Hell, I've even watched YouTube videos on the EDGE network. Not something I'd do a lot, but it is doable. Yeah, I was thinking that the iPhone has 6 hours of Internet use time. So with EDGE, that means you'll be able to watch about 2 videos.:-)
Actually, Zenith sold PCs to the US Military Academies back in the late 80s, via "Zenith Data Systems." Weird machines.
Sitting at home somewhere I think I still have my Zenith Data Systems T-shirt that they made up for the military contracts. It featured a cartoon of these stereotypical rather tough looking army guys toting PCs instead of guns.
Re:First ATM I used was 50% chance
on
ATM Turns 40
·
· Score: 1
Ah...the good old days...
Way back in my youth, the local bank got one of the first ATM machines. Dear ol' D2N2.
The ATM had no idea how much money I had in my bank account--I was either allowed to take money out or not. So I learned pretty quickly that if I was a bit short of funds around the end of the month, I could go to the ATM and withdraw, say, $200 and it would let me. Of course, my account would be overdrawn, I'd pay a $10 penalty, and my ATM card would stop working. When my paycheck came in, I'd deposit it into the account along with whatever excess cash I had left.
So if finances were tight, I knew where I could get a couple hundred dollars. Very handy.
One day, though, I went to the ATM. It grabbed my card and told me to see the people inside the bank. They told me they wouldn't give me my card back unless I stopped doing that. So I agreed not to and they gave me my ATM card back and I was a good boy and didn't do it again.
The only difference is that you don't have to keep swapping disks out of it Well, you know, I've wondered about this.
The operating system lives in Flash memory, last I heard. Thus, your 4GB iPhone--from what I understand--is actually about a 3.5GB iPhone. So if you're traveling and want to bring your music collection and a few movies, you'd best not be taking too many pictures with your 2 megapixel digital camera.
You'd also better bring your laptop so you have someplace to store those images.
Somebody had an article about how the iPhone will "Fly then Flop." I didn't read it, but I think it's a good point.
I think the iPhone will fly off the shelves due to the fanboy influence. But there's a point where it will stop. Between the price, no third-party apps (limited capabilities), slow internet access, etc. there's only so much that the non-Fanboy will accept to have a shiny toy.
But I also think that Apple is in this for the long haul. They will correct as many deficiencies as they can and the iPhone 2 will bring in more of the masses.
Well, yes, I can understand that. But then the appropriate comment from the person should have said, "As a matter of policy, we don't talk about programs -- whether or not they exist." The fact that he was talking about classified programs is what caught my eye...
FTFA:
"As a matter of policy, we don't talk about classified programs -- whether or not they exist," Lockheed's Tom Jurkowsky said. If the program doesn't exist, how can it be classified? Or has the military classified everything that doesn't exist?
Actually, I want to see Hillary Clinton in 2008, so that my grandkids' generation will be hopelessly confused by the mess of presidential names.
1988-1992: Bush, George 1992-2000: Clinton, William 2000-2008: Bush, George 2008-2012: Clinton, Hillary 2012-2016: Bush, Jebediah
Hell, this'll be better than John Adams and John Quincy Adams and Theodore Roosevelt and Franklin Roosevelt! It'll serve 'em right for playin' frisbee golf on my grave, damn whippersnappers!
Really! There are lots of people in both the US and the world who don't drive everywhere. Not as many here in Southern California, necessarily...
But, in general, it's the argument between the specialized and the general. I do a lot of biking. I have three devices that I take with me when I bike:
Garmin Edge 205 GPS Bike Computer
iPod nano (for use on trails, not on street)
Cellphone (for my emergency use)
While I love the idea of the iPhone replacing all three of these devices, my concern is the "emergency" aspect. In my case, the GPS is mounted on my bike (which is where I'd want the iPhone, so I can see things like speed and distance and such). The iPod usually lives in a jersey pocket. The cellphone is usually in the backpack--well protected and turned off. If I were to get injured, I would want a working cellphone. The iPod can get trashed. The GPS could get trashed. But the cellphone must be available.
Having all of these units in one handy device which I can carry about or mount on my bike means one point of failure. Not sure that's the best strategy.
Everyone has heard Webkit/Safari and decided that the applications are going to be in a browser. It looks more like Dashboard-style widgets as applets, which is NOT the same thing at all. Uh, go back and watch the video.
The "example" application was clearly running in Safari, as evidenced by the URL in the browser window.
That said, I firmly expected some sort of announcement of an extension to DashCode to allow developing iPhone widgets.
You have the Apple fanboys jumping up and down and telling us all how incredibly secure Mac OS X is. On the other hand, you have the Apple fanboys talking about insecure OS X is--so insecure that Apple can't allow any applications that have not been prescreened.
Which is it? Is OS X an insecure mess? Or is it bullet-proof? After all, isn't that the beauty of the iPhone--it's runs a "real" OS X?
That said, the "killer-app" is something that you see and you need. Personally, I think Apple has put lots of useful stuff into the iPhone that will be great for everyone. So the "killer-app" for the iPhone would be killer for a niche rather than for everyone.
There are some interesting iPod examples. Consider Griffin's external microphone for the iPod. If it wasn't for them, we'd still be waiting for Apple to come up with one. Do most people care about having a microphone to record stuff for their iPod? I know I don't. But Griffin probably makes decent money on it, from those who want an iPod but need the ability to leave themselves voice memos.
On the flip side, consider the FM Radio attachment. Now you and I can probably both agree that it's not really necessary but there's a small group that would like it. It took Apple quite awhile to actually do it. If it'd been open to third-parties, you would have had an AM/FM/Shortwave/TV Tuner for your iPod in six months.
You're right in that the iPhone doesn't really need Yet Another Address Book, Personal Organizer, or e-mail program. But how long will we have to wait for Apple to include an iChat that works with Yahoo and MSN? Heck, that might be somebody's killer app. Or to have it work with a Bluetooth Heart Monitor so I could monitor my heart rate? Or have it work with a Bluetooth GPS so I don't have to keep telling the stupid device where I am?
That's a useful feature, but if it's easy enough to set a few default locations that you frequent not very much less useful. But the whole point is...I don't have to! I don't have to tell the stupid device where it is because it already knows!
That's what makes it great--I don't have to configure the device for all of it's possible locations and then select the configuration based upon my location. The bloody machine knows. If I get a flat tire on my bike, I ask "Where's the nearest bike shop?" and it tells me. I don't have to set 10 waypoints along my route. Heck, if I'm driving and I have a problem, I'm not at the mercy of some tow truck driver ("Oh, your free towing only goes 7 miles and the nearest tire shop is ten miles away." "How about this place, it's right off the next exit?" "Uh...")
Heck, with the iPhone, here's another example: Location where photos were taken. "Show me all photos within 30 miles of Cleveland, Ohio."
Another one: Translation to other geographic information--"What's the zip code here? I forgot..." It'd be a dopey app, sure, and I personally have a pretty good memory. But I get asked about once-a-week from some dumb receptionist, "What's the zip code again?" Let him/her punch their phone and find out.
Theft prevention (especially on an Internet-connected cellphone)?
Can you get away without having a GPS? Sure. Just like nobody really needed a spreadsheet program--they could do it by hand with a calculator. But it was damn handy, wasn't it? Same idea.
Why is GPS the killer app? First, GPS is way cool.
Second, I hate telling things where they are when the technology exists for it to know. The "Calamari" iPhone ad was a great example--"Hmm, where's a good seafood restaurant close to where I am."
Third, there are times when I don't know where I am when I'm driving. While I hate people who stare at their GPS while driving, it is handy to at least have a device that says, "You missed the turn."
Fourth, I like the idea of a device that knows where I am and can configure itself appropriately. I don't have to go in and futz with time-zones. It can tell I'm somewhere around my house and set my network up appropriately. It can tell I'm somewhere around work and set my network up appropriately. It can even keep my clock accurate without an Internet connection. Heck, ideally it might keep track of all this stuff so once I year when I go through JFK airport, I don't have to spend half my layover trying to figure out how to get on the Internet because it remembers the configuration from last year and it's geo-tagged (to use a buzzword) to JFK Airport.
While a GPS isn't a killer app, per se, having a GPS in the phone and an API to get the data gives application developers some interesting ideas...
[...] if Macs came with the same hardware choice as you get with non-Apple PCs. That is a legitimate argument against Apple. I don't care about webcams in my laptop, but I end up having to pay for one, WUXGA makes icons too small so Apple won't include it, etc.
On the other hand, most consumers don't care. They just want a computer.
- If you're not wanting to spend top-dollar, non-Apple PCs are far cheaper. You're right. Most people who make this argument compare against Dell, HP, Gateway, etc. Other big name and big brand companies. Which, I suppose, is a fair comparison. But the reality is you can find computers cheaper than these guys through the thousands of other small-fry companies. It takes some time, effort, knowledge, and comparison shopping but you can get just the right computer at just the right price.
Or, if you'd rather spend time doing other things, you can get a Mac.
- There *are* fewer applications for Apple computers, which is to be expected as they don't command the market-share of, say, Windows Again, you're right. But it depends what you want to do.
As a long-time Mac user, where I've run into the "Oh, I can't find an app to do that" is in external hardware support. I want my Mac to talk to this device but the guy who makes the device doesn't support the Mac. My favorite example? I got a car several years ago with a diagnostic connector. I was thinking this would be a cool thing to hook up to my Mac and read the information about how my engine is performing, etc. There was a package that would do that, but it's Windows-only.
So, yup. If I want to tune my car, you're right. I'm SOL with a Mac. For the other 99.997% of humanity, this isn't a big deal.
I'd also point out the "brand name" issue. If you want to run AutoCAD, you need Windows. If you want to do CAD, there are plenty of applications that run on the Mac. So if AutoCAD is what you need, you need Windows. If you're using a Mac, you'll have to invest some time, effort, knowledge, and comparison shopping to get just the right application.
Hm. That sounds familiar.
- They are *different* to use, and if you're used to Windows, that means you have a learning curve to climb, which implies work just to use the computer Okay, now you're stretching. "I don't think I'll buy that Lexus because the controls are different from my Honda and I might have to work to figure out how to turn on the cruise control."
- They do use one-button mice, on the notebooks at least, and the "mighty mouse" is not exactly a two-buttoned mouse if you keep a finger on the right mouse button. Again, something you have to get used to. Or you can buy another mouse, again, more money. You're really being a whiner on this one. First, see above. Second, buy another mouse if it bothers you that much. My god, it's more money. I just found a five-button USB mouse for $5.06. You're really gonna bitch about an extra $5?
- Apple computers are just as secure as everything else on the market if used properly. Apple doesn't have a magic bullet against trojan horses, it just isn't that big of a target for hackers. Well, this one I'll sort of agree on. You're right--if the user says, "Hey! Install Spyware on my computer!" there's not much that can be done. Social engineering attacks are tough to combat for just that reason--the person wants to get infected.
About the only advantage you have on the Mac is that it will at least jump up and say, "Please authenticate" so it's a little more obvious that somebody wants to do something. "Gee, why should I have to authenticate in order to read this greeting card that somebody sent me?" It's not much help, granted, but at least it's something and it doesn't pop-up nearly as often as UAC does under Vista.
Well, it's a commercial, so you can't necessarily trust it. Everything looks good in commercials. They just edited out the part where you had to tell the phone where you were...
Personally, I'd be curious about the accuracy of the triangulation data. My bicycle gear consists of a bicycle GPS, a phone, and an iPod. It would be way cool to have an all in one device (I'll even write the bicycle computer part--that would be fun!).
As I've said before, I'm not sure I think this is a good idea--I carry the phone with me for emergencies and I'm not sure I really like the idea of not being able to make a call if I crash because I've been listening to music for the last three hours. But mounting an iPhone on my bike as a bike computer would be really cool, even if I had to drag along a "backup phone" for emergencies.
I'm not sure the ratings necessarily need an adjustment--the more you try to narrow done, the more confusing it will be. Heck, there are those who already are complaining about how complicated the current system is. What's the different between an 8/10 or a 6/10? Is 7/10 okay for my 6 year old to watch?
To me, the system is more designed as a warning. If it's TV-14, you probably want to think twice about letting your 6 year old watch it. You might watch an episode before making that decision. To use "Heroes" as an example, most episodes were rated TV-14 which I think was pretty good--except for the parts with Syler cutting peoples' heads open. The problem I have is do you rate an episode TV-MA because of one 10 second scene where a cheerleader's head is getting sliced open?
One thing I think would be interesting--especially in these days of DVRs--is to have a more dynamic version. The show's fine, the show's fine, *Bling* "This section is rated TV-MA (Watch Now) (Skip)". If you want, you can hit Skip and it will either move ahead to the section where everything is fine (or wait until that part shows up) or you can watch it anyway, after telling the kids to leave the room for a few minutes.
I don't believe so. But I'm curious whether the E911 system could be used in the phone in order to determine your location? There are rumors talking about this...
I'm a fan of the V-Chip and ratings in that it gives parents at least some idea whether or not a particular program may be suitable before airing. While I don't think it's the ultimate solution, it at least puts the responsibility where it belongs--the person in front of the TV. I have to admit, I sometimes question the ratings that are given. I was surprised that Jack Bauer tearing some guy's throat out with his teeth was TV-14. I was surprised that Syler slicing people's heads open was TV-14. I remember reading a complaint from one of the TV watchdogs about some show on MTV which was rated TV-PG because all the naughty words were bleeped out though the subject matter was probably not suitable for younger children. But if you thought this was out of line, you should complain to the people who rated it that way--not the government.
But the V-Chip is not suitable for live broadcasts because there is no way to know in advance whether or not someone speaking is suddenly going to start a stream of obscenities or show their breasts and the V-Chip did not envision a need to have a "TV-L" rating to say, "Anything can happen, you're on your own."
"It's a very interesting how they managed to sneak in terrorists. But I don't understand how counterfeit CDs and filesharing have to do with each other." It's a dubious distinction, but I'll try.
If I'm going to counterfeit a CD, I need to get originals. So I download them off the Internet, make a CD of the music, and sell it for $5. Considering how cheap CDs are, it's almost pure profit.
1. If you can't vote, you can't contribute money. I like this one, but here's a funny question: Who determines this?
I'm president of a large multinational corporation. I make 500 $1000 contributions to a candidate using various names a pulled out of the phone book. That's $500,000. Is it the candidate's responsibility to determine this before using the money? While they determine whether or not those people really intended to contribute money and whether they've already contributed the maximum amount, what happens to the money? Is it placed into a bank account? Who gets the interest? $25,000 a month wouldn't hurt too many campaigns. And tracking down those 500 people could take lots of time.
Can the candidate use that money as collateral for a $250,000 loan? After all, a certain percentage will work out to be legitimate. So while the candidate waits for it to be cleared, he or she can get a bank loan for half the amount. When half of it clears, they'll pay off the loan.
Suppose this is caught? Is it the candidate's fault or the contributor's fault? After all, the candidate has no legal standing to arrest me. Do they return the money? What's to keep me from just turning around and sending it again with 500 other names, all of which must be painstakingly checked out (while the campaign gets use of the money).
2. Your contribution per election is limited to $X where X is on the order of a few thousand to perhaps tens of thousands of $. [...] In any case, if your army of lawyers can find a loophole in this, well they can force votes outright for less money. I believe the "loophole" has been found.
I believe it was the Supreme Court that equated campaign contributions with political speech. It does sort of make sense--if I believe in a candidate and I would like said candidate to succeed, I should be able to give said candidate as much as I can afford. Of course, the counter argument is that it's unfair--if I can afford to contribute more to a candidate than you can afford to contribute to his or her opponent, my candidate will have more money.
Consider campaign volunteers. If lots of people believe in a candidate, lots of people may volunteer to work for that candidate. Is this unfair to another candidate who's ideas aren't as popular? Should campaign volunteers be equal? Should you not be allowed to volunteer for a candidate because that candidate already has more volunteers than his or her opponent?
Personally, I'd drop #2. I can contribute as much as I would like to a candidate. There is no rule, though, about anonymity if it is a free speech case so I would make certain that the names of all contributors are public information. As many republicans discovered in the last election, the electorate still doesn't like a candidate who appears to be on the take.
I'm one of those people who actually does skip the ads--most of the time. The reason I do this is to watch a 21 or 42 minute program versus a half-hour or hour program.
My DVR does not have a "jump" button, though. It has a Fast-Forward. In fact, it has three fast-forward speeds which appear, from the time-stamps, to be 2x, 10x, and 30x. 30x is a little fast--I need to be on my toes. 2x is a little slow. 10x is just about right and I tend to use that one.
What's interesting is that occasionally an ad will catch my eye. I will stop, go back, and watch it. I was thinking that this may mean the advertisers start building ads and buying ad time in order to catch our eyes as we fast-forward through. The little 15 second ads will probably disappear. You might see more 60 second ads being sold (at 10x, that gives 6 impressions to make me go "Whoa, what was that?") with more stunning visuals to catch the eye of the fast-forwarder.
In other words, I think the advertising world will adapt.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, Zenith sold PCs to the US Military Academies back in the late 80s, via "Zenith Data Systems." Weird machines.
Sitting at home somewhere I think I still have my Zenith Data Systems T-shirt that they made up for the military contracts. It featured a cartoon of these stereotypical rather tough looking army guys toting PCs instead of guns.
Ah...the good old days...
Way back in my youth, the local bank got one of the first ATM machines. Dear ol' D2N2.
The ATM had no idea how much money I had in my bank account--I was either allowed to take money out or not. So I learned pretty quickly that if I was a bit short of funds around the end of the month, I could go to the ATM and withdraw, say, $200 and it would let me. Of course, my account would be overdrawn, I'd pay a $10 penalty, and my ATM card would stop working. When my paycheck came in, I'd deposit it into the account along with whatever excess cash I had left.
So if finances were tight, I knew where I could get a couple hundred dollars. Very handy.
One day, though, I went to the ATM. It grabbed my card and told me to see the people inside the bank. They told me they wouldn't give me my card back unless I stopped doing that. So I agreed not to and they gave me my ATM card back and I was a good boy and didn't do it again.
The operating system lives in Flash memory, last I heard. Thus, your 4GB iPhone--from what I understand--is actually about a 3.5GB iPhone. So if you're traveling and want to bring your music collection and a few movies, you'd best not be taking too many pictures with your 2 megapixel digital camera.
You'd also better bring your laptop so you have someplace to store those images.
Or, better yet, buy the 8GB version.
Somebody had an article about how the iPhone will "Fly then Flop." I didn't read it, but I think it's a good point.
I think the iPhone will fly off the shelves due to the fanboy influence. But there's a point where it will stop. Between the price, no third-party apps (limited capabilities), slow internet access, etc. there's only so much that the non-Fanboy will accept to have a shiny toy.
But I also think that Apple is in this for the long haul. They will correct as many deficiencies as they can and the iPhone 2 will bring in more of the masses.
Well, yes, I can understand that. But then the appropriate comment from the person should have said, "As a matter of policy, we don't talk about programs -- whether or not they exist." The fact that he was talking about classified programs is what caught my eye...
I'm confused.
Actually, I want to see Hillary Clinton in 2008, so that my grandkids' generation will be hopelessly confused by the mess of presidential names.
1988-1992: Bush, George
1992-2000: Clinton, William
2000-2008: Bush, George
2008-2012: Clinton, Hillary
2012-2016: Bush, Jebediah
Hell, this'll be better than John Adams and John Quincy Adams and Theodore Roosevelt and Franklin Roosevelt! It'll serve 'em right for playin' frisbee golf on my grave, damn whippersnappers!
It won't fit on my bike.
Really! There are lots of people in both the US and the world who don't drive everywhere. Not as many here in Southern California, necessarily...
But, in general, it's the argument between the specialized and the general. I do a lot of biking. I have three devices that I take with me when I bike:
- Garmin Edge 205 GPS Bike Computer
- iPod nano (for use on trails, not on street)
- Cellphone (for my emergency use)
While I love the idea of the iPhone replacing all three of these devices, my concern is the "emergency" aspect. In my case, the GPS is mounted on my bike (which is where I'd want the iPhone, so I can see things like speed and distance and such). The iPod usually lives in a jersey pocket. The cellphone is usually in the backpack--well protected and turned off. If I were to get injured, I would want a working cellphone. The iPod can get trashed. The GPS could get trashed. But the cellphone must be available.Having all of these units in one handy device which I can carry about or mount on my bike means one point of failure. Not sure that's the best strategy.
But I still love the idea.
The "example" application was clearly running in Safari, as evidenced by the URL in the browser window.
That said, I firmly expected some sort of announcement of an extension to DashCode to allow developing iPhone widgets.
This is where I laugh...
You have the Apple fanboys jumping up and down and telling us all how incredibly secure Mac OS X is. On the other hand, you have the Apple fanboys talking about insecure OS X is--so insecure that Apple can't allow any applications that have not been prescreened.
Which is it? Is OS X an insecure mess? Or is it bullet-proof? After all, isn't that the beauty of the iPhone--it's runs a "real" OS X?
I can't answer that because I don't know of one.
That said, the "killer-app" is something that you see and you need. Personally, I think Apple has put lots of useful stuff into the iPhone that will be great for everyone. So the "killer-app" for the iPhone would be killer for a niche rather than for everyone.
There are some interesting iPod examples. Consider Griffin's external microphone for the iPod. If it wasn't for them, we'd still be waiting for Apple to come up with one. Do most people care about having a microphone to record stuff for their iPod? I know I don't. But Griffin probably makes decent money on it, from those who want an iPod but need the ability to leave themselves voice memos.
On the flip side, consider the FM Radio attachment. Now you and I can probably both agree that it's not really necessary but there's a small group that would like it. It took Apple quite awhile to actually do it. If it'd been open to third-parties, you would have had an AM/FM/Shortwave/TV Tuner for your iPod in six months.
You're right in that the iPhone doesn't really need Yet Another Address Book, Personal Organizer, or e-mail program. But how long will we have to wait for Apple to include an iChat that works with Yahoo and MSN? Heck, that might be somebody's killer app. Or to have it work with a Bluetooth Heart Monitor so I could monitor my heart rate? Or have it work with a Bluetooth GPS so I don't have to keep telling the stupid device where I am?
That's what makes it great--I don't have to configure the device for all of it's possible locations and then select the configuration based upon my location. The bloody machine knows. If I get a flat tire on my bike, I ask "Where's the nearest bike shop?" and it tells me. I don't have to set 10 waypoints along my route. Heck, if I'm driving and I have a problem, I'm not at the mercy of some tow truck driver ("Oh, your free towing only goes 7 miles and the nearest tire shop is ten miles away." "How about this place, it's right off the next exit?" "Uh...")
Heck, with the iPhone, here's another example: Location where photos were taken. "Show me all photos within 30 miles of Cleveland, Ohio."
Another one: Translation to other geographic information--"What's the zip code here? I forgot..." It'd be a dopey app, sure, and I personally have a pretty good memory. But I get asked about once-a-week from some dumb receptionist, "What's the zip code again?" Let him/her punch their phone and find out.
Theft prevention (especially on an Internet-connected cellphone)?
Can you get away without having a GPS? Sure. Just like nobody really needed a spreadsheet program--they could do it by hand with a calculator. But it was damn handy, wasn't it? Same idea.
Second, I hate telling things where they are when the technology exists for it to know. The "Calamari" iPhone ad was a great example--"Hmm, where's a good seafood restaurant close to where I am."
Third, there are times when I don't know where I am when I'm driving. While I hate people who stare at their GPS while driving, it is handy to at least have a device that says, "You missed the turn."
Fourth, I like the idea of a device that knows where I am and can configure itself appropriately. I don't have to go in and futz with time-zones. It can tell I'm somewhere around my house and set my network up appropriately. It can tell I'm somewhere around work and set my network up appropriately. It can even keep my clock accurate without an Internet connection. Heck, ideally it might keep track of all this stuff so once I year when I go through JFK airport, I don't have to spend half my layover trying to figure out how to get on the Internet because it remembers the configuration from last year and it's geo-tagged (to use a buzzword) to JFK Airport.
While a GPS isn't a killer app, per se, having a GPS in the phone and an API to get the data gives application developers some interesting ideas...
On the other hand, most consumers don't care. They just want a computer. - If you're not wanting to spend top-dollar, non-Apple PCs are far cheaper. You're right. Most people who make this argument compare against Dell, HP, Gateway, etc. Other big name and big brand companies. Which, I suppose, is a fair comparison. But the reality is you can find computers cheaper than these guys through the thousands of other small-fry companies. It takes some time, effort, knowledge, and comparison shopping but you can get just the right computer at just the right price.
Or, if you'd rather spend time doing other things, you can get a Mac. - There *are* fewer applications for Apple computers, which is to be expected as they don't command the market-share of, say, Windows Again, you're right. But it depends what you want to do.
As a long-time Mac user, where I've run into the "Oh, I can't find an app to do that" is in external hardware support. I want my Mac to talk to this device but the guy who makes the device doesn't support the Mac. My favorite example? I got a car several years ago with a diagnostic connector. I was thinking this would be a cool thing to hook up to my Mac and read the information about how my engine is performing, etc. There was a package that would do that, but it's Windows-only.
So, yup. If I want to tune my car, you're right. I'm SOL with a Mac. For the other 99.997% of humanity, this isn't a big deal.
I'd also point out the "brand name" issue. If you want to run AutoCAD, you need Windows. If you want to do CAD, there are plenty of applications that run on the Mac. So if AutoCAD is what you need, you need Windows. If you're using a Mac, you'll have to invest some time, effort, knowledge, and comparison shopping to get just the right application.
Hm. That sounds familiar. - They are *different* to use, and if you're used to Windows, that means you have a learning curve to climb, which implies work just to use the computer Okay, now you're stretching. "I don't think I'll buy that Lexus because the controls are different from my Honda and I might have to work to figure out how to turn on the cruise control." - They do use one-button mice, on the notebooks at least, and the "mighty mouse" is not exactly a two-buttoned mouse if you keep a finger on the right mouse button. Again, something you have to get used to. Or you can buy another mouse, again, more money. You're really being a whiner on this one. First, see above. Second, buy another mouse if it bothers you that much. My god, it's more money. I just found a five-button USB mouse for $5.06. You're really gonna bitch about an extra $5? - Apple computers are just as secure as everything else on the market if used properly. Apple doesn't have a magic bullet against trojan horses, it just isn't that big of a target for hackers. Well, this one I'll sort of agree on. You're right--if the user says, "Hey! Install Spyware on my computer!" there's not much that can be done. Social engineering attacks are tough to combat for just that reason--the person wants to get infected.
About the only advantage you have on the Mac is that it will at least jump up and say, "Please authenticate" so it's a little more obvious that somebody wants to do something. "Gee, why should I have to authenticate in order to read this greeting card that somebody sent me?" It's not much help, granted, but at least it's something and it doesn't pop-up nearly as often as UAC does under Vista.
Well, it's a commercial, so you can't necessarily trust it. Everything looks good in commercials. They just edited out the part where you had to tell the phone where you were...
Personally, I'd be curious about the accuracy of the triangulation data. My bicycle gear consists of a bicycle GPS, a phone, and an iPod. It would be way cool to have an all in one device (I'll even write the bicycle computer part--that would be fun!).
As I've said before, I'm not sure I think this is a good idea--I carry the phone with me for emergencies and I'm not sure I really like the idea of not being able to make a call if I crash because I've been listening to music for the last three hours. But mounting an iPhone on my bike as a bike computer would be really cool, even if I had to drag along a "backup phone" for emergencies.
I'm not sure the ratings necessarily need an adjustment--the more you try to narrow done, the more confusing it will be. Heck, there are those who already are complaining about how complicated the current system is. What's the different between an 8/10 or a 6/10? Is 7/10 okay for my 6 year old to watch?
To me, the system is more designed as a warning. If it's TV-14, you probably want to think twice about letting your 6 year old watch it. You might watch an episode before making that decision. To use "Heroes" as an example, most episodes were rated TV-14 which I think was pretty good--except for the parts with Syler cutting peoples' heads open. The problem I have is do you rate an episode TV-MA because of one 10 second scene where a cheerleader's head is getting sliced open?
One thing I think would be interesting--especially in these days of DVRs--is to have a more dynamic version. The show's fine, the show's fine, *Bling* "This section is rated TV-MA (Watch Now) (Skip)". If you want, you can hit Skip and it will either move ahead to the section where everything is fine (or wait until that part shows up) or you can watch it anyway, after telling the kids to leave the room for a few minutes.
I don't believe so. But I'm curious whether the E911 system could be used in the phone in order to determine your location? There are rumors talking about this...
I'm a fan of the V-Chip and ratings in that it gives parents at least some idea whether or not a particular program may be suitable before airing. While I don't think it's the ultimate solution, it at least puts the responsibility where it belongs--the person in front of the TV. I have to admit, I sometimes question the ratings that are given. I was surprised that Jack Bauer tearing some guy's throat out with his teeth was TV-14. I was surprised that Syler slicing people's heads open was TV-14. I remember reading a complaint from one of the TV watchdogs about some show on MTV which was rated TV-PG because all the naughty words were bleeped out though the subject matter was probably not suitable for younger children. But if you thought this was out of line, you should complain to the people who rated it that way--not the government.
But the V-Chip is not suitable for live broadcasts because there is no way to know in advance whether or not someone speaking is suddenly going to start a stream of obscenities or show their breasts and the V-Chip did not envision a need to have a "TV-L" rating to say, "Anything can happen, you're on your own."
If I'm going to counterfeit a CD, I need to get originals. So I download them off the Internet, make a CD of the music, and sell it for $5. Considering how cheap CDs are, it's almost pure profit.
That's how you equate the two.
Launch the Space Shuttle 833 times?
Uh...I'd be willing to bet that you will not find a terminal app on an iPhone.
I'm president of a large multinational corporation. I make 500 $1000 contributions to a candidate using various names a pulled out of the phone book. That's $500,000. Is it the candidate's responsibility to determine this before using the money? While they determine whether or not those people really intended to contribute money and whether they've already contributed the maximum amount, what happens to the money? Is it placed into a bank account? Who gets the interest? $25,000 a month wouldn't hurt too many campaigns. And tracking down those 500 people could take lots of time.
Can the candidate use that money as collateral for a $250,000 loan? After all, a certain percentage will work out to be legitimate. So while the candidate waits for it to be cleared, he or she can get a bank loan for half the amount. When half of it clears, they'll pay off the loan.
Suppose this is caught? Is it the candidate's fault or the contributor's fault? After all, the candidate has no legal standing to arrest me. Do they return the money? What's to keep me from just turning around and sending it again with 500 other names, all of which must be painstakingly checked out (while the campaign gets use of the money). 2. Your contribution per election is limited to $X where X is on the order of a few thousand to perhaps tens of thousands of $. [...] In any case, if your army of lawyers can find a loophole in this, well they can force votes outright for less money. I believe the "loophole" has been found.
I believe it was the Supreme Court that equated campaign contributions with political speech. It does sort of make sense--if I believe in a candidate and I would like said candidate to succeed, I should be able to give said candidate as much as I can afford. Of course, the counter argument is that it's unfair--if I can afford to contribute more to a candidate than you can afford to contribute to his or her opponent, my candidate will have more money.
Consider campaign volunteers. If lots of people believe in a candidate, lots of people may volunteer to work for that candidate. Is this unfair to another candidate who's ideas aren't as popular? Should campaign volunteers be equal? Should you not be allowed to volunteer for a candidate because that candidate already has more volunteers than his or her opponent?
Personally, I'd drop #2. I can contribute as much as I would like to a candidate. There is no rule, though, about anonymity if it is a free speech case so I would make certain that the names of all contributors are public information. As many republicans discovered in the last election, the electorate still doesn't like a candidate who appears to be on the take.
But it's a DRY intense solar radiation...
I'm one of those people who actually does skip the ads--most of the time. The reason I do this is to watch a 21 or 42 minute program versus a half-hour or hour program.
My DVR does not have a "jump" button, though. It has a Fast-Forward. In fact, it has three fast-forward speeds which appear, from the time-stamps, to be 2x, 10x, and 30x. 30x is a little fast--I need to be on my toes. 2x is a little slow. 10x is just about right and I tend to use that one.
What's interesting is that occasionally an ad will catch my eye. I will stop, go back, and watch it. I was thinking that this may mean the advertisers start building ads and buying ad time in order to catch our eyes as we fast-forward through. The little 15 second ads will probably disappear. You might see more 60 second ads being sold (at 10x, that gives 6 impressions to make me go "Whoa, what was that?") with more stunning visuals to catch the eye of the fast-forwarder.
In other words, I think the advertising world will adapt.