Cinch
Sep 5, 01:06 PM
But with every attempt, the chance of success increases significantly. Lets keep our fingers crossed. :)
I think a simpler explanation is that certain things are never meant to be together.
Video on demand are NetFlix currently fill the niche, if there is a niche. Whatever Apple do, it has to be simple and easy i.e. it doesn't require lots of thinking..a lazy person can operate. This is the living room not the office where I don't care to navigate my computer to search for movies to watch.
Cinch
I think a simpler explanation is that certain things are never meant to be together.
Video on demand are NetFlix currently fill the niche, if there is a niche. Whatever Apple do, it has to be simple and easy i.e. it doesn't require lots of thinking..a lazy person can operate. This is the living room not the office where I don't care to navigate my computer to search for movies to watch.
Cinch
aeaglex07
Apr 20, 01:16 PM
Wow, this is really, really bad. I've no idea how any company would think this was acceptable. There's no way this was simply an oversight.
Absolutely unacceptable.
go buy a Droid and let Google sell your personal info:D
Absolutely unacceptable.
go buy a Droid and let Google sell your personal info:D
08Hawks
Mar 23, 04:53 PM
Tell them NO ! No ! NO ! The States/Cities do not enforce the Law to the extreme like they should after the 1st offense !!!!! What difference does it make if all you are going to do is smack their little hand the first few times !!!! The folks that are going to break the law are going to break the law no matter what !!! Also I might add that I have seen here in the greater Kansas City Mo area that the newspapers post the areas anyway ...
Dagless
Sep 13, 08:58 PM
well this is certainly big news!
aristotle
Nov 13, 05:19 PM
You say that but it's not necessarily true. One of my apps was rejected for depicting an image of an Apple product. Not a copyrighted file, mind you. Just a little icon, drawn by me, that looked like an Apple product. It was rejected for depicting an Apple trademark.
Well that might a the case in your situation but it this case Rogue Amoeba is using Apple's own copyright images in a client server application where the API on OS X does not confer the right to use those images on other devices by third party developers.
Well that might a the case in your situation but it this case Rogue Amoeba is using Apple's own copyright images in a client server application where the API on OS X does not confer the right to use those images on other devices by third party developers.
Evan_11
Sep 4, 08:55 PM
How about an iPod dock but with an airport express built-in. That way you could either stream video off of your iPod or your Mac. This is important since any device they introduce will have to be both Mac and PC compliant and there is no version of front row currently available for Windows.
DRewPi
Sep 3, 09:58 AM
I would at least wait and see what happens this mid september with all the things that are to come !!!! Then if u really need the MB just go for it !!!!
Popeye206
Mar 29, 12:02 PM
What I don't get is....
Nokia = looser in smart phone market.
Microsoft = looser in smart phone OS market.
So... Looser + Looser = Winner?
I know Nokia has a huge installed base of feature phones, but they're going to have to really step it up to catch up in the smart phone market. Even the old #1 guys (RIM) can't keep up with iOS and Android.
Nokia = looser in smart phone market.
Microsoft = looser in smart phone OS market.
So... Looser + Looser = Winner?
I know Nokia has a huge installed base of feature phones, but they're going to have to really step it up to catch up in the smart phone market. Even the old #1 guys (RIM) can't keep up with iOS and Android.
Lightivity
Sep 20, 04:37 AM
Erm... that is wrong. All major Hollywood DVDs are encoded as progressive full frames at 23.976fps. The interlacing you are seeing is the result of adding pulldown frames to pad it out to 29.97 interlaced for NTSC.
Not correct. Most Hollywood movies are encoded as interlaced and then pressed to dvd, just to be sure that all tv-sets (old and new) are able to display the content. If all film dvd:s were to be encoded as progressive, we wouldn't need all these more or less expensive deinterlacers in digital display systems (progressive in nature) and video sources. And also, we would need interlacers in all analogue displays (interlaced in nature)...not realistic.
Reference:
http://www.thedigitalbits.com/officialfaq.html#3.8 and
http://www.thedigitalbits.com/officialfaq.html#1.40 (esp. second paragraph)
Not correct. Most Hollywood movies are encoded as interlaced and then pressed to dvd, just to be sure that all tv-sets (old and new) are able to display the content. If all film dvd:s were to be encoded as progressive, we wouldn't need all these more or less expensive deinterlacers in digital display systems (progressive in nature) and video sources. And also, we would need interlacers in all analogue displays (interlaced in nature)...not realistic.
Reference:
http://www.thedigitalbits.com/officialfaq.html#3.8 and
http://www.thedigitalbits.com/officialfaq.html#1.40 (esp. second paragraph)
milo
Jul 20, 04:43 PM
Better be careful. I posted a similar idea in another thread and got flamed by a couple antagonistic people who have limited vision and are knashing for Woodcrest. I'm in agreement with you. I think having Conroes in the middle and lowend to replace the currently shipping Powermacs is feasible for Apple. Keep the G5 Quad until Kentsfield and maybe introduce a 3.0 Quad Woodcrest on the high-end workstation model to start a new professional line?
I can see why folks are clamoring for Woodcrest, but to me it seems a bit weird for Apple to adopt a chipset for 6 months or less. With Kentsfield shipping at the end of the year, why bother with Woodcrest now? If they would have begun selling last month when they first came out it would have made more sense. Now I'm thinking Apple is going to hold off simply because they haven't announced anything. Woodcrest has been out for around a month now, if Apple is/was going to use them, what's the hold up? I think they have been waiting for Conroe, not WWDC.
You don't think Apple would get raked over the coals if they released towers that were slower than the last generation? Conroe is fast, but no way it beats a quad G5. And I don't think a promise of a quad machine later on helps public relations any.
Also, doesn't the kentsfield have the same limitation as conroe? That you can only use it in single processor configs? A woodcrest chipset would have a longer life since you'd use the same one for multiple cloverton configs.
Next gen, conroe gets you 2 cores, woodcrest gives you 2 chips for 4 cores.
Gen after that, kentsfield gets you 4 cores, cloverton gets you 2 chips for 8 cores. There's room for both chipsets for at least the next two generations, and I wouldn't be surprised if it continues beyond that.
I can see why folks are clamoring for Woodcrest, but to me it seems a bit weird for Apple to adopt a chipset for 6 months or less. With Kentsfield shipping at the end of the year, why bother with Woodcrest now? If they would have begun selling last month when they first came out it would have made more sense. Now I'm thinking Apple is going to hold off simply because they haven't announced anything. Woodcrest has been out for around a month now, if Apple is/was going to use them, what's the hold up? I think they have been waiting for Conroe, not WWDC.
You don't think Apple would get raked over the coals if they released towers that were slower than the last generation? Conroe is fast, but no way it beats a quad G5. And I don't think a promise of a quad machine later on helps public relations any.
Also, doesn't the kentsfield have the same limitation as conroe? That you can only use it in single processor configs? A woodcrest chipset would have a longer life since you'd use the same one for multiple cloverton configs.
Next gen, conroe gets you 2 cores, woodcrest gives you 2 chips for 4 cores.
Gen after that, kentsfield gets you 4 cores, cloverton gets you 2 chips for 8 cores. There's room for both chipsets for at least the next two generations, and I wouldn't be surprised if it continues beyond that.
toddybody
Mar 30, 12:23 PM
No one refers to McDonald's as Burger Store. Their brand name is so strong that people actually say McDonald's because that logo and name is pretty much seared into everyone head.
You dont say Burger Store? Thats weird. I and everyone I know always say that...like, "hey dude, want to grab a big mac from Burger Store" or "hey, how about a nice Burger Store Egg McMuffin". Get with it dude :p
You dont say Burger Store? Thats weird. I and everyone I know always say that...like, "hey dude, want to grab a big mac from Burger Store" or "hey, how about a nice Burger Store Egg McMuffin". Get with it dude :p
Omniblast
Mar 30, 12:04 PM
By that argument, aren't windows and office generic terms???
I don't think Microsoft sues or claims to send cease and desist letters to people who make actual windows. I think they know the difference between software and a actual window.
I don't think Microsoft sues or claims to send cease and desist letters to people who make actual windows. I think they know the difference between software and a actual window.
parkds
Oct 12, 01:48 PM
Why is U2 so big with iPods anyways? The only group to have their own iPod. :confused:
(I don't mean to be disrespectful to the U2 fanboys out there)
Could be because Bono bought Steve Jobs apartment in New York City from him.
(I don't mean to be disrespectful to the U2 fanboys out there)
Could be because Bono bought Steve Jobs apartment in New York City from him.
owengot
Apr 14, 02:01 PM
I have a Rev D MacBook Air (11") and also think the Ivy Bridge will be a worthwhile upgrade. There is now no reason why that one shouldn't have USB 3.0, or Thunderbolt, plus Ivy Bridge, unlike Sandy Bridge, will have a GPU as fast as the NVIDIA 320m.
Amen to that :cool: As well as official support for OpenCL.
So when will Ivy Bridge be released?
Amen to that :cool: As well as official support for OpenCL.
So when will Ivy Bridge be released?
paradox00
Apr 15, 04:58 PM
You have to admit this thread is really funny.
How many times have we heard Apple lovers say it's not all about "specs" and the general public are not interested in "specs" and rubbish others when they say how much better spec their PC might be.
And yet, now that Apple has the high specs, all of a sudden THIS IS the most important thing.
No average consumer is ever going to notice the difference between USB3 and Thunderbolt, in fact USB3 will be better for the general user experience as it's backwards compatible.
But now, sod the typical consumer, the only thing that matters now is specs.
Oh, you have to laugh don't you :D
It all makes sense when you realize the user experience provided by TB will be amazing. If you think TB is about replacing USB you haven't actually figured out what TB is and what it's designed to do.
How many times have we heard Apple lovers say it's not all about "specs" and the general public are not interested in "specs" and rubbish others when they say how much better spec their PC might be.
And yet, now that Apple has the high specs, all of a sudden THIS IS the most important thing.
No average consumer is ever going to notice the difference between USB3 and Thunderbolt, in fact USB3 will be better for the general user experience as it's backwards compatible.
But now, sod the typical consumer, the only thing that matters now is specs.
Oh, you have to laugh don't you :D
It all makes sense when you realize the user experience provided by TB will be amazing. If you think TB is about replacing USB you haven't actually figured out what TB is and what it's designed to do.
gnasher729
May 1, 02:12 AM
I was wondering why so many people are so opposed to Apple offering Blu-Ray as a BTO option. I have read where Steve Jobs spoke negatively about Blu-Ray, I wonder if these same people would be all gung-ho for BR if Jobs had spoken positively about it? I realize that he is a very smart man, but he isn't God! I always thought that BR would have been a great thing to have on a Mac for things like backing up your iTunes library. Imagine that, being able to back up your entire iTunes library on two or three BR discs. That would have been really nice. I read somewhere the other day that they either have or are getting ready to have BR discs that have a 100GB capacity. What in the world would have been wrong with that?
Some people seem actively opposed, which is of course strange. My opinion: For backups, I wouldn't trust an optical drive. My iTunes library is backed up automatically as part of my Time Machine backup to an external drive, which is a lot lot faster than BluRay and I would trust it ten times more; it is fast because it is an incremental backup, and hard drives are faster anyway.
For playing BluRay disks, the content industry puts completely ridiculous demands on the OS and the hardware. Windows goes with these restrictions, Apple doesn't, Linux probably just can't. You need signed drivers, the OS only accepting signed drivers, and huge penalties if anything happened that allowed access to the unencrypted video stream.
Some people seem actively opposed, which is of course strange. My opinion: For backups, I wouldn't trust an optical drive. My iTunes library is backed up automatically as part of my Time Machine backup to an external drive, which is a lot lot faster than BluRay and I would trust it ten times more; it is fast because it is an incremental backup, and hard drives are faster anyway.
For playing BluRay disks, the content industry puts completely ridiculous demands on the OS and the hardware. Windows goes with these restrictions, Apple doesn't, Linux probably just can't. You need signed drivers, the OS only accepting signed drivers, and huge penalties if anything happened that allowed access to the unencrypted video stream.
turbobass
Mar 22, 08:45 PM
I just want to say a big "AMERICA, **** YEAH!" about this ...
But also I wanted to say we should be rewarding WIRELESS protocols. ThunderBolt = Fast, great. Polite golf clap. No AMERICA **** YEAH for ThunderBolt. Everything should be WIRELESS now. 2011 baby!:mad:
But also I wanted to say we should be rewarding WIRELESS protocols. ThunderBolt = Fast, great. Polite golf clap. No AMERICA **** YEAH for ThunderBolt. Everything should be WIRELESS now. 2011 baby!:mad:
munkery
Mar 19, 04:35 PM
A few examples: Look up Leap-A and Inqtana-A on OSX (very real OSX worms), MusMinim-A (recent trojan).
Leap-a required authentication to infect and spread via iChat given that iChat is owned by System but is only run with user privileges. It did NOT achieve privilege escalation via exploitation.
Inqtana-a was a proof of concept that could only modify the user level of the system because didn't achieve privilege escalation via exploitation. Malware can NOT install rootkits or keyloggers that can hook into apps owned by System (such as Safari, Mail, & etc) with only user level access.
MusMinim-a is also a beta proof of concept based of a legitimate piece of software ported from Windows (http://www.darkcomet-rat.com/). It requires authentication to install given that it does NOT achieve privilege escalation via exploitation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_malware#Threats (List of Malware threats on Linux; why not pretend they don't even exist?)
You do realize most of those are proof-of-concepts generated through research. Most were never present in the wild and did NOT achieve privilege escalation via exploitation. Two that were in the wild are Bliss (1997 - ineffective as did not include privilege escalation) and Stoag (1996). https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Linuxvirus
It sounds good at first except for one giant pothole of a flaw. I mean why do things that are difficult to trace when you can just set up a sign on a server somewhere that says "Here's my bank account! Come and arrest me!" (i.e. the money is being redirected...follow the money trail!) :rolleyes:
You do realize that the redirection of ad revenue is one of the primary means of profit generation of what has been referred to as the most advanced Windows rootkit. BTW, some variants achieve privilege escalation via exploitation (see the second link).
http://www.brighthub.com/internet/google/articles/66090.aspx
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/11/16/tdl_rootkit_does_64_bit_windows/
Trojans are particularly a problem since a lot of programs ask for root password permission to be installed (including Apple software).
Untrue. Mac apps rarely ask for authentication to install if you install the app in the appropriate folder for the user account type.
Leap-a required authentication to infect and spread via iChat given that iChat is owned by System but is only run with user privileges. It did NOT achieve privilege escalation via exploitation.
Inqtana-a was a proof of concept that could only modify the user level of the system because didn't achieve privilege escalation via exploitation. Malware can NOT install rootkits or keyloggers that can hook into apps owned by System (such as Safari, Mail, & etc) with only user level access.
MusMinim-a is also a beta proof of concept based of a legitimate piece of software ported from Windows (http://www.darkcomet-rat.com/). It requires authentication to install given that it does NOT achieve privilege escalation via exploitation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_malware#Threats (List of Malware threats on Linux; why not pretend they don't even exist?)
You do realize most of those are proof-of-concepts generated through research. Most were never present in the wild and did NOT achieve privilege escalation via exploitation. Two that were in the wild are Bliss (1997 - ineffective as did not include privilege escalation) and Stoag (1996). https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Linuxvirus
It sounds good at first except for one giant pothole of a flaw. I mean why do things that are difficult to trace when you can just set up a sign on a server somewhere that says "Here's my bank account! Come and arrest me!" (i.e. the money is being redirected...follow the money trail!) :rolleyes:
You do realize that the redirection of ad revenue is one of the primary means of profit generation of what has been referred to as the most advanced Windows rootkit. BTW, some variants achieve privilege escalation via exploitation (see the second link).
http://www.brighthub.com/internet/google/articles/66090.aspx
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/11/16/tdl_rootkit_does_64_bit_windows/
Trojans are particularly a problem since a lot of programs ask for root password permission to be installed (including Apple software).
Untrue. Mac apps rarely ask for authentication to install if you install the app in the appropriate folder for the user account type.
torbjoern
Apr 25, 03:07 AM
i thought this from my first post, but his join date is 08, and he's a regular. that is what has me thinking that what he is saying is really how he thinks/acts.
I thought it from the first post too.
We don't know how many accounts he registered here on MR in 08, and it doesn't really take that many postings to become a regular.
I thought it from the first post too.
We don't know how many accounts he registered here on MR in 08, and it doesn't really take that many postings to become a regular.
zacman
Apr 20, 12:36 PM
1984 is not happening because companies and the government spies on you but because of people that are saying: "So what? It's not a big issue."
Yamcha
Apr 30, 06:43 PM
Glad, hoping for a redesign, but probably unlikely, also would be great to see the yellow tint issue resolved..
deputy_doofy
Sep 14, 08:24 AM
Is there any chance that they'll release the MBPs here?
Funny how we're all looking for that same glimmer of hope. :)
If nothing else, 9-24 is extremely close to 9-27 - the date on which Dell claims to be shipping their (Merom) Core 2's.
Signs look good, but by now, I'm not getting my hopes up.
Funny how we're all looking for that same glimmer of hope. :)
If nothing else, 9-24 is extremely close to 9-27 - the date on which Dell claims to be shipping their (Merom) Core 2's.
Signs look good, but by now, I'm not getting my hopes up.
mrgreen4242
Sep 5, 01:54 PM
Well fudge. I've been holding off on getting an Airport Express for literally a year, waiting for an AV version. I finally had to get one when I moved (no cable drop in the office at new house, so needed a wireless router) and then like 2 weeks later they release the AV model. Bastards.
Oh well, probably can't afford one anyways - seeing as the AE w/ AirTunes is still $100. Does Apple price match refurb hardware? I'm assuming the AE price will drop when they release the AV model.
Hmmm, I might be able to talk my wife into letting me get one for the theatre room if I can make it send cable TV up there too... Have to wait and see what the product actually is.
Also, $10-15 for a d/l movies is a ripoff. Unless they are going to do HD quality movies at $15, DVDs will remain a much better value. Now, HD download service, with an affordable playback mechanism, at $15 per movie they will clean up... SD though? Forget about it.
Oh well, probably can't afford one anyways - seeing as the AE w/ AirTunes is still $100. Does Apple price match refurb hardware? I'm assuming the AE price will drop when they release the AV model.
Hmmm, I might be able to talk my wife into letting me get one for the theatre room if I can make it send cable TV up there too... Have to wait and see what the product actually is.
Also, $10-15 for a d/l movies is a ripoff. Unless they are going to do HD quality movies at $15, DVDs will remain a much better value. Now, HD download service, with an affordable playback mechanism, at $15 per movie they will clean up... SD though? Forget about it.
GGJstudios
Feb 25, 10:16 AM
It makes sense. iProducts are increasingly becoming ubiquitous, therefore they will become more profitable for malware developers to attack. It's not a McAfee sales pitch so much as it's stating the obvious. Same with Android.
i think it's pretty common knowledge that Apple devices will be targeted more by virus making idiots in the future as they become more popular.
The "Market Share Myth" has been around a long time, and it's exactly that: a myth. It's displays ignorance of the facts to say, "When Apple has more market share, they'll be more of a target." 10 or so years ago, Mac had a very small market share, and there were a handful of viruses that ran on Mac OS 9 and earlier. Today, Mac has a much larger market share than ever before (and growing at the rate of a million Macs a month), and the number of viruses in the wild that run on current Macs has not increased, but has declined.... to exactly zero. There has never been a virus in the wild that runs on Mac OS X. That completely nullifies the "market share" argument. The fact is, Macs already DO have a larger market share, not to mention iPhones and other iDevices. Are they immune to threats? Absolutely not. No device is immune. The fact is, at the present time, there are no threats to Mac OS X or iDevices except one: the user.
Sad, but true :(
(And I don't feel the need to argue or debate or say more in this thread to justify this obvious fact.)
In other words, "My mind's made up. Don't confuse me with facts." You don't feel the need to argue or debate, because you have no facts to support your opinion.
Made a correction to the headline. It should be:
McAfee faces obsolescence with increasing Apple popularity.;)
Exactly! It's really a matter of greed. McAfee has plenty of work in the Windows world to keep them in business for a very long time. However, they look that the growth and popularity and, yes, market share enjoyed by Apple, and they want a piece of that lucrative pie. But how do they get it, when there's obviously no need for their product? Well, you attempt to create a need, with FUD.
A little reading material: Mac Virus/Malware Info (http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=9400648&postcount=4)
i think it's pretty common knowledge that Apple devices will be targeted more by virus making idiots in the future as they become more popular.
The "Market Share Myth" has been around a long time, and it's exactly that: a myth. It's displays ignorance of the facts to say, "When Apple has more market share, they'll be more of a target." 10 or so years ago, Mac had a very small market share, and there were a handful of viruses that ran on Mac OS 9 and earlier. Today, Mac has a much larger market share than ever before (and growing at the rate of a million Macs a month), and the number of viruses in the wild that run on current Macs has not increased, but has declined.... to exactly zero. There has never been a virus in the wild that runs on Mac OS X. That completely nullifies the "market share" argument. The fact is, Macs already DO have a larger market share, not to mention iPhones and other iDevices. Are they immune to threats? Absolutely not. No device is immune. The fact is, at the present time, there are no threats to Mac OS X or iDevices except one: the user.
Sad, but true :(
(And I don't feel the need to argue or debate or say more in this thread to justify this obvious fact.)
In other words, "My mind's made up. Don't confuse me with facts." You don't feel the need to argue or debate, because you have no facts to support your opinion.
Made a correction to the headline. It should be:
McAfee faces obsolescence with increasing Apple popularity.;)
Exactly! It's really a matter of greed. McAfee has plenty of work in the Windows world to keep them in business for a very long time. However, they look that the growth and popularity and, yes, market share enjoyed by Apple, and they want a piece of that lucrative pie. But how do they get it, when there's obviously no need for their product? Well, you attempt to create a need, with FUD.
A little reading material: Mac Virus/Malware Info (http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=9400648&postcount=4)
No comments:
Post a Comment