The game was announced fore the Wii. Just not release date. For all intents and purposes, if a simpler version can dun on the DS, there's no reason a more decent version will on the Wii.
I'm actually waiting for this game on Wii, although I'm sick of hearing about it. I hope it'll be a good game. I'm just saying I wont bite on their 10$ add.
his is viral marketing at it's best: build up the excitement for years, finally announce another far-off release date and charge people for a preview of it.
iPhone runs on a down-clocked 112mghz processor. (before the 1.1.2 firmware, it ran at 100mghz). Yes, the processor is capable of 620mghz but the battery would last something like 1 hour so it's been down-clocked.
Plus the iPhone doesn't have to carry the bazillion drivers that the regular Mac OS X carries, nor the bazillion software in embarks. It is, otherwise, the same Mach kernel.
Regardless, I dont think I want to sent out my phone number and emails addresses to some third party who might just, in the end, get hacked and stolen his juicy database.
Not that I'd trust the government wich such a database either.
WOuldn't it suck to discover that, in the end, Hawking is just some lame robot sent from the futur to enlighten us?
Futur Scientist 1: "We should send back a robot!" Futur Scientist 2: "Hrm. it'll take years to develop a convincing one!" Futur Scientist 3: "Let's get to it!!" Futur Janitor: "Hey... why dont you make him look like a crip? You could then use that IBM 5100 chip on the floor as a voice box." Futur Scientists: "Smart ass".
Neither company thought it was funny. They had been throwing law suits at each other for almost 20 years un Apple (formerly Apple Computer) bought all the rights to the "Apple" trademarks and re-licensed them back to Apple Corps.
Youtube is as-free on the iPhone. And the 400$ NON-plastic thing actually lets me avoid dragging a 1000$+ laptop around, a phone and a music player all at once. So, what's your point?
My point was that YouTube has been converting their videos to H.264 for MONTHS. In fact, they've even mentioned months ago that every new videos uploaded to YouTube was being simultaneously H.264 -encoded on-the-fly. Initially, iPhone users have seen the benefits before other viewers because it's got a dedicated YouTube browser app (wich does full screen) (aka, non-flash based).
I dont hate you because you dont drive the same car I do. Go hate someone else.
iPhone users have been enjoying H.264-encoded YouTube for many months already.
To be frank, I've not been on YouTube.com ever since I've gotten the iPhone. The video quality is SO much better on H.264 than crap^H^H^H^H flash players that it's worth wasting time with it. Plus, you can actually pause, fast-forward, rewind and skip to any point without it failing like flash players always do.
There is a slight difference in this case though. Unlike compiled C or C++ libraries, Objective-C (/Cocoa) frameworks can be easily turned inside out. The strong method signature nature of the language actually makes it easy to figure out the parameters being passed. If in doubt, just ask at runtime!!
Introspection makes this easy, as in java (and c# I suppose--I'm just guessing for this one).
Also, given Apple did mention it into a post (see above reply) and that although there wasn't documentation per say, the functions were in a published API (in this particular case), one could say "the plans where on display".
Foreword: I pulled my head out of Steve's ass when I unlocked my iPhone.
Now...
Maybe he's on to something though. You see, published APIs are APIs that are generally tested and well engineered (although that's sometimes arguable). The idea is that a published API can be relied upon for the foreseable future as being available and to do what it's documented to do.
Now, if Safari is using yet-unpublished APIs, it does so at a possible cost of futur compatibility and, even perhaps, worse performance down the line.
Now, obviously, Apple is in a rather sweet spot to use this because they have some inside info as to when things might get changed. Or at least, access to engineers that can fix it.
Using Cocoa/Objective-C for any APIs makes any framework (libraries) easy to dig into. There are THOUSANDS of unpublished methods in Cocoa classes. They're unpublished because they are not meant to be normal entry points for various reasons. They might be some internal data munger routines that end up being used by some public API but it's not to day that accessing this one directly wouldn't be a performance boost for something else, used in a different context.
There are tools you can use to find out what method Cocoa classes implement and if you really want, you can dig right into them. The cost, though, is that you risk futur incompatibilities.
That's probably what's going on in this case.
FYI: I also make use of some undocumented methods. There. let me give you one:
@interface NSScreen (_NSScreen_screenNumber)
- (int) _ScreenNumber;
@end
@implementation NSScreen (_NSScreen_screenNumber)
- (int) _ScreenNumber {
return _screenNumber; }
@end
Oh noes! I gave you access to a method wich may give you an unfair advantage to a poor sap who'll have to traverse an array using an interator to get screen numbers!!!
For a counter argument, Apple is now as evil as the company it fought all these years. So, maybe they're just guilty of this one too.
Well, think about it. If these extra phones are not sold BY Apple but rather than by the manufacturer's own extra (un-contracted) production run, doesn't that make the manufacturer a thief in the story, keeping profits for itself rather than let Apple sell the products?
If I had contracted 1m phones to find out that 400k other ones were build without my consent, I'd be majorly pissed at my contractor for having stolen a potential 400k*399$ in revenues.
Someone needs to explain how distribution channels can legally divert these phones away.
Apple is the only producer of these phones (well, through OEM partners), wich presumably moves the phones to some Apple warehouses and they, in turn, are moved off to Apple stores and authorised resellers (AT&T, Orange, T-Mobile and O2 if I'm not mistaking).
So, where do all the grey market phones come from? And how can Apple account for them if they've never been in their warehouses?
Mine was bought in an Apple store so I'm not even worried about it but I wonder about those I see in downtown Montreal cell phone outlets (at a premium price). Should those be considered stolen devices?
Slashdot Mirror
Because now they have proof that Mars has weapons of mass sublimation.
Moo?
The game was announced fore the Wii. Just not release date. For all intents and purposes, if a simpler version can dun on the DS, there's no reason a more decent version will on the Wii.
I'm actually waiting for this game on Wii, although I'm sick of hearing about it. I hope it'll be a good game. I'm just saying I wont bite on their 10$ add.
his is viral marketing at it's best: build up the excitement for years, finally announce another far-off release date and charge people for a preview of it.
Also, pun intended.
Last time you checked, you failed.
iPhone runs on a down-clocked 112mghz processor. (before the 1.1.2 firmware, it ran at 100mghz). Yes, the processor is capable of 620mghz but the battery would last something like 1 hour so it's been down-clocked.
Plus the iPhone doesn't have to carry the bazillion drivers that the regular Mac OS X carries, nor the bazillion software in embarks. It is, otherwise, the same Mach kernel.
Regardless, I dont think I want to sent out my phone number and emails addresses to some third party who might just, in the end, get hacked and stolen his juicy database.
Not that I'd trust the government wich such a database either.
One word: inquisition.
WOuldn't it suck to discover that, in the end, Hawking is just some lame robot sent from the futur to enlighten us?
Futur Scientist 1: "We should send back a robot!"
Futur Scientist 2: "Hrm. it'll take years to develop a convincing one!"
Futur Scientist 3: "Let's get to it!!"
Futur Janitor: "Hey... why dont you make him look like a crip? You could then use that IBM 5100 chip on the floor as a voice box."
Futur Scientists: "Smart ass".
My link didn't work. My bad. here's Candu info: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CANDU
The Candu reactor is a good export for Canada. AND it can use depleted uranium and other non-weapon-grade fuel.
Neither company thought it was funny. They had been throwing law suits at each other for almost 20 years un Apple (formerly Apple Computer) bought all the rights to the "Apple" trademarks and re-licensed them back to Apple Corps.
Your point being?
And you're also wrong. It's "Apple Corps".
^ AAC format.
It already has a real file system, and you can do all those things you've mentioned using add-on apps from the urrent hacker community.
Eg, SendFile, MobileFinder etc.
How can you go through life being so unloved?
Youtube is as-free on the iPhone. And the 400$ NON-plastic thing actually lets me avoid dragging a 1000$+ laptop around, a phone and a music player all at once. So, what's your point?
My point was that YouTube has been converting their videos to H.264 for MONTHS. In fact, they've even mentioned months ago that every new videos uploaded to YouTube was being simultaneously H.264 -encoded on-the-fly. Initially, iPhone users have seen the benefits before other viewers because it's got a dedicated YouTube browser app (wich does full screen) (aka, non-flash based).
I dont hate you because you dont drive the same car I do. Go hate someone else.
iPhone users have been enjoying H.264-encoded YouTube for many months already.
To be frank, I've not been on YouTube.com ever since I've gotten the iPhone. The video quality is SO much better on H.264 than crap^H^H^H^H flash players that it's worth wasting time with it. Plus, you can actually pause, fast-forward, rewind and skip to any point without it failing like flash players always do.
Just dont want to clash with a possible implementation somewhere. besides, this isn't the exact code I'm using. My employer wouldn't aprove otherwise.
There is a slight difference in this case though. Unlike compiled C or C++ libraries, Objective-C (/Cocoa) frameworks can be easily turned inside out. The strong method signature nature of the language actually makes it easy to figure out the parameters being passed. If in doubt, just ask at runtime!!
Introspection makes this easy, as in java (and c# I suppose--I'm just guessing for this one).
Also, given Apple did mention it into a post (see above reply) and that although there wasn't documentation per say, the functions were in a published API (in this particular case), one could say "the plans where on display".
Foreword: I pulled my head out of Steve's ass when I unlocked my iPhone.
Now...
Maybe he's on to something though. You see, published APIs are APIs that are generally tested and well engineered (although that's sometimes arguable). The idea is that a published API can be relied upon for the foreseable future as being available and to do what it's documented to do.
Now, if Safari is using yet-unpublished APIs, it does so at a possible cost of futur compatibility and, even perhaps, worse performance down the line.
Now, obviously, Apple is in a rather sweet spot to use this because they have some inside info as to when things might get changed. Or at least, access to engineers that can fix it.
Using Cocoa/Objective-C for any APIs makes any framework (libraries) easy to dig into. There are THOUSANDS of unpublished methods in Cocoa classes. They're unpublished because they are not meant to be normal entry points for various reasons. They might be some internal data munger routines that end up being used by some public API but it's not to day that accessing this one directly wouldn't be a performance boost for something else, used in a different context.
There are tools you can use to find out what method Cocoa classes implement and if you really want, you can dig right into them. The cost, though, is that you risk futur incompatibilities.
That's probably what's going on in this case.
FYI: I also make use of some undocumented methods. There. let me give you one:
@interface NSScreen (_NSScreen_screenNumber)
- (int) _ScreenNumber;
@end
@implementation NSScreen (_NSScreen_screenNumber)
- (int) _ScreenNumber
{
return _screenNumber;
}
@end
Oh noes! I gave you access to a method wich may give you an unfair advantage to a poor sap who'll have to traverse an array using an interator to get screen numbers!!!
For a counter argument, Apple is now as evil as the company it fought all these years. So, maybe they're just guilty of this one too.
Oh I understand that.
Mine got purchased by a friend in NC.
But, 400,000 phones? Damn. That's a lot of friends.
Well, think about it. If these extra phones are not sold BY Apple but rather than by the manufacturer's own extra (un-contracted) production run, doesn't that make the manufacturer a thief in the story, keeping profits for itself rather than let Apple sell the products?
If I had contracted 1m phones to find out that 400k other ones were build without my consent, I'd be majorly pissed at my contractor for having stolen a potential 400k*399$ in revenues.
Someone needs to explain how distribution channels can legally divert these phones away.
Apple is the only producer of these phones (well, through OEM partners), wich presumably moves the phones to some Apple warehouses and they, in turn, are moved off to Apple stores and authorised resellers (AT&T, Orange, T-Mobile and O2 if I'm not mistaking).
So, where do all the grey market phones come from? And how can Apple account for them if they've never been in their warehouses?
Mine was bought in an Apple store so I'm not even worried about it but I wonder about those I see in downtown Montreal cell phone outlets (at a premium price). Should those be considered stolen devices?
Shelf stocks of Dukem Nukem Forever.
And yeah, I meant relative pressure.
No, I think he means explode. You cant implode if there's negative outside pressure.