Mexbearpig
Apr 8, 10:56 PM
Portenzo case finally came in as did my beats that I got for $80. <snip>
http://img716.imageshack.us/img716/3117/p4080881.jpg
How did you get beats for $80?
http://img716.imageshack.us/img716/3117/p4080881.jpg
How did you get beats for $80?
nfl46
Apr 15, 04:33 PM
People FAIL to realize that the case could have been taken with a iPhone 3G or something of that sorts. These are not high quality pictures so its not going to look perfect. Because one pictures has a spot on it and the other doesn't, does not mean the pictures are fake.
Nevertheless, I don't like the back casing. Oh well, MOST of us are going to have a case on it anyway. So, we won't be seeing it.
The screen looks bigger...well the case looks longer. A 3.7" screen perhaps?
Nevertheless, I don't like the back casing. Oh well, MOST of us are going to have a case on it anyway. So, we won't be seeing it.
The screen looks bigger...well the case looks longer. A 3.7" screen perhaps?
trip1ex
Apr 25, 05:52 PM
Whew! I was having a hard time imagining what a slightly larger edge to edge screen iphone would look like. Thank goodness for MacRumors.
crap freakboy
Jan 5, 05:43 PM
Excellent work MR.
Stops me sneaking a look before the stream is available.
Now I can watch after the kids and 'er indoors are asleep.
Fantastic.
Stops me sneaking a look before the stream is available.
Now I can watch after the kids and 'er indoors are asleep.
Fantastic.
xlight
Aug 1, 02:00 PM
First you bitch about MS then when Apple does the same thing it is not wrong.
Come on ...
Come on ...
adouglas2001
Jan 15, 02:55 PM
Just sold my Apple shares.
Genius move, that.
Have you never heard of "sell on the news?" Everyone's already done it.
Apple is down $13.50 as I write this.
It will come back up, provided the economy as a whole doesn't implode.
I got an Apple gift card for the holidays, and was waiting to see what Apple was going to announce. My decision? I'm ordering a refurb MBP to replace my G4 Powerbook this week.
"Old old old?" Not compared to my early-2003 computer. It's dramatically faster, dramatically more efficient, and dramatically more capacious than the machine I've got. Based on the Penryn tests I've seen so far, an MBP update will result in only a marginal improvement. I don't NEED a few extra percent of battery life or performance here and there.
It is always wiser in the long run IMHO to be a late adopter and buy near the end of a product lifecycle than near the beginning. Early adopters are, and have always been, late beta testers.
I dunno...seems that everyone could use just a little less caffeine and stop obsessing over instant gratification and wish fulfillment. Take a deep breath. Leopard WILL be updated. Blu-Ray WILL happen. The MBP WILL get a refresh. And so on. But not today. Big deal. Wait a few months.
Could be that age and decades of experience have given me an appreciation for the long view. I just don't get all torqued up over every tiny move that Apple makes (or fails to make). They still make great products.
Genius move, that.
Have you never heard of "sell on the news?" Everyone's already done it.
Apple is down $13.50 as I write this.
It will come back up, provided the economy as a whole doesn't implode.
I got an Apple gift card for the holidays, and was waiting to see what Apple was going to announce. My decision? I'm ordering a refurb MBP to replace my G4 Powerbook this week.
"Old old old?" Not compared to my early-2003 computer. It's dramatically faster, dramatically more efficient, and dramatically more capacious than the machine I've got. Based on the Penryn tests I've seen so far, an MBP update will result in only a marginal improvement. I don't NEED a few extra percent of battery life or performance here and there.
It is always wiser in the long run IMHO to be a late adopter and buy near the end of a product lifecycle than near the beginning. Early adopters are, and have always been, late beta testers.
I dunno...seems that everyone could use just a little less caffeine and stop obsessing over instant gratification and wish fulfillment. Take a deep breath. Leopard WILL be updated. Blu-Ray WILL happen. The MBP WILL get a refresh. And so on. But not today. Big deal. Wait a few months.
Could be that age and decades of experience have given me an appreciation for the long view. I just don't get all torqued up over every tiny move that Apple makes (or fails to make). They still make great products.
cherrypop
Oct 11, 09:00 AM
Makes total sense to me: Microsoft's Zune introduction naturally raised the bar for MP3 players. Some of the press Zune is getting for its larger display, clean design and usability is adding to the pressure for Apple to ship an answer to the Zune.
Apple is ready to announce their rumored video/wireless iPod
Apple is ready to announce their rumored video/wireless iPod
AppleScruff1
Apr 22, 11:34 AM
How do you feel about being tracked and information stored without your knowledge? Oh wait, it's ok, Uncle Stevie knows what's best.
balamw
Oct 3, 12:14 AM
charcoal gray.
That was my point, until it's thoroughly tested in court (or repealed or modified) it remains up to interpretation, which makes most encryption/DRM reverse engineering related work in the US (somewhat) risky business.
DVD Jon may have found a way around this in that he's not currently trying to circumvent the access control, he appears to be trying to apply a compatible access control to files that would not otherwise have one.
B
That was my point, until it's thoroughly tested in court (or repealed or modified) it remains up to interpretation, which makes most encryption/DRM reverse engineering related work in the US (somewhat) risky business.
DVD Jon may have found a way around this in that he's not currently trying to circumvent the access control, he appears to be trying to apply a compatible access control to files that would not otherwise have one.
B
Santabean2000
Oct 4, 07:08 AM
This is the Mac mini of houses at best.
Wow. Some of you really are hooked on the bigger is better buzz.
Seriously, get out and see some of the world. Perspective people. The world is NOT just the US.
Anyone tootin' on these forums (including myself) can consider themselves truly blessed.
A Mac mini house..? Hardly. It's a mansion by any worldly measure.
Wow. Some of you really are hooked on the bigger is better buzz.
Seriously, get out and see some of the world. Perspective people. The world is NOT just the US.
Anyone tootin' on these forums (including myself) can consider themselves truly blessed.
A Mac mini house..? Hardly. It's a mansion by any worldly measure.
Play Ultimate
Oct 3, 12:44 PM
iPhone will come out before X'mas.
Actually I would predict a video iPod before Xmas; with a possible announcement right around the time Zune is released.
iPhone I don't see until next year sometime.
Actually I would predict a video iPod before Xmas; with a possible announcement right around the time Zune is released.
iPhone I don't see until next year sometime.
dunk321
Mar 17, 01:38 AM
I just told a story and everybody is entitled to their personal opinion, what's done is done, I wasn't look for any congrats for this posting, but I Thank you all for the laughs
coder12
Apr 25, 03:11 PM
iPhone nano mock-up?
Image (http://zclee.com/random/iphonenano.jpg)
Nope, that's the new iPod touch ;)
Image (http://zclee.com/random/iphonenano.jpg)
Nope, that's the new iPod touch ;)
milo
Oct 11, 09:36 AM
No freaking way. Even thanksgiving is a long shot, early next year is more likely (which would be around the same time as iTV).
:D You're joking, right? If you're tired of rumors, it's just so easy to stop directing your browser to a site called macRUMORS.com
People aren't tired of rumors. We're just tired of the same old repetitive, idiotic, blatantly wrong rumors. I don't want to hear rumors unless they have a reliable source and have a solid chance of being accurate. This one is just stupid.
:D You're joking, right? If you're tired of rumors, it's just so easy to stop directing your browser to a site called macRUMORS.com
People aren't tired of rumors. We're just tired of the same old repetitive, idiotic, blatantly wrong rumors. I don't want to hear rumors unless they have a reliable source and have a solid chance of being accurate. This one is just stupid.
Mike31c
Nov 18, 10:01 AM
I don't see why AMD and Intel OSX laptops can't live together... We all see the windoze users have their choice of AMD or Intel, dual cores or single cores... why can't Apple/OSX?
As for the G5 ibook/powerbook, well judging by the way the G5 iMac was built, then frankly, I don't see why a G5 laptop could not of been built. The current line of iMacs practically IS a notebook on a vertical stand so they could of put it in a notebook form. Besides, how do we know the G5 iBook does not exist?
I mean besides from the fact that "unless Mr. Jobs says it exists, it does not exist" logic. :p
Come on folks, there has to be a LOT of stuff in the R&D labs of Apple that we will never know of or see because of a change of the Master Plan of Steve Jobs:
As for the G5 ibook/powerbook, well judging by the way the G5 iMac was built, then frankly, I don't see why a G5 laptop could not of been built. The current line of iMacs practically IS a notebook on a vertical stand so they could of put it in a notebook form. Besides, how do we know the G5 iBook does not exist?
I mean besides from the fact that "unless Mr. Jobs says it exists, it does not exist" logic. :p
Come on folks, there has to be a LOT of stuff in the R&D labs of Apple that we will never know of or see because of a change of the Master Plan of Steve Jobs:
MagicBoy
Mar 25, 06:10 PM
Did I miss something? I was talking about Eidorian. And I don't care if he's secretly Steve Jobs. A troll is a troll.
Yeah, I thought the same. Was trying to work out how Schmye made such a mad link!
He probably OD'd on Mountain Dew ;)
Yeah, I thought the same. Was trying to work out how Schmye made such a mad link!
He probably OD'd on Mountain Dew ;)
forrestmc4
Jan 10, 10:09 PM
I'm a regular reader of Gizmodo and their "rival" Engadget. I have to say after this stunt I don't have much respect left for Giz. A presentation, particularly a press presentation, is a key part of CES marketing for some of the biggest names around. Messing with the Motorola presentation was way, way, way over the line. Sadly, the comments on the story seem to show a rift in the Gizmodo readership trending towards acceptance of this unbelievably unprofessional conduct. There were even commenters faulting companies for leaving IR receivers uncovered by electrical tape or some other rudimentary signal blocking fix. Companies shouldn't have to shelter their product presentations from this kind of childishness, journalistic professionalism should take care of that.
Shame on Gizmodo. Bring out the banhammer.
Shame on Gizmodo. Bring out the banhammer.
marktwain
Nov 24, 07:15 PM
The Apple store onine and the retail stores are not offering double dicounts...you will have to choose the sale price OR your education / corporate discount. If you found a location that gives both, they aren't following the published guidelines. Good for you, but it doesn't mean the other locations will follow suite.
Squonk
Oct 3, 01:55 PM
I still believe that there will be some type of announcement, on something, before Thanksgiving.
Yup - I hear you. Apple going three months, in the wind-up to holiday shopping without any more "press", I don't think so. I wish it were the iPhone, but I concurr with the rest that this is unlikely. MBPs then?
Yup - I hear you. Apple going three months, in the wind-up to holiday shopping without any more "press", I don't think so. I wish it were the iPhone, but I concurr with the rest that this is unlikely. MBPs then?
hypmatize
Apr 8, 09:13 PM
I was supposed to get it today but my dad had a doctor appointment so i'll be getting it tomorrow:D
http://img703.imageshack.us/img703/1339/ps3justcause2.jpg (http://img703.imageshack.us/i/ps3justcause2.jpg/)
so freaking can't wait to do crazy stuff in that game:D!! specially the skydiving part (Grand Theft Auto4+Spider Man 2 = Just Cause 2):D
yeah its a great game....its a lot of fun :D
http://img703.imageshack.us/img703/1339/ps3justcause2.jpg (http://img703.imageshack.us/i/ps3justcause2.jpg/)
so freaking can't wait to do crazy stuff in that game:D!! specially the skydiving part (Grand Theft Auto4+Spider Man 2 = Just Cause 2):D
yeah its a great game....its a lot of fun :D
radiohead14
May 3, 03:02 PM
1. Root
2. XDA Forum
3. Side load
4. ???
5. Winning.
it's amazing what those XDA devs could do. great helpful community there.
2. XDA Forum
3. Side load
4. ???
5. Winning.
it's amazing what those XDA devs could do. great helpful community there.
840quadra
Nov 25, 05:52 PM
some kid in front of me in line brought in his old ipod for the ipod exchange program and got an additional discount on today's price. the 30gb ipod he got ended up being a little over $200. :rolleyes:
Really ? That's quite sad that he only got ~$28 for his old ipod! Broken iPods go for way more than that on ebay!
Really ? That's quite sad that he only got ~$28 for his old ipod! Broken iPods go for way more than that on ebay!
snberk103
Apr 15, 08:03 PM
Well actually we know the TSA methods don't work because both of the incidents were from European airports that mirror what the TSA does. Added to the number of weapons that make it through TSA checkpoints, it's easy to see that the TSA does in fact not work to the extent that it is expected to.
All we know is that increased security screening is not perfect. Perhaps you can extrapolate the European experience (in this case) to the TSA... but that's as far as you can go.
I understood your rather simplistic attempt at game theory just fine. The problem remains that one side is not a rational actor. The command portion of terrorists have virtually nothing to lose with a botched attempt, and neither does the fanatic patsy. A 50/50 ratio isn't good enough for our security because the downside for both command and patsy are much smaller than the upside (from their perspective). The chances of failure need to be much higher in order to effectively deter terrorists.
Do you always start with the insulting tone (see bolding) when the debate isn't going your way? I would argue that both sides are rational actors, though both sides may also employ non-rational players. The higher echelons of terrorist organizations have shown themselves to very worried about being captured by the fact that they are so hard to catch. If they didn't care, they wouldn't be going to a great deal of trouble to avoid it. Therefore, to my mind, they are rational actors. That 50/50 number is one that I threw into the argument as an "for argument's sake". Please don't rely on it for anything factual. The TSA in fact catches more than 50% of their training/testing planted weapons. And yes, I think even if the the number was as low as 50/50 a rational actor would do everything... oh heck... I've already written all that - you've not presented anything else of substance in it's place, so I'll just save my typing finger....
Sacrificing these things is appropriate when there is a tangible gain. There hasn't been much of a tangible gain with TSA, and this is coming from the head of Israeli Security. We're paying a lot and getting almost nothing in return. Every year there's a new "standard" put out there to make it seem like TSA is doing something, but time and again security experts have lambasted TSA and its efforts as a dog and pony show.
Your own opinion of flying should be an example of how ridiculous things have gotten. If people now become disgruntled and irritated every time they fly, for perhaps marginal gains in security, then our methods have failed.
That's the funny thing. I've never actually said that the TSA is the best thing around. All I've said is that the TSA is doing something. That's all - that the TSA is doing something right. Not everything. Just something. Go back and look it up. Even the head of the Israeli security never said they were useless (as in doing nothing right). Just that it wasn't the best use of resources. Oh, and if you know Israelis (and I do), then you'll also know that there is another Israeli who knows just as much as that first fellow, and she thinks the TSA is doing things just fine.
It is difficult to prove, but you can make an educated guess about what the cause is. Other than the correlational evidence, there is no other good data to suggest that TSA has actually been effective. In no field is correlation enough to establish anything but correlation.
That's the problem with 90% of the decisions Governments make. All they have is correlational connections. Or incomplete causal relationships. Or... basically the best they can do is make an educated guess, and hope for the best.
No, that's not how it works. If you want to assert your idea as correct, the burden is on you to show that it is correct. I am going to try to poke holes in your reasoning, and it's up to you to show that my criticisms are invalid on the bases of logic and evidence.
No, on two counts. 1) You asserted "Our attempts at security are at best as good as Lisa's rock...". I countered your assertion by saying that the TSA must be doing something right, and used the stats on hijackings. I (to paraphrase you) "poked hole in your reasoning". You've presented nothing that counters my evidence, except to try mocking it as simplistic. If it is, then show how it is.... If my argument doesn't convince you. Then say so, and then leave it at that. I have my opinion, you have yours. But if you want me to change my opinion you had better do better. 2) I've forgotten - cr*p.
So far you've only cited correlation, which is not sufficient evidence for causation. You ignored my criticism based on military intervention, changing travel patterns, etc, and only want to trumpet your belief that correlation is enough. It's not. If you don't want to do more on Mac Rumors, then don't post anymore on this topic concerning this line of discussion.
You are right correlations don't show causation. But they are evidence for it. If you have evidence that shows otherwise, present it.
All we know is that increased security screening is not perfect. Perhaps you can extrapolate the European experience (in this case) to the TSA... but that's as far as you can go.
I understood your rather simplistic attempt at game theory just fine. The problem remains that one side is not a rational actor. The command portion of terrorists have virtually nothing to lose with a botched attempt, and neither does the fanatic patsy. A 50/50 ratio isn't good enough for our security because the downside for both command and patsy are much smaller than the upside (from their perspective). The chances of failure need to be much higher in order to effectively deter terrorists.
Do you always start with the insulting tone (see bolding) when the debate isn't going your way? I would argue that both sides are rational actors, though both sides may also employ non-rational players. The higher echelons of terrorist organizations have shown themselves to very worried about being captured by the fact that they are so hard to catch. If they didn't care, they wouldn't be going to a great deal of trouble to avoid it. Therefore, to my mind, they are rational actors. That 50/50 number is one that I threw into the argument as an "for argument's sake". Please don't rely on it for anything factual. The TSA in fact catches more than 50% of their training/testing planted weapons. And yes, I think even if the the number was as low as 50/50 a rational actor would do everything... oh heck... I've already written all that - you've not presented anything else of substance in it's place, so I'll just save my typing finger....
Sacrificing these things is appropriate when there is a tangible gain. There hasn't been much of a tangible gain with TSA, and this is coming from the head of Israeli Security. We're paying a lot and getting almost nothing in return. Every year there's a new "standard" put out there to make it seem like TSA is doing something, but time and again security experts have lambasted TSA and its efforts as a dog and pony show.
Your own opinion of flying should be an example of how ridiculous things have gotten. If people now become disgruntled and irritated every time they fly, for perhaps marginal gains in security, then our methods have failed.
That's the funny thing. I've never actually said that the TSA is the best thing around. All I've said is that the TSA is doing something. That's all - that the TSA is doing something right. Not everything. Just something. Go back and look it up. Even the head of the Israeli security never said they were useless (as in doing nothing right). Just that it wasn't the best use of resources. Oh, and if you know Israelis (and I do), then you'll also know that there is another Israeli who knows just as much as that first fellow, and she thinks the TSA is doing things just fine.
It is difficult to prove, but you can make an educated guess about what the cause is. Other than the correlational evidence, there is no other good data to suggest that TSA has actually been effective. In no field is correlation enough to establish anything but correlation.
That's the problem with 90% of the decisions Governments make. All they have is correlational connections. Or incomplete causal relationships. Or... basically the best they can do is make an educated guess, and hope for the best.
No, that's not how it works. If you want to assert your idea as correct, the burden is on you to show that it is correct. I am going to try to poke holes in your reasoning, and it's up to you to show that my criticisms are invalid on the bases of logic and evidence.
No, on two counts. 1) You asserted "Our attempts at security are at best as good as Lisa's rock...". I countered your assertion by saying that the TSA must be doing something right, and used the stats on hijackings. I (to paraphrase you) "poked hole in your reasoning". You've presented nothing that counters my evidence, except to try mocking it as simplistic. If it is, then show how it is.... If my argument doesn't convince you. Then say so, and then leave it at that. I have my opinion, you have yours. But if you want me to change my opinion you had better do better. 2) I've forgotten - cr*p.
So far you've only cited correlation, which is not sufficient evidence for causation. You ignored my criticism based on military intervention, changing travel patterns, etc, and only want to trumpet your belief that correlation is enough. It's not. If you don't want to do more on Mac Rumors, then don't post anymore on this topic concerning this line of discussion.
You are right correlations don't show causation. But they are evidence for it. If you have evidence that shows otherwise, present it.
mclihah2
Oct 11, 12:11 AM
At this point, ill believe it when it happens
Well personally, I'll fervently believe in it, until it happens, at which point I will stop believing in it at all.
Well personally, I'll fervently believe in it, until it happens, at which point I will stop believing in it at all.
