BS Man. The drinking age thing is not to prevent people under 21 from drinking. Mostly, to be honest, it's about people in their 30s wanting to be CERTAIN the girl they're hitting on is really 20 something, and not some 18 year old. Kids and bars don't blend well. Also, its a way to control merchants, make some extra tax money, andf in general just a measure of control.
But saying the drinking age is why we're making a stronger ID card??? No, that's about border access, illegal drivers, and illegal immigrants.
Why do we need a national ID system? We spend too much money on having 50 of them seperately, and too much money training people to spot real ones and fake ones. Last barkeep's listing I looked at had over 180 unique valid IDs (Most staes have at least 2, plus all the other military and givernment ID cards).
Also, unifying the ID system means we can normalize driver points, and track offenses from one state to another. today you can loose your license in one state for DUI and a dozen tickets, then just move to another state, apply, and drive away. That should NOT be possible. Heck, today, if your license is suspended in your state, but you're driving in another and get stopped, 9/10 the cop can't even pull your record, and if you do get a ticket, your home state is not informed.
If we make a harder to fake ID in the process of creating a national driver registration system that ALL state cops have access to (not to search blindly, but to look up a driver when he's handed an ID), then good, some kids who would lie to get into a bar won't be able to.
Personally, I think the drinking age should be lowered to 14, but keep the age to purchase alcohol at 21. Let parents and schools provide the alcohol and let the kids party. Keep em off the roads until they're a little more mature, 15-16 is too young, and no kid should have an unrestricted license until 18 (or until admitted to college if they get in at 17).
A hospitol birth certificate isn't hard to obtain, but an authorized state certificate, which keep in mind is also back-ended and validated by information maintained by the SSA and serveral other databases, is nearly impossible to obtain.
My wife lost hers and we needed it to go on our honeymoon to get a passport. It was a nasty process as they wanted to validate things like the name of the hospital she was born in just to get a COPY of her birth certificate. When I went to get a replacement SS card a couple of years ago and I brough my original certificate, it wasn't a current certified state version, and they made a dozen phone calls to validate my certificate was in fact valid, and then suggested in the future I might want to get an updated certified copy and keep the original for posterity...
Making a fake is not hard at all, but as soon as they might try to enter that information in their system, if the record in the computer can't be found or is inaccurate, you have to go through an appeals process and several ID validations before they'll issue a licences. They do NOT take for granted what's on the piece of paper you hand them. This isn't the 70's.
Geting a valid ID created using phony information is very hard... VERY hard. Not to mention the mathing SS card, valid SS record, validated proof of address from utility companies, proof of insurance in that fake name, vehicle registration, and more....
Even as backwards as SC is, you can do everything but get the photo changed on your licence from home, including reprints, renewals, change of address, and more, and it;s between $10 and $24 depending on the service.
You get a $400 discount for signing a 2 year contract on an iPhone. You can get a 0 year plan by saccrificing the discount entirely. You get a $200 discount if you're already a iPhone user ($400 if your current iPhone is an Edge model). You only need to renew for 2 years, not extend by 2 years. You can get a "1 year" contract by canceling after 1 year, and paying the ETF and giving them BACK half of the original subsidy ($200), so a 1 year plan costs $85 more than a 2 year plan.
Since a "1 year" plan has the same monthly price as a 2 year contract, and you refund the subsidy prorated, basically, instead of charging you more per month (like they used to do for shorter plans), they're simply charging you an extra $85.
However, in the USA, a iPhone is no more than an iPod with a phone on anyone else's network, and won't work at 3G speeds... Why bother? Visual Voicemail doesn't work, push notifications don't work, SMS and MMS don't work, 3G doesn't work, what's it good for off their network? Buy a iPod touch instead if you don't like AT&T.
IT'S a $600 PHONE! YOU'RE GETTING IT FOR $399! SFTU!
Even with other devices, to get a $100 discount you have to go 2 years ("new every 2" or whatever they call it). Here you;ve been in 1 year, got a $400 discount on the original device, and can now get a $200 on the newest model.
This is not a friggin $200 camera flip phone, this is a phone, iPod, PSP, micro-netbook, touchscreen video-cameraphone (in 480p I might add, better than most cheap hand cameras), where the software costs $0-10, not $15-40 per application, and you have access to 50,000 apps!!!!
STOP thinking about this ias a $200 device. START thinking about it as a $600 device.
Look at the Blackberry Storm from Verizon. $499 ($199 with 2 year contract). Nowhere NEAR as feature complete as the iPhone 3G, slower, barely plays games, and all the software (the about 200 apps), cost many times what the iPhone apps cost. On top of that, the 450 minute plan is $30 MORE EXPENSIVE than AT&T's plan. Songs cost $3 not $0.99 The unlimited plan is $20 more per month... Got a less than 1 year old blackberry? You can get a new Storm, but only at $100 off, or you have to rescind your original subsidized fee before getting the Storm. This also is a WORSE deal than upgrading an iPhone that "doesn't qualify".
exactly. Anyone who bought an iPhone 3G in the last 6 months should have been clearly aware that new devices were rumored, including some nice hardware improvements.
When the Moto Razr came out it was $599 (WITH a contract), within 6 months it was $399. Within 2 years it was being given away for $99 on contracts... by year 3 it was simply $99, no contract, and free otherwise, and by then it was also the 2nd or 3rd revision of the hardware (the original had SHITTY call quality, or so claimed all my coworkers on the same network when their calls dropped and I had 5 bars).
You want it now? Fork over the cash. You see a movie in the theatre on release day it's $9 a ticket. 4 weeks later you can find $7 shows in many places, a couple weeks later it's on $2 screens. Then it's $3.99 to rent. Waiting makes everything cheaper. Don;t complain about Apple and AT&T, complain about general microeconomics.
you forgot to include refunding to AT&T the subsidized cost included in the device, $400, prorated over your contract. It's either that or return the iPhone...
one problem... you failed to completely read the ETF fee terms... You not only have to pay the fee, but you have to pay the prorated subsidized cost of the device as well, which means payiong the difference between the $199 or $299 you paid for the phone with your contract, and the $599 or $699 the phone actually retails for, prorated by the number of months you maintained your contract.
However, MOST people out there bought the 3G less than a year ago, and mostly would not expect to upgrade. Some closer to the 1 year mark might be interested in the new features, but they'll have the eat the $200 extra charge for not having completed their current contract.
Me, I have a 1st gen Edge iPhone I've had for 19 months, and I can upgrade for free. I skipped 3G as the feature difference simply did not justify the phone cost plus the $15 a month plan incrase. 3G owners have the same choice: is 1.1MP, a better lense, some video capability, a compass, and a slightly faster CPU really worth $200 more vs. waiting 6-10 months? (especially since 3D runs just fine on the 3G as is, and nearly all the new tricks are backported in the software).
You must be kidding. It was one of the most successful single launches in apple history, and one of the most desired apple products at the time. Yes, the flat panel has outsold it now, but the market share today is 3 times what it was in early 2000 when tha "lamp" was introduced.
I sold one on ebay about 2 years ago, 768MB RAM 1.0GHz processor 17", got $740 for it (polus shipping), it was 4 YEARS OLD!
Things that are not popular don't hold 50% of their purchase value after 4 years... especially computers.
Apple dumped the design because they needed to add a GPU to the iMac line, and it simply wasn't going to fit in the 10" wide dome base. The iMac was great for everyday computing, but Apple was taking a lot of heat for not having a machine under $2K that could play video games, and 20" and larger screens also worked poorly with the screen support.
He is that good. Every design, even in it;s most basic form, comes before him (or starts with him). He has very critical input, changes the direction of the deisgn, adds aesthetic charm to it, and has it redesigned at his orders to meet those specifications.
One of his programmers wrote a personal application for streamlining video editing. After seeing it, jobs gave him dozens of ideas how to make the app flow better, designed a more aesthetic interface, and commissioned a team to further the application based on his specs and ideas using the programmers initial work as a starting point. Although the idea was not his, the final product was very much shaped by him, and he was credited in the design of the current iMovie app.
jobs is not a coder, he's not a system engineer, but he's a design genious, and one of the singular most powerful infuencers of overall system design at Apple. Ideas like the lamp iMac, the apple remote design, how the apple store is staffed, software interface look and feel, and more all come from his mind.
Were that the case, it would not simply be an effort to hide the money, but would be highly illegal, and not only guarantee an disfavorable bankruptcy hearing, and certainly a later result in Apple's favor, but it would trigger international and SEC investigations as well. and the Psystar people would certainly be imrpisoned in contempt of court until the names of their investors could be revealed and the money traced.
As an investor looking for secrecy, would you trust a couple of outspoken geeks to keep your secred under threat of federal imprisonment simply to avoid identity, when the punishment for trying through such means could likely mean your own long term incarceration, and seisure of FAR more money?
It is VERY difficut to hide money as it transitions from one entity to another. unmarked accounts are not exactly allowed for businesses to have, only persons. Migrating cash through enough shells to hide the path is very difficult, and many of those shells are still very easily linked back to a source.
moving money around this was is actually easy to hide from taxes and such, but once an issue arrises (bankruptcy, lawsuit, SEC investigation, etc) the mystery will peak their interests...
Hiding the money may be possible, but hiding all the communication about the money, the deals on paper, etc, nope, not so easy. In the end, we can just threaten them to tell us...
movements like this are generally considdered terrorist action, planned conspiracy to defraud millions is not exactly a gimmick charge with slap on the wrist penalties. Why risk such a thing just to steal some of Apple's thunder, especially when it was WELL known that no profits would be possible under this deal.
You are partially correct. The time signal is received, and the delay is processed, this gives the (pretty much) exact distance between the receiver and the satellite. Using multiple signals from miltiple satellites, triangulation is possible, howver, triangulation is only possible if you not only know the distance to each transmitter, but also it's exact position at the time of transmission. Since the GPS sattelites are orbiting, not fixed geosynchronous birds, the satelite's current spacial position is ALSO transmitted as part of the data to each GPS receiver in each data burst.
The GPS system is constantly monitored from 6 ground based observatories (that we know of) and their delta position is calculated constantly and reported every 24 hours to a base in Colorado (and likely others). Each satelite returns to the same position each day exactly 4 minutes earlier than it did the day before, and follows the exact same arc it did on the previous (it actually makes 2 orbits each day). However, this can't be guaranteed to be EXACTLY the same arc due to megnetic and solar influences. The positional variance was originally permitted to be off by 6 meters each day, but with newer technology has been reduced to about 2 meters. This variance is maintained across it's entire 11h.58m arc of flight.
If a GPS satellite is off course, due to solar wind, geomagnetic influence, or other issues, we upload data to the satellite which in turn transmits to each GPS on earth correcting the drift. We do not very often "move" a satelite to adjust it's position as that requires fuel expenditure whith is in extremely limited supply. It takes 48 hours of monitoring to validate the position of the satelite (it's current position is easy to pinpoint through observation, but it's TRACE requires analysis over time to determine it's exact arc.) Data is reported daily, using a 48 hour rolling wondow of data, and 7 days of data are compiled, from multiple independent tracking sources, and combined to improve accuracy. Each day the sattelites are given updated data on their position, though this data is about 3-4 days delayed by the time it's transmitted, reducing it's overall accuracy, and then the satelite is merely "assuming" it;s position based on mathematical calculations for the next 24 hours.
Because of the number of satelites involved in a single reading, and a variance of several meters from exact known position, combined with atmospheris and ground based interference and reflection, it's not typically possible to get more than 10-20 meter accuracy on a civilian GPS (military units receive much more accurate/current positioning information as it's updated not only more frequently, but the receivers operate on a stonger signal, and use more than 1 frequency, eliminating much interference and providing much higher accuracy).
If we can make the exact position of the satelite better known, by allowing GPS to take it's own real time spacial positioning readings, and be acurate to less than 1 meter in real time instead of 2-6 meters 24 -48 hours delayed, then we can get overall GPS accuracy down to 2-3 meters using our current signaling. Combining that with L2C and L3C frequencies to eliminate shadowing and signal reflection issues, we can acheive less than 1 meter accuracy.
DGPA and now AGPS use additional ground based signal sources with known fixed positions to more accurately (or more quicly) determine position.
I didn't imply punishing them legally, i meant (in response to the original poster) that their market share did not need to fall that far... I implied no method for making it fall.
As i said, Apple is not interested in the "bulk" market. Their OEM licensing deal will allways favor mid range and higher class systems. In that segment, Apple's own hardware competes extremely well on price, and on the higher end their hardware is cheaper than the competition by large margins. (being intel's #1 profitable customer I'm sure allows the enjoyment of steep high-end discounts as well as first-out product releases).
They don't need to license in bulk to move into that market, they only need to partner to get the "OS X Compatible" stickers emplazoned on machines. People will gladly buy OS X in large numbers given the ability (and a support system). If even 10% of PC buyers opted to install OS X, that would nearly DOUBLE Apple's install base... Besides, Linus has moved into that market quite effectively without such OEM deals, and with barely a fraction of Apple's penetration.
Their movement may be a fact, but when you calculate position based on space-time instead of simply space, the movement IN space is HIGHLY predictible, and therefore highly accurate. The system of calculations might need periodic adjustment (say every few decades) gue to unforseen gravametric effects, but generally, it's a pretty significant (and thus in itself predictable) event to actually cause a pulsar to have to adjust is'd galactic course... We don't really care about the emissions of the pulsar, only it's relative position to the other pulsars in relation to the current time in nanoseconds.
It would be interesting if it came to light that due to the complexity of relativity in the short distances around the planet, combined with atmospheric and other signal interference validating position from ground based sources, if the positioning of the GPS sattelites themselves would in fact be more accurate using the pulsar based Galactic Positioning Systems...
ie, our Global Positioning Sattelites could one day map their relative position using the Galatic positioning system... making GPS more accurate on earth:)
It's being "phased" out. Your machine was one of the lucky 1% that got the update now. My home machine did not have it automatically, but doing a "check for updates now" populated it. I'm waiting a few days to install it however until 1)I get around to making another image backup and 2) other people try it and fail first...
I run Vista. index is enabled by default, but one of the first tweaks i did was switch it off, and Windows Search can be uninstalled/hidden.
The indexer runs as a "background" serivce, which is a new type and is supposed only get CPU cycles when the machine is idle. unfortunately, this only works for the FIRST instance of a background process, and there are many cases where more than one can conflict under Vista, and then indexing begins chewing up resources. I had it kick off in the middle of playing games when the CPU was over 80%.
WS4 will NOT be enabled on my machine. I keep the index service, pre-fetch, and several other services forcibally disabled on my machine. When I'm looking for something, it;s either an e-mail, which google or xobni instantly find for me without M$'s help, or it's a file I've properly store and can find myself in 3-4 clicks, or it;s a media item already indexed by iTunes... I don't search my personal machine for random crap, and anything I've ever needed to find on my own machine was ALREADY indexed by somethiung else.... It's a complete waste of resources, a waste of disk space for the index database, and every time you run a major patch, it fucking re-indexes, which for my 400+GB of stuff, takes as long as defragging.
This is not to mention that is also searches inside files, and stores that data in a database in a predetermined location. I have data in docs on my system I'd just as much prefer NOT be in a non--encrypted central repository... contacts, SSNs, phone numbers, e-mail addresses, all go in that database that is VERY easy for a hacker to lift...
If there's a way to uninstall WS4 after SP2, not just disabling it, I will.
Agreed completely. Apple even competes directly with HP and Dell on pricing for their mid range 24" iMacs and their mid range MacBooks. Only at the low end does Apple begin to charge more than a $100 premium for their system, but considdering the software value of the included, highly productive package (even comparing a cheap dell with a copy of Pinacle Studio and Photoshop Elements is going to cost more than a base Mac).
I don't think Windows needs to be punished all the way to 65%. They're already at that level in college admissions... It will likely be OS 10.8 before we see shelf copies for non-Apple hardware, but by then, Apple will still be charging the $100 premium for their PCs, but the profit they loose on the hardware (very small on the low end systems), will easily be offset by the profit on the software (large). Also, since Apple will likely still continue to offer the value proposition on the higher end systems, why by the competitions machine and then buy OSX, it;s simply cheaper to buy Apple's machine and a copy of windows...
Where Apple will make out whoever is in the gamers, and in the folks with compatible cheap PCs that would not have bought both a mac and a PC, but would would buy a PC and a copy of Apple's software (then iLife and other products).
When OS X is available on PC hardware, Windows may still be the majority OS sold, but OS X will be used on many of those PCs. There will also be a RAPID uptake in existing PC owners buying copies to install.
To pull this off, Apple does need a few milestones to be cleared however: - much better corportate directory integration - integration into common enterprise system monitoring and software package rollout tools. - A method of tracking licenced copy use (piracy prevention). - A native driver tracking and upgrade/patching system to handle the multitude of additional drivers needing to be managed. - a software package, preferably web based, to validate OS X compatability for a windows machine. - An OEM buy-in, including branding, OSX compatability publications, minimum requirements, and other vendor support.
Make no mistake, Apple won't be licensing "clones". They'll be simply permitting their OS on other PC hardware, specific PC hardware with specific components (likely Intel and nVidia only chipsets; ATI and nVidia only graphics; Intel, Realtek, and Broadcom gig nics; USB3 required, bluetooth required, Atheros based wireless cards, a specific audio controller, and other very specific component requirements. I doubt the base apple compatability tester would qualify more than 20% of the off-the-shelf PCs... Certainly nothing under $500 would qualify.
The xServe is a low priced 1U server that brings mid range businesses the ability to deploy a large number of fiber connected servers that support Unix class stability while bridging Mac and PC users into active directory.
Anyone who runs web sites can eaily use Apache on it, it makes a great file server, it can run database engines from multiple vendors, and it;s a nice form factor with hot swap drives, dual PS, and most importantly, is a fully manufacturer supported server that does not run Windows.
A lot of unix shops are starting to integrate OS X server for it's flexibility in role, combined with Apple's very low DASD storage prices and the ability to easily integrate OS X server into HDS and EMC arrays, it's a nice system...
They're cheap, well supported, systems with performance to spare and high reliability. They're easy to manage, and make managing the other macs in the network easier.
Heck, for their cost, I know several shops that have even bought them and deployed Windows on them...
NOBODY blames the hardware unless it stops working completely, but the turth is most system crashes and system instability are hardware related, including nearly every cause of the dreaded BSOD.
Everyone blames M$ for having an unstable OS, in fact TV commercials even poke fun at it, but in truth, Windows running on properly tuned hardware with custom settings and tweaks can run months without a reboot (and only then to install patches). Give Windows the specs it wants, and combine comonents that dont't just "work together" but are actually tuned and designed to coexist on the same board, and use a high quality mainboard and power supply, and you'll get a very stable system.
Even if they had made such a donation, without the hopes of a return on their investment, such a donation would be required to be documented. There are limits to such donations by US law (what i don;t know, but I know the SEC limits such "meddling"
Apple has promised there will not be chip level lockdowns in OS X, or any future apple OS. their OS runs on commodoty hardware, they only license it to run on Apple Brnaded systems (currently). It;s been rumored for years that Apple is partnering with dozens of vendors and plans to release an OS X approved spec and sell OS X on shelves opposite Windows (likely on a price tier competitive to Home Premium, but including iLife).
Apple has not released OS X for open systems for 1 primary reason: they don;t want to support your junk kit, and they don;t want to get the blame for OS X having stability issues. If manufacturers are allowed to be held to the same wishy washy standards as micsoft, then not only would OS X be seen to be just as unstable, but it would likely be sold on many systems that don't really meet the minimum specs of iLife, and would provide a lack-luster performance.
The hardware market has been shrinking (unified drivers, fewer verndors, better driver certification, open standards). In a couple of years, especially once dedicated GPUs become the norm across all systems, and when comodoty $500 PCs have significant specs, I expect to see Apple come pre-configured, OEM, on select systems, but by that point, Apple hardware should also be slightly more in line price-wise (on several systems, Apple is actually currently cheaper than the competition, especially in the pro and server lines, but on the low end there's still a premium for the design and software).
actually, the bankruptcy filing will releav exactly who is funding them. In the pending court case, the investors could be protected, but in SEC investigations, and in bank records that are required to be made public durring a bankruptcy, this has to come to light.
250K in debt, assets frozen, and sales blocked by court order, how does a bank expect them to pay?...and who would invest in a company about to be ass raped by Apple lawyers?
well, it doesn't have to run for 24 hours on one charge, the other race cars are lucky to run 70 minutes on a tank of gas...
If it can make 150 miles, when they pull in to swap the tires, and jack it up, they could also drip the batteries from the under carrige and replace them en masse.
high performance charging system run on generators pit-site could bring those Li-Ti or Li-Su batteries to full charge in 30 minutes...
Heck, the "lemans edition" steet cars sold as production vehicles very often peak over 500HP... and those are not the race models, but simply collector cars.
Slashdot Mirror
BS Man. The drinking age thing is not to prevent people under 21 from drinking. Mostly, to be honest, it's about people in their 30s wanting to be CERTAIN the girl they're hitting on is really 20 something, and not some 18 year old. Kids and bars don't blend well. Also, its a way to control merchants, make some extra tax money, andf in general just a measure of control.
But saying the drinking age is why we're making a stronger ID card??? No, that's about border access, illegal drivers, and illegal immigrants.
Why do we need a national ID system? We spend too much money on having 50 of them seperately, and too much money training people to spot real ones and fake ones. Last barkeep's listing I looked at had over 180 unique valid IDs (Most staes have at least 2, plus all the other military and givernment ID cards).
Also, unifying the ID system means we can normalize driver points, and track offenses from one state to another. today you can loose your license in one state for DUI and a dozen tickets, then just move to another state, apply, and drive away. That should NOT be possible. Heck, today, if your license is suspended in your state, but you're driving in another and get stopped, 9/10 the cop can't even pull your record, and if you do get a ticket, your home state is not informed.
If we make a harder to fake ID in the process of creating a national driver registration system that ALL state cops have access to (not to search blindly, but to look up a driver when he's handed an ID), then good, some kids who would lie to get into a bar won't be able to.
Personally, I think the drinking age should be lowered to 14, but keep the age to purchase alcohol at 21. Let parents and schools provide the alcohol and let the kids party. Keep em off the roads until they're a little more mature, 15-16 is too young, and no kid should have an unrestricted license until 18 (or until admitted to college if they get in at 17).
A hospitol birth certificate isn't hard to obtain, but an authorized state certificate, which keep in mind is also back-ended and validated by information maintained by the SSA and serveral other databases, is nearly impossible to obtain.
My wife lost hers and we needed it to go on our honeymoon to get a passport. It was a nasty process as they wanted to validate things like the name of the hospital she was born in just to get a COPY of her birth certificate. When I went to get a replacement SS card a couple of years ago and I brough my original certificate, it wasn't a current certified state version, and they made a dozen phone calls to validate my certificate was in fact valid, and then suggested in the future I might want to get an updated certified copy and keep the original for posterity...
Making a fake is not hard at all, but as soon as they might try to enter that information in their system, if the record in the computer can't be found or is inaccurate, you have to go through an appeals process and several ID validations before they'll issue a licences. They do NOT take for granted what's on the piece of paper you hand them. This isn't the 70's.
Geting a valid ID created using phony information is very hard... VERY hard. Not to mention the mathing SS card, valid SS record, validated proof of address from utility companies, proof of insurance in that fake name, vehicle registration, and more....
Even as backwards as SC is, you can do everything but get the photo changed on your licence from home, including reprints, renewals, change of address, and more, and it;s between $10 and $24 depending on the service.
You get a $400 discount for signing a 2 year contract on an iPhone.
You can get a 0 year plan by saccrificing the discount entirely.
You get a $200 discount if you're already a iPhone user ($400 if your current iPhone is an Edge model). You only need to renew for 2 years, not extend by 2 years.
You can get a "1 year" contract by canceling after 1 year, and paying the ETF and giving them BACK half of the original subsidy ($200), so a 1 year plan costs $85 more than a 2 year plan.
Since a "1 year" plan has the same monthly price as a 2 year contract, and you refund the subsidy prorated, basically, instead of charging you more per month (like they used to do for shorter plans), they're simply charging you an extra $85.
However, in the USA, a iPhone is no more than an iPod with a phone on anyone else's network, and won't work at 3G speeds... Why bother? Visual Voicemail doesn't work, push notifications don't work, SMS and MMS don't work, 3G doesn't work, what's it good for off their network? Buy a iPod touch instead if you don't like AT&T.
IT'S a $600 PHONE! YOU'RE GETTING IT FOR $399! SFTU!
Even with other devices, to get a $100 discount you have to go 2 years ("new every 2" or whatever they call it). Here you;ve been in 1 year, got a $400 discount on the original device, and can now get a $200 on the newest model.
This is not a friggin $200 camera flip phone, this is a phone, iPod, PSP, micro-netbook, touchscreen video-cameraphone (in 480p I might add, better than most cheap hand cameras), where the software costs $0-10, not $15-40 per application, and you have access to 50,000 apps!!!!
STOP thinking about this ias a $200 device. START thinking about it as a $600 device.
Look at the Blackberry Storm from Verizon. $499 ($199 with 2 year contract). Nowhere NEAR as feature complete as the iPhone 3G, slower, barely plays games, and all the software (the about 200 apps), cost many times what the iPhone apps cost. On top of that, the 450 minute plan is $30 MORE EXPENSIVE than AT&T's plan. Songs cost $3 not $0.99 The unlimited plan is $20 more per month... Got a less than 1 year old blackberry? You can get a new Storm, but only at $100 off, or you have to rescind your original subsidized fee before getting the Storm. This also is a WORSE deal than upgrading an iPhone that "doesn't qualify".
exactly. Anyone who bought an iPhone 3G in the last 6 months should have been clearly aware that new devices were rumored, including some nice hardware improvements.
When the Moto Razr came out it was $599 (WITH a contract), within 6 months it was $399. Within 2 years it was being given away for $99 on contracts... by year 3 it was simply $99, no contract, and free otherwise, and by then it was also the 2nd or 3rd revision of the hardware (the original had SHITTY call quality, or so claimed all my coworkers on the same network when their calls dropped and I had 5 bars).
You want it now? Fork over the cash. You see a movie in the theatre on release day it's $9 a ticket. 4 weeks later you can find $7 shows in many places, a couple weeks later it's on $2 screens. Then it's $3.99 to rent. Waiting makes everything cheaper. Don;t complain about Apple and AT&T, complain about general microeconomics.
you forgot to include refunding to AT&T the subsidized cost included in the device, $400, prorated over your contract. It's either that or return the iPhone...
one problem... you failed to completely read the ETF fee terms... You not only have to pay the fee, but you have to pay the prorated subsidized cost of the device as well, which means payiong the difference between the $199 or $299 you paid for the phone with your contract, and the $599 or $699 the phone actually retails for, prorated by the number of months you maintained your contract.
However, MOST people out there bought the 3G less than a year ago, and mostly would not expect to upgrade. Some closer to the 1 year mark might be interested in the new features, but they'll have the eat the $200 extra charge for not having completed their current contract.
Me, I have a 1st gen Edge iPhone I've had for 19 months, and I can upgrade for free. I skipped 3G as the feature difference simply did not justify the phone cost plus the $15 a month plan incrase. 3G owners have the same choice: is 1.1MP, a better lense, some video capability, a compass, and a slightly faster CPU really worth $200 more vs. waiting 6-10 months? (especially since 3D runs just fine on the 3G as is, and nearly all the new tricks are backported in the software).
You must be kidding. It was one of the most successful single launches in apple history, and one of the most desired apple products at the time. Yes, the flat panel has outsold it now, but the market share today is 3 times what it was in early 2000 when tha "lamp" was introduced.
I sold one on ebay about 2 years ago, 768MB RAM 1.0GHz processor 17", got $740 for it (polus shipping), it was 4 YEARS OLD!
Things that are not popular don't hold 50% of their purchase value after 4 years... especially computers.
Apple dumped the design because they needed to add a GPU to the iMac line, and it simply wasn't going to fit in the 10" wide dome base. The iMac was great for everyday computing, but Apple was taking a lot of heat for not having a machine under $2K that could play video games, and 20" and larger screens also worked poorly with the screen support.
He is that good. Every design, even in it;s most basic form, comes before him (or starts with him). He has very critical input, changes the direction of the deisgn, adds aesthetic charm to it, and has it redesigned at his orders to meet those specifications.
One of his programmers wrote a personal application for streamlining video editing. After seeing it, jobs gave him dozens of ideas how to make the app flow better, designed a more aesthetic interface, and commissioned a team to further the application based on his specs and ideas using the programmers initial work as a starting point. Although the idea was not his, the final product was very much shaped by him, and he was credited in the design of the current iMovie app.
jobs is not a coder, he's not a system engineer, but he's a design genious, and one of the singular most powerful infuencers of overall system design at Apple. Ideas like the lamp iMac, the apple remote design, how the apple store is staffed, software interface look and feel, and more all come from his mind.
Were that the case, it would not simply be an effort to hide the money, but would be highly illegal, and not only guarantee an disfavorable bankruptcy hearing, and certainly a later result in Apple's favor, but it would trigger international and SEC investigations as well. and the Psystar people would certainly be imrpisoned in contempt of court until the names of their investors could be revealed and the money traced.
As an investor looking for secrecy, would you trust a couple of outspoken geeks to keep your secred under threat of federal imprisonment simply to avoid identity, when the punishment for trying through such means could likely mean your own long term incarceration, and seisure of FAR more money?
It is VERY difficut to hide money as it transitions from one entity to another. unmarked accounts are not exactly allowed for businesses to have, only persons. Migrating cash through enough shells to hide the path is very difficult, and many of those shells are still very easily linked back to a source.
moving money around this was is actually easy to hide from taxes and such, but once an issue arrises (bankruptcy, lawsuit, SEC investigation, etc) the mystery will peak their interests...
Hiding the money may be possible, but hiding all the communication about the money, the deals on paper, etc, nope, not so easy. In the end, we can just threaten them to tell us...
movements like this are generally considdered terrorist action, planned conspiracy to defraud millions is not exactly a gimmick charge with slap on the wrist penalties. Why risk such a thing just to steal some of Apple's thunder, especially when it was WELL known that no profits would be possible under this deal.
You are partially correct. The time signal is received, and the delay is processed, this gives the (pretty much) exact distance between the receiver and the satellite. Using multiple signals from miltiple satellites, triangulation is possible, howver, triangulation is only possible if you not only know the distance to each transmitter, but also it's exact position at the time of transmission. Since the GPS sattelites are orbiting, not fixed geosynchronous birds, the satelite's current spacial position is ALSO transmitted as part of the data to each GPS receiver in each data burst.
The GPS system is constantly monitored from 6 ground based observatories (that we know of) and their delta position is calculated constantly and reported every 24 hours to a base in Colorado (and likely others). Each satelite returns to the same position each day exactly 4 minutes earlier than it did the day before, and follows the exact same arc it did on the previous (it actually makes 2 orbits each day). However, this can't be guaranteed to be EXACTLY the same arc due to megnetic and solar influences. The positional variance was originally permitted to be off by 6 meters each day, but with newer technology has been reduced to about 2 meters. This variance is maintained across it's entire 11h.58m arc of flight.
If a GPS satellite is off course, due to solar wind, geomagnetic influence, or other issues, we upload data to the satellite which in turn transmits to each GPS on earth correcting the drift. We do not very often "move" a satelite to adjust it's position as that requires fuel expenditure whith is in extremely limited supply. It takes 48 hours of monitoring to validate the position of the satelite (it's current position is easy to pinpoint through observation, but it's TRACE requires analysis over time to determine it's exact arc.) Data is reported daily, using a 48 hour rolling wondow of data, and 7 days of data are compiled, from multiple independent tracking sources, and combined to improve accuracy. Each day the sattelites are given updated data on their position, though this data is about 3-4 days delayed by the time it's transmitted, reducing it's overall accuracy, and then the satelite is merely "assuming" it;s position based on mathematical calculations for the next 24 hours.
Because of the number of satelites involved in a single reading, and a variance of several meters from exact known position, combined with atmospheris and ground based interference and reflection, it's not typically possible to get more than 10-20 meter accuracy on a civilian GPS (military units receive much more accurate/current positioning information as it's updated not only more frequently, but the receivers operate on a stonger signal, and use more than 1 frequency, eliminating much interference and providing much higher accuracy).
If we can make the exact position of the satelite better known, by allowing GPS to take it's own real time spacial positioning readings, and be acurate to less than 1 meter in real time instead of 2-6 meters 24 -48 hours delayed, then we can get overall GPS accuracy down to 2-3 meters using our current signaling. Combining that with L2C and L3C frequencies to eliminate shadowing and signal reflection issues, we can acheive less than 1 meter accuracy.
DGPA and now AGPS use additional ground based signal sources with known fixed positions to more accurately (or more quicly) determine position.
I didn't imply punishing them legally, i meant (in response to the original poster) that their market share did not need to fall that far... I implied no method for making it fall.
As i said, Apple is not interested in the "bulk" market. Their OEM licensing deal will allways favor mid range and higher class systems. In that segment, Apple's own hardware competes extremely well on price, and on the higher end their hardware is cheaper than the competition by large margins. (being intel's #1 profitable customer I'm sure allows the enjoyment of steep high-end discounts as well as first-out product releases).
They don't need to license in bulk to move into that market, they only need to partner to get the "OS X Compatible" stickers emplazoned on machines. People will gladly buy OS X in large numbers given the ability (and a support system). If even 10% of PC buyers opted to install OS X, that would nearly DOUBLE Apple's install base... Besides, Linus has moved into that market quite effectively without such OEM deals, and with barely a fraction of Apple's penetration.
Their movement may be a fact, but when you calculate position based on space-time instead of simply space, the movement IN space is HIGHLY predictible, and therefore highly accurate. The system of calculations might need periodic adjustment (say every few decades) gue to unforseen gravametric effects, but generally, it's a pretty significant (and thus in itself predictable) event to actually cause a pulsar to have to adjust is'd galactic course... We don't really care about the emissions of the pulsar, only it's relative position to the other pulsars in relation to the current time in nanoseconds.
It would be interesting if it came to light that due to the complexity of relativity in the short distances around the planet, combined with atmospheric and other signal interference validating position from ground based sources, if the positioning of the GPS sattelites themselves would in fact be more accurate using the pulsar based Galactic Positioning Systems...
ie, our Global Positioning Sattelites could one day map their relative position using the Galatic positioning system... making GPS more accurate on earth :)
It's being "phased" out. Your machine was one of the lucky 1% that got the update now. My home machine did not have it automatically, but doing a "check for updates now" populated it. I'm waiting a few days to install it however until 1)I get around to making another image backup and 2) other people try it and fail first...
I run Vista. index is enabled by default, but one of the first tweaks i did was switch it off, and Windows Search can be uninstalled/hidden.
The indexer runs as a "background" serivce, which is a new type and is supposed only get CPU cycles when the machine is idle. unfortunately, this only works for the FIRST instance of a background process, and there are many cases where more than one can conflict under Vista, and then indexing begins chewing up resources. I had it kick off in the middle of playing games when the CPU was over 80%.
WS4 will NOT be enabled on my machine. I keep the index service, pre-fetch, and several other services forcibally disabled on my machine. When I'm looking for something, it;s either an e-mail, which google or xobni instantly find for me without M$'s help, or it's a file I've properly store and can find myself in 3-4 clicks, or it;s a media item already indexed by iTunes... I don't search my personal machine for random crap, and anything I've ever needed to find on my own machine was ALREADY indexed by somethiung else.... It's a complete waste of resources, a waste of disk space for the index database, and every time you run a major patch, it fucking re-indexes, which for my 400+GB of stuff, takes as long as defragging.
This is not to mention that is also searches inside files, and stores that data in a database in a predetermined location. I have data in docs on my system I'd just as much prefer NOT be in a non--encrypted central repository... contacts, SSNs, phone numbers, e-mail addresses, all go in that database that is VERY easy for a hacker to lift...
If there's a way to uninstall WS4 after SP2, not just disabling it, I will.
Agreed completely. Apple even competes directly with HP and Dell on pricing for their mid range 24" iMacs and their mid range MacBooks. Only at the low end does Apple begin to charge more than a $100 premium for their system, but considdering the software value of the included, highly productive package (even comparing a cheap dell with a copy of Pinacle Studio and Photoshop Elements is going to cost more than a base Mac).
I don't think Windows needs to be punished all the way to 65%. They're already at that level in college admissions... It will likely be OS 10.8 before we see shelf copies for non-Apple hardware, but by then, Apple will still be charging the $100 premium for their PCs, but the profit they loose on the hardware (very small on the low end systems), will easily be offset by the profit on the software (large). Also, since Apple will likely still continue to offer the value proposition on the higher end systems, why by the competitions machine and then buy OSX, it;s simply cheaper to buy Apple's machine and a copy of windows...
Where Apple will make out whoever is in the gamers, and in the folks with compatible cheap PCs that would not have bought both a mac and a PC, but would would buy a PC and a copy of Apple's software (then iLife and other products).
When OS X is available on PC hardware, Windows may still be the majority OS sold, but OS X will be used on many of those PCs. There will also be a RAPID uptake in existing PC owners buying copies to install.
To pull this off, Apple does need a few milestones to be cleared however:
- much better corportate directory integration
- integration into common enterprise system monitoring and software package rollout tools.
- A method of tracking licenced copy use (piracy prevention).
- A native driver tracking and upgrade/patching system to handle the multitude of additional drivers needing to be managed.
- a software package, preferably web based, to validate OS X compatability for a windows machine.
- An OEM buy-in, including branding, OSX compatability publications, minimum requirements, and other vendor support.
Make no mistake, Apple won't be licensing "clones". They'll be simply permitting their OS on other PC hardware, specific PC hardware with specific components (likely Intel and nVidia only chipsets; ATI and nVidia only graphics; Intel, Realtek, and Broadcom gig nics; USB3 required, bluetooth required, Atheros based wireless cards, a specific audio controller, and other very specific component requirements. I doubt the base apple compatability tester would qualify more than 20% of the off-the-shelf PCs... Certainly nothing under $500 would qualify.
The xServe is a low priced 1U server that brings mid range businesses the ability to deploy a large number of fiber connected servers that support Unix class stability while bridging Mac and PC users into active directory.
Anyone who runs web sites can eaily use Apache on it, it makes a great file server, it can run database engines from multiple vendors, and it;s a nice form factor with hot swap drives, dual PS, and most importantly, is a fully manufacturer supported server that does not run Windows.
A lot of unix shops are starting to integrate OS X server for it's flexibility in role, combined with Apple's very low DASD storage prices and the ability to easily integrate OS X server into HDS and EMC arrays, it's a nice system...
They're cheap, well supported, systems with performance to spare and high reliability. They're easy to manage, and make managing the other macs in the network easier.
Heck, for their cost, I know several shops that have even bought them and deployed Windows on them...
NOBODY blames the hardware unless it stops working completely, but the turth is most system crashes and system instability are hardware related, including nearly every cause of the dreaded BSOD.
Everyone blames M$ for having an unstable OS, in fact TV commercials even poke fun at it, but in truth, Windows running on properly tuned hardware with custom settings and tweaks can run months without a reboot (and only then to install patches). Give Windows the specs it wants, and combine comonents that dont't just "work together" but are actually tuned and designed to coexist on the same board, and use a high quality mainboard and power supply, and you'll get a very stable system.
Even if they had made such a donation, without the hopes of a return on their investment, such a donation would be required to be documented. There are limits to such donations by US law (what i don;t know, but I know the SEC limits such "meddling"
Apple has promised there will not be chip level lockdowns in OS X, or any future apple OS. their OS runs on commodoty hardware, they only license it to run on Apple Brnaded systems (currently). It;s been rumored for years that Apple is partnering with dozens of vendors and plans to release an OS X approved spec and sell OS X on shelves opposite Windows (likely on a price tier competitive to Home Premium, but including iLife).
Apple has not released OS X for open systems for 1 primary reason: they don;t want to support your junk kit, and they don;t want to get the blame for OS X having stability issues. If manufacturers are allowed to be held to the same wishy washy standards as micsoft, then not only would OS X be seen to be just as unstable, but it would likely be sold on many systems that don't really meet the minimum specs of iLife, and would provide a lack-luster performance.
The hardware market has been shrinking (unified drivers, fewer verndors, better driver certification, open standards). In a couple of years, especially once dedicated GPUs become the norm across all systems, and when comodoty $500 PCs have significant specs, I expect to see Apple come pre-configured, OEM, on select systems, but by that point, Apple hardware should also be slightly more in line price-wise (on several systems, Apple is actually currently cheaper than the competition, especially in the pro and server lines, but on the low end there's still a premium for the design and software).
actually, the bankruptcy filing will releav exactly who is funding them. In the pending court case, the investors could be protected, but in SEC investigations, and in bank records that are required to be made public durring a bankruptcy, this has to come to light.
250K in debt, assets frozen, and sales blocked by court order, how does a bank expect them to pay? ...and who would invest in a company about to be ass raped by Apple lawyers?
well, it doesn't have to run for 24 hours on one charge, the other race cars are lucky to run 70 minutes on a tank of gas...
If it can make 150 miles, when they pull in to swap the tires, and jack it up, they could also drip the batteries from the under carrige and replace them en masse.
high performance charging system run on generators pit-site could bring those Li-Ti or Li-Su batteries to full charge in 30 minutes...
My concern is the 400HP total... most of it;s competition does 0-100 in about 8 seconds, and runs in the 600-1000HP range... For instance, the Audi Deisel (first time ever) ran at 650HP http://www.auto-power-girl.com/specifications/audi/audi_r10_le_mans_race_car-540
Heck, the "lemans edition" steet cars sold as production vehicles very often peak over 500HP... and those are not the race models, but simply collector cars.