sábado, 21 de mayo de 2011

happy easter bunny

happy easter bunny. %IMG_DESC_1%
  • %IMG_DESC_1%

  • babyj
    Sep 21, 03:17 AM
    There is going to be a lot of changes to how we watch and pay for tv shows over the next few years, its still early days at the moment. The main change will be watching everything on demand rather than at the time it is broadcast.

    The bottom line is that the tv companies (producers and broadcasters) have to make money from the shows. That money can come from advertising, cable / satellite subscriptions, paying for downloads or for on demand type services.

    Everyone is treading very carefully at present as they don't want to upset the balance. For example, brands won't pay for advertising if no one is watching the ads as viewers are all buying downloads and until the downloads are paying the bills the tv companies don't want to do anything too drastic.

    Here in the UK the next big thing is likely to be the BBC going all out with downloads and streaming of their content. Which in theory won't cost anyone in the UK much (maybe just paying for the traffic) as we already pay through the tv license.

    If Apple want to get a good market share in the UK they need to forget about tv shows and do a deal for content from the BBC and the Premiership, as the exclusive live rights to the latter is what made Sky so big and popular.

    happy easter bunny. %IMG_DESC_2%
  • %IMG_DESC_2%

  • Rend It
    Aug 29, 01:59 PM
    I see a lot of people in this thread are either blindly making excuses for Apple, or for the industry in general. I am most surprised that there is any Hg (mercury) anywhere in Apple's line. Likely, there's a Hg-vapor lamp for the LCD backlights.

    An actual link to Apple's materials usage:


    I'm not really sure what Greenpeace's deal is with the PVC and BFRs. What about the thousands of miles of PVC pipe in use in homes and elsewhere? As for BFRs, it's pretty damn important to make sure an object doesn't catch fire. Again, there are plenty of nasty non-asbestos fire-abatement materials used in building manufacturing. I'm not making excuses for Apple, but I think some perspective is called for here. I assume that Greenpeace's major issue is the toxicological effect these substances have on the environment. However, in terms of the actual amounts used, the electronics industry probably uses much less than the construction industry. True, there are probably companies leading the way in green building materials, but it certainly isn't an industry standard.

    Apple is in compliance with RoHS; otherwise it couldn't sell computers in CA or in Europe. That means that they have probably stopped using Pb-based solders (which contained 40% Pb!). I'm dissappointed with the Hg issue, but it is a relatively small amount (less than 3.5 mg per lamp). Hopefully, the industry will soon find a replacement for these lamps, as well as the conventional printed circuit board materials. More importantly for Apple, I hope that they show more of a leadership role in this area than they have in the past. :(

    happy easter bunny. %IMG_DESC_3%
  • %IMG_DESC_3%

  • foodog
    Apr 13, 06:12 AM
    Yeah, I don't know about one click CC either. Color me skeptical. Although a lot of color adjustments are just minor, so theoretically, it could do a decent job.

    Anyone doing complicated color work is going to need a dedicated app anyway. I don't think it's realistic to assume FCPX will ever be able to do this.

    I really don't think Apple is doing away with Motion or Color. FCP has had Motion funtionality built in for some time, now it will have Color functionality built in. There is still a need for the stand alone apps for the less simple things.

    happy easter bunny. %IMG_DESC_4%
  • %IMG_DESC_4%

  • matticus008
    Mar 20, 03:14 PM
    No, this is completely wrong. Copyright is nothing more nor less than a monopoly on distribution of copies of the copyrighted work.

    Anyone purchasing a copy of the copyrighted work owns that copy. They do not have a license to that copy, they own that copy. They don't need a license to do anything with that copy except for re-distributing copies of it. Because the copyright holder holds the copyright monopoly, only the copyright holder may copy the work in question and then distribute those copies. Anyone else who wants to re-distribute further copies must get a license from the copyright holder.

    But no license is required to purchase a work or to use that work once it is purchased. Copyright is a restriction on what you can do with the things you have purchased and now own.

    This is how the various open source licenses work, for example. They only come into play when someone tries to redistribute copies. That's the only time they *can* come into play; without any redistribution of copies, copyright law has no effect.

    For example, you can, and have every right to, sell things that you have purchased. No license is required to sell your furniture, your stereo equipment, or the CDs that you have purchased or the books that you have purchased. At the turn of the century, book publishers tried to place a EULA inside their books forbidding resale. The courts--up to the Supreme Court of the United States--said that the copyright monopoly does not cover that, and thus no EULA based on the copyright monopoly can restrict it.

    In the Betamax case, the Supreme Court used the same reasoning to say that time-shifting is not a copyright violation. The copyright monopoly is a restriction on what owners can do with the things that they have purchased and now own, and must be strictly interpreted for this reason.

    When you buy a book, a CD, or anything else that is copyrighted, you own that copy, and may do whatever you want with that copy, with the exception that you cannot violate the copyright holder's monopoly on making copies and redistributing those copies. You can make as many copies as you want, as long as you don't distribute them; and you can distribute the original copy as long as it is the original. Neither of those acts infringes on the copyright holder's monopoly on copying and redistributing.

    This is why the DMCA had to be so convoluted, making the act of circumvention illegal, rather than going to the heart of what the RIAA, etc., wanted.

    No, you're not at all correct here. Digital copyrights are licenses. You do not own the copy. When you buy a CD, you own the CD and can burn it [EDIT: literally] or sell it if you want, provided you don't retain a copy. When you buy a book, you can sell the book or highlight the pages or do what you want to your copy, but you can't change three words and republish it. When you buy a music download, you have every right to use it, make short clips of it, make mix CDs from those files and give them to a few friends (as long as you are not making the CDs in bulk or charging for them). Your license does not allow you to modify the contents such that it enables you to do things not allowed by law. You can't rent a car and break all the locks so that anyone can use it without the keys. If you OWN the car, you can do that.

    But you do not OWN the music you've bought, you're merely using it as provided for by the owner. Because digital files propagate from a single copy, and that original can be copied and passed along with no quality loss or actual effort to the original copier (who still retains his copy), the law supports DRM which is designed to prevent unauthorized copying. If you could put a whole retail CD and magically duplicate it exactly, including the silk-screen label, professional quality insert printing, an exact molecule-for-molecule duplicate, and if you could do this for zero cost to you and give them away to anyone over the internet, what you would be doing is against the law. Copying the digital files gives you an exact replica, at no cost, and requires no special hardware or software--which is exactly why the artists and labels feel they need DRM. They're within their rights to protect their property.

    Copying for your own uses (from device to device) is prefectly within your rights, but modifying the file so it works in ways it was not originally intended IS against copyright law. It's like taking a Windows license and installing it on Mac OS. You can't do it, regardless of the fact that you own a copy of it for Windows. You bought that license for Windows and have no right to use it on a Mac (except through VPC, and only if that's the one installation you've made). Beyond the DMCA, your legally-binding Terms of Service specifically state that you are not to circumvent the protections on the files you buy and you are not to access the iTMS from anything but iTunes. Those are the terms you agreed to, and those are the terms that are enforceable in court, independent of the DMCA. If you think that the copyright owners who forced these terms to be included in Apple's software are wrong, tell them. But breaking the iTunes TOS is breaking the law. The DMCA is convoluted, I agree, and much of it can be spun to be inappropriate and restrictive. But you have to work to change it, not break the law because you don't like it. You have no right to do so, but you have the option to, and you must deal with the consequences if you choose that path. Breaking DRM is a violation of copyright law and the DMCA (or whatever similar legislation says so in your country). Steal if you want to, but know that it IS against the law and it IS stealing.

    happy easter bunny. %IMG_DESC_5%
  • %IMG_DESC_5%

  • 840quadra
    Apr 28, 10:50 AM
    Uhm, I still use an iPod. It carries all my music, usable contacts and calendar now and some games. And a touch interface. You are saying that my iPod Touch is not an Ipod. Guess we need to call it iTouch after all.

    I still use a classic style iPod too, I even said that in the post you quoted.

    Apple may market the iPod touch as an "iPod", but in all reality it is just an advanced PDA that has a really good music player inside it. More of an iPod by Label, than it is by past definition.

    I think it is stretching it to call the iPod a fad. One of the defining aspects of a fad is its temporary nature. 8-10 years temporary? Everything is temporary.

    I don't think it is. There are many past examples of fads that lasted an entire decade, even longer.

    Multifunction devices (PDAs & Phones) existed during the peak of iPod popularity, however they were not sought after by the masses in the way the iPod was. Even now Apple still offers a clickwheel iPod alongside the Touch / iPhone. Because of that, you can't exactly say it has been replaced, when it is still offered (along with other smaller iPod music player offerings).

    People have been migrating away from the dedicated iPod MP3 player, since the introduction of the iPhone, and Android devices. Many of us still buy and use classic iPod music players, but it is becoming more of an enthusiast / niche market than it is mainstream.

    You may not want to call it a Fad even though it meets many of the criteria, which is fine. I am only one person with one opinion.

    Like it or not, the iPod fad (or era) is drawing to a close, it is now the turn of the iPhone / Touch (or Android) and iPad (or Tablet).

    happy easter bunny. %IMG_DESC_6%
  • %IMG_DESC_6%

  • MacRumors
    Apr 12, 10:11 PM
    http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/12/apple-demos-final-cut-pro-x-at-nab-2011/)


    happy easter bunny. %IMG_DESC_7%
  • %IMG_DESC_7%

  • cgmpowers
    Sep 12, 04:04 PM
    I agree, they most likely left out the DVR function because of the movie and television studios. Why would someone want to 'buy' an older movie for $10 when you can record it via EyeTV and edit out the commercials and the transfer it to your iTunes (which is exactly what the new version of EyeTV does!).

    No wonder Apple made EyeTV unbundle it from Front Row... At least I can still record, edit out commercials and transfer to iTunes!! Who needs Tivo anymore!!

    Christopher Powers

    I think Apple had to compromise to be able to get TV shows on itunes pledging not to have a pvr to networks.
    Elgato is here and they are good, so it's just a matter to buy it and use it to stream videos to your TV via ITV.

    happy easter bunny. %IMG_DESC_8%
  • %IMG_DESC_8%

  • mike31mets
    Apr 22, 06:34 PM
    I was in the same boat as the OP a few years back. My circumstances and motivations in learning OS X were a bit than the OP's. I've learned a good deal about OS X. The things it can and can't do and how it differs from Windows.

    So some of the stuff in this thread I knew about, but the one that I still can't figure out is switching between all windows. Everyone says just use CMD + ~. However when I do that on my iMac, all I get is a switch between windows in a particular application. I'm using the Apple standard wired keyboard with numberpad.

    In Windows, ATL + Tab switches between all windows (and it shows you the windows in a preview much like CMD + Tab does with applications).

    happy easter bunny. %IMG_DESC_9%
  • %IMG_DESC_9%

  • eric_n_dfw
    Mar 20, 07:25 PM
    Hey, good point. Even it is totally unfair and unjust, it's still wrong because breaking the law is wrong. :rolleyes:What is unfair and unjust about DRM? It's your $.99, if you don't like DRM, don't bitch about it - just spend it elsewhere! :rolleyes:

    happy easter bunny. %IMG_DESC_10%
  • %IMG_DESC_10%

  • neilp4453
    Feb 16, 03:17 PM
    I can believe this, but only since the Android OS is open source. This means companies are making phones with their OS, not because its better. The iPhone is the superior phone, but Google is doing a great job at making the Android available to the masses.

    That is pretty delusional talk right there. The iPhone is superior...how? I can tell you that I like the iPhone UI better but that is where it ends. The droid marketplace is better or will become better (mostly because it is open source). I have already seen some apps that do a better job than their counterpart on the iPhone. Now don't get me wrong, the App Store has SO MANY more choice but it wouldn't surprise me if this quickly changes. The Android Marketplace is still relatively new.

    The Droid is superior in native features and this is my main concern. Apple is very behind on this...and it is nothing new to know that Apple doesn't pick up anything new until everyone else has it. Still waiting for hdmi on macbooks. The UI is nothing to laugh at either. THese aren't poorly designed phones and it is the type of delusional thinking that "Apple rules, other developers drool" that is getting us no where. The worst part is that it just requires a new software update...they just don't want to do it until their last string begins to break.

    When I originally bought my iPhone, I came on here and posted some negatives about the phone. 90% of this community grabbed their pick forks and demanded to know where I lived. Of course, no one had any input on my points because there are none. The mentality here is take it like it is (long and hard) or go somewhere else.

    happy easter bunny. %IMG_DESC_11%
  • %IMG_DESC_11%

  • bigjohn
    May 5, 11:33 AM
    Works fine for me here in L.A.

    Although I so rarely use voice anymore... I wish there was a 200 minute plan for like $19

    happy easter bunny. %IMG_DESC_12%
  • %IMG_DESC_12%

  • MacFly123
    Oct 7, 06:20 PM
    I hope my sarcasm meter is broken.

    If it is not, comments like this are exactly what is wrong with this forum.

    What does Microsoft has to do with topic?

    No sarcasm at all. I know Microsoft wasn't specifically in the topic, but it relates heavily. Apple, Google, and Palm are all going to be big players in the mobile computing world. Microsoft, RIM, and Symbian are all very outdated and behind. I think it is all very interesting. I wasn't alive when the personal computing revolution went down, but this is the same type of revolution.

    It is very relevant because it seems like Google is becoming the new Microsoft. There are some big differences though that make me not despise Google, such as how they are pretty open. I rejoice in Microsoft failing because the world and technology is a better place without them hindering innovation and progression with all their illegal proprietary lock-in antics they constantly shove down peoples' throats! :rolleyes: RIP Micro$oft! :p

    happy easter bunny. %IMG_DESC_13%
  • %IMG_DESC_13%

  • macridah
    Oct 25, 10:33 PM
    I just got my mac pro a month and a half ago.

    happy easter bunny. %IMG_DESC_14%
  • %IMG_DESC_14%

  • ender land
    Apr 26, 01:32 AM
    If you strike a bias and confrontational tone, you get one in return.

    And people wonder why PRSI conversations revolve in endless circles, rehashing the same tired subject matter...

    I don't think I did and that certainly is not what I got in return.

    I originally was not going to comment on this thread but the above post struck me as relatively interesting. Your first post is full of statements insinuating religious people are less intelligent, illogical, have something wrong with them, are stubborn, incapable of learning, etc.

    You might get a useful answer if you instead asked "why do rational or intelligent people believe in religion" if you honestly want to learn more about what you address in the original post. Otherwise, you are not asking an earnest question, you are more or less stating "all religious people are unintelligent or irrational, what do you think?" Of course this would require acknowledging the possibility people might believe in religion for reasons other than fear, ignorance, stubbornness, etc.

    Ultimately, the answer to this question will only occur if you can truthfully say "I fundamentally understand why someone is religious. They are because of A, B, C. The reason I disagree with this is because of X, Y, Z." You will not be able to fully answer your question from only the last part of that. Understanding the fundamental differences in what you believe and what someone else believes. And to be perfectly fair, there are probably a large number of religious people of all variety of faiths who probably could not defend their own faith (and in a more general case, real beliefs in general, religious/political/etc) and give any reasons of any significance why they hold the faith/beliefs they do.

    happy easter bunny. %IMG_DESC_15%
  • %IMG_DESC_15%

  • firestarter
    Apr 23, 04:25 PM
    I don't think many people say they're Catholic to fit in or be trendy... Maybe Jewish, but definitely not Catholic.

    Your arguments would probably be stronger if you dropped this 'trendy' idea. Atheism is gaining in popularity in the US, and that increase in popularity may in part be due to other attributes of the atheist social group. But membership of social groups has always been this way... how many 'theists' go to church because they like to meet people, sing and have a cup of tea on a Sunday?

    To label as 'trendy' is to apply a dismissive label, which I don't believe forwards the argument.

    I've concluded American Atheists who are continually challenged on their beliefs and "surrounded by enemies" are more likely to read into atheism and all it entails, rather like a convert to a religion knows the religion better than people who were born into it. Europe is very secular, compared to the US at least, and thus a lot of people are "born into" atheism/secularism.

    I think you're probably right. American atheists probably aren't 'intellectually lazy' as they're forced to justify their position much more than a European atheist would be. They've consciously chosen to reject an established belief and choose an alternate - some thought and decision process would be involved in that.

    It's easily possible for a European atheist to not be exposed to religion, grow up happily with their own set of ethics and morals, and never be challenged over their lack of belief. Intellectually lazy? Not really... why should anyone have to jump through hoops to prove the non existence of a god?

    happy easter bunny. %IMG_DESC_16%
  • %IMG_DESC_16%

  • Bill McEnaney
    Apr 26, 10:31 PM
    Would you agree that there is ample evidence of the imperfection of scripture, of the interference of church leadership to mold and shape the message of ancient scripture to suit their agenda, to manipulate and control the sheep? And that ancient scripture based solely on it's existence and the message of ancient man really adds no weight to the existence of God as described by these scriptures? The big question besides Does God exist? is Does it have the qualities, rules, and expectations, we imagine it to have? I've always asked was there this flurry of Godly attributed activity that ceased completely after the passing of Jesus? Fact, fiction, or superstition? We have no way on this Earth of verifying the validity of ancient messages.
    Huntn, please show me some evidence for what you're saying. Then I'll tell you what I think of it. Meanwhile, I should admit that the Bible's original manuscripts no longer exist, and there are copyists' mistakes in the existing copies. There are mistranslations in at least some Bible translations. Take Matthew 24:24 in the King James Version. It's ungrammatical (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2024:24&version=KJV). But I still need you to give us some evidence that, for example, some tendentious ancient people tampered with Bible passages.

    happy easter bunny. %IMG_DESC_17%
  • %IMG_DESC_17%

  • ct2k7
    Apr 24, 05:39 PM
    I think it's a bit late to worry about that :D

    haha. One thing we agree on :):apple:

    happy easter bunny. %IMG_DESC_18%
  • %IMG_DESC_18%

  • Benjamins
    Apr 20, 08:01 PM
    People should drop the Ferrari analogy, because it's totally off the mark. Ferrari is better than pretty much anything else, on almost every aspect you can think of, except size.

    An iPhone isn't better than an Android phone on all aspects, it's better in certain ones and worse in others. Overall I prefer Apple's ecosystem when it comes to personal computing, and when it comes to cellphones, I just bought an iPhone (1st gen) because I'm an Apple user anyway, and it seemed pretty amazing in 2007 when Jobs introduced it, and I'm still using my 1st gen.

    unless you really really want widgets and Flash, otherwise I can't think of anything better on Android.

    Btw: my Prius gets much better gas mileage than a Ferrari. :)

    happy easter bunny. %IMG_DESC_19%
  • %IMG_DESC_19%

  • balamw
    Apr 9, 03:50 PM
    If it's too hot on bare legs, then common sense says, "don't put it on bare legs!" It's so simple, even a cave man could figure it out.

    We keep a spare 0.5" 3 ring binder in the family room for the rare time when using the MacBook is potentially uncomfortable.

    99% of the time, e.g. couch surfing, it doesn't get hot at all. When it can, e.g. gaming, you have plenty of warning before it really starts getting warm (the fans start balring, etc...) to reach for a barrier.

    Most, if not all, notebooks from all vendors suggest not using the notebook on anything other than a hard surface like a desk or table. Do not use in bed, on a sofa, couch, rug or bare legs. A lot of that has to do with blocking the vents they rely on for air cooling.


    Sep 26, 11:52 PM
    Yes, Intel will be shipping Clovertowns then - but when will Apple get around to putting them in systems? (November - well, that can wait for The Lord God Jobs' keynote in January, for sure.)

    Most vendors are putting Merom systems in their customers' hands, but Apple is still shipping Yonahs in the MacIntelBooks.

    I'm at IDF at Moscone, and most of the booths have Kentsfield or Clovertown systems running. (Apple isn't in the hall.)

    I think that you're being very brave in assuming that Apple will ship quads in systems when Intel releases them...Maybe I'm just naive and overly optimistic or just plain dumb. I always think of MacWorld as a consumer event so I thought Steve wouldn't care to present the Dual Clovertown Mac Pro there. But I guess you're probably right. Nevertheless, I feel there is good reason to feel optimistic and happy about the prospect of 8-core computing in 2007.

    May 4, 10:33 AM
    Did you read about this solution on Apple web site? Not everybody reads MacRumors.
    If you Google "Mac Defender" you'll run across any number of sites that will tell you the same thing: Don't install it and remove it from your system. You don't need to be a MR forums reader to find that out. After all, the information about the threat didn't originate from this site, and neither did the solution.

    Apr 15, 09:41 AM
    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)

    I have a couple problems with this approach. There's so much attention brought to this issue of specifically gay bullying that it's hard to see this outside of the framework of identity politics.

    Where's the videos and support for fat kids being bullied? Aren't they suicidal, too, or are we saying here that gays have a particular emotional defect and weakness? They're not strong enough to tough this out? Is that the image the gay community wants to promote?

    Man, being a fat kid in high school. That was rough. There were a number of cool, popular gay guys in my school. I'm sure they took some crap from some people, but oh how I would have rather been one of them! But hey, I'm still here, I'm still alive.

    Bullying is a universal problem that affects just about anyone with some kind of difference others choose to pick on. It seems like everyone is just ignoring all that for this hip, trendy cause.

    Gotta agree with you there. Im sure they get bullied like everyone else, but I remember in high school an experience where I was harassed and picked on, beat up, hit in the head with a chair, etc, etc, and the administration did nothing. I was bigger than this guy, but I really didn't want to fight him, violence doesn't solve violence, finally the principal gave him a warning, which he laughed about.

    Then I remember a gay kid, who was a friend of mine, who was called a ********t, the kid who called him that was suspended for two weeks for "sexual harassment".

    So that's what I got out of it, if your straight your expected to fight, nevermind in the "real world" its called assault and the appropriate thing is to call law enforcement, fighting can land YOU in jail, even if they started it in most states. BUT, if you are a less common victim, then all they need to do is say a mean word to you and BAM suspension, requires counselling, and becoming a social outcast for being bigoted and insensitive.

    Do I disagree with the school suspending them? Nope, not at all, I do, however, wish pop culture didn't have such an effect on the way schools are run. Pop culture has taken on the gay cause, good for them, but they continue to ignore all of the others, I think it's just stuck in their head that someone can't pick on someone bigger than them. They watch that video of that Australian kid and basically say "its your fault unless you fight back like him". Kids shouldn't have to fight back in school, they should learn and grow, it's not prison. School officials should stop ALL bullying, no matter how the issue is "stacked".

    Apr 22, 09:42 PM
    Again, how can you prove something that (in theory) exists outside of time and space?

    It's a never-ending speculation.

    Even if we managed to explore every square inch of time and space you can always ask, "but what if something exists beyond that?"

    The question remains, what makes an atheist?

    The desire to see some form of proof before believing in an extraordinary explanation.

    It's pretty simple really.

    Apr 22, 09:37 PM
    The reason I'm agnostic is because there is no evidence of God(s), but I'm open to the possibility. As of yet, no one has made a good case. It always comes down to the leap of faith. And the only reason to take the leap of faith is because that person needs to believe in a god for some reason.

    No hay comentarios:

    Publicar un comentario