Lostanddamned
Sep 29, 05:43 AM
I like it, its simple - albiet not that simple, with a lot of good designs.
puuukeey
Jan 9, 01:48 PM
It refreshes the supposed page every minute!
NICE!!!
NICE!!!
skunk
Apr 21, 12:07 PM
It may be that the backend has a different value stored than what displayed in your cached version. Honestly I know about as much of the system as you do. I haven't seen that behavior exhibited but I do thank you for bringing it up so that it can be looked into.I clicked on a post rated 0 and it went to -2. I clicked on another post rated 0, and it went to -2. I clicked - again and it went to -1.
Aniej
Jan 5, 04:11 PM
I didn't see any replies to my idea about posting a counter to tick of the DD:HH:MM:SS until climax, I mean Keynote.;) Usually I take that as a bad sign, but you know how you all get when you have blue b..., you can't think straight. So is this idea worth pursuing, kinda like the widgets available, but might be nice to have directly tied to the link with no spoilers.
more...
ctdonath
Sep 30, 07:39 AM
I'm not fond of Spanish Revival, but this is not the way of doing things...
For philosophical context, consider:
Apple does not have a "museum" of past products. Jobs considers any product which is no longer sold a failure (if it wasn't, they'd still be selling it) and not worthy of nostalgia.
If nobody is going to buy the Jackling House and live in it, then 'tis time to discard it and move on to something which someone will buy/build and live in.
For philosophical context, consider:
Apple does not have a "museum" of past products. Jobs considers any product which is no longer sold a failure (if it wasn't, they'd still be selling it) and not worthy of nostalgia.
If nobody is going to buy the Jackling House and live in it, then 'tis time to discard it and move on to something which someone will buy/build and live in.
Fredou51
Sep 12, 07:53 AM
Canada iTunes music store shows "It's Showtime. The iTunes Store is being updated." as well!!
Fred
Fred
more...
Luis
Jan 11, 10:17 PM
I still like Engadget better. And after this, It'll probably be only Engadget that I continue to read.
GFLPraxis
Apr 15, 03:27 PM
My only claim is that something the TSA is doing is working to help prevent hijackings. This was in response to some arguments that nothing airport security was doing was in fact useful. If you go back, you will see I quoted both TSA and European stats, not just TSA. And that while there may have been no passenger hijackings in the 90s in the USA, there were a couple in Europe, and one in Japan. And then nothing in Europe and Japan or the USA since 9/11. Which I believe is due to increased airport security, similar to what the TSA does.
That's all I'm saying. I'm not advocating for the current screening, just refuting some baseless arguments that it's a total waste of money ("baseless" as in - "it's my opinion, and I'm not presenting any evidence to support it"). Opinions are fine, and everyone is entitled to them. Just don't expect me to accept an opinion as fact, if I can support my opposing opinion with at least some evidence.
(I'm using Japan and Europe 'cause they also have a tradition of terrorist organizations targeting their planes, and because they "harmonized" their screening standards to the TSA. No choice, if they wanted to continue flying their planes into or over US airspace. Other countries may have also harmonized (like Canada) but either they don't have a tradition of terrorism, or I don't have enough info about them.)
Alright, we might be perceiving each other's arguments differently and arguing semantics in that case.
I have no issue with airport security besides the last two years' increase. I feel the body scanners and pat downs on opt out are unnecessary wastes of time, money, and personal privacy.
I have no issue with other aspects of post 9/11 airport security. I fly all the time and never found it worth giving a thought before the recent implementation.
That's all I'm saying. I'm not advocating for the current screening, just refuting some baseless arguments that it's a total waste of money ("baseless" as in - "it's my opinion, and I'm not presenting any evidence to support it"). Opinions are fine, and everyone is entitled to them. Just don't expect me to accept an opinion as fact, if I can support my opposing opinion with at least some evidence.
(I'm using Japan and Europe 'cause they also have a tradition of terrorist organizations targeting their planes, and because they "harmonized" their screening standards to the TSA. No choice, if they wanted to continue flying their planes into or over US airspace. Other countries may have also harmonized (like Canada) but either they don't have a tradition of terrorism, or I don't have enough info about them.)
Alright, we might be perceiving each other's arguments differently and arguing semantics in that case.
I have no issue with airport security besides the last two years' increase. I feel the body scanners and pat downs on opt out are unnecessary wastes of time, money, and personal privacy.
I have no issue with other aspects of post 9/11 airport security. I fly all the time and never found it worth giving a thought before the recent implementation.
more...
Coolerking
Sep 12, 07:51 AM
You can't even check on orders already placed at Apple.com. The store is down.
arn
Oct 11, 01:03 PM
I always took that as an implication that page 1 rumors were from more reliable sources, and should be considered more likely to be true. I didn't say that they were guaranteed to be true, just that they are more reliable.
I agree but you said
"Unless you (MacRumors, not the 'source' website of the rumor,) have credible, reliable, direct sources, it belongs on Page 2"
and, again, that's not the criteria.
Page 1 stories are generally more reliable than Page 2 stories... and that's true in this case but it's not a hard and fast rule. People get too hung up on Page 1 vs. Page 2. If a more unceratin rumor gets posted on Page 1, it is generally posted with caveats, as in this case.
arn
I agree but you said
"Unless you (MacRumors, not the 'source' website of the rumor,) have credible, reliable, direct sources, it belongs on Page 2"
and, again, that's not the criteria.
Page 1 stories are generally more reliable than Page 2 stories... and that's true in this case but it's not a hard and fast rule. People get too hung up on Page 1 vs. Page 2. If a more unceratin rumor gets posted on Page 1, it is generally posted with caveats, as in this case.
arn
more...
63dot
Mar 4, 06:31 PM
All anyone has to remember in a liberal vs conservative discussion is one simple fact: There has been no law ever initiated by conservatives to help working class citizens. All of these ideas- min wage, child labor laws, max hours per week, workplace safety, etc, all spring from liberal thinking, because liberals give a damn. Conservatives as a rule are too worried about who might take their hard earned money. You know the "sorry we just can't afford it" argument.
Hey, I believe you and know what you say is true.
When you corner him on such a topic, he will just spout out concurrences or dissents which tend to support his point of view. And if interpreted in a creative way, one can say the GOP has sometimes sided with workers. But that's a very old GOP and not the neo-cons of today.
Hey, I believe you and know what you say is true.
When you corner him on such a topic, he will just spout out concurrences or dissents which tend to support his point of view. And if interpreted in a creative way, one can say the GOP has sometimes sided with workers. But that's a very old GOP and not the neo-cons of today.
tech4all
Nov 24, 05:28 PM
Too bad the iPod Shuffle wasn't on sale. I was considering ordering one today if it were on sale. :(
more...
flopticalcube
Nov 27, 05:48 PM
Sale Day MB 2/120 now shipping! :)
Shipment exception. :(
C'est la vie.
Shipment exception. :(
C'est la vie.
Popeye206
May 4, 07:10 AM
I love how these type of topics bring up all sorts of off the wall comments from politics, to legality of things.
The bottom line is, the carriers are not a fan of customers going around the system.. whatever that "system" is. Where Apple has played along with the carriers, Android devices have promoted going around the system and it looks like the carriers are not happy about this.
In the long run, everything finds it level.
The bottom line is, the carriers are not a fan of customers going around the system.. whatever that "system" is. Where Apple has played along with the carriers, Android devices have promoted going around the system and it looks like the carriers are not happy about this.
In the long run, everything finds it level.
more...
*LTD*
Mar 13, 08:07 AM
No. A new market has been opened by Apple. That is as far as it goes. An iPad is not for everyone. Tablets will never kill off Laptops or Desktops or Servers.
Wait a while.
Wait a while.
AhmedFaisal
Apr 13, 06:28 AM
Don't know what is more ridiculous, the pat down of the little girl or the mother asking for a re-scan. I op out every single time I travel. It is not evident (and the TSA flunkies don't really know) whether a given device is a backscatter scanner or a an active or passive terahertz wave scanner. There is currently no long term evidence that backscatter or active terahertz wave scanners do not have side effects, especially for frequent travelers. Unless they switch all scanners to passive terahertz wave scanners, I will continue to opt out and if they ever make these scans mandatory without the opt out option, I will refuse to fly.
more...
WillEH
Apr 27, 08:01 PM
I think the whole issue is about them filming it and laughing, and encouraging it. Not the fact that people were fighting in McDonalds. People fight all over the world, in many places. Should each place be held responsible because someone had a fight? no and yes, depends on the situation. Should each place be held responsible if the staff are laughing, filming, and egging people on? yes and no. Yes for the fact they were very unprofessional. But McDonalds can't be blamed for the fight happening in a restaurant they own. They can however be blamed for the way the staff acted. But can you really expect any less of someone who hates the job they're in, Paid minimum wage, etc. Humans at the end of the day are Animals. We are entertained by death, pain and sadness. We always have been, and always will be. It's in the blood, it's been in the instinct for thousands, if not millions of years. We're barbarians. Like it or not.
CalBoy
Apr 14, 10:50 PM
I understand the point you are trying to make (re: enhanced security measures] but technically those two incidents had nothing to do with the TSA since they both flew from non-USA airports - that is, the TSA didn't screen them at all.
While this is true, we can't allow that technicality to wipe the slate clean. Our security as a whole is deficient, even if the TSA on its own might not be responsible for these two particular failures. Our tax dollars are still going to the our mutual safety so we should expect more.
I guess that depends on how you define "not much trouble". We can't know the actual number, since we will never know many actually get through. But they are catching over half the weapons that their own agents try to smuggle through on test/training runs. So that counts as being "some trouble". How much "trouble" is enough? Read my post above about how much risk a "bad person" organization is willing to take on 50/50 odds. My late father made his career "gaming" situations, so I have a bit of a passing knowledge of it. I am certain that the TSA has "gamed" the odds, and the TSA believe that they have reached a reasonable balance between costing the public time, money, and indignities - and - ensuring a reasonable level of safety for the flying public. They may be wrong.... but I would bet money that, to the best of their ability, they believe they have reached a balance.
Well when a fanatic is willing to commit suicide because he believes that he'll be rewarded in heaven, 50/50 odds don't seem to be all that much of a deterrent. What's worse is that we've only achieved that with a lot of our personal dignity, time, and money. I don't think we can tolerate much more. We should be expecting more for the time, money, and humiliation we're putting ourselves (and our 6 year-old children) through.
If this is the TSA's best effort and what it believes is the best balance, I want a new TSA.
OK, then why are hijackings down? I have my working hypothesis. I cited some evidence to support it. If you don't agree, then it is up to you to state an alternative one that is supported by more than unsupported statements.
I am not saying the TSA (or in my case CATSA) is perfect or haven't mucked things up sometimes. I'm just saying that I believe that they have been mostly responsible for a dramatic drop in airline hijackings. I cited some statistics. Now it's your turn.....
Your statistics don't unequivocally prove the efficacy of the TSA though. They only show that the TSA employs a cost-benefit method to determine what measures to take.
Since you believe in the efficacy of the TSA so much, the burden is yours to make a clear and convincing case, not mine. I can provide alternative hypotheses, but I am in no way saying that these are provable at the current moment in time. I'm only saying that they are rational objections to your theory.
My hypothesis is essentially the same as Lisa's: the protection is coming from our circumstances rather than our deliberative efforts.
Terrorism is a complex thing. My bet is that as we waged wars in multiple nations, it became more advantageous for fanatics to strike where our military forces were. Without having to gain entry into the country, get past airport security (no matter what odds were), or hijack a plane, terrorists were able to kill over 4,000 Americans in Iraq and nearly 1,500 in Afghanistan. That's almost twice as many as were killed on 9/11.
If I were the leader of a group intent on killing Americans and Westerners in general, I certainly would go down that route rather than hijack planes.
ps there is no proof that it wasn't Lisa's rock. There are some very weird causal relationships in the world. Like shooting wolves causes the Aspen to die off in Wyoming. Or .... overfishing the Salmon in the Pacific changes the mix of trees along the rivers of the BC coast.....
It's pretty clear that it was not the rock. Ecosystems are constantly finding new equilibriums; killing off an herbivore's primary predator should cause a decline in vegetation. That is not surprising, nor is it difficult to prove (you can track all three populations simultaneously). There is also a causal mechanism at work that can explain the effect without the need for new assumptions (Occam's Razor).
The efficacy of the TSA and our security measures, on the other hand, are quite complex and are affected by numerous causes. Changes in travel patterns, other nations' actions, and an enemey's changing strategy all play a big role. You can't ignore all of these and pronounce our security gimmicks (and really, that's what patting down a 6 year-old is) to be so masterfully effective.
While this is true, we can't allow that technicality to wipe the slate clean. Our security as a whole is deficient, even if the TSA on its own might not be responsible for these two particular failures. Our tax dollars are still going to the our mutual safety so we should expect more.
I guess that depends on how you define "not much trouble". We can't know the actual number, since we will never know many actually get through. But they are catching over half the weapons that their own agents try to smuggle through on test/training runs. So that counts as being "some trouble". How much "trouble" is enough? Read my post above about how much risk a "bad person" organization is willing to take on 50/50 odds. My late father made his career "gaming" situations, so I have a bit of a passing knowledge of it. I am certain that the TSA has "gamed" the odds, and the TSA believe that they have reached a reasonable balance between costing the public time, money, and indignities - and - ensuring a reasonable level of safety for the flying public. They may be wrong.... but I would bet money that, to the best of their ability, they believe they have reached a balance.
Well when a fanatic is willing to commit suicide because he believes that he'll be rewarded in heaven, 50/50 odds don't seem to be all that much of a deterrent. What's worse is that we've only achieved that with a lot of our personal dignity, time, and money. I don't think we can tolerate much more. We should be expecting more for the time, money, and humiliation we're putting ourselves (and our 6 year-old children) through.
If this is the TSA's best effort and what it believes is the best balance, I want a new TSA.
OK, then why are hijackings down? I have my working hypothesis. I cited some evidence to support it. If you don't agree, then it is up to you to state an alternative one that is supported by more than unsupported statements.
I am not saying the TSA (or in my case CATSA) is perfect or haven't mucked things up sometimes. I'm just saying that I believe that they have been mostly responsible for a dramatic drop in airline hijackings. I cited some statistics. Now it's your turn.....
Your statistics don't unequivocally prove the efficacy of the TSA though. They only show that the TSA employs a cost-benefit method to determine what measures to take.
Since you believe in the efficacy of the TSA so much, the burden is yours to make a clear and convincing case, not mine. I can provide alternative hypotheses, but I am in no way saying that these are provable at the current moment in time. I'm only saying that they are rational objections to your theory.
My hypothesis is essentially the same as Lisa's: the protection is coming from our circumstances rather than our deliberative efforts.
Terrorism is a complex thing. My bet is that as we waged wars in multiple nations, it became more advantageous for fanatics to strike where our military forces were. Without having to gain entry into the country, get past airport security (no matter what odds were), or hijack a plane, terrorists were able to kill over 4,000 Americans in Iraq and nearly 1,500 in Afghanistan. That's almost twice as many as were killed on 9/11.
If I were the leader of a group intent on killing Americans and Westerners in general, I certainly would go down that route rather than hijack planes.
ps there is no proof that it wasn't Lisa's rock. There are some very weird causal relationships in the world. Like shooting wolves causes the Aspen to die off in Wyoming. Or .... overfishing the Salmon in the Pacific changes the mix of trees along the rivers of the BC coast.....
It's pretty clear that it was not the rock. Ecosystems are constantly finding new equilibriums; killing off an herbivore's primary predator should cause a decline in vegetation. That is not surprising, nor is it difficult to prove (you can track all three populations simultaneously). There is also a causal mechanism at work that can explain the effect without the need for new assumptions (Occam's Razor).
The efficacy of the TSA and our security measures, on the other hand, are quite complex and are affected by numerous causes. Changes in travel patterns, other nations' actions, and an enemey's changing strategy all play a big role. You can't ignore all of these and pronounce our security gimmicks (and really, that's what patting down a 6 year-old is) to be so masterfully effective.
leomac08
Apr 12, 08:39 PM
Whatta Fu**!????????????????????????? :eek:
Who is the background voice, is it another sibling or the girl saying I don't want to get pat down?
Who is the background voice, is it another sibling or the girl saying I don't want to get pat down?
MacFan1957
Jul 21, 11:07 AM
Really classy apple. Try to cover up your mistake by confusing users and trying to insult competitors you didn't think you even had to worry about.
Apple continues to disappoint in surprising ways. What happened to the focus on building great products?
If users are confused that is their own fault not Apples. A part of that confusion is that this is some kind of design "mistake" on Apples part, its not, it was a design choice! It was a trade off of battery life, form factor and signal strength. I can only say that for me the phone is as perfect as it could be given obvious limitations, battery life isn't limitless and all cell phone suffer with signal issues of some kind.
I trust Apple, they are smarter than your average blogger and for sure smarter than your average forum poster! More power to them I say! :-)
Apple continues to disappoint in surprising ways. What happened to the focus on building great products?
If users are confused that is their own fault not Apples. A part of that confusion is that this is some kind of design "mistake" on Apples part, its not, it was a design choice! It was a trade off of battery life, form factor and signal strength. I can only say that for me the phone is as perfect as it could be given obvious limitations, battery life isn't limitless and all cell phone suffer with signal issues of some kind.
I trust Apple, they are smarter than your average blogger and for sure smarter than your average forum poster! More power to them I say! :-)
Hugh
Apr 5, 10:14 PM
I'm going to start a TV channel that only shows commercials.
They already have it and it's actually quite popular. :D
In 2000 there was a web site that was nothing but ads. Ads from all around the globe. Why is it gone? It got to popular and they were having a hard time paying for the bandwidth. Not to mention that some of the companies wanted money or their ad pulled. It was a great site to see all the Super Bowl ads. :/
They already have it and it's actually quite popular. :D
In 2000 there was a web site that was nothing but ads. Ads from all around the globe. Why is it gone? It got to popular and they were having a hard time paying for the bandwidth. Not to mention that some of the companies wanted money or their ad pulled. It was a great site to see all the Super Bowl ads. :/
Nicolasdec
Jan 9, 05:05 PM
http://events.apple.com.edgesuite.net/j47d52oo/event/
Polo5
Oct 6, 10:13 AM
could i move in with you steve? :p
dondiego87
Jan 9, 03:07 PM
I have to say, my heart was broken when I saw the spoiler in the ticker...
Next time, for safety's sake, just post a blank page that says "Here's where the link will be:" and put the link there once the movie's up. Other than that, totally blank.
Next time, for safety's sake, just post a blank page that says "Here's where the link will be:" and put the link there once the movie's up. Other than that, totally blank.
