miles01110
Apr 25, 08:51 AM
Yes. I'm sure that consolidated.db just appeared randomly and it's all a huge media conspiracy.
ChickenSwartz
Aug 4, 01:42 PM
1. If you check Apple's knowledge database or the manual that come with MBP, it actually says not to put this laptop on top of your lap, ....
I have a 4 year old Toshiba that runs (under moderate load) fairly cool. It also warned against using in lap.
I think all "laptops" will come with that warning now. It is just an attempt to prevent lawsuits.
Plus, guys, it is bad for your...ummm....baby makers...they are on the outside for a reason.
I have a 4 year old Toshiba that runs (under moderate load) fairly cool. It also warned against using in lap.
I think all "laptops" will come with that warning now. It is just an attempt to prevent lawsuits.
Plus, guys, it is bad for your...ummm....baby makers...they are on the outside for a reason.
Object-X
Nov 22, 10:30 AM
I know that many Blue Tooth features of my Motorola cell phone is disabled by Verizon. Even if Apple would make the best cell phone possible, how many of those great featues do you think the cell phone companies would actually allow the use of.
Remember simple things like ring tones, photos & such could easilly be transferred from the cell phone to your home computer. But this is not usually allowed. Could this be because the cell phone companies allow these features only to add to their revenue stream, not to give the cell phone user some additional user or usuable feature?
Unless the an Apple cell phone was available from all cell phone service providers & without many of the cell phone features disabled, do you think that it could be a success?
Bill the TaxMan
To answer your question: yes, I think it will be a success.
First, there are the rumors that the phone will be sold unlocked. If true, then the carriers will have no control over what features a phone has or can use.
Secondly, most of the features we are talking about are Internet related. As long as the phone has the ability to connect to the Internet all of Apple's .Mac services can be reached.
Last, but not least, Apple has a history of innovating around intrenched limitations. One of the reasons Apple has been successful in changing market dynamics with their products is because they change the game.
Keep in mind that this will just be the first phone of many. It is quite possible that some sort of wireless VOIP phone could bypass cell phone networks entirely. I don't think that will happen at the beginning, but it is a future possibility. Perhaps what is behind the Apple Google connection. Remember, I said Apple has a way of changing market dynamics with their technology.
I don't believe Apple would ever allow some other company to dictate to them what features or technology they can use. If cell phone carriers had that kind of control Apple would simply stay out. This more than anything leads me to believe the "unlocked" phone rumors; that would be very consistant with Apple's way of doing business.
Remember simple things like ring tones, photos & such could easilly be transferred from the cell phone to your home computer. But this is not usually allowed. Could this be because the cell phone companies allow these features only to add to their revenue stream, not to give the cell phone user some additional user or usuable feature?
Unless the an Apple cell phone was available from all cell phone service providers & without many of the cell phone features disabled, do you think that it could be a success?
Bill the TaxMan
To answer your question: yes, I think it will be a success.
First, there are the rumors that the phone will be sold unlocked. If true, then the carriers will have no control over what features a phone has or can use.
Secondly, most of the features we are talking about are Internet related. As long as the phone has the ability to connect to the Internet all of Apple's .Mac services can be reached.
Last, but not least, Apple has a history of innovating around intrenched limitations. One of the reasons Apple has been successful in changing market dynamics with their products is because they change the game.
Keep in mind that this will just be the first phone of many. It is quite possible that some sort of wireless VOIP phone could bypass cell phone networks entirely. I don't think that will happen at the beginning, but it is a future possibility. Perhaps what is behind the Apple Google connection. Remember, I said Apple has a way of changing market dynamics with their technology.
I don't believe Apple would ever allow some other company to dictate to them what features or technology they can use. If cell phone carriers had that kind of control Apple would simply stay out. This more than anything leads me to believe the "unlocked" phone rumors; that would be very consistant with Apple's way of doing business.
Mac-Rumours
May 4, 04:02 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-gb) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8C148)
The entire idea of restoring from a Time Machine backup has always been illogical to me.
If Time Machine backs up everything, then it backs up whatever problems you had that resulted in your need for restore.
Time Machine has limited real use, and its basically limited to accidentally deleting things.
Indeed, which is why I also do a Carbon Copy Clone once in a while. Most people, for some reason, just use Time Machine. Maybe they never have encountered a catastrophic disk failure. Seems like a big risk to take.
CCC would also copy any issues (apart from hardware faults) so how would that be better?
The entire idea of restoring from a Time Machine backup has always been illogical to me.
If Time Machine backs up everything, then it backs up whatever problems you had that resulted in your need for restore.
Time Machine has limited real use, and its basically limited to accidentally deleting things.
Indeed, which is why I also do a Carbon Copy Clone once in a while. Most people, for some reason, just use Time Machine. Maybe they never have encountered a catastrophic disk failure. Seems like a big risk to take.
CCC would also copy any issues (apart from hardware faults) so how would that be better?
Plutonius
May 3, 10:42 PM
Please Vote
1) Does everyone agree that "Don't Panic" is the leader at the start of this game (his job is to send in our orders) ?
2) Do we leave the room in two groups as per "Don't Panic's" suggestion ?
I'll vote 1) Yes 2) Yes
1) Does everyone agree that "Don't Panic" is the leader at the start of this game (his job is to send in our orders) ?
2) Do we leave the room in two groups as per "Don't Panic's" suggestion ?
I'll vote 1) Yes 2) Yes
dongmin
Jul 21, 02:26 PM
It'll be quite an action-packed WWDC, if all these rumors pan out--which of course they wont.
-Leopard preview
-Mac Pros
-new iPod Nanos
-true video iPods
-iTMS movie downloads
-MacBook Pros with Meroms
Crazy. I'm betting against the consumer-related announcements. And hoping for MBPs with new enclosure and features.
-Leopard preview
-Mac Pros
-new iPod Nanos
-true video iPods
-iTMS movie downloads
-MacBook Pros with Meroms
Crazy. I'm betting against the consumer-related announcements. And hoping for MBPs with new enclosure and features.
puckhead193
Apr 20, 10:47 AM
I thought that would be the upgrade this year... nothing special like the 3gs update.
If I can't run iOS 5 then maybe but i'm sure I could run it on my iphone 4
If I can't run iOS 5 then maybe but i'm sure I could run it on my iphone 4
bobbytallant
Mar 28, 11:25 AM
I guess the later release of the next gen iPhone would make sense at least, in terms of the release of the white iPhone 4.
When Philip Schiller said the white iPhone 4 would arrive 'this spring', many questioned the logic, given the 'impending' Summer release of the iPhone 5.
The timing of this release obviously makes makes more sense now (if this latest rumor is true lol).
When Philip Schiller said the white iPhone 4 would arrive 'this spring', many questioned the logic, given the 'impending' Summer release of the iPhone 5.
The timing of this release obviously makes makes more sense now (if this latest rumor is true lol).
Jape
Dec 2, 02:38 PM
Well it's 12/2 and I am anxiously awaiting an email that BLT has received their order and MY order is on its way.
LOL don't think I can stand another delay.
Yea I agree, I emailed them and they haven't responded yet. Sigh hopefully we get something
LOL don't think I can stand another delay.
Yea I agree, I emailed them and they haven't responded yet. Sigh hopefully we get something
grahamperrin
Nov 26, 12:21 PM
At http://openforum.sophos.com/t5/Sophos-Anti-Virus-for-Mac-Home/Disabling-Sophos-from-start-up/m-p/1117#M643 in the words of a VIP:
Sophos Mac HE wasn't built to be used for on-demand scans only - it will use more resources than necessary for just this task�
----
slowing my Mac to a crawl
Experiences do vary greatly.
At one extreme: users who find SAV better than comparable software from other developers. There are many such users.
At the other extreme: users who find that SAV causes deadlock (requiring a forced shutdown or restart) before the computer can be used. Around http://openforum.sophos.com/t5/Sophos-Anti-Virus-for-Mac-Home/Unable-to-complete-login-after-reboot/m-p/1005#M588 I hope to discover whether a previously known issue was:
a) resolved appropriately (if the number of WorkerThreads was not increased from 4, then how was the issue resolved?)
or
b) overlooked.
Somewhere in the middle: Second and subsequent launches of applications, a sense of hogging (http://openforum.sophos.com/t5/Sophos-Anti-Virus-for-Mac-Home/Second-and-subsequent-launches-of-applications-a-sense-of/td-p/355) � by default, on-access scanning excludes archives and compressed files (IMO that's not ideal); if you do prefer on-access scanning of archives and compressed files you may find that some types of application are unusually slow to launch.
Reading File Vault Information � The Matrix Data Bank (http://www.schollnick.net/wordpress/macintosh-related/file-vault-information) (highlights (http://diigo.com/0drrs)) �
each additional thread will take up approx 8Mb of memory
� alongside http://openforum.sophos.com/t5/Sophos-Anti-Virus-for-Mac-Home/Unable-to-complete-login-after-reboot/m-p/981#M576 my gut feeling at the moment is that a debatably small memory footprint (4 WorkerThreads, with no GUI to increase the number to a safer 15) presents unnecessary risk to some users.
Personally, I'm disappointed that a respected organisation with expertise in security (Sophos) has not taken care to have their product work reliably, for all users, with a key security feature (FileVault) of an operating system. It may be that only a handful of users are affected, but deadlocks and forced shutdowns are never acceptable.
Security is vaguely to mildly inconvenient, and worth it in my opinion.
+1
For some types of user, software such as Sophos Anti-Virus for Mac OS X does offer additional (never total) peace of mind.
My advice: try it. If you find a problem, feedback to Sophos.
Sophos Mac HE wasn't built to be used for on-demand scans only - it will use more resources than necessary for just this task�
----
slowing my Mac to a crawl
Experiences do vary greatly.
At one extreme: users who find SAV better than comparable software from other developers. There are many such users.
At the other extreme: users who find that SAV causes deadlock (requiring a forced shutdown or restart) before the computer can be used. Around http://openforum.sophos.com/t5/Sophos-Anti-Virus-for-Mac-Home/Unable-to-complete-login-after-reboot/m-p/1005#M588 I hope to discover whether a previously known issue was:
a) resolved appropriately (if the number of WorkerThreads was not increased from 4, then how was the issue resolved?)
or
b) overlooked.
Somewhere in the middle: Second and subsequent launches of applications, a sense of hogging (http://openforum.sophos.com/t5/Sophos-Anti-Virus-for-Mac-Home/Second-and-subsequent-launches-of-applications-a-sense-of/td-p/355) � by default, on-access scanning excludes archives and compressed files (IMO that's not ideal); if you do prefer on-access scanning of archives and compressed files you may find that some types of application are unusually slow to launch.
Reading File Vault Information � The Matrix Data Bank (http://www.schollnick.net/wordpress/macintosh-related/file-vault-information) (highlights (http://diigo.com/0drrs)) �
each additional thread will take up approx 8Mb of memory
� alongside http://openforum.sophos.com/t5/Sophos-Anti-Virus-for-Mac-Home/Unable-to-complete-login-after-reboot/m-p/981#M576 my gut feeling at the moment is that a debatably small memory footprint (4 WorkerThreads, with no GUI to increase the number to a safer 15) presents unnecessary risk to some users.
Personally, I'm disappointed that a respected organisation with expertise in security (Sophos) has not taken care to have their product work reliably, for all users, with a key security feature (FileVault) of an operating system. It may be that only a handful of users are affected, but deadlocks and forced shutdowns are never acceptable.
Security is vaguely to mildly inconvenient, and worth it in my opinion.
+1
For some types of user, software such as Sophos Anti-Virus for Mac OS X does offer additional (never total) peace of mind.
My advice: try it. If you find a problem, feedback to Sophos.
Jape
Nov 16, 09:28 PM
well tomorrow could actually be the day BLT ships of tomtom car kits:) It seems that a lot of people have canceled, because there back ordered number went down. Hopefully they will overnight it...lol ;)
Daveoc64
May 4, 03:15 PM
That's NOT the context here.
I'm the one that raised the point in the first place! I think I set the context!
And don't tell me you take the EULA seriously.
I do. I don't have any need to violate it. I only have one Mac.
All of my computers have a fully licenced copy of Windows XP or 7 on them.
I'm the one that raised the point in the first place! I think I set the context!
And don't tell me you take the EULA seriously.
I do. I don't have any need to violate it. I only have one Mac.
All of my computers have a fully licenced copy of Windows XP or 7 on them.
balamw
Apr 9, 09:15 PM
Tastes great. (who's with me):p
Given your argument I would have thought you'd represent "less filling". :p
B
Given your argument I would have thought you'd represent "less filling". :p
B
DTphonehome
Jul 29, 09:20 PM
Of course Verizon will wait two years before they decide to adopt it into their lineup.
Ha! Verizon will NEVER carry it.
Anyway I'm on verizon and its been nothing but problems with them for the past year or so. Their 'can you hear me now' network has turned into the 'what? hello? HELLO? *click*' network. I'll be happy to switch if the new phone is not on verizon.
I'm pretty happy with VZW service. Their phones are lousy and crippled, but after trying every other provider, VZW was the only one who had almost perfect service in NYC, and I need reliable service more than I need a shiny phone.
Ha! Verizon will NEVER carry it.
Anyway I'm on verizon and its been nothing but problems with them for the past year or so. Their 'can you hear me now' network has turned into the 'what? hello? HELLO? *click*' network. I'll be happy to switch if the new phone is not on verizon.
I'm pretty happy with VZW service. Their phones are lousy and crippled, but after trying every other provider, VZW was the only one who had almost perfect service in NYC, and I need reliable service more than I need a shiny phone.
lilo777
Apr 18, 03:47 PM
Well isn't that just embarassing? lol 10 times the money and they can't find SHI*T :mad:
Annual revenues:
Apple - $65.23 billion (2010)
Samsung Electronics - $117.4 billion (2009)
Annual revenues:
Apple - $65.23 billion (2010)
Samsung Electronics - $117.4 billion (2009)
itcheroni
Apr 21, 12:50 AM
I'd love it if you could point out where you addressed this, because as a tax accountant, I'm having a hard time thinking of a time when a realized capital gain isn't income - if you have a realized net gain (ie amount realized is greater than your basis in the capital asset), you certainly have income. Certainly you could reinvest that net gain, but that doesn't mean you don't have income, that just means you realized a gain and reinvested the old basis and the gain (income). You're only taxed on realized gains that are recognized by the code (and you can net against realized losses) - sure, I could have an unrealized capital gain that isn't income, but I wouldn't be taxed on it either. Not that I don't agree with some of your points, but I'd really love the same clarification on this that most other posters have been asking for.
I suppose what you are getting at as a trader is that you buy a capital asset for $1000 and sell two days latter for $1100, then reinvest the $1100 into another capital asset. You'd be taxed on the $100 of capital gain even though you effectively have no cash in your hands to pay the tax. Unfortunately for traders, income doesn't mean cash. But a person who was in the trade or business of being a professional trader wouldn't qualify for capital gains treatment anyways, it would all be ordinary income.
Okay, but just for you, dude (when you disagree with me, we both can at least understand what we're disagreeing on. Other people here, well, it's just a waste of time. They start responding before even understanding my point). I guess I didn't make it clear earlier but my perspective on capital gains is in relation to inflation. If there were 100 widgets and 100 dollars, let's say the value of one widget was 1 dollar. If the central bank in charge of dollars decides to do some quantitative easing and increases the money supply to 200 dollars. This will lead to inflation with one widget valued at approximately 2 dollars. Now, why should one pay capital gains on this when, most likely, everything else costs more too. You didn't really receive any gain; the measurement of value (dollars) decreased.
For example, let's say there was a tax for getting taller. If the measurement of an inch or foot keeps decreasing, you will have to keep paying even though you're not getting taller.
Earlier I gave an example of the time between buying an apple and biting into it, likening it to cost basis and realized gain. We would find it ridiculous to pay a tax for any capital gain in the apple, but if I choose to save my money in gold until I use it, most people think I'm actually gaining something. If I were holding stock in a company that paid dividends, that might be different.
So from my perspective, the inflation (capital gain) itself is a tax, and we have to pay a tax for that tax. Right now, I don't believe the economy is really improving; the Fed is just creating enough inflation to improve the numbers. Stocks may be going up, but I think food prices are going up even faster. So what is the point of a capital gains on stocks if the proceeds from the sale nets you even less groceries than at the time of your cost basis? If a 1 ounce gold coin a hundred years ago buys you roughly the same today, what is the point of charging a capital gains? In this case, the coin would have gone from $20 to $1500, adding up to a capital gain of $1480. Sure, you could have save the $20 in cash instead of gold, but then you're "taxed" by inflation. Instead of paying your rent for several months, $20 will now buy you a haircut. Forget the "tax the rich" aspect of this; this makes it really difficult for poor people to save money because they are the ones most likely to save cash.
My concern is, how will we save our purchasing power? The government is actively decreasing the value of our money and anything we do to try and save our purchasing power is stripped away by taxes.
I suppose what you are getting at as a trader is that you buy a capital asset for $1000 and sell two days latter for $1100, then reinvest the $1100 into another capital asset. You'd be taxed on the $100 of capital gain even though you effectively have no cash in your hands to pay the tax. Unfortunately for traders, income doesn't mean cash. But a person who was in the trade or business of being a professional trader wouldn't qualify for capital gains treatment anyways, it would all be ordinary income.
Okay, but just for you, dude (when you disagree with me, we both can at least understand what we're disagreeing on. Other people here, well, it's just a waste of time. They start responding before even understanding my point). I guess I didn't make it clear earlier but my perspective on capital gains is in relation to inflation. If there were 100 widgets and 100 dollars, let's say the value of one widget was 1 dollar. If the central bank in charge of dollars decides to do some quantitative easing and increases the money supply to 200 dollars. This will lead to inflation with one widget valued at approximately 2 dollars. Now, why should one pay capital gains on this when, most likely, everything else costs more too. You didn't really receive any gain; the measurement of value (dollars) decreased.
For example, let's say there was a tax for getting taller. If the measurement of an inch or foot keeps decreasing, you will have to keep paying even though you're not getting taller.
Earlier I gave an example of the time between buying an apple and biting into it, likening it to cost basis and realized gain. We would find it ridiculous to pay a tax for any capital gain in the apple, but if I choose to save my money in gold until I use it, most people think I'm actually gaining something. If I were holding stock in a company that paid dividends, that might be different.
So from my perspective, the inflation (capital gain) itself is a tax, and we have to pay a tax for that tax. Right now, I don't believe the economy is really improving; the Fed is just creating enough inflation to improve the numbers. Stocks may be going up, but I think food prices are going up even faster. So what is the point of a capital gains on stocks if the proceeds from the sale nets you even less groceries than at the time of your cost basis? If a 1 ounce gold coin a hundred years ago buys you roughly the same today, what is the point of charging a capital gains? In this case, the coin would have gone from $20 to $1500, adding up to a capital gain of $1480. Sure, you could have save the $20 in cash instead of gold, but then you're "taxed" by inflation. Instead of paying your rent for several months, $20 will now buy you a haircut. Forget the "tax the rich" aspect of this; this makes it really difficult for poor people to save money because they are the ones most likely to save cash.
My concern is, how will we save our purchasing power? The government is actively decreasing the value of our money and anything we do to try and save our purchasing power is stripped away by taxes.
dontmatter
Apr 7, 03:00 PM
What a way to win.
ender land
Apr 10, 10:46 AM
hence the ambiguity, IMO, of the presentation of the equation.
Ambiguity would be something like
what does 48 2 9 3 equal?
A mathematical expression such as the one addressed here is not ambiguous unless people draw inferences from it which are not present. Just because people can incorrectly draw information does not make something inherently ambiguous.
It would be ambiguous if there were two right answers from the given information. In this case, there is not, there is only one answer which makes sense mathematically from the equation.
Ambiguity would be something like
what does 48 2 9 3 equal?
A mathematical expression such as the one addressed here is not ambiguous unless people draw inferences from it which are not present. Just because people can incorrectly draw information does not make something inherently ambiguous.
It would be ambiguous if there were two right answers from the given information. In this case, there is not, there is only one answer which makes sense mathematically from the equation.
maccompaq
Jan 5, 09:08 AM
I don't use AV software on my Windows computers nor will I use it on my Macs.
And believe it or not, I have not had an infection in all the years (many) that I have been on the net.
And believe it or not, I have not had an infection in all the years (many) that I have been on the net.
MattInOz
May 6, 07:52 AM
Double post
ohbrilliance
Mar 29, 05:25 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8F190 Safari/6533.18.5)
I'd say the bottleneck is the port and not the chemical manufacturer. As for bringing such manufacturing to the US, these are very obscure components in a deep supply chain, fulfilled by specialist industries. Apple would have to fulfill the operation of dozens if not hundreds of these companies in order to bring manufacturing home. Not really feasible.
I'd say the bottleneck is the port and not the chemical manufacturer. As for bringing such manufacturing to the US, these are very obscure components in a deep supply chain, fulfilled by specialist industries. Apple would have to fulfill the operation of dozens if not hundreds of these companies in order to bring manufacturing home. Not really feasible.
tipdrill407
Aug 7, 07:14 PM
There are many of you I want to beat with a spiky stick right now. Let's consolidate you into one bullet-point list of whiners:
archipellago
Apr 26, 04:51 PM
Actually, they are merging, and that's because of the huge debt that Porsche got due to trying to take over Volkswagen. (BTW, the current CEO of Porsche AG is from Volkswagen, that's not generally how you do it after you've taken over another company, more like what happens when you've lost.)
wanna re-check that sunshine..?
wanna re-check that sunshine..?
Tonsko
Dec 7, 04:51 AM
Did you even bother to read this link that someone posted for you cav23j? http://openforum.sophos.com/t5/Sophos-Anti-Virus-for-Mac-Home/Slow-down-when-scanning-Work-around-now-available/td-p/295
Was having problems getting sophos to complete a scan without bringing the MBP to a standstill and require a reboot... I read that thread and everything worked as it shouild. It has given me no other problems.
Was having problems getting sophos to complete a scan without bringing the MBP to a standstill and require a reboot... I read that thread and everything worked as it shouild. It has given me no other problems.
