple tends to avoid complicated product lines. That is one too many options in my opinion.
Looking forward to whatever enhancements Apple bring with it.
I don't see that happening. Apple tends to avoid complicated product lines. That is one too many options in my opinion.
chrono1081
Apr 7, 01:54 PM
It's sad but it's starting to sound like that's exactly what anti-Apple people want. They're making it sound like Apple regularly colludes with suppliers. Maybe it does, but there's no proof, or at least Apple buying up the supply of touch panels certainly doesn't constitute proof.
Apple legitimately amassed a large cash reserve. Apple is using that massive hoard of cash to secure the best possible deals with component suppliers. If that's called anticompetitive, then I don't know what to say.
+1 its not anticompetitive, its smart. Apple actually MOVES these things and people buy them. It would only be anti-competitive if they bought a ton of them on purpose and never used them.
The amount of anti-apple on mac rumors is sickening anymore. Its like going to engadget.
Apple legitimately amassed a large cash reserve. Apple is using that massive hoard of cash to secure the best possible deals with component suppliers. If that's called anticompetitive, then I don't know what to say.
+1 its not anticompetitive, its smart. Apple actually MOVES these things and people buy them. It would only be anti-competitive if they bought a ton of them on purpose and never used them.
The amount of anti-apple on mac rumors is sickening anymore. Its like going to engadget.
EricNau
May 3, 09:48 PM
I don't have the time to write an exhaustive response to this magnum opus, but I'm going to leave with a few concluding points:
It doesn't matter what normal body temperature is because that's not what people are looking for when they take a temperature; they're looking for what's not normal. If it can be helped, the number one is seeking should be as flat as possible.
There is a distinctive quality about 100 that is special. It represents an additional place value and is a line of demarcation for most people. For a scientist or professional, the numbers seem the same (each with 3 digits ending in the tenths place), but to the lay user they are very different. The average person doesn't know what significant digits are or when rounding is appropriate. It's far more likely that someone will falsely remember "37.2" as "37" than they will "99" as "98.6." Even if they do make an error and think of 98.6 as 99, it is an error on the side of caution (because presumably they will take their child to the doctor or at least call in).
I realize this makes me seem like I put people in low regard, but the fact is that most things designed for common use are meant to be idiot-proof. Redundancies and warnings are hard to miss in such designs, and on a temperature scale, one that makes 100 "dangerous" is very practical and effective. You have to keep in mind that this scale is going to be used by the illiterate, functionally illiterate, the negligent, the careless, the sloppy, and the hurried.
The importance of additional digits finds its way into many facets of life, including advertising and pricing. It essentially the only reason why everything is sold at intervals of "xx.99" instead of a flat price point. Marketers have long determined that if they were to round up to the nearest whole number, it would make the price seem disproportionately larger. The same "trick" is being used by the Fahrenheit scale; the presence of the additional digit makes people more alarmed at the appropriate time.
I believe the discussion of body temperature has reached a senseless level. I disagree with your claim that body temperatures in celsius are more difficult to remember, and I don't believe there's any substatial evidence to support this claim. Regardless, Celsius seems to work just fine for the entire world (...practically), unless you know something about European mothers that I don't.
Of course any amateur baker has at least a few cups of both wet and dry so they can keep ingredients separated but measured when they need to be added in a precise order. It just isn't practical to bake with 3 measuring devices and a scale (which, let's be real here, would cost 5 times as much as a set of measuring cups).
I see no reason why baking with a scale is impractical. It's not what you're used to, but that doesn't reflect upon the merits of a metric system.
This also relies on having recipes with written weights as opposed to volumes. It would also be problematic because you'd make people relearn common measurements for the metric beaker because they couldn't have their cups (ie I know 1 egg is half a cup, so it's easy to put half an egg in a recipe-I would have to do milimeter devision to figure this out for a metric recipe even though there's a perfectly good standard device for it).
Written weights are more accurate. What's problematic is that there's an additional requirement for measuring volumes of dry goods. Flour must be measured after sifting, brown sugar must be packed, etc. Not only does weighing dry goods eliminate the need to standardization of volume, but it's always going to be more accurate.
So what would you call 500ml of beer at a bar? Would everyone refer to the spoon at the dinner table as "the 30?" The naming convention isn't going to disappear just because measurements are given in metric. Or are you saying that the naming convention should disappear and numbers used exclusively in their stead?
As balmaw explained, it doesn't really matter what you call a pint of beer at a bar. Every culture and language has their own name for it.
In that case, what would I call 1 cup of a drink? Even if it is made flat at 200, 250, or 300ml, what would be the name? I think by and large it would still be called a cup. In that case you aren't really accomplishing much because people are going to refer to it as they will and the metric quantity wouldn't really do anything because it's not something that people usually divide or multiply by 10 very often in daily life.
If you ask for a "cup of water" at a restaurant, will you be given exactly 8oz? I don't think so.
Most cups hold more than a cup. So, in the absence of a measuring cup, there's really no need for such a designation. So, assuming we do away with the customary system, why do you need a word to describe 8oz of water? You would stop thinking in cups and start thinking in quarter liter intervals (which is equally, if not more, convenient).
No, that would be 1/4 of a liter, not 4 liters. I'm assuming that without gallons, the most closely analogous metric quantity would be 4 liters. What would be the marketing term for this? The shorthand name that would allow people to express a quantity without referring to another number?
I believe milk in Germany is bought by the liter, though I'm sure European members here could elaborate on that.
You might find purchasing milk by the liter cumbersome, but it works well for them.
Well I'm assuming that beer would have to be served in metric quantities, and a pint is known the world over as a beer. You can't really expect the name to go out of use just because the quantity has changed by a factor of about 25ml.
Beer is served in metric quantities all over the world. ...And there are plenty of names for it that aren't "pint." Additionally, I assure you that an American pint of beer is served with less precision than 25ml from bar to bar.
Except you can't divide the servings people usually take for themselves very easily by 2, 4, 8, or 16. An eighth of 300ml (a hypothetical metric cup), for example, is a decimal. It's not very probable that if someone was to describe how much cream they added to their coffee they'd describe it as "37.5ml." It's more likely that they'll say "1/4 of x" or "2 of y." This is how the standard system was born; people took everyday quantities (often times as random as fists, feet, and gulps) and over time standardized them.
And metric units, too, are used the world over to describe household amounts.
Also, dividing 300ml (though, I find it interesting that you keep choosing to compare metric units to customary units, since this is counter-productive) can easily be rounded to 38 or even 40ml, which is precise enough even for baking.
Though it's entirely a moot point. Metric recipes are normalized to "easy" measurements, just like American recipes are normalized to the nearest cup or 1/2 for items like flour and sugar.
Every standard unit conforms to a value we are likely to see to this day (a man's foot is still about 12 inches, a tablespoon is about one bite, etc). Granted it's not scientific, but it's not meant to be. It's meant to be practical to describe everyday units, much like "lion" is not the full scientific name for panthera leo. One naming scheme makes sense for one application and another makes sense for a very different application. I whole heartedly agree that for scientific, industrial, and official uses metric is the way to go, but it is not the way to go for lay people. People are not scientists. They should use the measuring schemes that are practical for the things in their lives.
I don't find the customary system practical. To the contrary, I find it convoluted with no consistency.
It's onerous to learn how to multiply and divide by 10 + 3 root words? :confused: Besides, so many things in our daily lives have both unit scales. My ruler has inches and cm and mm. Bathroom scales have pounds and kg. Even measuring cups have ml written on them.
I've witnessed many students struggle with it. When you grow up using Fahrenheit, feet, miles, inches, cups, teaspoons, etc. you get a sense of what each one means; you can "feel" it. The same can't be said about the metric system for most Americans, and it's extremely difficult to teach yourself what each unit intuitively represents as a high school student, for example.
It's something many of us will never get. Kilometers, Celsius, liters, centimeters, etc. will always "feel" foreign because of the units we were raised with at home. We owe our kids better.
It doesn't matter what normal body temperature is because that's not what people are looking for when they take a temperature; they're looking for what's not normal. If it can be helped, the number one is seeking should be as flat as possible.
There is a distinctive quality about 100 that is special. It represents an additional place value and is a line of demarcation for most people. For a scientist or professional, the numbers seem the same (each with 3 digits ending in the tenths place), but to the lay user they are very different. The average person doesn't know what significant digits are or when rounding is appropriate. It's far more likely that someone will falsely remember "37.2" as "37" than they will "99" as "98.6." Even if they do make an error and think of 98.6 as 99, it is an error on the side of caution (because presumably they will take their child to the doctor or at least call in).
I realize this makes me seem like I put people in low regard, but the fact is that most things designed for common use are meant to be idiot-proof. Redundancies and warnings are hard to miss in such designs, and on a temperature scale, one that makes 100 "dangerous" is very practical and effective. You have to keep in mind that this scale is going to be used by the illiterate, functionally illiterate, the negligent, the careless, the sloppy, and the hurried.
The importance of additional digits finds its way into many facets of life, including advertising and pricing. It essentially the only reason why everything is sold at intervals of "xx.99" instead of a flat price point. Marketers have long determined that if they were to round up to the nearest whole number, it would make the price seem disproportionately larger. The same "trick" is being used by the Fahrenheit scale; the presence of the additional digit makes people more alarmed at the appropriate time.
I believe the discussion of body temperature has reached a senseless level. I disagree with your claim that body temperatures in celsius are more difficult to remember, and I don't believe there's any substatial evidence to support this claim. Regardless, Celsius seems to work just fine for the entire world (...practically), unless you know something about European mothers that I don't.
Of course any amateur baker has at least a few cups of both wet and dry so they can keep ingredients separated but measured when they need to be added in a precise order. It just isn't practical to bake with 3 measuring devices and a scale (which, let's be real here, would cost 5 times as much as a set of measuring cups).
I see no reason why baking with a scale is impractical. It's not what you're used to, but that doesn't reflect upon the merits of a metric system.
This also relies on having recipes with written weights as opposed to volumes. It would also be problematic because you'd make people relearn common measurements for the metric beaker because they couldn't have their cups (ie I know 1 egg is half a cup, so it's easy to put half an egg in a recipe-I would have to do milimeter devision to figure this out for a metric recipe even though there's a perfectly good standard device for it).
Written weights are more accurate. What's problematic is that there's an additional requirement for measuring volumes of dry goods. Flour must be measured after sifting, brown sugar must be packed, etc. Not only does weighing dry goods eliminate the need to standardization of volume, but it's always going to be more accurate.
So what would you call 500ml of beer at a bar? Would everyone refer to the spoon at the dinner table as "the 30?" The naming convention isn't going to disappear just because measurements are given in metric. Or are you saying that the naming convention should disappear and numbers used exclusively in their stead?
As balmaw explained, it doesn't really matter what you call a pint of beer at a bar. Every culture and language has their own name for it.
In that case, what would I call 1 cup of a drink? Even if it is made flat at 200, 250, or 300ml, what would be the name? I think by and large it would still be called a cup. In that case you aren't really accomplishing much because people are going to refer to it as they will and the metric quantity wouldn't really do anything because it's not something that people usually divide or multiply by 10 very often in daily life.
If you ask for a "cup of water" at a restaurant, will you be given exactly 8oz? I don't think so.
Most cups hold more than a cup. So, in the absence of a measuring cup, there's really no need for such a designation. So, assuming we do away with the customary system, why do you need a word to describe 8oz of water? You would stop thinking in cups and start thinking in quarter liter intervals (which is equally, if not more, convenient).
No, that would be 1/4 of a liter, not 4 liters. I'm assuming that without gallons, the most closely analogous metric quantity would be 4 liters. What would be the marketing term for this? The shorthand name that would allow people to express a quantity without referring to another number?
I believe milk in Germany is bought by the liter, though I'm sure European members here could elaborate on that.
You might find purchasing milk by the liter cumbersome, but it works well for them.
Well I'm assuming that beer would have to be served in metric quantities, and a pint is known the world over as a beer. You can't really expect the name to go out of use just because the quantity has changed by a factor of about 25ml.
Beer is served in metric quantities all over the world. ...And there are plenty of names for it that aren't "pint." Additionally, I assure you that an American pint of beer is served with less precision than 25ml from bar to bar.
Except you can't divide the servings people usually take for themselves very easily by 2, 4, 8, or 16. An eighth of 300ml (a hypothetical metric cup), for example, is a decimal. It's not very probable that if someone was to describe how much cream they added to their coffee they'd describe it as "37.5ml." It's more likely that they'll say "1/4 of x" or "2 of y." This is how the standard system was born; people took everyday quantities (often times as random as fists, feet, and gulps) and over time standardized them.
And metric units, too, are used the world over to describe household amounts.
Also, dividing 300ml (though, I find it interesting that you keep choosing to compare metric units to customary units, since this is counter-productive) can easily be rounded to 38 or even 40ml, which is precise enough even for baking.
Though it's entirely a moot point. Metric recipes are normalized to "easy" measurements, just like American recipes are normalized to the nearest cup or 1/2 for items like flour and sugar.
Every standard unit conforms to a value we are likely to see to this day (a man's foot is still about 12 inches, a tablespoon is about one bite, etc). Granted it's not scientific, but it's not meant to be. It's meant to be practical to describe everyday units, much like "lion" is not the full scientific name for panthera leo. One naming scheme makes sense for one application and another makes sense for a very different application. I whole heartedly agree that for scientific, industrial, and official uses metric is the way to go, but it is not the way to go for lay people. People are not scientists. They should use the measuring schemes that are practical for the things in their lives.
I don't find the customary system practical. To the contrary, I find it convoluted with no consistency.
It's onerous to learn how to multiply and divide by 10 + 3 root words? :confused: Besides, so many things in our daily lives have both unit scales. My ruler has inches and cm and mm. Bathroom scales have pounds and kg. Even measuring cups have ml written on them.
I've witnessed many students struggle with it. When you grow up using Fahrenheit, feet, miles, inches, cups, teaspoons, etc. you get a sense of what each one means; you can "feel" it. The same can't be said about the metric system for most Americans, and it's extremely difficult to teach yourself what each unit intuitively represents as a high school student, for example.
It's something many of us will never get. Kilometers, Celsius, liters, centimeters, etc. will always "feel" foreign because of the units we were raised with at home. We owe our kids better.
ehoui
Mar 31, 08:25 AM
Lion looks awesome, I don't know why there is so much whining about it.
It has more to do with the human condition than the condition of Lion.
It has more to do with the human condition than the condition of Lion.
tpavur
Apr 21, 04:51 PM
wow! I just fired up my 3.2 mac pro w/ 5870 for the first time and this is what welcomes me? i feel so wronged...
dansgil
Aug 4, 12:28 AM
All I want from WWDC is a Merom MBP. Well...Leopard too. :)
bloodycape
Apr 18, 05:10 PM
No it's not. It's not that obvious. Phones sucked so bad before the iphone. Smart phones sucked even worse. Treo's, Q's omg. horrible pieces of equipment.
I can't say they sucked, they were just more spartan compare to what we have now. Sure the touch screen aspect of it was crap, but the browser was acceptable, battery life was good, and they keyboard, least on the 650, and 700w where good all the years I used them. From time to time I miss my 700w and WM as it had this nerdy charm to it.
This could out like the RIM v Handspring(Palm bought them later) lawsuit were RIM sued Handspring for copying their keyboard, and something related to emailing on a mobile device. They settled out of court in the end.
I can't say they sucked, they were just more spartan compare to what we have now. Sure the touch screen aspect of it was crap, but the browser was acceptable, battery life was good, and they keyboard, least on the 650, and 700w where good all the years I used them. From time to time I miss my 700w and WM as it had this nerdy charm to it.
This could out like the RIM v Handspring(Palm bought them later) lawsuit were RIM sued Handspring for copying their keyboard, and something related to emailing on a mobile device. They settled out of court in the end.
msb3079
Apr 20, 11:11 AM
No. Don't stretch to the bezel, unless the bezel is getting bigger, which is the same bloody thing as making a bigger phone. I don't want the screen at the edge of the phone, and nobody makes this, for good reason. You have to be able to hold onto something on the phone. Really.
I'm getting so sick of hearing this excuse. NO ONE holds the phone by the TINY little black glass area next to the screen (right and left in portrait orientation)... the hold it by the metal edge, which has nothing to do with how close the edge of the screen is to the edge of the phone.
So tired of this.
I'm getting so sick of hearing this excuse. NO ONE holds the phone by the TINY little black glass area next to the screen (right and left in portrait orientation)... the hold it by the metal edge, which has nothing to do with how close the edge of the screen is to the edge of the phone.
So tired of this.
Piggie
Apr 23, 05:53 PM
Does anyone know what mountain that is a picture of? I'm asking on behalf of a curious third party
It's Mount Fuji
http://www.mt-fuji.gr.jp/gallery/05.jpg
It's Mount Fuji
http://www.mt-fuji.gr.jp/gallery/05.jpg
LegendKillerUK
Mar 27, 12:19 AM
If true...sounds like iPhone 3GS and iPad 1 owners are going to be shown the door.
Based on history the 3GS will still be in for updates along with the iPad. Performance on the other hand...
Based on history the 3GS will still be in for updates along with the iPad. Performance on the other hand...
