Swift
Mar 24, 07:12 PM
It's the slogan for OS X Lion. Right.
Now, maybe they could get "Back to My Mac" working as a celebration...
Now, maybe they could get "Back to My Mac" working as a celebration...
JaSuS
Sep 28, 02:38 PM
Gates: What's that?
Jobs: It's an iHouse.
Gates: But there's no Windows.
Jobs: Exactly!!! Hahahahaha!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qHO8l-Bd1O4
CAH CAH CAH!
I love this one man you rock!
Jobs: It's an iHouse.
Gates: But there's no Windows.
Jobs: Exactly!!! Hahahahaha!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qHO8l-Bd1O4
CAH CAH CAH!
I love this one man you rock!
obeygiant
Apr 16, 06:58 PM
Well have fun Lee!
Meanwhile here's a clip about the honey badger (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4r7wHMg5Yjg).
Meanwhile here's a clip about the honey badger (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4r7wHMg5Yjg).
rowlands
Oct 24, 11:17 PM
If I recall correctly they did formally apologize. I do genuinely like the guys at Gizmodo and I enjoying their blog, its a personal thing. Some of friends can't stand it and prefer Engadget.
I personally hope that they're given a chance to prove that they can make tech journalism fun without going over the top. If they blow it this time, I fully support punishment.
I personally hope that they're given a chance to prove that they can make tech journalism fun without going over the top. If they blow it this time, I fully support punishment.
CalBoy
Apr 14, 10:50 PM
I understand the point you are trying to make (re: enhanced security measures] but technically those two incidents had nothing to do with the TSA since they both flew from non-USA airports - that is, the TSA didn't screen them at all.
While this is true, we can't allow that technicality to wipe the slate clean. Our security as a whole is deficient, even if the TSA on its own might not be responsible for these two particular failures. Our tax dollars are still going to the our mutual safety so we should expect more.
I guess that depends on how you define "not much trouble". We can't know the actual number, since we will never know many actually get through. But they are catching over half the weapons that their own agents try to smuggle through on test/training runs. So that counts as being "some trouble". How much "trouble" is enough? Read my post above about how much risk a "bad person" organization is willing to take on 50/50 odds. My late father made his career "gaming" situations, so I have a bit of a passing knowledge of it. I am certain that the TSA has "gamed" the odds, and the TSA believe that they have reached a reasonable balance between costing the public time, money, and indignities - and - ensuring a reasonable level of safety for the flying public. They may be wrong.... but I would bet money that, to the best of their ability, they believe they have reached a balance.
Well when a fanatic is willing to commit suicide because he believes that he'll be rewarded in heaven, 50/50 odds don't seem to be all that much of a deterrent. What's worse is that we've only achieved that with a lot of our personal dignity, time, and money. I don't think we can tolerate much more. We should be expecting more for the time, money, and humiliation we're putting ourselves (and our 6 year-old children) through.
If this is the TSA's best effort and what it believes is the best balance, I want a new TSA.
OK, then why are hijackings down? I have my working hypothesis. I cited some evidence to support it. If you don't agree, then it is up to you to state an alternative one that is supported by more than unsupported statements.
I am not saying the TSA (or in my case CATSA) is perfect or haven't mucked things up sometimes. I'm just saying that I believe that they have been mostly responsible for a dramatic drop in airline hijackings. I cited some statistics. Now it's your turn.....
Your statistics don't unequivocally prove the efficacy of the TSA though. They only show that the TSA employs a cost-benefit method to determine what measures to take.
Since you believe in the efficacy of the TSA so much, the burden is yours to make a clear and convincing case, not mine. I can provide alternative hypotheses, but I am in no way saying that these are provable at the current moment in time. I'm only saying that they are rational objections to your theory.
My hypothesis is essentially the same as Lisa's: the protection is coming from our circumstances rather than our deliberative efforts.
Terrorism is a complex thing. My bet is that as we waged wars in multiple nations, it became more advantageous for fanatics to strike where our military forces were. Without having to gain entry into the country, get past airport security (no matter what odds were), or hijack a plane, terrorists were able to kill over 4,000 Americans in Iraq and nearly 1,500 in Afghanistan. That's almost twice as many as were killed on 9/11.
If I were the leader of a group intent on killing Americans and Westerners in general, I certainly would go down that route rather than hijack planes.
ps there is no proof that it wasn't Lisa's rock. There are some very weird causal relationships in the world. Like shooting wolves causes the Aspen to die off in Wyoming. Or .... overfishing the Salmon in the Pacific changes the mix of trees along the rivers of the BC coast.....
It's pretty clear that it was not the rock. Ecosystems are constantly finding new equilibriums; killing off an herbivore's primary predator should cause a decline in vegetation. That is not surprising, nor is it difficult to prove (you can track all three populations simultaneously). There is also a causal mechanism at work that can explain the effect without the need for new assumptions (Occam's Razor).
The efficacy of the TSA and our security measures, on the other hand, are quite complex and are affected by numerous causes. Changes in travel patterns, other nations' actions, and an enemey's changing strategy all play a big role. You can't ignore all of these and pronounce our security gimmicks (and really, that's what patting down a 6 year-old is) to be so masterfully effective.
While this is true, we can't allow that technicality to wipe the slate clean. Our security as a whole is deficient, even if the TSA on its own might not be responsible for these two particular failures. Our tax dollars are still going to the our mutual safety so we should expect more.
I guess that depends on how you define "not much trouble". We can't know the actual number, since we will never know many actually get through. But they are catching over half the weapons that their own agents try to smuggle through on test/training runs. So that counts as being "some trouble". How much "trouble" is enough? Read my post above about how much risk a "bad person" organization is willing to take on 50/50 odds. My late father made his career "gaming" situations, so I have a bit of a passing knowledge of it. I am certain that the TSA has "gamed" the odds, and the TSA believe that they have reached a reasonable balance between costing the public time, money, and indignities - and - ensuring a reasonable level of safety for the flying public. They may be wrong.... but I would bet money that, to the best of their ability, they believe they have reached a balance.
Well when a fanatic is willing to commit suicide because he believes that he'll be rewarded in heaven, 50/50 odds don't seem to be all that much of a deterrent. What's worse is that we've only achieved that with a lot of our personal dignity, time, and money. I don't think we can tolerate much more. We should be expecting more for the time, money, and humiliation we're putting ourselves (and our 6 year-old children) through.
If this is the TSA's best effort and what it believes is the best balance, I want a new TSA.
OK, then why are hijackings down? I have my working hypothesis. I cited some evidence to support it. If you don't agree, then it is up to you to state an alternative one that is supported by more than unsupported statements.
I am not saying the TSA (or in my case CATSA) is perfect or haven't mucked things up sometimes. I'm just saying that I believe that they have been mostly responsible for a dramatic drop in airline hijackings. I cited some statistics. Now it's your turn.....
Your statistics don't unequivocally prove the efficacy of the TSA though. They only show that the TSA employs a cost-benefit method to determine what measures to take.
Since you believe in the efficacy of the TSA so much, the burden is yours to make a clear and convincing case, not mine. I can provide alternative hypotheses, but I am in no way saying that these are provable at the current moment in time. I'm only saying that they are rational objections to your theory.
My hypothesis is essentially the same as Lisa's: the protection is coming from our circumstances rather than our deliberative efforts.
Terrorism is a complex thing. My bet is that as we waged wars in multiple nations, it became more advantageous for fanatics to strike where our military forces were. Without having to gain entry into the country, get past airport security (no matter what odds were), or hijack a plane, terrorists were able to kill over 4,000 Americans in Iraq and nearly 1,500 in Afghanistan. That's almost twice as many as were killed on 9/11.
If I were the leader of a group intent on killing Americans and Westerners in general, I certainly would go down that route rather than hijack planes.
ps there is no proof that it wasn't Lisa's rock. There are some very weird causal relationships in the world. Like shooting wolves causes the Aspen to die off in Wyoming. Or .... overfishing the Salmon in the Pacific changes the mix of trees along the rivers of the BC coast.....
It's pretty clear that it was not the rock. Ecosystems are constantly finding new equilibriums; killing off an herbivore's primary predator should cause a decline in vegetation. That is not surprising, nor is it difficult to prove (you can track all three populations simultaneously). There is also a causal mechanism at work that can explain the effect without the need for new assumptions (Occam's Razor).
The efficacy of the TSA and our security measures, on the other hand, are quite complex and are affected by numerous causes. Changes in travel patterns, other nations' actions, and an enemey's changing strategy all play a big role. You can't ignore all of these and pronounce our security gimmicks (and really, that's what patting down a 6 year-old is) to be so masterfully effective.
twoodcc
Jul 13, 10:02 PM
farout man, thats BS. is it ADSL?
it's cable internet. the company is mediacom. it's the only cable company out here. but i guess i might have to go dsl if they don't fix it
it's cable internet. the company is mediacom. it's the only cable company out here. but i guess i might have to go dsl if they don't fix it
onicon
Jan 10, 06:39 PM
like emikshe quoted, woz and steve as well were screwing around a lot in their young days. they even made money from selling devices to phone for free. where are the voices crying for boycott of apple because the founding fathers were evil hackers, keeping poor at&t from making their living?
if you want to prevent people from screwing with you presentations on tvs, just disable the ir port (via the rs232 console/diagnostic software or by slapping a sticker over the ir port). securing you devices takes at most 2min per device. so let the companies learn from this and don't bash gizmodo like mad.
who would have complained if it was microsofts demo pcs that got hacked because of some security vounerability?
if you want to prevent people from screwing with you presentations on tvs, just disable the ir port (via the rs232 console/diagnostic software or by slapping a sticker over the ir port). securing you devices takes at most 2min per device. so let the companies learn from this and don't bash gizmodo like mad.
who would have complained if it was microsofts demo pcs that got hacked because of some security vounerability?
Hephaestus
Mar 18, 04:23 AM
Thanks for the responses guys, pretty much reinforces what I originally thought. Somebody actually owned themself yesterday, he kept going on about how Android phones get apps for free. " I got angry birds for free but you paid for it", when I asked him to show me Angry Birds running on his HTC it was running at around 2FPS, the lag made my eyes bleed. Lol It all turned very silent after that.
lostontheisland
Apr 5, 04:56 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
better than being angry over someone elses opinion.
I'm not angry. There's a difference between being angry and having a civilized argument that DOESN'T involve name calling.
first-chill!, second-chill a little more, third-am i not within my own rights to call something as i see it?or is that reserved solely for you?the choice of words i use are just that my choice so take your opinion about me elsewhere as after some thought iv decided I couldn't care any less what you say.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
better than being angry over someone elses opinion.
I'm not angry. There's a difference between being angry and having a civilized argument that DOESN'T involve name calling.
first-chill!, second-chill a little more, third-am i not within my own rights to call something as i see it?or is that reserved solely for you?the choice of words i use are just that my choice so take your opinion about me elsewhere as after some thought iv decided I couldn't care any less what you say.
gwangung
Jan 15, 09:06 PM
Blogging isn't journalism, otherwise Mrs Weisman down the street who blogs about her bridge club is a journalist. Did we really learn nothing from the Engadget Apple stock thing?
Well, actually, not quite...A journalist reports. If you report, you're a journalist. Some folks are better at it than others.
wedding hair makeup photos
wedding hairstyles big
wedding hair updo ideas
If your wedding day is coming,
by Wedding Hairstyles
or straight hair. wedding-
Similar Hairstyles
Romantic Wedding Hairstyle
Choosing a hair style is a
Well, actually, not quite...A journalist reports. If you report, you're a journalist. Some folks are better at it than others.
Aperture
Jan 8, 09:34 PM
Sales/growth update
Ultra portable notebook
iTunes movie rentals & DVD digital copies
Updated/Refreshed Apple TV - Perhaps a slight price drop (To promote iTunes movie rentals)
Look into the iPhone SDK - available to developers in Feb. as planned
Ultra portable notebook
iTunes movie rentals & DVD digital copies
Updated/Refreshed Apple TV - Perhaps a slight price drop (To promote iTunes movie rentals)
Look into the iPhone SDK - available to developers in Feb. as planned
kurt.mac
Jan 15, 04:07 PM
Reactions -
Macbook air
Pros
- Smallest laptop yet
- touch pad
- lite
Cons
- EXTREMELY TO MUCH- 1200 more that any one expected
- 64GB to 80GB hard drive, thats what i partition my boot camp on, thats what my DOG eats for breakfast
- 1.6GHz... piss poor, your lucky to run word on that
- OPTIONAL super drive, what the hell is that, having to plug something the size of a macbook air onto it just to watch a dvd, WTF., optional.. ur i think that EVERYONE needs a superdrive, if not, say good bye to installing software
Overall, i think the macbook air is so over priced and doesnt give what everyone needs, power. I dont think i will buy something just because it look good, remember the old saying
" Dont judge a book by its cover"
i shall reword this to
" Dont judge a macbook by its cover"
Overall = 3 out of 10
Time Capsule
Pros
- Airport and external time machine hd all in one
Con
Overall= 8/10
Macbook air
Pros
- Smallest laptop yet
- touch pad
- lite
Cons
- EXTREMELY TO MUCH- 1200 more that any one expected
- 64GB to 80GB hard drive, thats what i partition my boot camp on, thats what my DOG eats for breakfast
- 1.6GHz... piss poor, your lucky to run word on that
- OPTIONAL super drive, what the hell is that, having to plug something the size of a macbook air onto it just to watch a dvd, WTF., optional.. ur i think that EVERYONE needs a superdrive, if not, say good bye to installing software
Overall, i think the macbook air is so over priced and doesnt give what everyone needs, power. I dont think i will buy something just because it look good, remember the old saying
" Dont judge a book by its cover"
i shall reword this to
" Dont judge a macbook by its cover"
Overall = 3 out of 10
Time Capsule
Pros
- Airport and external time machine hd all in one
Con
Overall= 8/10
*LTD*
Apr 23, 05:17 PM
It is no secret that pedophiles have been known to hack children's computers to gain access to their webcam pictures, messenger conversations and ect. If that child has an iPhone and the said pedophile knows the file that contains the iPhone locations; what the pedo essentially has is the child's daily or weekly routine of where they are.
I buy it. Slim chance, but certainly possible and certainly doable.
I'd have to disagree. There are a lot of ways to keep tabs on someone if you wish to do them harm. The issue is whether the (as yet unknown) purpose of this data is useful enough to justify it's being there in the state it's in. There is no immediate way it gives anyone any special or expedient means of causing another harm. You'll need a lot of contingencies and variables come together to form specific cases. I really don't see that happening. That said, the reasons I've seen so far aren't that nefarious. It actually makes sense to be tracked in this way, especially in light of the argument that it's a caching mechanism in order to make it easier to switch from tower to tower. I can believe this. I don't believe there's any evil behind it. Nor do I for the moment believe this is easily accessible by anyone other than physically by the user/owner of the phone. And then it's likely not easy for the average person.
Said paedophile *before* this information has been able to track children without problems using other means, I'd wager. Likely easier means, though I'm not well-versed in the specific modus operandi of paedophiles. I suspect I'll need forensics/law enforcement training to get a complete understanding.
Besides, your example is based upon pure conjecture. First assumption is they are able to hack into their phone. Is hacking into iPhones remoely a big problem out in the wild? Not that I've heard or seen.
What I'm saying is take the "wait and see" aproach before we begin to vilify and condemn Apple as self-serving, careless data-mining opportunists.
So it's a plea for sanity. But I've noticed that whenever Apple's quarterly report rolls around and it's usually stellar news, the insanity of our loveable contrarians ramps up, purely for the purpose of being contrarians, as if we need to "balance out" all the enthusiasm with careful doses of negativity so we're not *too* positive. I'm not referring to you, roadbloc, by the way.
So in any case, this is my position, and I'll say it's the same position I'd take if it were Google and MS.
I buy it. Slim chance, but certainly possible and certainly doable.
I'd have to disagree. There are a lot of ways to keep tabs on someone if you wish to do them harm. The issue is whether the (as yet unknown) purpose of this data is useful enough to justify it's being there in the state it's in. There is no immediate way it gives anyone any special or expedient means of causing another harm. You'll need a lot of contingencies and variables come together to form specific cases. I really don't see that happening. That said, the reasons I've seen so far aren't that nefarious. It actually makes sense to be tracked in this way, especially in light of the argument that it's a caching mechanism in order to make it easier to switch from tower to tower. I can believe this. I don't believe there's any evil behind it. Nor do I for the moment believe this is easily accessible by anyone other than physically by the user/owner of the phone. And then it's likely not easy for the average person.
Said paedophile *before* this information has been able to track children without problems using other means, I'd wager. Likely easier means, though I'm not well-versed in the specific modus operandi of paedophiles. I suspect I'll need forensics/law enforcement training to get a complete understanding.
Besides, your example is based upon pure conjecture. First assumption is they are able to hack into their phone. Is hacking into iPhones remoely a big problem out in the wild? Not that I've heard or seen.
What I'm saying is take the "wait and see" aproach before we begin to vilify and condemn Apple as self-serving, careless data-mining opportunists.
So it's a plea for sanity. But I've noticed that whenever Apple's quarterly report rolls around and it's usually stellar news, the insanity of our loveable contrarians ramps up, purely for the purpose of being contrarians, as if we need to "balance out" all the enthusiasm with careful doses of negativity so we're not *too* positive. I'm not referring to you, roadbloc, by the way.
So in any case, this is my position, and I'll say it's the same position I'd take if it were Google and MS.
Benjy91
Apr 18, 06:43 AM
Ahhhh.... dude... the only Apps that don't really get approved are ones that do things that can cause security risks or just plain trying to steal your information.
Not true, Id say that is in the small minority, believing that is falling in line with the people who believe that simply plugging a PC running Windows into the Internet will result in it being flooded with viruses within seconds.
There are plenty of apps on my iPhone from Cydia that merely add improved functionality, like 'Infinifolder' which lets me have unlimited apps in a folder. iBlacklist, which lets me block numbers without having to get my carrier to do it for me. BiteSMS, which lets me read, reply, look up their profile, or call them from the recieved SMS window, without having to leave my current App.
Not true, Id say that is in the small minority, believing that is falling in line with the people who believe that simply plugging a PC running Windows into the Internet will result in it being flooded with viruses within seconds.
There are plenty of apps on my iPhone from Cydia that merely add improved functionality, like 'Infinifolder' which lets me have unlimited apps in a folder. iBlacklist, which lets me block numbers without having to get my carrier to do it for me. BiteSMS, which lets me read, reply, look up their profile, or call them from the recieved SMS window, without having to leave my current App.
rhett7660
Oct 10, 03:47 PM
i say ban them from life
nothin' but the chair for these practical jokers.
I am really surprised someone didn't get hurt?... Could you imagine some of the pissed off people.
I agree.
nothin' but the chair for these practical jokers.
I am really surprised someone didn't get hurt?... Could you imagine some of the pissed off people.
I agree.
Al Coholic
May 2, 11:02 AM
iSteve caves to the likes of Al Franken. Yep. Too Funny.
Maybe Al can get Apple to put a real GPU back in the MBP13? I'm off to email him. Wish me luck!
Maybe Al can get Apple to put a real GPU back in the MBP13? I'm off to email him. Wish me luck!
Boston007
May 2, 11:24 AM
I find it hilarious that Steve Jobs claimed Apple was not tracking users, but now all of a sudden we find Location tracking being completely removed from this version of iOS, that is honestly something that annoyes me..
EXACTLY
The fanboys are hilarious to say the least
EXACTLY
The fanboys are hilarious to say the least
ct2k7
Apr 23, 07:59 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8H7)
Who is this "untoward person"?
What would the "issue" be?
e.g. paedophile. Issue is rather obvious.
Who is this "untoward person"?
What would the "issue" be?
e.g. paedophile. Issue is rather obvious.
Cartoonkid
Oct 6, 12:38 PM
It was a good message until they stated "Before you pick a phone, pick a network." That would be valid in an iPhone-less world. They would still be selling us phones based on a spinning CGI rendering of a phone's outer shell. "Look! A plastic candy bar! You like candy, don't you? Then you'll love our rectangular phone! Brand new features like rounded edges and three colors!"
Apple changed the game. The device should now be the focus. The service should be an afterthought in the background.
+1
I had absolutely no issues with Verizon for over two years, but I ditched them in June to get an iPhone, rather than settle for a Crackberry.
And maybe it's because I live in SoCal, but apparently I'm one of the fortunate few (at least by the sounds of all the grumblings on MR) to have had no problems with AT&T. Admittedly, I don't make a ton of calls, but in the past 3 1/2 months, I've never had a single dropped call.
If Verizon started carrying the iPhone, the only thing that would make me leave AT&T is price.
Apple changed the game. The device should now be the focus. The service should be an afterthought in the background.
+1
I had absolutely no issues with Verizon for over two years, but I ditched them in June to get an iPhone, rather than settle for a Crackberry.
And maybe it's because I live in SoCal, but apparently I'm one of the fortunate few (at least by the sounds of all the grumblings on MR) to have had no problems with AT&T. Admittedly, I don't make a ton of calls, but in the past 3 1/2 months, I've never had a single dropped call.
If Verizon started carrying the iPhone, the only thing that would make me leave AT&T is price.
schwell
Oct 11, 08:07 PM
I too came from Verizon where I hardly ever dropped a call. I can't remember it ever being a problem. Now I have my second iPhone (first was with tmobile) and I have to say that AT&T is the worst carrier I've ever used. I live in Chicago and not a day goes by where at least 1 call is dropped (usually more than 1).
I'd be right behind you in line at verizon to get one of their iPhones.
AT&T should be penalized for their garbage coverage by apple ripping the exclusivity deal away from them.
We in America would really benefit from legislation that bans anticompetitive exclusivity contracts. Similar laws to that which Europe enjoys would make everyone here a little happier.
Choice is never a bad thing.
You have hundreds of phone choices.
I doubt the legislation would make people happier. Most of you would find something else to complain about (e.g. price, features).
I'd be right behind you in line at verizon to get one of their iPhones.
AT&T should be penalized for their garbage coverage by apple ripping the exclusivity deal away from them.
We in America would really benefit from legislation that bans anticompetitive exclusivity contracts. Similar laws to that which Europe enjoys would make everyone here a little happier.
Choice is never a bad thing.
You have hundreds of phone choices.
I doubt the legislation would make people happier. Most of you would find something else to complain about (e.g. price, features).
GQB
Apr 15, 11:56 PM
I dislike it when people keep saying that line over and over. Does competition really make products better? Where's the truth in that? If it's truly the case, why do we still see half-baked consumer products for the end user?
.
It, like 'the free market always decides best' is simply and literally religious dogma.
Competition as often as not results in a race to the bottom, just as the 'free market' is useless regarding life necessities (e.g. water or health care.)
.
It, like 'the free market always decides best' is simply and literally religious dogma.
Competition as often as not results in a race to the bottom, just as the 'free market' is useless regarding life necessities (e.g. water or health care.)
Northgrove
May 3, 02:31 PM
Here's my take on it.
One of the carriers source of income is data charges. Within that category of data sales is:
1) Data used via smartphone for web access.
2) Data used via tethering your phone & laptop.
3) Data used via a laptop air card bought from the carrier.
When you use method 2 illegally, the carrier loses out on that data sale. It's been like this for years, yet not been a problem as large as it is now.
Yes, hmm, I think where this arguments ends is that they have set their prices so that they don't actually make a profit from their data charges alone, and need to somehow "compensate" for this by creating artificial fees. I guess the fierce competition drives them there. What I'm saying is just that I think charging for the way you use data isn't very logical, but charging for how much data you use is. Hm, if that made any sense. :)
One of the carriers source of income is data charges. Within that category of data sales is:
1) Data used via smartphone for web access.
2) Data used via tethering your phone & laptop.
3) Data used via a laptop air card bought from the carrier.
When you use method 2 illegally, the carrier loses out on that data sale. It's been like this for years, yet not been a problem as large as it is now.
Yes, hmm, I think where this arguments ends is that they have set their prices so that they don't actually make a profit from their data charges alone, and need to somehow "compensate" for this by creating artificial fees. I guess the fierce competition drives them there. What I'm saying is just that I think charging for the way you use data isn't very logical, but charging for how much data you use is. Hm, if that made any sense. :)
ten-oak-druid
Apr 29, 09:44 PM
As for this control panel issue with buttons versus sliders, why does Apple feel they need to group expose and spaces under one control panel anyway?
Why not just make them separate control panels?
Why not just make them separate control panels?
EricNau
Nov 24, 01:02 AM
Last year the store was updated long after midnight.
0 comments:
Post a Comment