AP_piano295
May 4, 06:17 PM
I tend to disagree with the saying of "ends don't justify the means".
As for your last example, medical testing is a completely different scenario. In the torture case, you are doing it to someone who is part of the terrorist/criminal activity. They are already part of a criminal act, they already broke the law and they are planning in breaking it again to kill/damage more people.
People with medical conditions haven't done anything wrong.
So lets do medical testing on criminals, thats ok right?
As for your last example, medical testing is a completely different scenario. In the torture case, you are doing it to someone who is part of the terrorist/criminal activity. They are already part of a criminal act, they already broke the law and they are planning in breaking it again to kill/damage more people.
People with medical conditions haven't done anything wrong.
So lets do medical testing on criminals, thats ok right?
iMeowbot
Aug 13, 03:44 PM
I like it, but it should have been iMeowTiger.
I'll get to 'em all, but ... could ... not ... resist ... pun ...
I'll get to 'em all, but ... could ... not ... resist ... pun ...
Greenjeens
Jul 26, 08:43 PM
At this point, I couldn't really care less about Blu Ray or HD-DVD. I'd be more excited if Apple included Lightscribe or equivalent capability in their drives. Unlabeled discs are piled high on my desk.
Get a $100 inkjet cd/dvd printer. I use the Epson R320 (has a few more bells and whistles). You can Google images and print just about any kind of image on your discs. They look GREAT!
Generic ink is about $15 for a complete set! Doesn't look the best for photos but works fine for labels.
http://www.supermediastore.com/epson-stylus-photo-r220-inkjet-cd-printer.html
http://www.supermediastore.com/what-is-thermal-inkjet-printing-how-to-print-dvd.html
-
Dave
Get a $100 inkjet cd/dvd printer. I use the Epson R320 (has a few more bells and whistles). You can Google images and print just about any kind of image on your discs. They look GREAT!
Generic ink is about $15 for a complete set! Doesn't look the best for photos but works fine for labels.
http://www.supermediastore.com/epson-stylus-photo-r220-inkjet-cd-printer.html
http://www.supermediastore.com/what-is-thermal-inkjet-printing-how-to-print-dvd.html
-
Dave
spacepower7
Apr 5, 02:17 AM
On my system all m4v and m4b (audiobooks) show up in the finder as protected but they are not. Regardless of the default app I set to open them....
more...
srl7741
Sep 13, 02:26 PM
Found a nice new image that looks pretty good. Source (http://interfacelift.com/wallpaper_beta/downloads/date/any/)
.
.
danamania
Apr 28, 10:37 AM
If you would like an informative take on the issue read:
http://www.pcpro.co.uk/blogs/2011/04/28/the-unedifying-arrogance-of-apple/
Unfortunately that article has at least one fundamental mistake about how the data in consolidated.db is obtained that leads to incorrect conclusions.
Their statement "Yes, cell towers can be “located more than one hundred miles away”, but only if you live in the Mojave Desert." gives away part of that thinking. The database does not contain a list of cell towers/locations that the iPhone has identified by itself - local geography is totally irrelevant, because consolidated.db records a list of cell towers sent from Apple. I tested this by wiping my iPhone clean, not restoring from a backup, then leaving it sit for a while on my desk on Saturday.
Within 30 minutes consolidated.db held data on about 30 cell towers across a range of 80km, and every single one had the same timestamp. It could do this because it's received a dump of relatively nearby towers and wifi points from Apple. All the iPhone has recorded of its own position is a few strong towers, sent off the IDs of those to Apple, and received back a file with info on more towers around me that may be useful in the future - Apple selects which towers, and by looking at iPhoneTracker's dump of other folks' consolidated.db files, it's across a wide wide physical range.
That's the biggie. The list of locations in consolidated.db ARE NOT DISCOVERED BY THE PHONE ITSELF - It's a list sent from Apple, and all entries are timestamped AFTER that information comes back from Apple, which is not necessarily when the phone was remotely near that location.
Wifi turned out even more distant, timewise. I (and my phone :) was in a location 5km away from home, and after returning I checked my consolidated.db for any wifi points from near that place. There were none. I checked again that night, there were none. I checked again the next morning, and there they were, 1750 wifi points timestamped around 2am - that's a list of wifi points across several kilometres, for a position I was at more than 12 hours beforehand. I could have been on the other side of the country at that timestamp, or I could have been in the same place. For looking back and 'tracking' me or my phone it's about as accurate as throwing a dart at a spinning globe. For enabling me to find my own location through aGPS, it lets me find my precise location if I choose, in seconds instead of 13 minutes. I'm the one who benefits.
Worth mentioning apart from the 2MB limit is that new data from Apple on the same cell towers or wifi points overwrites the old data. Last I looked at my consolidated.db, (because I haven't moved more than a few km) every cell tower in it has a timestamp of the most recent time it was updated; today that's Thursday morning (16 hours ago) There are no cell tower entries with timestamps before that, even though I've been checking consolidated.db since Saturday when it first showed a record of towers approximately near me. More succinctly, each unique object (cell tower or wifi point) only has its location stored in consolidated.db once, and that's its most recent known position as sent from Apple.
I feel this log shouldn't be readable so easily, and it could do with being smaller (There's no point to stale data from a year ago on a city I haven't been near for the same time, when wifi points and cell towers could have changed dramatically) but as for tracking? It's about as close to tracking me as carrying a bag of maps is.
http://www.pcpro.co.uk/blogs/2011/04/28/the-unedifying-arrogance-of-apple/
Unfortunately that article has at least one fundamental mistake about how the data in consolidated.db is obtained that leads to incorrect conclusions.
Their statement "Yes, cell towers can be “located more than one hundred miles away”, but only if you live in the Mojave Desert." gives away part of that thinking. The database does not contain a list of cell towers/locations that the iPhone has identified by itself - local geography is totally irrelevant, because consolidated.db records a list of cell towers sent from Apple. I tested this by wiping my iPhone clean, not restoring from a backup, then leaving it sit for a while on my desk on Saturday.
Within 30 minutes consolidated.db held data on about 30 cell towers across a range of 80km, and every single one had the same timestamp. It could do this because it's received a dump of relatively nearby towers and wifi points from Apple. All the iPhone has recorded of its own position is a few strong towers, sent off the IDs of those to Apple, and received back a file with info on more towers around me that may be useful in the future - Apple selects which towers, and by looking at iPhoneTracker's dump of other folks' consolidated.db files, it's across a wide wide physical range.
That's the biggie. The list of locations in consolidated.db ARE NOT DISCOVERED BY THE PHONE ITSELF - It's a list sent from Apple, and all entries are timestamped AFTER that information comes back from Apple, which is not necessarily when the phone was remotely near that location.
Wifi turned out even more distant, timewise. I (and my phone :) was in a location 5km away from home, and after returning I checked my consolidated.db for any wifi points from near that place. There were none. I checked again that night, there were none. I checked again the next morning, and there they were, 1750 wifi points timestamped around 2am - that's a list of wifi points across several kilometres, for a position I was at more than 12 hours beforehand. I could have been on the other side of the country at that timestamp, or I could have been in the same place. For looking back and 'tracking' me or my phone it's about as accurate as throwing a dart at a spinning globe. For enabling me to find my own location through aGPS, it lets me find my precise location if I choose, in seconds instead of 13 minutes. I'm the one who benefits.
Worth mentioning apart from the 2MB limit is that new data from Apple on the same cell towers or wifi points overwrites the old data. Last I looked at my consolidated.db, (because I haven't moved more than a few km) every cell tower in it has a timestamp of the most recent time it was updated; today that's Thursday morning (16 hours ago) There are no cell tower entries with timestamps before that, even though I've been checking consolidated.db since Saturday when it first showed a record of towers approximately near me. More succinctly, each unique object (cell tower or wifi point) only has its location stored in consolidated.db once, and that's its most recent known position as sent from Apple.
I feel this log shouldn't be readable so easily, and it could do with being smaller (There's no point to stale data from a year ago on a city I haven't been near for the same time, when wifi points and cell towers could have changed dramatically) but as for tracking? It's about as close to tracking me as carrying a bag of maps is.
more...
aristotle
Apr 21, 12:32 PM
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOR you can compare smartphone OSs like what is normally done.
Dude, could you be any more obvious with an username like that? Get real dude.
Or we could compare smartphone models where the iPhone models would win again or we could compare actual smartphone brands which would again have Apple beating android brands.
If you want to compare iOS to Android then you have to include iPod Touches and iPads. They all run iOS and can basically run the same set of iPhone/iPod Touch or universal apps. It is not Apple's problem that almost nobody is making a non-phone android device in the same form factor as the iPod Touch. It is also not Apple's problem that Android tablets have been a flop.
If you are developer on iOS, you can target iPhones, iPod Touches and iPads with the same app if you choose so they can be consider one platform as far as universal apps are concerned.
Dude, could you be any more obvious with an username like that? Get real dude.
Or we could compare smartphone models where the iPhone models would win again or we could compare actual smartphone brands which would again have Apple beating android brands.
If you want to compare iOS to Android then you have to include iPod Touches and iPads. They all run iOS and can basically run the same set of iPhone/iPod Touch or universal apps. It is not Apple's problem that almost nobody is making a non-phone android device in the same form factor as the iPod Touch. It is also not Apple's problem that Android tablets have been a flop.
If you are developer on iOS, you can target iPhones, iPod Touches and iPads with the same app if you choose so they can be consider one platform as far as universal apps are concerned.
ctbear
May 4, 08:22 PM
I posted this under "Windows on Mac" but it is not getting many hits...
This (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1147277)
Basically my MiniDP->DVI cable works under OS X but not Windows 7. It is detected normally but just won't display any image. Any ideas?
This (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1147277)
Basically my MiniDP->DVI cable works under OS X but not Windows 7. It is detected normally but just won't display any image. Any ideas?
more...
pbgdlax47
Sep 23, 07:17 AM
Hi my name is Pat. I go t college and I use this ihome model IP9BR for my ipod touch about 90% of the time it wakes me up when I need to get to practice and the other 10% it just doesnt wake me up. :mad: I have it set on the Ihome playlist and it is really making me mad when it doesnt wake me up. Is this normal?
ericinboston
Nov 24, 10:04 PM
I'm certain TJ MAXX ran this by their legal team...
If they are willing to sell the product at a $100 loss, that's their choice.
But it's not a $100 loss because tjmaxx is buying them for LESS than $499 to begin with from their distributor. So maybe they only lose $65 or $75 per iPad. As most have mentioned here the goal is to get people into the stores. I'm sure tjmax only bought a few per store so there will always be the "sorry we sold out" line and the customer will just hang around and buy something.
Even if tjmax did buy them at full price and lost $100 so what? Do the math if they lost $100 per iPad and bought 300 ipads....that's $30k for a killer ad campaign. And if you've ever been to their stores you will notice they never stock more than like 5 quantity of 90% of their items. Do you really think they are going to have hundreds of ipads per store? No way....more like 10-20 at best.
If they are willing to sell the product at a $100 loss, that's their choice.
But it's not a $100 loss because tjmaxx is buying them for LESS than $499 to begin with from their distributor. So maybe they only lose $65 or $75 per iPad. As most have mentioned here the goal is to get people into the stores. I'm sure tjmax only bought a few per store so there will always be the "sorry we sold out" line and the customer will just hang around and buy something.
Even if tjmax did buy them at full price and lost $100 so what? Do the math if they lost $100 per iPad and bought 300 ipads....that's $30k for a killer ad campaign. And if you've ever been to their stores you will notice they never stock more than like 5 quantity of 90% of their items. Do you really think they are going to have hundreds of ipads per store? No way....more like 10-20 at best.
more...
Winni
Dec 21, 08:06 AM
Macs would be an excellent choice for any business to use ...
Yeah, sure. Because all of those business/enterprise applications written exclusively for Windows run ah-so smoothly on Macs...
Just accept it, folks: There is no business case for using Macs in an enterprise environment.
Compatibility? Fail. (There is a world beyond the Microsoft .doc format where enterprise applications live. There's OLD Java, and many Java apps require a very specific Oracle JVM to run. There's .NET. There's Sharepoint. There's an IBM mainframe you need to talk to. There are department printers that have no OS X drivers. There's a long list of office equipment that only plays well with Windows.)
Enterprise-ready? Fail. See compatibility, see support, see backup.
Central administration? Fail. Try applying group policies to a Mac.
Central backup? Fail. No, Time Machine is NOT an enterprise solution.
TCO? Fail. Expensive hardware, short-lived platform support.
Enterprise-support from the manufacturer (Apple)? HUGE fail.
Roadmaps? Fail. Apple doesn't even know what the word means. You just cannot plan with this company and their products.
Product longevity? Knock-out Fail. (Try getting support for OS X Leopard in two years from now. Try getting support for Tiger or Panther TODAY. Then compare it to Windows XP, an OS from the year that will be officially supported until 2014. Then make your strategic choice and tell me with a straight face that you want to bet your money on Cupertino toys.)
It's MUCH easier to integrate Linux desktops into an enterprise environment than it is to put Mac OS X boxes in there. Why? Because some "blue chip" companies like Oracle and IBM actually use, sell and support Linux and make sure that it can be used in an enterprise environment.
Trying to push a home user/consumer platform like the Mac into a corporate environment is a very bad idea. Especially if the company behind the product recently even announced that they dropped their entire server hardware because nobody wanted them. Why should the head of a large IT department trust a company that just dropped their only product that was even remotely targeted at the enterprise market? It's like asking a CTO to bet the company's IT future on Nintendo Wiis.
And just for your info: I've had those discussions at the World Health Organization of the United Nations, and it turned out to be IMPOSSIBLE to integrate Macs into their IT environment. I had the only Mac (a 20" Core Duo) in a world wide network because I was able to talk someone higher up the ladder into approving the purchase order for it, but then I quickly had to give up on OS X and instead run Windows on it in order to get my job as an IT admin done and be able to use the IT resources of the other WHO centers. OS X Tiger totally sucked in our network for almost all of the above reasons, but Windows Vista and XP got the job done perfectly. It wasn't very persuasive to show off a Mac that only runs Windows. That's what you get for being an Apple fanboy, which I admittedly was at that time.
Where I work now, two other people bought Macs, and one of them has ordered Windows 7 yesterday and wants me to wipe out OS X from his hard disk and replace it with Windows. He's an engineer and not productive with OS X, rather the opposite: OS X slows him down and doesn't provide any value to him.
And personally, after more than five years in Apple land, I will now also move away from OS X. It's a consumer platform that's only there to lock people into the Apple hardware and their iTunes store. If the web browser and iTunes and maybe Final Cut Studio, Logic Studio or the Adobe Creative Suites are the only pieces of software that you need to be happy, then OS X probably is okay for you. For everything else, it quickly becomes a very expensive trap or just a disappointment. When Apple brag about how cool it is to run Windows in "Boot Camp" or a virtualization software, then this rather demonstrates the shortcomings of the Mac platform instead of its strengths. I can also run Windows in VirtualBox on Linux. But why is this an advantage? Where's the sense in dividing my hardware resources to support TWO operating systems to get ONE job done? What's the rationalization for that? There is none. It just shows that the Mac still is not a full computing platform without Microsoft products. And that is the ultimate case AGAINST migrating to Mac OS X.
Yeah, sure. Because all of those business/enterprise applications written exclusively for Windows run ah-so smoothly on Macs...
Just accept it, folks: There is no business case for using Macs in an enterprise environment.
Compatibility? Fail. (There is a world beyond the Microsoft .doc format where enterprise applications live. There's OLD Java, and many Java apps require a very specific Oracle JVM to run. There's .NET. There's Sharepoint. There's an IBM mainframe you need to talk to. There are department printers that have no OS X drivers. There's a long list of office equipment that only plays well with Windows.)
Enterprise-ready? Fail. See compatibility, see support, see backup.
Central administration? Fail. Try applying group policies to a Mac.
Central backup? Fail. No, Time Machine is NOT an enterprise solution.
TCO? Fail. Expensive hardware, short-lived platform support.
Enterprise-support from the manufacturer (Apple)? HUGE fail.
Roadmaps? Fail. Apple doesn't even know what the word means. You just cannot plan with this company and their products.
Product longevity? Knock-out Fail. (Try getting support for OS X Leopard in two years from now. Try getting support for Tiger or Panther TODAY. Then compare it to Windows XP, an OS from the year that will be officially supported until 2014. Then make your strategic choice and tell me with a straight face that you want to bet your money on Cupertino toys.)
It's MUCH easier to integrate Linux desktops into an enterprise environment than it is to put Mac OS X boxes in there. Why? Because some "blue chip" companies like Oracle and IBM actually use, sell and support Linux and make sure that it can be used in an enterprise environment.
Trying to push a home user/consumer platform like the Mac into a corporate environment is a very bad idea. Especially if the company behind the product recently even announced that they dropped their entire server hardware because nobody wanted them. Why should the head of a large IT department trust a company that just dropped their only product that was even remotely targeted at the enterprise market? It's like asking a CTO to bet the company's IT future on Nintendo Wiis.
And just for your info: I've had those discussions at the World Health Organization of the United Nations, and it turned out to be IMPOSSIBLE to integrate Macs into their IT environment. I had the only Mac (a 20" Core Duo) in a world wide network because I was able to talk someone higher up the ladder into approving the purchase order for it, but then I quickly had to give up on OS X and instead run Windows on it in order to get my job as an IT admin done and be able to use the IT resources of the other WHO centers. OS X Tiger totally sucked in our network for almost all of the above reasons, but Windows Vista and XP got the job done perfectly. It wasn't very persuasive to show off a Mac that only runs Windows. That's what you get for being an Apple fanboy, which I admittedly was at that time.
Where I work now, two other people bought Macs, and one of them has ordered Windows 7 yesterday and wants me to wipe out OS X from his hard disk and replace it with Windows. He's an engineer and not productive with OS X, rather the opposite: OS X slows him down and doesn't provide any value to him.
And personally, after more than five years in Apple land, I will now also move away from OS X. It's a consumer platform that's only there to lock people into the Apple hardware and their iTunes store. If the web browser and iTunes and maybe Final Cut Studio, Logic Studio or the Adobe Creative Suites are the only pieces of software that you need to be happy, then OS X probably is okay for you. For everything else, it quickly becomes a very expensive trap or just a disappointment. When Apple brag about how cool it is to run Windows in "Boot Camp" or a virtualization software, then this rather demonstrates the shortcomings of the Mac platform instead of its strengths. I can also run Windows in VirtualBox on Linux. But why is this an advantage? Where's the sense in dividing my hardware resources to support TWO operating systems to get ONE job done? What's the rationalization for that? There is none. It just shows that the Mac still is not a full computing platform without Microsoft products. And that is the ultimate case AGAINST migrating to Mac OS X.
tobefirst
Oct 10, 04:53 PM
...and if you already have an image tied to that person, it will overwrite it with their twitter pic
I don't care for that at all either. In fact, I would like to have it the other way- it shows my contact pic INSTEAD OF a tweeter's picture if I have one. It just replaced my sister's picture with the blank Twitter icon. Not cool.
I don't care for that at all either. In fact, I would like to have it the other way- it shows my contact pic INSTEAD OF a tweeter's picture if I have one. It just replaced my sister's picture with the blank Twitter icon. Not cool.
more...
Kuriakose
Apr 8, 01:43 AM
I currently have a Macbook A1278, I was wondering if i can replace the upper case of my labtop. I am having trouble in finding a guide on how to replace it.
R.Perez
Mar 15, 06:13 PM
too bad, i support the death penalty.
So you have absolute 100% confidence in our "justice" system?
So you have absolute 100% confidence in our "justice" system?
more...
Gregg2
Apr 8, 12:24 PM
You should've had the second r fixed too. ;)
fel10
Sep 5, 06:37 PM
It is done with the program Geektool. Have a look here (http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=9077447&postcount=1618).
Thanks bud
Thanks bud
more...
jrko
Apr 9, 11:49 AM
ok so hunting 10.5 disc that doesn't cost more than the machine in the first place!
Will 2Gb of ram solve my video streaming issues? I've been looking at ATI 9800 with 128mb ram and they are pretty cheap from a pc.
how do you go about flashing one?
wedding dress 2011
chiffon wedding dresses 2011
Will 2Gb of ram solve my video streaming issues? I've been looking at ATI 9800 with 128mb ram and they are pretty cheap from a pc.
how do you go about flashing one?
jTreu
Oct 9, 12:03 PM
built in search sounds pretty cool:cool:
Qwest905
Dec 1, 01:47 PM
Oh well
how did you get the date on the left..what's the application called
thanks
how did you get the date on the left..what's the application called
thanks
AndyUnderscoreR
Mar 23, 05:58 PM
One tip I have for those clients who want to change absolutley every little detail... explain that you are happy to change it all for an extra fee, and you'll even offer a lower hourly rate since you're not being asked to do anything creative, but remind them that they will end up with a site designed by an amateur to their personal, individual taste, rather than the site designed by a professional and designed to appeal to their whole customer base that they've already paid for.
JGruber
Feb 9, 11:56 AM
I'm hoping this document is right - http://www.ppcgeeks.com/2011/02/09/breaking-exclusive-news-att-will-offer-mobile-to-mobile-with-every-carrier-starting-tomorrow/
Cleberg
Apr 23, 11:49 AM
Is there a way to have alerts created automatically when when a new event is entered?
ucfgrad93
Aug 4, 12:27 PM
On my iMac.
sinsin07
Apr 27, 07:08 PM
How many of the people who posted here negatively about this situation gone and deleted the file in question or downloaded the file that allows you to the tracking?
ไม่มีความคิดเห็น:
แสดงความคิดเห็น