I have to wonder how a government who doesn't believe in hand-outs (no free health care etc.) can possibly approve of such a large bail-out to Wall Street of all organizations -- the place that is the most full of people who are usually against such things. All it does for me is prove that many of the people in Wall Street are just selfish hypocrites at the end of the day. By many of their own philosophies, if Wall Street crashes, it should be left to dye -- survival of the fittest and all that, right? Because that just as much applies to poor decisions as it does to being poor. I'm all for making sure the US economy doesn't collapse, even though I don't live there and I disapprove of it's military actions, but this whole thing still strikes me as repugnant.
Why would it be Greenpeace? That makes no sense if you actually think about it as this is not about the way Apple designs its products but a possible defect in the production. Perhaps you could take your knee-jerk reactions somewhere else?
Yeah, an uprising, that's right. Job's saw the comments here on Slashdot, panicked, and decided to partially remove the NDA. Get real, this was bound to happen all along. Sometime in the future, when Apple's lawyers have figured out every little detail, and their developers have finalised the SDK more, then I'm sure more restrictions will be dropped. All this NDA stuff is basically just Apple's way of allowing 3rd party developers to start writing apps for the iPhone while they're still setting the whole thing up.
Because the way they think of words in there[sic] head, loose would never accidentally come out as lose.
Then you know what my native language is. Congrats. However, you still seem to assume that all people process their native written language the same way and is therefore a reliable gauge of the value of someone's opinion?
But if you don't agree to the NDA, then you are obviously going to loose your developer membership, which is required to get your apps in the store. You may not agree that the whole situation is fair, but they sure as hell have the legal right to do what they're doing here -- they have a whole team of good lawyers to make sure of that.
If someone has done the planning and has the resources for a terrorist attack, what is to stop them from popping a beta-blocker or diazepam etc. before entering the airport?
I normally run OS X, but when I have to use Windows, I also prefer XP with the older, win2k looks. The thing I like about OS X aesthetics is that it's simple and clean. The old Windows 95-2000 design may not be as pretty, but it's still simple and clean.
And the latest ones don't appear to have Blu-ray, either, and since I watch all my movies on my computer, I won't be using Blu-ray until it comes standard with my computer.
I find it less scary that a company is choosing to do it themselves, rather than having the government officially banning it. YouTube is not a public service, and if they don't want this kind of content on their site because they think it causes more harm than good, then they are free to ban it. Sure as hell beats legislation.
Who said I have this view? I'm saying that some people do. Obviously, I don't have stats on this. As for the rest of your argument, I disagree. And there isn't much to back what you say, either. To say that democrats try to weasel their way out of taxes and that republicans don't is a pretty naive thing to say, simply because it's so one-sided, among other things -- how can I take you seriously?
That's true. One of the biggest symptoms of depression is lack of motivation and it can create a feedback loop: The longer you stay depressed, the less motivation you have, the less likely you are to try and do things that will help you get over your depression.
Well, that's what I mean: Some people see so much suffering in the world that they feel powerless to do anything about it, especially if they also think that the people with the power are against them.
No, I don't think it is. Making fun of the Windows user base is simply obnoxious, and I think MS was right to call Apple out on it.
But it's not supposed to be real! That's why it's such a stereotype, because it's obviously supposed to be a stereotype. Whoever did the Apple ads obviously knew that many different people use Windows as do OS X. It's called humor. It's what some advertises use as way to get you to listen to them. That's why these MS ads are so bad; they are taking the thing too seriously, as if they believe that the people who see Apple ads will actually be converted and believe the stereotype. So they start a campaign to say "No, we aren't stereotypes!!1" and come off looking like someone who didn't get the joke because they are so out of touch with their customers.
Additionally, they don't give a good reason why someone should use Windows. I mean, if I was an unbiased consumer and the Apple and MS ads are the only thing I see, am I going to make my decision based on who I think has the most fair marketing or who I think sells the better product? It's as if all MS can say to potential customers is "look, a diverse range of normal people use our product, so it can't be too bad (and if it is, misery love company)" whereas Apple is saying "We think we're the best because not only because our products look really cool, but they actually work better (than you know who)".
Slashdot Mirror
Why do I need other I/O ports, exactly?
I have to wonder how a government who doesn't believe in hand-outs (no free health care etc.) can possibly approve of such a large bail-out to Wall Street of all organizations -- the place that is the most full of people who are usually against such things. All it does for me is prove that many of the people in Wall Street are just selfish hypocrites at the end of the day. By many of their own philosophies, if Wall Street crashes, it should be left to dye -- survival of the fittest and all that, right? Because that just as much applies to poor decisions as it does to being poor. I'm all for making sure the US economy doesn't collapse, even though I don't live there and I disapprove of it's military actions, but this whole thing still strikes me as repugnant.
Why would it be Greenpeace? That makes no sense if you actually think about it as this is not about the way Apple designs its products but a possible defect in the production. Perhaps you could take your knee-jerk reactions somewhere else?
Actually, denying that something is true and finding no evidence that something is true are two quite different things.
Why even bother with a proper reply to someone who won't even put their name to their post?
Probably something to do with the way charging works.
Apple is facing a mass exodus of phone developers with their constant blunders from secrecy and rejecting apps that threaten their own apps.
Apple is facing a mass exodus of OSS zealots with their constant blunders from secrecy and rejecting apps that threaten their own apps.
There, fixed that for you.
Yeah, an uprising, that's right. Job's saw the comments here on Slashdot, panicked, and decided to partially remove the NDA. Get real, this was bound to happen all along. Sometime in the future, when Apple's lawyers have figured out every little detail, and their developers have finalised the SDK more, then I'm sure more restrictions will be dropped. All this NDA stuff is basically just Apple's way of allowing 3rd party developers to start writing apps for the iPhone while they're still setting the whole thing up.
Who lead you to believe any of that, exactly?
Only a troll would compare a cushy job developing software for the iPhone to slavery. Mods: Please adjust parent comment accordingly.
100% beef? At least where I live.
Because the way they think of words in there[sic] head, loose would never accidentally come out as lose.
Then you know what my native language is. Congrats. However, you still seem to assume that all people process their native written language the same way and is therefore a reliable gauge of the value of someone's opinion?
But if you don't agree to the NDA, then you are obviously going to loose your developer membership, which is required to get your apps in the store. You may not agree that the whole situation is fair, but they sure as hell have the legal right to do what they're doing here -- they have a whole team of good lawyers to make sure of that.
Yeah, because most of their customers are iPhone developers?
iMac screens are not good for photo work? Someone should have told me! BS.
If someone has done the planning and has the resources for a terrorist attack, what is to stop them from popping a beta-blocker or diazepam etc. before entering the airport?
I normally run OS X, but when I have to use Windows, I also prefer XP with the older, win2k looks. The thing I like about OS X aesthetics is that it's simple and clean. The old Windows 95-2000 design may not be as pretty, but it's still simple and clean.
Those of you claiming that upscaled 480p looks as good as native 1080p have probably never compared them side by side.
Those of you claiming that upscaled 480p looks as good as native 1080p need your eyes checked.
And the latest ones don't appear to have Blu-ray, either, and since I watch all my movies on my computer, I won't be using Blu-ray until it comes standard with my computer.
But the BCS figures do not include under-16s
Yeah, and who do you think is going to be the most influenced by videos they see on YouTube?
I find it less scary that a company is choosing to do it themselves, rather than having the government officially banning it. YouTube is not a public service, and if they don't want this kind of content on their site because they think it causes more harm than good, then they are free to ban it. Sure as hell beats legislation.
Who said I have this view? I'm saying that some people do. Obviously, I don't have stats on this. As for the rest of your argument, I disagree. And there isn't much to back what you say, either. To say that democrats try to weasel their way out of taxes and that republicans don't is a pretty naive thing to say, simply because it's so one-sided, among other things -- how can I take you seriously?
That's true. One of the biggest symptoms of depression is lack of motivation and it can create a feedback loop: The longer you stay depressed, the less motivation you have, the less likely you are to try and do things that will help you get over your depression.
Well, that's what I mean: Some people see so much suffering in the world that they feel powerless to do anything about it, especially if they also think that the people with the power are against them.
No, I don't think it is. Making fun of the Windows user base is simply obnoxious, and I think MS was right to call Apple out on it.
But it's not supposed to be real! That's why it's such a stereotype, because it's obviously supposed to be a stereotype. Whoever did the Apple ads obviously knew that many different people use Windows as do OS X. It's called humor. It's what some advertises use as way to get you to listen to them. That's why these MS ads are so bad; they are taking the thing too seriously, as if they believe that the people who see Apple ads will actually be converted and believe the stereotype. So they start a campaign to say "No, we aren't stereotypes!!1" and come off looking like someone who didn't get the joke because they are so out of touch with their customers.
Additionally, they don't give a good reason why someone should use Windows. I mean, if I was an unbiased consumer and the Apple and MS ads are the only thing I see, am I going to make my decision based on who I think has the most fair marketing or who I think sells the better product? It's as if all MS can say to potential customers is "look, a diverse range of normal people use our product, so it can't be too bad (and if it is, misery love company)" whereas Apple is saying "We think we're the best because not only because our products look really cool, but they actually work better (than you know who)".