admanimal
Mar 28, 02:25 PM
Yes what a heinous crime for Apple to want to promote their new distribution platform and encourage developers to take advantage of it.
Hovey
Jul 21, 12:41 PM
You seem to have missed the "... MORE than iPhone 3gs" part.
A better antenna should drop FEWER calls (unless there's a flaw)
Yeah but none of us know what that number is. It could be a full 1/100 for all we know. 2-5% is still pretty good. There will NEVER be a phone that never drops a call, ever. We also don't know other manufacturers ratio. There's probably a reason why they don't give that information.
A better antenna should drop FEWER calls (unless there's a flaw)
Yeah but none of us know what that number is. It could be a full 1/100 for all we know. 2-5% is still pretty good. There will NEVER be a phone that never drops a call, ever. We also don't know other manufacturers ratio. There's probably a reason why they don't give that information.
MacRumors
Apr 8, 12:38 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/08/best-buy-not-in-trouble-with-apple-holding-ipad-2-stock-for-upcoming-promotion/)
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/08/133528-bbyhold.jpg
spiritual wallpapers.
more...
spiritual wallpaper. spiritual
spiritual wallpapers.
more...
Spiritual Wallpapers Divine
spiritual wallpaper. spiritual
more...
Free Wallpapers Indian Gods
-spiritual-wallpapers.
more...
spiritual wallpapers.
-spiritual-wallpapers.
more...
Spiritual Wallpapers Hindu
-spiritual-wallpapers.
more...
Pictures of Sai Baba
-spiritual-wallpapers.
more...
spiritual wallpapers.
spiritual wallpapers.
More Spiritual Wallpapers
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/08/133528-bbyhold.jpg
TuffLuffJimmy
Apr 26, 11:32 AM
Am I missing something totally obvious here? But what's that slot above the earpiece speaker meant to be exactly?
Like I say maybe I missed something as looking at their comparison images they seem to imply the current iPhone 4 has one already?!!?
What gives?
Sensors. That same slot is on the iPhone 4, although I don't have one handy to check if it looks the same. It's just harder to see on the black one because, well, it's black too.
Like I say maybe I missed something as looking at their comparison images they seem to imply the current iPhone 4 has one already?!!?
What gives?
Sensors. That same slot is on the iPhone 4, although I don't have one handy to check if it looks the same. It's just harder to see on the black one because, well, it's black too.
more...
toddybody
May 2, 12:44 PM
Because a huge amount of the reported details on this matter are wrong.
While the method of storing the cell location cache may show poor judgment on Apples part, I don't see any malicious intent. The system is logical implemented and on the surface, cell location data does not appear sensitive enough to justify encryption. It is only after further analysis that potentially sensitive data can be inferred.
Regardless it's good to see it being addressed.
I am glad they are addressing it as well; however...Apple's response to this issue has been somewhat confusing (and begs the question as to why they needed that much data and why it was not encrypted properly). Ill be first to say that it most likely is and was just a dumb move on Apple's behalf...
My greater point was, that folks seem predisposed to trust Apple's decisions on EVERYTHING. I mean, just look at threads on apple's decision not to include specific HW in their systems...no BluRay, no res bump on recent 13 MBP refresh (even though the previous Air has a standard 1400x900 res), poor GPU selection in iMac, Antenna Gate, Apple's disproportioned profit margins...All this is perpetuated and supported by "Apple Fans". The reasons are "Blu Ray is a dying format, and Apple is actually doing us a favor by not including it" (WTF?)... "The 1280x800 screen on my 13MPB is fine, people need to stop whining for things they dont need"..."Wow! they gave the iMac a 5750! Finally some powerful graphics!"..."Youre holding it wrong"..."Mac's cost more cause theyre just so well built". Its like some Apple fans will think of anyway to spin an Apple decision as "they know whats best for us".
Were taking a beating with a smile, then remarking on how wonderful and magical it was.
While the method of storing the cell location cache may show poor judgment on Apples part, I don't see any malicious intent. The system is logical implemented and on the surface, cell location data does not appear sensitive enough to justify encryption. It is only after further analysis that potentially sensitive data can be inferred.
Regardless it's good to see it being addressed.
I am glad they are addressing it as well; however...Apple's response to this issue has been somewhat confusing (and begs the question as to why they needed that much data and why it was not encrypted properly). Ill be first to say that it most likely is and was just a dumb move on Apple's behalf...
My greater point was, that folks seem predisposed to trust Apple's decisions on EVERYTHING. I mean, just look at threads on apple's decision not to include specific HW in their systems...no BluRay, no res bump on recent 13 MBP refresh (even though the previous Air has a standard 1400x900 res), poor GPU selection in iMac, Antenna Gate, Apple's disproportioned profit margins...All this is perpetuated and supported by "Apple Fans". The reasons are "Blu Ray is a dying format, and Apple is actually doing us a favor by not including it" (WTF?)... "The 1280x800 screen on my 13MPB is fine, people need to stop whining for things they dont need"..."Wow! they gave the iMac a 5750! Finally some powerful graphics!"..."Youre holding it wrong"..."Mac's cost more cause theyre just so well built". Its like some Apple fans will think of anyway to spin an Apple decision as "they know whats best for us".
Were taking a beating with a smile, then remarking on how wonderful and magical it was.
inkswamp
May 3, 05:43 PM
And why is this on mac rumors.
Does it really matter what the competition does.
Why is there always someone doing this? Does nobody go by the old netiquette rule of lurking on a site for a while to get a feel for things before posting?
I assume you haven't taken the time to fully absorb what this site is about. It goes beyond just Mac rumors. Go back through the archives of the site and you'll see. MR has always posted significant updates about direct competitors to Apple products as well as news concerning the tech industry that could impact Macs and iOS users. It's nothing new.
Oh, and welcome to the site. :)
Does it really matter what the competition does.
Why is there always someone doing this? Does nobody go by the old netiquette rule of lurking on a site for a while to get a feel for things before posting?
I assume you haven't taken the time to fully absorb what this site is about. It goes beyond just Mac rumors. Go back through the archives of the site and you'll see. MR has always posted significant updates about direct competitors to Apple products as well as news concerning the tech industry that could impact Macs and iOS users. It's nothing new.
Oh, and welcome to the site. :)
more...
MacinDoc
Nov 23, 11:56 PM
Apple Canada online store is down for updates now...
edit: Scott beat me to it.
edit: Scott beat me to it.
HMFIC03
Apr 29, 03:58 PM
Too bad, I was looking forward to the scroll bars similar to iOS
more...
bousozoku
Sep 25, 04:28 PM
I guess I mean support without any hacks necessary.
As long as you had enough RAM, the right processor, and the right version of Mac OS X, it was supported. It hasn't changed in the low level requirements. :)
My machine didn't have enough RAM, so it was immediately rejected. However, they were doing me a favour because the dual and dual core G5s still had performance issues with it.
As long as you had enough RAM, the right processor, and the right version of Mac OS X, it was supported. It hasn't changed in the low level requirements. :)
My machine didn't have enough RAM, so it was immediately rejected. However, they were doing me a favour because the dual and dual core G5s still had performance issues with it.
ghostlyorb
May 2, 09:48 AM
If battery life increases... I'll be happy!
more...
maclaptop
May 3, 02:26 PM
I don't really get this... You already pay fees for the data - why do they care for how you use it?
Here's my take on it.
One of the carriers source of income is data charges. Within that category of data sales is:
1) Data used via smartphone for web access.
2) Data used via tethering your phone & laptop.
3) Data used via a laptop air card bought from the carrier.
When you use method 2 illegally, the carrier loses out on that data sale. It's been like this for years, yet not been a problem as large as it is now.
Here's my take on it.
One of the carriers source of income is data charges. Within that category of data sales is:
1) Data used via smartphone for web access.
2) Data used via tethering your phone & laptop.
3) Data used via a laptop air card bought from the carrier.
When you use method 2 illegally, the carrier loses out on that data sale. It's been like this for years, yet not been a problem as large as it is now.
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...
balamw
Oct 2, 06:17 PM
Besides... the more I think about it, the more I don't see why iTunes wouldn't play the compatible Fairplay songs. Apple can't make any major changes to the existing DRM in files to break compatible Fairplay files.... since they would have then have to reencode all of those files sitting on people's hard drives.
The "key" to unlocking the FairPlay DRM is your iTMS account.
One factor that DVD Jon already uncovered once before is that the actual encoding of the DRM to your account is done locally by the iTunes client. This might help in their current effort. Previously the transmitted file was unenencrypted, while now it appears to be given some common form of encryption. Perhaps the easiest way they could make it work would be to see if they can fool iTunes into encrypting the file for them.
Since the files are already decrypted and encrypted locally in faster that real time, it doesn't seem too farfetched that Apple could decide to "upgrade" the DRM on the files locally whenever you access them, or in one swell foop as they did to detect gapless tracks.
Even if iTunes did the encrypting Apple could still break this by releasing a new iTunes client and mandating its use as they have done before. Most probably they would not want to deal with the hassle of dealing with support calls from folks who lost their protected files since they didn't have a backup but didn't buy the files from ITMS in the first place....
I personally don't see the net positive for Apple, but DVD Jon has surprised me in the past.
B
The "key" to unlocking the FairPlay DRM is your iTMS account.
One factor that DVD Jon already uncovered once before is that the actual encoding of the DRM to your account is done locally by the iTunes client. This might help in their current effort. Previously the transmitted file was unenencrypted, while now it appears to be given some common form of encryption. Perhaps the easiest way they could make it work would be to see if they can fool iTunes into encrypting the file for them.
Since the files are already decrypted and encrypted locally in faster that real time, it doesn't seem too farfetched that Apple could decide to "upgrade" the DRM on the files locally whenever you access them, or in one swell foop as they did to detect gapless tracks.
Even if iTunes did the encrypting Apple could still break this by releasing a new iTunes client and mandating its use as they have done before. Most probably they would not want to deal with the hassle of dealing with support calls from folks who lost their protected files since they didn't have a backup but didn't buy the files from ITMS in the first place....
I personally don't see the net positive for Apple, but DVD Jon has surprised me in the past.
B
ct2k7
Apr 16, 10:11 AM
Just to say that that metal one on the Foxconn box has the same serial as the iPod nano 16GB Chromatic.
more...
clintob
Oct 11, 12:09 PM
I'm not sure I understand the people who (a) don't believe this is coming soon, or (b) don't believe it's coming at all because "people won't use it - it's too small." That's garbage.
Not everything Apple releases has to be an "earth shattering" revolution. Some stuff can just have a niche market and be better than what's out there. They're in it to make money first and foremost. And frankly, if people could carry an iPod-sized object, with wireless headphones, and that could play widescreen movies on a 4" or so screen (AND, oh by the way, carry their iTunes library to boot), it would be the death of the portable DVD player.
No, that's not a huge market, or a cash cow by any means. Nor is it a revolutionary product. But at the end of the day, it's pretty damned cool which means most of us will buy it (despite our attempts not to), and it's certainly another cha-ching to add to the list for Apple.
Not everything Apple releases has to be an "earth shattering" revolution. Some stuff can just have a niche market and be better than what's out there. They're in it to make money first and foremost. And frankly, if people could carry an iPod-sized object, with wireless headphones, and that could play widescreen movies on a 4" or so screen (AND, oh by the way, carry their iTunes library to boot), it would be the death of the portable DVD player.
No, that's not a huge market, or a cash cow by any means. Nor is it a revolutionary product. But at the end of the day, it's pretty damned cool which means most of us will buy it (despite our attempts not to), and it's certainly another cha-ching to add to the list for Apple.
autrefois
Sep 12, 07:39 AM
Note that it doesn't say "The iTunes Music Store is being updated." That's a pretty clear sign to me that not only are they going to add movies, it's also now just going to be the iTunes Store.
Very good point. I've never seen it called the iTunes Store before by Apple. It can't be a coincidence.
If the iTunes Music Store is going to be called the iTunes Store (iTMS > iTS?) then shouldn't the name iTunes change as well to coincide with the change in available media? :o
I'm sure this was cause for much discussion at Apple. iMovie is taken obviously. iTunes is already very well known, so they must have decided to just stick with that. The "i" doesn't really mean a whole lot anymore anyway (iWeb = Internet Web?!), so why should "Tunes"? ;)
Very good point. I've never seen it called the iTunes Store before by Apple. It can't be a coincidence.
If the iTunes Music Store is going to be called the iTunes Store (iTMS > iTS?) then shouldn't the name iTunes change as well to coincide with the change in available media? :o
I'm sure this was cause for much discussion at Apple. iMovie is taken obviously. iTunes is already very well known, so they must have decided to just stick with that. The "i" doesn't really mean a whole lot anymore anyway (iWeb = Internet Web?!), so why should "Tunes"? ;)
more...
dante@sisna.com
Aug 8, 03:51 PM
Yes, obviously a 23 inch and a 24 inch cannot be the same panel. You are such a genius. But I wonder.. can a 30 inch apple and a 30 inch dell be the same panel?.. how about a 20 inch apple and a 20 inch dell?.
But forget all about that.. Are you saying the manufacturer gives apple the superior panels and leave the rejects for Dell?.. So cause Dell panel is 24 inch, they suck compared to apple 23 inch cause logically, since they are not the same size, it implies the Dell panel sucks!!!...
We must all get together and donate a nobel prize to you. You are such a genius, you make Einstein pale in comparison.
I don't want to leave you hanging but here's what happens.. The manufacter makes the panels. They cut a panel to apple specs and then the make the exact same panel (or one like it, hopefully, this manufacturer has quality control like every other company and can reproduce panels to exact specifications) and cuts the same panel to 24 inch to dell specifications.
Simple enough for you Einstein?.
Hello "Einstein," -- while the panels may be the same, and they are, you should do a bit more research before tagging others with hostility.
The color management of Apple Cinema HD is superior to that of the Dell due to firmware differences and interaction with Colorsync in the actual OS. We do high-end color management on both 23 and 30" Cinema HD's -- we have a Dell 24 inch as well. Without custom profiles the Dell pales in comparision to the Mac Cinema HD's -- Even with a Custom Profile the Dell is less useful to us as most of our nationwide clients have Mac OS systems with Cinema HD's -- we can send a digital proof and insure that our client sees what we see thanks to the firmware/OS Sync.
In this respects Dells are very expensive monitors for us to use as they force us to burn physical color prints and FEDEX to clients. We cannot afford this in our job costs. So for our business we'll take the Cheaper, Superior Apple Cinema HD's over the less predictable, more expensive Dell's.
You really should consider all angles before bashing.
DJO
But forget all about that.. Are you saying the manufacturer gives apple the superior panels and leave the rejects for Dell?.. So cause Dell panel is 24 inch, they suck compared to apple 23 inch cause logically, since they are not the same size, it implies the Dell panel sucks!!!...
We must all get together and donate a nobel prize to you. You are such a genius, you make Einstein pale in comparison.
I don't want to leave you hanging but here's what happens.. The manufacter makes the panels. They cut a panel to apple specs and then the make the exact same panel (or one like it, hopefully, this manufacturer has quality control like every other company and can reproduce panels to exact specifications) and cuts the same panel to 24 inch to dell specifications.
Simple enough for you Einstein?.
Hello "Einstein," -- while the panels may be the same, and they are, you should do a bit more research before tagging others with hostility.
The color management of Apple Cinema HD is superior to that of the Dell due to firmware differences and interaction with Colorsync in the actual OS. We do high-end color management on both 23 and 30" Cinema HD's -- we have a Dell 24 inch as well. Without custom profiles the Dell pales in comparision to the Mac Cinema HD's -- Even with a Custom Profile the Dell is less useful to us as most of our nationwide clients have Mac OS systems with Cinema HD's -- we can send a digital proof and insure that our client sees what we see thanks to the firmware/OS Sync.
In this respects Dells are very expensive monitors for us to use as they force us to burn physical color prints and FEDEX to clients. We cannot afford this in our job costs. So for our business we'll take the Cheaper, Superior Apple Cinema HD's over the less predictable, more expensive Dell's.
You really should consider all angles before bashing.
DJO
twoodcc
Aug 15, 04:38 PM
well here's something weird going on. when i stand my computer up, the temps go up. and when i lay it down, they go back down. here is a youtube video of it. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZXCSPXOOZ5U)
but i do have a theory. the only thing i can think of is the cpu cooler isn't air tight, even though i screwed it as tight as i could. oh well, i guess i'll check it laid down
but i do have a theory. the only thing i can think of is the cpu cooler isn't air tight, even though i screwed it as tight as i could. oh well, i guess i'll check it laid down
Dalton63841
Apr 27, 03:25 AM
komodrone
13 hours ago at 12:39 pm
"...in total penetration" THAT'S WHAT SHE SAID. yeah I signed up for an account just to post this.
Rating: 10 Positives / 0 Negatives
It saddens me that THIS got more votes than many actual substantial posts...
13 hours ago at 12:39 pm
"...in total penetration" THAT'S WHAT SHE SAID. yeah I signed up for an account just to post this.
Rating: 10 Positives / 0 Negatives
It saddens me that THIS got more votes than many actual substantial posts...
goosnarrggh
Nov 17, 10:05 AM
You are obviously not a systems programmer.
Check out the source code for Xen, and then try to tell me that a Xeon and an Opteron have identical instruction sets....
I'm not going to run Xen. In fact, I'm unlikely to ever use virtuialization technology.
I'm going to run QuickTime, and iTunes, and Rosetta, and web browsers, and code spit out by a run-of-the-mill x86_64 variation of GCC.
And none of those sorts of applications require a re-compile. From that perspective, AMD64 and ET64T are close enough to identical to suit my needs.
Check out the source code for Xen, and then try to tell me that a Xeon and an Opteron have identical instruction sets....
I'm not going to run Xen. In fact, I'm unlikely to ever use virtuialization technology.
I'm going to run QuickTime, and iTunes, and Rosetta, and web browsers, and code spit out by a run-of-the-mill x86_64 variation of GCC.
And none of those sorts of applications require a re-compile. From that perspective, AMD64 and ET64T are close enough to identical to suit my needs.
TheWheelMan
Mar 17, 05:10 PM
Love this forum for a good laugh. Obviously the OP was wrong with what he did but love laughing at all the holier than thou responses. :D
You mean like posting just to say "I'm laughing at you all?" Welcome to the "holier than thou club, buddy.
You mean like posting just to say "I'm laughing at you all?" Welcome to the "holier than thou club, buddy.
snberk103
Apr 13, 09:48 AM
The 9/11 hijackers did not bring anything on the plane that was banned. No amount of groping or searching by airport security would've prevented 9/11.
9/11 was a failure of intelligence, not a failure of airport security.
I thought box cutters were banned? Can you provide a link to support your statement?
Box cutters were banned in response to 9/11. As always, airline security is reactive. Bush sold us a bill of goods while increasing the size and cost of government.
The OP was ambiguous ... I read it that the weapons used on 9/11 were still not banned. As opposed to not banned at the time.
Hasn't anyone noticed that not a single US plane has been hijacked in the past 10 years? A quick look at Wikipedia shows 7 US planes hijacked in the 1970s, several in the 80s and 90s. Four planes were hijacked in 2001 (all on the same day....) - and then not a single US, European, Japanese plane has been hijacked.
Something is working.....
9/11 was a failure of intelligence, not a failure of airport security.
I thought box cutters were banned? Can you provide a link to support your statement?
Box cutters were banned in response to 9/11. As always, airline security is reactive. Bush sold us a bill of goods while increasing the size and cost of government.
The OP was ambiguous ... I read it that the weapons used on 9/11 were still not banned. As opposed to not banned at the time.
Hasn't anyone noticed that not a single US plane has been hijacked in the past 10 years? A quick look at Wikipedia shows 7 US planes hijacked in the 1970s, several in the 80s and 90s. Four planes were hijacked in 2001 (all on the same day....) - and then not a single US, European, Japanese plane has been hijacked.
Something is working.....
iW00t
Jan 12, 04:47 AM
I think people's first reaction to see a phone with speakers floating in air.. would be 'wow.. WTF!' instead of 'ew'
I prefer that technology to be made larger and turned into... anti crash aircraft, aircraft that flies on anti gravity and by definition will never crash.
A bunch of floating speakers, who cares! Noise pollution man!
I prefer that technology to be made larger and turned into... anti crash aircraft, aircraft that flies on anti gravity and by definition will never crash.
A bunch of floating speakers, who cares! Noise pollution man!
Octantis
Apr 4, 12:39 PM
Another way to go about tracking is via the MAC address. It is unique to your xbox and in theory just a traceable as an ip address. You should probably have it from the earlier logs when the box was near your house. You could go to each Internet service in town and ask if this MAC address is hitting their network.
Worth a shot.
Worth a shot.
No comments:
Post a Comment