Really? So you mean I can legally download it from Apple and install it on a VM or PC? Download link?
I think the term for that is "intentionally obtuse". The copyright holder allows you to use it for free on any Apple-branded computer, and doesn't allow you to use it on any other computer.
And even if you (like me) simply run Windows on it, being able to buy it at the local Apple store or be able to get it fixed at the local Apple store, by a company I trust to fix things is a win.
When my relatives had a problem with their iPad and the new printer they had bought, I told them to go to the Apple Store which is luckily only a few miles away. The idea that you could go to a computer store and would actually get help with your problems, without paying for it, was completely alien to them. (iPad was their first Apple computer).
Multi Touch Trackpad (no one else even comes close)
QFT. The amazing thing is that my completely computer illiterate relatives can take my MacBook and use Safari without being told a thing how to use it (I have given up telling them there is no reason to go to www.google.com first).
If you are in an airport your are IN PUBLIC. Your privacy rights are significantly reduced when you are in public. You have no legal expectation of privacy in public. There is nothing remotely creepy about this. In fact I actually think this is a fairly clever use of the technology which allows people to easily opt out if desired.
Excuse me... When I'm in a public place, I can see everyone who can see me. It's symmetrical. The other passengers can see me, I can see them.
When someone spies on me electronically, that spy doesn't actually know whether I'm in public or not. Airports have lots of rooms where I could be that are not public. I can't see any justification why the fact that people can see me would mean that people can electronically spy on me.
ou want to keep the hard drive at 50% or less to maximize performance. If the hard drive is more than 50% full, the read/write head takes longer to reach the data. If the hard drive is 90% full, most OSes will have performance issues.
Actually, any OS will have performance issues, because the transfer rate (MB/sec) drops from the outside tracks to the inside tracks. That's why for home use, you just buy the biggest hard drive that you can easily afford (if you need 1TB, you buy 3TB), because that way you use only the parts of the drive with the highest transfer speed, and the average head movement time is also a lot less.
The problem you have is, someone like that wont let the car drive itself because a self driving car will stick to speed limits and slow down at pedestrian crossings because it will be programmed to anticipate stopping at a pedestrian crossing (like a defensive driver is trained to do). Nope, someone that self adsorbed and with such poor time management skills will be taking manual control with the pedal pressed to the floor whilst screaming into their phone. You simply cant overcome selfishness with a new technology.
If an accident happens, and you have a car that could have driven itself, and recorded what speed it should have gone and what speed it did go (like "crossing ahead, slow down from 50mph to 30mph" vs real speed accelerating to 60), you have an excellent witness. Jailtime for killing a pedestrian can overcome selfishness.
I'd say they let the ISP's figure out the amount of tax, and then the government sets up a dozen accounts that each download exactly one GB of data each month, to verify that the taxes are correct.
At least that's what I would do, putting my evil hat on.
ou have a population that expects a warning a certain time before a condition applies.
The correct way to handle the light turning yellow was told before: You stop if it is safe to do so. You don't stop if it isn't safe to do so. Very simple.
Now whoever installs the traffic light should set it up so that people going at or below the speed limit who don't stop because it's unsafe will not collide with any traffic, and won't be given tickets for crossing a red light. Remember what I said: You only cross the traffic light if it's unsafe to stop. And avoiding something that is unsafe shouldn't give you a ticket.
Clearly if the yellow phase is too short, then the short term effect is that people will get tickets who have done nothing wrong. The long term effect will be that people don't want to get tickets, so they try stopping at a traffic light when it isn't safe to do so.
... will tell you that they aren't actually making money on speed cameras. They have about 100, of which 25 are active at any time; whenever they get the impression that people figured out one is inactive, they swap.
According to them, having 100 speed cameras, even with the majority not actually doing anything, is enough to serve the purpose, which is keeping speed down. Well, that's what the police tells you.
There are areas in London where things are different. And don't go 71mph on the motorway in Cornwall.
absolutely.... there should be a strict law about this 3D printed guns.... man imagine if ISIS gets this technology... it can do more disasters than now...
You're being daft here. The man wasn't jailed for having a 3D printed gun, he was jailed for having a gun.
As for internet harrassment, it might be better to sentence people to perform ass kissing services for the harrassed for some period of time. The movement of the justice system away from pushing people to make restitution for harm done, and instead toward universal incarceration for every possible infraction, is a second injustice to victims, as well as being corrosive poison to society. If a guy is an asshole and threatens someone but didn't really mean it, do we really want to spend societal resources to imprison them for TWO FUCKING YEARS! Does anybody ever think? I mean really THINK about the implications of what they are saying when they cheer on the state to put the boot to more faces? Do you really think the "there ought to be a law" model can go on forever without that boot ultimately winding up on your own face?
It is surely a good idea to have alternative punishments than just prison. Take fly tipping (which is a horrible nuisance in some place): Convict anyone who is caught to keep the area clean that he messed up, until the next guy is caught and convicted. That would keep the country clean and teach them a valuable lesson.
But also keep in mind that two years is the _maximum_ sentence. Like fly tipping should have a maximum punishment that works for someone emptying a dozen 30 ton trucks full of rubbish, this also needs a suitable punishment for the worst imaginable cases.
You might want to review that statement, Apple appears to be cleaning house on the money side, taking 87% of the profit in the market. [businessinsider.com]
Worse for Apple's competitors, that was in Feb. 2014. Since then Samsung is in trouble (sorry, Samsung isn't but I bet some Samsung executives are) because their profits in the mobile market have dropped by 70% from last year, and Apple can't build the iPhone 6 fast enough (about 20 million sold worldwide and 20 million pre-ordered in China alone).
Also, Dell announced a 5k monitor before the iMac was announced, which probably uses the same panel. We should be able to compare the two soon. In the past Apple displays have proven to be exactly the same as other displays with the same panel and similar glass, so I wouldn't expect any surprises.
Dell announced earlier, Apple deliverd earlier.
Both monitors cost the same (comparing Apple's real price and Dell's announced price), but Apple's monitor contains a nice computer:-)
How is that different from Apple using its position in the high-end phone market to unfairly favor its product in the headphone market?
1. Strange how we are always told that Apple's market share is dropping, but when it suits people, they change the goal post and talk about "high-end phone market share".
2. Microsoft, Apple, and everyone else are free to sell whatever they want to sell (if they have the right person's permission obviously).
3. Microsoft manipulated the market so that other browsers couldn't compare fairly; even if they were better than Microsoft's browsers, they were very hard to sell. If you go to a shop selling Bose, Beats, and other headphones, there's nothing that stops you from buying what you like.
I imagine Beats/Apple isn't too happy with Bose's shenanigans regarding telling NFL players they can't wear their Beats headphones until 90 minutes after the end of the game.
Could it be just the simple fact that every time Beats headphones are sold Apple makes profit, every time that Bose headphones are sold Bose makes profit, and Apple prefers Apple making profit vs. Bose making profit?
Yeah, I can also install vmware on my PC, and run MacOS in it, because some people have worked around the roadblocks that Apple put in the way to prevent users who pay for their software from doing that. How odd that Microsoft will permit me to virtualize their OS, but Apple won't. It's almost like they're bigger assholes than Microsoft. No, wait. It's exactly like that.
Microsoft's _business_ is to sell their operating system. Apple's _business_ is to sell computer hardware. If you claim that you can't see the difference then you are either deeply dishonest or an idiot.
Strange. Apple makes the best products, the best laptops, the best desktops, the best phones and the best tablets, and people are buying them.
You claim that Apple could make products that are worse than rubbish and people would buy them. What makes you think that?
Or are you trying to say that Apple is so much better than the rest that even if they built something that is way below Apple's usual standards it would still be good enough to sell?
What the fuck are people doing using non-free software that claims to protect their privacy? If you can't even see the source, what do you expect?
Seeing the source doesn't help when (a) you are not a software developer, (b) you are a software developer with a job who doesn't have unlimited time to look at source code, (c) you are a software developer with lots of spare time but the source code that you are shown isn't the source code used.
And open source gives the bad guys an easy way to create hacked versions of secure software that aren't secure. Someone stealing your secrets is unlikely to be impressed by GPL and copyright.
If you are going to make me liable for something then I has to be something under my control. Short of tying my kids up in chains and never letting them do anything there is no way for me do absolutely guarantee that they will never do anything which causes liability. Not only would I refuse to do that it would be illegal and society does not want parents to do that: kids have to learn to control their own behaviour and that means giving them the freedom to do things wrong.
If you read at least the summary, the parents weren't liable for their kids making a post (which kids can do since you can't control them permanently). The parents were liable for their kids not removing a post, which is something the parents should have been able to control.
Slashdot Mirror
Really? So you mean I can legally download it from Apple and install it on a VM or PC? Download link?
I think the term for that is "intentionally obtuse". The copyright holder allows you to use it for free on any Apple-branded computer, and doesn't allow you to use it on any other computer.
And even if you (like me) simply run Windows on it, being able to buy it at the local Apple store or be able to get it fixed at the local Apple store, by a company I trust to fix things is a win.
When my relatives had a problem with their iPad and the new printer they had bought, I told them to go to the Apple Store which is luckily only a few miles away. The idea that you could go to a computer store and would actually get help with your problems, without paying for it, was completely alien to them. (iPad was their first Apple computer).
Multi Touch Trackpad (no one else even comes close)
QFT. The amazing thing is that my completely computer illiterate relatives can take my MacBook and use Safari without being told a thing how to use it (I have given up telling them there is no reason to go to www.google.com first).
Sorry, but who has the luxury of buying twice as much disk so we can keep them all under 50%??
i just had a look; if you need 1TB in a desktop, I can buy 1TB for £46 and 2TB for £54.
If you are in an airport your are IN PUBLIC. Your privacy rights are significantly reduced when you are in public. You have no legal expectation of privacy in public. There is nothing remotely creepy about this. In fact I actually think this is a fairly clever use of the technology which allows people to easily opt out if desired.
Excuse me... When I'm in a public place, I can see everyone who can see me. It's symmetrical. The other passengers can see me, I can see them.
When someone spies on me electronically, that spy doesn't actually know whether I'm in public or not. Airports have lots of rooms where I could be that are not public. I can't see any justification why the fact that people can see me would mean that people can electronically spy on me.
ou want to keep the hard drive at 50% or less to maximize performance. If the hard drive is more than 50% full, the read/write head takes longer to reach the data. If the hard drive is 90% full, most OSes will have performance issues.
Actually, any OS will have performance issues, because the transfer rate (MB/sec) drops from the outside tracks to the inside tracks. That's why for home use, you just buy the biggest hard drive that you can easily afford (if you need 1TB, you buy 3TB), because that way you use only the parts of the drive with the highest transfer speed, and the average head movement time is also a lot less.
Apple hardware is always over-priced, right?
If you can keep it hidden away for 38 years and then sell it for 150,000 percent profit, then obviously it is _not_ overpriced.
The problem you have is, someone like that wont let the car drive itself because a self driving car will stick to speed limits and slow down at pedestrian crossings because it will be programmed to anticipate stopping at a pedestrian crossing (like a defensive driver is trained to do). Nope, someone that self adsorbed and with such poor time management skills will be taking manual control with the pedal pressed to the floor whilst screaming into their phone. You simply cant overcome selfishness with a new technology.
If an accident happens, and you have a car that could have driven itself, and recorded what speed it should have gone and what speed it did go (like "crossing ahead, slow down from 50mph to 30mph" vs real speed accelerating to 60), you have an excellent witness. Jailtime for killing a pedestrian can overcome selfishness.
Does it print *naked* figurines?
It does print naked figurines, which don't require any quotation marks, if you take off your cloths inside the booth when the scan is taken.
I'd say they let the ISP's figure out the amount of tax, and then the government sets up a dozen accounts that each download exactly one GB of data each month, to verify that the taxes are correct.
At least that's what I would do, putting my evil hat on.
ou have a population that expects a warning a certain time before a condition applies.
The correct way to handle the light turning yellow was told before: You stop if it is safe to do so. You don't stop if it isn't safe to do so. Very simple.
Now whoever installs the traffic light should set it up so that people going at or below the speed limit who don't stop because it's unsafe will not collide with any traffic, and won't be given tickets for crossing a red light. Remember what I said: You only cross the traffic light if it's unsafe to stop. And avoiding something that is unsafe shouldn't give you a ticket.
Clearly if the yellow phase is too short, then the short term effect is that people will get tickets who have done nothing wrong. The long term effect will be that people don't want to get tickets, so they try stopping at a traffic light when it isn't safe to do so.
... will tell you that they aren't actually making money on speed cameras. They have about 100, of which 25 are active at any time; whenever they get the impression that people figured out one is inactive, they swap.
According to them, having 100 speed cameras, even with the majority not actually doing anything, is enough to serve the purpose, which is keeping speed down. Well, that's what the police tells you.
There are areas in London where things are different. And don't go 71mph on the motorway in Cornwall.
absolutely .... there should be a strict law about this 3D printed guns .... man imagine if ISIS gets this technology ... it can do more disasters than now ...
You're being daft here. The man wasn't jailed for having a 3D printed gun, he was jailed for having a gun.
As for internet harrassment, it might be better to sentence people to perform ass kissing services for the harrassed for some period of time. The movement of the justice system away from pushing people to make restitution for harm done, and instead toward universal incarceration for every possible infraction, is a second injustice to victims, as well as being corrosive poison to society. If a guy is an asshole and threatens someone but didn't really mean it, do we really want to spend societal resources to imprison them for TWO FUCKING YEARS! Does anybody ever think? I mean really THINK about the implications of what they are saying when they cheer on the state to put the boot to more faces? Do you really think the "there ought to be a law" model can go on forever without that boot ultimately winding up on your own face?
It is surely a good idea to have alternative punishments than just prison. Take fly tipping (which is a horrible nuisance in some place): Convict anyone who is caught to keep the area clean that he messed up, until the next guy is caught and convicted. That would keep the country clean and teach them a valuable lesson.
But also keep in mind that two years is the _maximum_ sentence. Like fly tipping should have a maximum punishment that works for someone emptying a dozen 30 ton trucks full of rubbish, this also needs a suitable punishment for the worst imaginable cases.
You might want to review that statement, Apple appears to be cleaning house on the money side, taking 87% of the profit in the market. [businessinsider.com]
Worse for Apple's competitors, that was in Feb. 2014. Since then Samsung is in trouble (sorry, Samsung isn't but I bet some Samsung executives are) because their profits in the mobile market have dropped by 70% from last year, and Apple can't build the iPhone 6 fast enough (about 20 million sold worldwide and 20 million pre-ordered in China alone).
Also, Dell announced a 5k monitor before the iMac was announced, which probably uses the same panel. We should be able to compare the two soon. In the past Apple displays have proven to be exactly the same as other displays with the same panel and similar glass, so I wouldn't expect any surprises.
Dell announced earlier, Apple deliverd earlier.
:-)
Both monitors cost the same (comparing Apple's real price and Dell's announced price), but Apple's monitor contains a nice computer
How is that different from Apple using its position in the high-end phone market to unfairly favor its product in the headphone market?
1. Strange how we are always told that Apple's market share is dropping, but when it suits people, they change the goal post and talk about "high-end phone market share".
2. Microsoft, Apple, and everyone else are free to sell whatever they want to sell (if they have the right person's permission obviously).
3. Microsoft manipulated the market so that other browsers couldn't compare fairly; even if they were better than Microsoft's browsers, they were very hard to sell. If you go to a shop selling Bose, Beats, and other headphones, there's nothing that stops you from buying what you like.
I imagine Beats/Apple isn't too happy with Bose's shenanigans regarding telling NFL players they can't wear their Beats headphones until 90 minutes after the end of the game.
Could it be just the simple fact that every time Beats headphones are sold Apple makes profit, every time that Bose headphones are sold Bose makes profit, and Apple prefers Apple making profit vs. Bose making profit?
Yeah, I can also install vmware on my PC, and run MacOS in it, because some people have worked around the roadblocks that Apple put in the way to prevent users who pay for their software from doing that. How odd that Microsoft will permit me to virtualize their OS, but Apple won't. It's almost like they're bigger assholes than Microsoft. No, wait. It's exactly like that.
Microsoft's _business_ is to sell their operating system. Apple's _business_ is to sell computer hardware. If you claim that you can't see the difference then you are either deeply dishonest or an idiot.
When was the last time YOU wrote a fuckin' bootloader? Last time I did that was oh, about... a week ago.
And you think that makes you qualified to talk about the value of commercial hardware? I don't think so.
And so is Apple.
Apple: 5K display with a powerful computer built-in: $2,499. Dell: 5K display: $2,499.
Which one is overpriced?
Apple can shit in a box and people will buy it.
Strange. Apple makes the best products, the best laptops, the best desktops, the best phones and the best tablets, and people are buying them.
You claim that Apple could make products that are worse than rubbish and people would buy them. What makes you think that?
Or are you trying to say that Apple is so much better than the rest that even if they built something that is way below Apple's usual standards it would still be good enough to sell?
What the fuck are people doing using non-free software that claims to protect their privacy? If you can't even see the source, what do you expect?
Seeing the source doesn't help when (a) you are not a software developer, (b) you are a software developer with a job who doesn't have unlimited time to look at source code, (c) you are a software developer with lots of spare time but the source code that you are shown isn't the source code used.
And open source gives the bad guys an easy way to create hacked versions of secure software that aren't secure. Someone stealing your secrets is unlikely to be impressed by GPL and copyright.
If you are going to make me liable for something then I has to be something under my control. Short of tying my kids up in chains and never letting them do anything there is no way for me do absolutely guarantee that they will never do anything which causes liability. Not only would I refuse to do that it would be illegal and society does not want parents to do that: kids have to learn to control their own behaviour and that means giving them the freedom to do things wrong.
If you read at least the summary, the parents weren't liable for their kids making a post (which kids can do since you can't control them permanently). The parents were liable for their kids not removing a post, which is something the parents should have been able to control.
How easy is it to replace a Mac battery 8 years on? Actually how easy is it to replace it 8 months on?
Eight years on: You buy a battery, either from Apple or on eBay. You need a coin to unlock the battery and swap it out.
Eight months on: Doesn't matter how hard, because it will be under warranty.
A bit older: Very easy. You take your MacBook to the Apple Store, hand over your cash, and they put in a new battery.