jav6454
Apr 29, 10:51 AM
Chrmjenkins
That is all.
That is all.
WildCowboy
Oct 18, 04:26 PM
Nice bump in the stock...AAPL up 5.5% in after hours trading.
kainjow
Nov 3, 09:49 AM
Some more info here:
http://www.tuaw.com/2006/11/03/vmwares-fusion-begins-private-beta/
http://www.tuaw.com/2006/11/03/vmwares-fusion-begins-private-beta/
Clix Pix
Jan 10, 08:27 PM
I stumbled on to this discussion and continued reading the thread out of fascination.....
This woman clearly has some mental health issues. Aside from the obvious obesity, she clearly may have some physical issues, too, which are only contributing to this overall situation. That is most unfortunate and I really do hope that she is receiving both medical and psychological help, as she certainly is demonstrating that she is very needy, very in need of help outside of herself and her own little world.
It's interesting, isn't it? Onlookers recoil in horror at the sight of a very obese, morbidly obese, beyond-morbidly obese, individual and shudder. Someone who is 400, 500, 600 pounds or more just isn't a lovely sight.
On the opposite end of the spectrum onlookers also recoil in horror at the sight of a very emaciated individual, someone who is skeletal, skin-and-bones..... Someone who is an adult, even a short one, weighing in at 40, 50 or 60 pounds just isn't a lovely sight, either.
Funny how very often the emaciated ones (those suffering from anorexia nervosa, which is a clinical diagnosis outlined and fully described in the psychiatric literature and the DSM -- Diagnostic and Statistical Manual -- issued on a periodic basis by psychiatrists) -- do wind up in a clinical setting, either a medical floor or a psychiatric floor...... It's pretty clear to even the most naive of laypersons that there is something wrong when a person seems to be starving him/herself to death and is presenting as skeletal.
Funny that when someone is going to the opposite extreme and stuffing him/herself to death that it isn't acknowledged in the same way and that very often it is only when someone has really gone to extremes such as weighing several hundred pounds over mere "overweight" status that anyone really takes notice. When someone presents weighing 600, 700, 800 pounds, yes, that is suggestive of the need for clinical intervention, both medical and psychological, isn't it?
On both ends of that spectrum, people die. Anorexics weighing 30 or 40 or 50 pounds die -- they also can die at much higher weights, closer to "normal" weights, too, actually, if the refeeding process and clinical treatment isn't handled carefully. Yes, they can die at so-called "normal" weights due to some underlying psychological issues never being addressed at all or not being addressed successfully even as the weight is seemingly restored.
Undoubtedly many people who have gotten to the point of morbid obesity or beyond that also have died, even during the process of attempting to restore weight to a healthier or more normal level....and again, chances are that this is due to the underlying psychological issues never being addressed or being inadequately addressed.
Sad, isn't it? Going to extremes in any direction is not a good thing and when this occurs it usually is pointing to significant underlying issues in an individual's life which really need to be addressed along with the particular weight situation.
Don't be repelled by the severely obese person you meet or the severely emaciated person you meet; these are real people with real feelings, real issues hiding in there somewhere and the bottom line is that these are people who need help.
This woman clearly has some mental health issues. Aside from the obvious obesity, she clearly may have some physical issues, too, which are only contributing to this overall situation. That is most unfortunate and I really do hope that she is receiving both medical and psychological help, as she certainly is demonstrating that she is very needy, very in need of help outside of herself and her own little world.
It's interesting, isn't it? Onlookers recoil in horror at the sight of a very obese, morbidly obese, beyond-morbidly obese, individual and shudder. Someone who is 400, 500, 600 pounds or more just isn't a lovely sight.
On the opposite end of the spectrum onlookers also recoil in horror at the sight of a very emaciated individual, someone who is skeletal, skin-and-bones..... Someone who is an adult, even a short one, weighing in at 40, 50 or 60 pounds just isn't a lovely sight, either.
Funny how very often the emaciated ones (those suffering from anorexia nervosa, which is a clinical diagnosis outlined and fully described in the psychiatric literature and the DSM -- Diagnostic and Statistical Manual -- issued on a periodic basis by psychiatrists) -- do wind up in a clinical setting, either a medical floor or a psychiatric floor...... It's pretty clear to even the most naive of laypersons that there is something wrong when a person seems to be starving him/herself to death and is presenting as skeletal.
Funny that when someone is going to the opposite extreme and stuffing him/herself to death that it isn't acknowledged in the same way and that very often it is only when someone has really gone to extremes such as weighing several hundred pounds over mere "overweight" status that anyone really takes notice. When someone presents weighing 600, 700, 800 pounds, yes, that is suggestive of the need for clinical intervention, both medical and psychological, isn't it?
On both ends of that spectrum, people die. Anorexics weighing 30 or 40 or 50 pounds die -- they also can die at much higher weights, closer to "normal" weights, too, actually, if the refeeding process and clinical treatment isn't handled carefully. Yes, they can die at so-called "normal" weights due to some underlying psychological issues never being addressed at all or not being addressed successfully even as the weight is seemingly restored.
Undoubtedly many people who have gotten to the point of morbid obesity or beyond that also have died, even during the process of attempting to restore weight to a healthier or more normal level....and again, chances are that this is due to the underlying psychological issues never being addressed or being inadequately addressed.
Sad, isn't it? Going to extremes in any direction is not a good thing and when this occurs it usually is pointing to significant underlying issues in an individual's life which really need to be addressed along with the particular weight situation.
Don't be repelled by the severely obese person you meet or the severely emaciated person you meet; these are real people with real feelings, real issues hiding in there somewhere and the bottom line is that these are people who need help.
more...
CPTMONK
Oct 24, 08:02 AM
why doiesnt the 15ich have 7200 hard drrivew?
T4R06
Apr 25, 09:00 AM
i hope this is true!
i am a 4G contractor right now here in T-mobile and i'll tell you HSPA+ is not as fast as verizon LTE but hey, there is no cap! right now im testing HSPA+ and im getting 4mbps on mytouch.
i hope this merging will not push thru.. or else, at&t will only butcher t-mobile good network..
i am a 4G contractor right now here in T-mobile and i'll tell you HSPA+ is not as fast as verizon LTE but hey, there is no cap! right now im testing HSPA+ and im getting 4mbps on mytouch.
i hope this merging will not push thru.. or else, at&t will only butcher t-mobile good network..
more...
KeareB
Oct 18, 06:18 PM
"Q on Mac Pro demand. A: Very positive reaction to Mac Pro. Still feel there is a delay in purchasing related to Creative Suite (Universal)"
They said the same thing about pro desktop sales when we were waiting on a carbon version from Adobe. Then, it was released and Pro sales didn't increase. Too bad you can't put Xeon in a MBP :P
I think this is different. Our company is not buying any Intel-based macs until Adobe releases Universal CS, and I don't know why anyone would spend $$ on new hardwre now only to take a performance hit, vs. a performance increase and better hardware bang for the buck by waiting 6-9 months.
They said the same thing about pro desktop sales when we were waiting on a carbon version from Adobe. Then, it was released and Pro sales didn't increase. Too bad you can't put Xeon in a MBP :P
I think this is different. Our company is not buying any Intel-based macs until Adobe releases Universal CS, and I don't know why anyone would spend $$ on new hardwre now only to take a performance hit, vs. a performance increase and better hardware bang for the buck by waiting 6-9 months.
bpaluzzi
Apr 19, 08:51 AM
.
more...
*LTD*
Apr 21, 11:09 PM
Even more entertaining is the fact that Apple is so arrogant they fail to realize how stupid they look.
Suing their biggest vendor.
It doesn't get any more stupid than that.
Do you honestly think Apple don't know what they're doing? They're the most successful company in tech today. And they got there by doing virtually the opposite of what everyone else is. Seems they've got the technology game (including the litigation game) all figured out.
Samsung doesn't have consumers on their side. Apple does. Samsung doesn't make the hottest products in tech. Apple does. Samsung make internals. That's a mater of logistics.
Whoever has the consumers attracts business. And consumers are tripping over each other to get Apple gear.
Besides, these phone patents have nothing to do with supply agreements, nor will they have any effect on supply agreements, so you can stop *wishing* that it will.
Even if you want to court insanity and assume one will affect the other, Apple has an insane amount of leverage, rendering Samsung as just another supplier among several. In terms of meeting Apple's capacity needs, Apple always has a plan B. It's safe to assume they've got one now. They're pretty untouchable when it comes to planning ahead. Sometimes they can't anticipate just how insane the demand is for their products, but a lot of companies would love to have that problem.
Suing their biggest vendor.
It doesn't get any more stupid than that.
Do you honestly think Apple don't know what they're doing? They're the most successful company in tech today. And they got there by doing virtually the opposite of what everyone else is. Seems they've got the technology game (including the litigation game) all figured out.
Samsung doesn't have consumers on their side. Apple does. Samsung doesn't make the hottest products in tech. Apple does. Samsung make internals. That's a mater of logistics.
Whoever has the consumers attracts business. And consumers are tripping over each other to get Apple gear.
Besides, these phone patents have nothing to do with supply agreements, nor will they have any effect on supply agreements, so you can stop *wishing* that it will.
Even if you want to court insanity and assume one will affect the other, Apple has an insane amount of leverage, rendering Samsung as just another supplier among several. In terms of meeting Apple's capacity needs, Apple always has a plan B. It's safe to assume they've got one now. They're pretty untouchable when it comes to planning ahead. Sometimes they can't anticipate just how insane the demand is for their products, but a lot of companies would love to have that problem.
zorinlynx
Apr 13, 08:58 PM
They could have avoided all this drama by just not announcing the white iPhone until it was ready, but noooo.
If no one knew it was planned, there wouldn't have been all this bitching, and Apple could have surprised us with it.
If no one knew it was planned, there wouldn't have been all this bitching, and Apple could have surprised us with it.
more...
Mischka07
Oct 1, 03:35 PM
wow... that is such ****! pardon my french but that is rediculous... they gonna discount the bill by a 30%? they ought to. totally unacceptable.
I got verizon, and I RARELY get dropped calls nowadays, the service got better over the years... im not gonna lie and say it never happens, but i dont remember the last time i had one.
to be fair with AT&T i gotta ask, are those calls only 30 seconds long or 30 minutes long and then gets dropped? 30 second dropped call would piss me off compared to a 30 minute one. if it drops at 30 minutes AT&T is doing ya a favor not accidently running up the minutes hahah
I've had AT&T and the iPhone for a week now. I've experienced about 4 dropped calls thus far, 3 of them were in downtown San Francisco. My calls rarely last over 5 minutes, but 2 of the dropped calls happened as I was dialing out. 1 dropped call was after 4 minutes on the phone, and I can't remember when the last dropped call happened.
That said, I've probably made and received a total of 150 calls in the past week, so a 3% dropped call ratio isn't too terrible.
I got verizon, and I RARELY get dropped calls nowadays, the service got better over the years... im not gonna lie and say it never happens, but i dont remember the last time i had one.
to be fair with AT&T i gotta ask, are those calls only 30 seconds long or 30 minutes long and then gets dropped? 30 second dropped call would piss me off compared to a 30 minute one. if it drops at 30 minutes AT&T is doing ya a favor not accidently running up the minutes hahah
I've had AT&T and the iPhone for a week now. I've experienced about 4 dropped calls thus far, 3 of them were in downtown San Francisco. My calls rarely last over 5 minutes, but 2 of the dropped calls happened as I was dialing out. 1 dropped call was after 4 minutes on the phone, and I can't remember when the last dropped call happened.
That said, I've probably made and received a total of 150 calls in the past week, so a 3% dropped call ratio isn't too terrible.
awmazz
Mar 11, 10:15 AM
And that's what bugs me. That's the only time I can think of on TV where they actually pulled a switcheroo instead of having the character killed or sending him or her on a long trip to visit Aunt Edna in Schenectady.
D'oh, how could I forget Zev Bellringer in LEXX played by Eva Habermann. Who became Xev Bellringer played by Xenia Seeberg.
Not really the same though as simply dropping a new actor in the same role without skipping a beat, as being sci-fi they could regenerate her in a different body. And what a body. Both of them. I preferred Zev myself, sad to see her go.
Dr Who has been using this technique for decades. ;)
Also, slightly different situation as well, every time they make a TV series out of a successful movie they swap the actors in the same roles. Nearly all of them in most cases. M*A*S*H and Stargate for example. Radar and Father Mulcahy were the only two to remain the same in M*A*S*H I think. And only the two characters from the planet of Abidos in Stargate if I recall.
D'oh, how could I forget Zev Bellringer in LEXX played by Eva Habermann. Who became Xev Bellringer played by Xenia Seeberg.
Not really the same though as simply dropping a new actor in the same role without skipping a beat, as being sci-fi they could regenerate her in a different body. And what a body. Both of them. I preferred Zev myself, sad to see her go.
Dr Who has been using this technique for decades. ;)
Also, slightly different situation as well, every time they make a TV series out of a successful movie they swap the actors in the same roles. Nearly all of them in most cases. M*A*S*H and Stargate for example. Radar and Father Mulcahy were the only two to remain the same in M*A*S*H I think. And only the two characters from the planet of Abidos in Stargate if I recall.
more...
Snowy_River
Jul 12, 06:54 PM
I understand what you are saying but are you really going to call "Vi" a pro app for word processing and say that it fully replaces Word. You can use any app as a tool to create a professional product.
If Vi is being used by a professional to produce a professional product, then, yes, I'd call it a professional application. As far as being able to completely replace Word, well if the professional in question was able to stop using Word, then apparently it was able to completely replace Word for that professional.
Apple labels iWork as a "consumer level" app. not me.
Show me where Apple calls Pages a consumer app (http://www.apple.com/iwork/pages/).
My definition of a "Pro level" app is one that has industry maturity, is excepted as standard industry wide, has many many features which allow it to be versatile and is useful in a variety of professional industries. It probably isn't the easiest app to use because it isn't focused to just one industry.
Your definition of a "professional" app seems mighty arbitrary, even to the extent of excluding most applications that exist. Specialized databases that are designed for a specific industry wouldn't meet your definition. Computer-Aided-Machining (CAM) software (which is only useful in one industry) wouldn't meet your definition. I could go on, but I think you get my point.
I would bet you that not .1% of printshops, publishers, lawyers, engineers, etc. even know what a .pages file is let alone are they working with it daily.
So now you're adding another level of definition to what it takes to be a "professional" app? Some percentage of people have to know about it? And where do you draw the line? Gee, I guess this means that any start-up company trying to produce a new professional application is doomed because how can they ever reach this percentage upon the release so their product can be considered "professional"? :rolleyes:
I come back to my point. I think the simplest definition of a "professional" app is an app that is being used by a professional to produce a professional product. Any other definition falls short of the mark, IMO.
If Vi is being used by a professional to produce a professional product, then, yes, I'd call it a professional application. As far as being able to completely replace Word, well if the professional in question was able to stop using Word, then apparently it was able to completely replace Word for that professional.
Apple labels iWork as a "consumer level" app. not me.
Show me where Apple calls Pages a consumer app (http://www.apple.com/iwork/pages/).
My definition of a "Pro level" app is one that has industry maturity, is excepted as standard industry wide, has many many features which allow it to be versatile and is useful in a variety of professional industries. It probably isn't the easiest app to use because it isn't focused to just one industry.
Your definition of a "professional" app seems mighty arbitrary, even to the extent of excluding most applications that exist. Specialized databases that are designed for a specific industry wouldn't meet your definition. Computer-Aided-Machining (CAM) software (which is only useful in one industry) wouldn't meet your definition. I could go on, but I think you get my point.
I would bet you that not .1% of printshops, publishers, lawyers, engineers, etc. even know what a .pages file is let alone are they working with it daily.
So now you're adding another level of definition to what it takes to be a "professional" app? Some percentage of people have to know about it? And where do you draw the line? Gee, I guess this means that any start-up company trying to produce a new professional application is doomed because how can they ever reach this percentage upon the release so their product can be considered "professional"? :rolleyes:
I come back to my point. I think the simplest definition of a "professional" app is an app that is being used by a professional to produce a professional product. Any other definition falls short of the mark, IMO.
FloatingBones
Nov 25, 12:34 AM
For the last time, STOP SPEAKING FOR OTHER PEOPLE!!! You have NO right what-so-ever to speak for anyone but yourself and yet you continue to state that EVER SINGLE iOS USER hates Flash and is glad to be rid of it and yet this Skyfire app proves just the opposite.
What I said: Users of the 120M+ iOS devices are doing just fine without Flash plugins is completely true. There are no Flash plugins for this device. Nobody can run a shred of Flash content in their browser on this device.
No amount of nonsensical shouting will change the facts.
You have every right to give your opinion on the matter, but it is your opinion, not the opinion of every single iOS user in existence.
But owners of those 120M+ iOS devices are doing just fine without Flash. Nobody forced them to buy those devices. If they were somehow "disappointed" because there are no Flash plugins available, nobody prevented them from returning them or reselling them.
That is NOT a shortcoming of Flash dude.
Also incorrect. There are huge shortcomings of Flash, and you've never addressed them.
You've never addressed the identity-leaking of Flash cookies: Flash doesn't honor the cookie privacy settings of the browser. More than half of the top 100 websites are now using Flash cookies to track users and store information about them. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-209.txt) Do you actually like the fact that those sites do an end-run around the cookie privacy settings by using Flash? I can't find a single rational person that likes the identity-leaking.
You've never addressed the quirkiness that Flash brings to the browser UI. On my Mac, scrolling works differently when my mouse is over a Flash region. Certain keyboard shortcuts cease to work. Text that appears in a Flash window is not searchable with the browser's text-finding feature. My Mac doesn't behave like a Mac inside of a Flash window.
The engineering choice made for iOS is simplicity. Layering Flash on top of the browser would compromise that simplicity. Click-to-flash semantics would add yet another layer of clutter and obfuscation to the UI.
You've never addressed Adobe's inability to deal competently to secure their software. Security experts believe that Adobe is going to surpass Microsoft as the #1 target for security attacks. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-231.htm) Besides Flash, Adobe Reader is a vector for zero day bugs (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt). I really don't know how you do that: it's a PDF reader! The bugs have been around in Adobe Reader for years and Adobe still hasn't fixed them.
If Apple enabled Flash in iOS Safari, they would be farming out the correct operation of their iOS browser to a company that has proven to be one of the least competent companies in dealing with malware attacks. Noted security expert Steve Gibson mocks their cluelessness:
"[Adobe:] how is that quarterly update cycle going for you?" (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt)
I have yet to find a single Flash enthusiast who can address those issues. I'm hardly surprised that you can't address them, either.
That is a shortcoming of Steve Jobs' choosing.
Nonsense. They are engineering and design choices. If Apple made bad engineering and design choices, they would never have sold 120M+ of these devices.
If you think they are a "shortcoming": there are simple solutions. Don't buy an iOS device. If you did buy one, sell it. Or maybe you can see if it will blend (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAl28d6tbko).
One thing is certain: Apple will not compromise their iOS browser with Flash, and complaining about that is rather silly.
Even if Flash is on the road to becoming obsolete, that doesn't mean people don't want to be able to access the entire Web in the here and now.
Adobe Flash is on the road to becoming obsolete. Even Adobe acknowledges the fact (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999).
Between the 120M+ iOS devices, the click-to-flash plugins disable Flash downloads on Windows, Mac OS X and Linux machines, and Adobe's new Flash-to-HTML5 conversion tools (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999), the abandonment of Flash will continue to accelerate.
You just don't seem to comprehend that.
You are correct. Flash is a legacy technology, and its day has passed.
You seem to have this deep seated hatred of Flash
There are fundamental failings in both the design and deployment of Flash. I listed three of those earlier in my reply.
The thing that got my attention was when I realized that Flash was maintaining its own set of cookies and that those cookies did not honor the privacy settings of my browser. I then learned about click-to-flash plugins to minimize my exposure to Flash. The shocking thing to me was how much disabling Flash improved the browsing experience: faster page loads, less flashing advertisements, and far less CPU usage.
and I can tell that if Steve had said "I LOVE Flash" instead you would almost undoubtedly be here fighting against HTML5 and for Flash.
You imply that I blindly agree with Apple's (and Jobs's) decisions. That is not the case.
I strongly disagree with Apple's decision to prevent Hypermac from selling external batteries for Mac computers (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1032695). Hypermac makes a quality product, and they are filling a niche that Apple ignores. Magsafe is a wonderful technology, but they should be licensing this tech to third-party vendors. I fondly hope that Apple addresses this deficiency in their strategy and product accessories soon.
If you search, you can find where I commented on this in the public record weeks ago.
Yes, I honestly believe that. You have no vested interest in either one. You're just being Steve's doormat.
Now you know better.
I see no reason why ANYONE should have to convert to HTML5.
Too many laptop users are tired of the CPU loading and battery suck of Flash apps.
Too many users don't like that Flash alters the UI inside of the browsers: altered scrolling behavior, keyboard shortcuts that don't work in Flash, text searches that don't work with text in a Flash app.
Too many privacy advocates are bothered that Flash maintains a separate set of cookies and those cookies do not honor the privacy settings of the browser. Commercial websites are using those Flash cookies to track users. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-209.txt)
Too many security advocates are wary of using Adobe products because of Adobe's poor track record against security attacks.
Even if all those four large concerns were addressed, websites have to deal with the growing number of users that use Flash-blocking plugins. Advertisers that deliver their ads with Flash have no guarantee that users will allow those Flash apps to be downloaded and run on their machines.
Those are the reasons why Flash's viability for delivering web content is in decline. Even if you don't see the reasons, Adobe does (http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2010/10/adobe-demos-flash-to-html5-conversion-tool.html).
What I said: Users of the 120M+ iOS devices are doing just fine without Flash plugins is completely true. There are no Flash plugins for this device. Nobody can run a shred of Flash content in their browser on this device.
No amount of nonsensical shouting will change the facts.
You have every right to give your opinion on the matter, but it is your opinion, not the opinion of every single iOS user in existence.
But owners of those 120M+ iOS devices are doing just fine without Flash. Nobody forced them to buy those devices. If they were somehow "disappointed" because there are no Flash plugins available, nobody prevented them from returning them or reselling them.
That is NOT a shortcoming of Flash dude.
Also incorrect. There are huge shortcomings of Flash, and you've never addressed them.
You've never addressed the identity-leaking of Flash cookies: Flash doesn't honor the cookie privacy settings of the browser. More than half of the top 100 websites are now using Flash cookies to track users and store information about them. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-209.txt) Do you actually like the fact that those sites do an end-run around the cookie privacy settings by using Flash? I can't find a single rational person that likes the identity-leaking.
You've never addressed the quirkiness that Flash brings to the browser UI. On my Mac, scrolling works differently when my mouse is over a Flash region. Certain keyboard shortcuts cease to work. Text that appears in a Flash window is not searchable with the browser's text-finding feature. My Mac doesn't behave like a Mac inside of a Flash window.
The engineering choice made for iOS is simplicity. Layering Flash on top of the browser would compromise that simplicity. Click-to-flash semantics would add yet another layer of clutter and obfuscation to the UI.
You've never addressed Adobe's inability to deal competently to secure their software. Security experts believe that Adobe is going to surpass Microsoft as the #1 target for security attacks. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-231.htm) Besides Flash, Adobe Reader is a vector for zero day bugs (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt). I really don't know how you do that: it's a PDF reader! The bugs have been around in Adobe Reader for years and Adobe still hasn't fixed them.
If Apple enabled Flash in iOS Safari, they would be farming out the correct operation of their iOS browser to a company that has proven to be one of the least competent companies in dealing with malware attacks. Noted security expert Steve Gibson mocks their cluelessness:
"[Adobe:] how is that quarterly update cycle going for you?" (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt)
I have yet to find a single Flash enthusiast who can address those issues. I'm hardly surprised that you can't address them, either.
That is a shortcoming of Steve Jobs' choosing.
Nonsense. They are engineering and design choices. If Apple made bad engineering and design choices, they would never have sold 120M+ of these devices.
If you think they are a "shortcoming": there are simple solutions. Don't buy an iOS device. If you did buy one, sell it. Or maybe you can see if it will blend (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAl28d6tbko).
One thing is certain: Apple will not compromise their iOS browser with Flash, and complaining about that is rather silly.
Even if Flash is on the road to becoming obsolete, that doesn't mean people don't want to be able to access the entire Web in the here and now.
Adobe Flash is on the road to becoming obsolete. Even Adobe acknowledges the fact (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999).
Between the 120M+ iOS devices, the click-to-flash plugins disable Flash downloads on Windows, Mac OS X and Linux machines, and Adobe's new Flash-to-HTML5 conversion tools (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999), the abandonment of Flash will continue to accelerate.
You just don't seem to comprehend that.
You are correct. Flash is a legacy technology, and its day has passed.
You seem to have this deep seated hatred of Flash
There are fundamental failings in both the design and deployment of Flash. I listed three of those earlier in my reply.
The thing that got my attention was when I realized that Flash was maintaining its own set of cookies and that those cookies did not honor the privacy settings of my browser. I then learned about click-to-flash plugins to minimize my exposure to Flash. The shocking thing to me was how much disabling Flash improved the browsing experience: faster page loads, less flashing advertisements, and far less CPU usage.
and I can tell that if Steve had said "I LOVE Flash" instead you would almost undoubtedly be here fighting against HTML5 and for Flash.
You imply that I blindly agree with Apple's (and Jobs's) decisions. That is not the case.
I strongly disagree with Apple's decision to prevent Hypermac from selling external batteries for Mac computers (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1032695). Hypermac makes a quality product, and they are filling a niche that Apple ignores. Magsafe is a wonderful technology, but they should be licensing this tech to third-party vendors. I fondly hope that Apple addresses this deficiency in their strategy and product accessories soon.
If you search, you can find where I commented on this in the public record weeks ago.
Yes, I honestly believe that. You have no vested interest in either one. You're just being Steve's doormat.
Now you know better.
I see no reason why ANYONE should have to convert to HTML5.
Too many laptop users are tired of the CPU loading and battery suck of Flash apps.
Too many users don't like that Flash alters the UI inside of the browsers: altered scrolling behavior, keyboard shortcuts that don't work in Flash, text searches that don't work with text in a Flash app.
Too many privacy advocates are bothered that Flash maintains a separate set of cookies and those cookies do not honor the privacy settings of the browser. Commercial websites are using those Flash cookies to track users. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-209.txt)
Too many security advocates are wary of using Adobe products because of Adobe's poor track record against security attacks.
Even if all those four large concerns were addressed, websites have to deal with the growing number of users that use Flash-blocking plugins. Advertisers that deliver their ads with Flash have no guarantee that users will allow those Flash apps to be downloaded and run on their machines.
Those are the reasons why Flash's viability for delivering web content is in decline. Even if you don't see the reasons, Adobe does (http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2010/10/adobe-demos-flash-to-html5-conversion-tool.html).
more...
Eldiablojoe
Apr 25, 09:54 PM
The pain will go away. And I promise that if the seer ever clears you, I won't vote for you.
Well, would you at least make me a condolence PB&J?
Well, would you at least make me a condolence PB&J?
fobfob
Jun 6, 06:10 AM
What if the 11 year-old had passed the bar exam?
Exactly!
"Don't worry Mom, it says here we can sue the pants off them!"
Exactly!
"Don't worry Mom, it says here we can sue the pants off them!"
more...
paradox00
Apr 13, 02:12 PM
ATV + dock connector is much more realistic.
Nabooly
Sep 14, 09:11 PM
http://i54.tinypic.com/155negx.jpg
http://i53.tinypic.com/m7e2rb.jpg
http://i53.tinypic.com/14xp0up.jpg
http://i53.tinypic.com/290rbxx.jpg
http://i51.tinypic.com/28c0awl.jpg
http://i55.tinypic.com/9r0qxc.jpg
http://i55.tinypic.com/1puebn.jpg
http://i52.tinypic.com/34e5k5e.gif
http://i51.tinypic.com/1zgdenb.jpg
http://i54.tinypic.com/dgl893.jpg
Jigsaw?? Is that you?! :eek:
http://i53.tinypic.com/m7e2rb.jpg
http://i53.tinypic.com/14xp0up.jpg
http://i53.tinypic.com/290rbxx.jpg
http://i51.tinypic.com/28c0awl.jpg
http://i55.tinypic.com/9r0qxc.jpg
http://i55.tinypic.com/1puebn.jpg
http://i52.tinypic.com/34e5k5e.gif
http://i51.tinypic.com/1zgdenb.jpg
http://i54.tinypic.com/dgl893.jpg
Jigsaw?? Is that you?! :eek:
HasanDaddy
Mar 15, 09:43 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_6 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8E200 Safari/6533.18.5)
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_6 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8E200 Safari/6533.18.5)
Apparently South Coast Plaza is selling none today
Still waiting here at Fashion Island - crossing fingers!
I really hope they have them in stock for you, man, and you emerge victorious. I just wanna see someone win today... besides Charlie Sheen.
Hahaha! Thanks man! Its a good day, no matter what!
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_6 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8E200 Safari/6533.18.5)
Apparently South Coast Plaza is selling none today
Still waiting here at Fashion Island - crossing fingers!
I really hope they have them in stock for you, man, and you emerge victorious. I just wanna see someone win today... besides Charlie Sheen.
Hahaha! Thanks man! Its a good day, no matter what!
steveh
Apr 12, 02:23 PM
Wouldn't matter anyway if you were using a ThunderBolt external hard drive. Very few mechanical hard drives can even reach 1Gbps-2Gbps. You'll need several of the fastest SSDs in RAID to even reach ThunderBolt speeds.
USB 3.0 FTW. More practical.
This week, mostly. In a year or three?
Don't forget that ThunderBolt can support USB x, as well as several other connection standards, including DisplayPort, hence any display connection standard that you can drive through it.
USB 3.0 FTW. More practical.
This week, mostly. In a year or three?
Don't forget that ThunderBolt can support USB x, as well as several other connection standards, including DisplayPort, hence any display connection standard that you can drive through it.
oldwatery
Apr 22, 12:14 PM
"...to ensure our continued innovation..."
Ripping-off other companies' UI's is "innovation" now?
Samsung is such a pathetic company. They make nice TVs but still pathetic.
Oh please...like Apple are the shining example of integrity :rolleyes:
Ripping-off other companies' UI's is "innovation" now?
Samsung is such a pathetic company. They make nice TVs but still pathetic.
Oh please...like Apple are the shining example of integrity :rolleyes:
ArtOfWarfare
Apr 12, 08:23 PM
In about 45 minutes...
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1135747
Thanks, just saw it.
Kind of surprised it's such a late thing... doesn't Apple tend to do events at 10 AM, not 10 PM? (I guess it's still only 7 PM on their coast... still, isn't it time to go home by now for their employees?)
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1135747
Thanks, just saw it.
Kind of surprised it's such a late thing... doesn't Apple tend to do events at 10 AM, not 10 PM? (I guess it's still only 7 PM on their coast... still, isn't it time to go home by now for their employees?)
SeanZy
Mar 14, 12:13 PM
I personally do not like the brea employees.
Have a friend in line there right now though, hopefully he gets one
Have a friend in line there right now though, hopefully he gets one
r1ch4rd
Apr 23, 04:47 PM
Corporate policy is always going to put the safety of employees first, so that usually means not letting them get dragged into violent situations. However, I would like to think that McDonalds would also stand by and support an employee who made a common sense judgement to try and calm a situation like that. Having said that, they should also respect if the employees didn't feel comfortable stepping in. Like iJohnHenry says, they aren't the police, they work in a restaurant.
There seemed to be a lot of staff in the fringes of the video, I am sure they could have done something. Good on the manager and member of the public for trying to stop them. I guess having the video footage must also help. I'd rather not have my hair pulled out than get a good conviction though!
There seemed to be a lot of staff in the fringes of the video, I am sure they could have done something. Good on the manager and member of the public for trying to stop them. I guess having the video footage must also help. I'd rather not have my hair pulled out than get a good conviction though!
No comments:
Post a Comment