revelated
Apr 13, 11:31 PM
Why would they do that? Support for Exchange 2003 is going away. Microsoft gave a roadmap 5 years ago which showed companies when to start planning Exchange upgrades.
Here's the deal. Exchange is one of those Microsoft products that they made too damn well. To the point there really isn't a value to upgrading. If anything it's harmful to do so as they started removing critical features such as journaling. Then you talk about the thousands and thousands of dollars to invest to make such a change only to kill off valuable features, and I don't blame companies for not rushing to get off of it. Same deal with Windows 7 - some companies are doing it, but most aren't, because there isn't a compelling enough reason to spend that money, especially not in large enterprises.
Microsoft knows that. That's why the Windows version of Office 2010 fully supports Exchange 2003. Don't sit here and try to defend them - there IS NO defense. They gutted the Mac version for one reason - they don't want Mac users to have a version of Office that is similar or superior to what Windows users have. Why would they?
Anyone who seriously believes the fairy tale about dropping support for Exchange I ask you - why then does Microsoft support it still in 2010 Office and always have? Betcha don't have a valid answer, but I do. Microsoft knows the game and how to play it.
Here's the deal. Exchange is one of those Microsoft products that they made too damn well. To the point there really isn't a value to upgrading. If anything it's harmful to do so as they started removing critical features such as journaling. Then you talk about the thousands and thousands of dollars to invest to make such a change only to kill off valuable features, and I don't blame companies for not rushing to get off of it. Same deal with Windows 7 - some companies are doing it, but most aren't, because there isn't a compelling enough reason to spend that money, especially not in large enterprises.
Microsoft knows that. That's why the Windows version of Office 2010 fully supports Exchange 2003. Don't sit here and try to defend them - there IS NO defense. They gutted the Mac version for one reason - they don't want Mac users to have a version of Office that is similar or superior to what Windows users have. Why would they?
Anyone who seriously believes the fairy tale about dropping support for Exchange I ask you - why then does Microsoft support it still in 2010 Office and always have? Betcha don't have a valid answer, but I do. Microsoft knows the game and how to play it.
Consultant
Apr 1, 08:40 AM
Greedy content distributors.
Surely they want more money.
Surely they want more money.
gatearray
Oct 6, 01:29 PM
Two new models, a "high end" and a smaller "low end" model???
Already exists. They are called the 8gb iPhone 3GS for $99, and the 32gb iPhone 4 for $299.
Next year, there will be an iPhone 4 with 8gb for $99, and the iPhone 5 will take over the $199/$299 spots with new, fantastic features. :)
How much cheaper does Apple need to make the phone to entice buyers? What can they do to make a more expensive phone for "high end" customers? Make it gold-plated, or possibly an iPhone with 24" spinner rims?
I agree with everyone else here, Shaw Wu should stop being a fake analyst and get to work at his new, more appropriate job� asking me if I want fries with that.
Already exists. They are called the 8gb iPhone 3GS for $99, and the 32gb iPhone 4 for $299.
Next year, there will be an iPhone 4 with 8gb for $99, and the iPhone 5 will take over the $199/$299 spots with new, fantastic features. :)
How much cheaper does Apple need to make the phone to entice buyers? What can they do to make a more expensive phone for "high end" customers? Make it gold-plated, or possibly an iPhone with 24" spinner rims?
I agree with everyone else here, Shaw Wu should stop being a fake analyst and get to work at his new, more appropriate job� asking me if I want fries with that.
akatsuki
Apr 5, 07:16 PM
Frankly Apple should just commit to Thunderbolt and put those ports right on there. There is really no need for any other port.
more...
shiseiryu1
Mar 24, 10:09 AM
Why can't Apple do WIFI screensharing using Airplay and AppleTV? They were boasting about how you can connect the iPad to the bigscreen using a cable...how cool would it be if you didn't need the cable (just use AppleTV or Airplay licensed device)? The technology obviously exists...there is already another company who makes such a device. It seems like Apple is very close they just need to make the next step.
asdf542
Apr 5, 07:27 PM
I knew there was a reason to sit the 2011 mbp refresh out.
Why? Soon enough there will be thunderbolt to USB 3 adapters seeing as how thunderbolt has twice the bandwidth of USB 3.0. 2011 MBP owners won't be missing out on anything should they need USB 3.0 down the road.
Why? Soon enough there will be thunderbolt to USB 3 adapters seeing as how thunderbolt has twice the bandwidth of USB 3.0. 2011 MBP owners won't be missing out on anything should they need USB 3.0 down the road.
more...
gagebart
Mar 13, 10:55 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
.
.
Snowy_River
Nov 18, 03:02 PM
Do you have proof apple ordered the destruction of the products?
There are a few outlets to get the same products but they are in China.
Of course not. I was saying that if these were the original parts that were rejected by Apple, then there isn't much wiggle room regarding the fact that they are stolen goods. It is highly unlikely that Apple released these parts for sale. It is much more likely that they were ordered stored or destroyed. Either way, they would now be stolen property.
Now, if they were from another manufacturer (i.e. a knock-off product), or from a non-Apple production run at Foxconn (though there may be some serious issues there, too, as under contract Apple may own all product coming off certain tools), then the only possible criminal issue would be patent infringement.
There are a few outlets to get the same products but they are in China.
Of course not. I was saying that if these were the original parts that were rejected by Apple, then there isn't much wiggle room regarding the fact that they are stolen goods. It is highly unlikely that Apple released these parts for sale. It is much more likely that they were ordered stored or destroyed. Either way, they would now be stolen property.
Now, if they were from another manufacturer (i.e. a knock-off product), or from a non-Apple production run at Foxconn (though there may be some serious issues there, too, as under contract Apple may own all product coming off certain tools), then the only possible criminal issue would be patent infringement.
more...
bornofmac
Feb 19, 01:37 PM
I guess we can already be tracked with the phones we already own?
Rfid would give more info though.
Our populace is largely ignorant of our own governments history and thus oblivious to the freedoms that would be given up freely by this being included in our phones.
Our government is trying to get rfid included in our licenses and has been met with stiff resistance. Now the sheeple will fall for the "convenience" of rfid in the phone.
Fools.
You know how you can turn your iPhone onto airplane mode? Most likely, especially with such a hot topic as this, you will be able to turn your RFID on and off, because as you remember, you are in control here. Phones also tend to be customizable. Right now based on size only (hd). Once again, with a topic like this, you will most likely be able to request no RFID in the phone.
Or, imagine this, if you don't like it, don't buy it. Simply go buy a different phone. The problem has been solved. Amazing.
If you're worried about the government know that you're a gaining weight because the pants your buying are larger than the last ones, maybe you should look at your self esteem, or maybe you have a weight problem. Try spending less time complaining on the internet and more time on your feet.
Either way, let them put RFID tags in. Lets advance to Japans level of technology. We here in America are so closed minded and paranoid. If you're so paraniod about the government knowing that you're buying things you shouldn't, don't bring your phone in the store, or don't do illegal activities.
And lastly, some of you are worried that advertisers will target people. As human beings (real live) we have freedom of choice. We don't have to listen to ads, and we can buy what we want. Develop a little self control. I don't want to see tampon ads when I am watching the game with the guys, it would be great if we had audience only oriented ads.
So, quit buying dirty magazines, bomb making materials, listening to every ad, and thinking that we have it all here in America, and then maybe embrace that Apple thinks like a human being a little more than the average corperation.
Cheers Apple heads!
Rfid would give more info though.
Our populace is largely ignorant of our own governments history and thus oblivious to the freedoms that would be given up freely by this being included in our phones.
Our government is trying to get rfid included in our licenses and has been met with stiff resistance. Now the sheeple will fall for the "convenience" of rfid in the phone.
Fools.
You know how you can turn your iPhone onto airplane mode? Most likely, especially with such a hot topic as this, you will be able to turn your RFID on and off, because as you remember, you are in control here. Phones also tend to be customizable. Right now based on size only (hd). Once again, with a topic like this, you will most likely be able to request no RFID in the phone.
Or, imagine this, if you don't like it, don't buy it. Simply go buy a different phone. The problem has been solved. Amazing.
If you're worried about the government know that you're a gaining weight because the pants your buying are larger than the last ones, maybe you should look at your self esteem, or maybe you have a weight problem. Try spending less time complaining on the internet and more time on your feet.
Either way, let them put RFID tags in. Lets advance to Japans level of technology. We here in America are so closed minded and paranoid. If you're so paraniod about the government knowing that you're buying things you shouldn't, don't bring your phone in the store, or don't do illegal activities.
And lastly, some of you are worried that advertisers will target people. As human beings (real live) we have freedom of choice. We don't have to listen to ads, and we can buy what we want. Develop a little self control. I don't want to see tampon ads when I am watching the game with the guys, it would be great if we had audience only oriented ads.
So, quit buying dirty magazines, bomb making materials, listening to every ad, and thinking that we have it all here in America, and then maybe embrace that Apple thinks like a human being a little more than the average corperation.
Cheers Apple heads!
bsamcash
Apr 6, 12:41 PM
Has the Woz ever been wrong!
But he is absolutely right. It is perfectly useable without a base computer to sync with, too. Think of it this way, if one doesn't have a computer already, they won't have anything to sync. Then it's just on to the iTunes Store.
This is the right device for, say, my sister, who just wants to be able to browse the web, play some games, and watch some videos. And my guess is that's the target audience as well as the "normal" user.
But he is absolutely right. It is perfectly useable without a base computer to sync with, too. Think of it this way, if one doesn't have a computer already, they won't have anything to sync. Then it's just on to the iTunes Store.
This is the right device for, say, my sister, who just wants to be able to browse the web, play some games, and watch some videos. And my guess is that's the target audience as well as the "normal" user.
more...
Cinch
Nov 14, 03:22 PM
8. Couldn't give a toss (aka Ryanair). Like we're going to give you anything.
Ryanair must be a British com. or others. I never heard of Ryanair.
Cinch
Ryanair must be a British com. or others. I never heard of Ryanair.
Cinch
swingerofbirch
Nov 14, 02:29 PM
Has no one else thought of the security implications of this? They are allowing people to connect complex computer devices to the electronics system of an airplane. What is to stop someone from writing a virus that would infiltrate the plane's computers and cause it to crash? With all the crazy precautions they take regarding toothpaste, it's hard to see how they could miss the obvious.
more...
swarmster
Apr 19, 12:28 PM
Why can't the A4 display the 9 screenshots, as per the video, it's hardly taxing?
I don't think anyone doubts the machine can do the expose effect (the iPad 1 does it in Safari just fine).
There are plenty of reasons it might have been turned down for their final switcher implementation. One, the final iOS allows a variable number of programs to remain open depending on their memory requirements. The expose implementation implies that 9 can be open. That's inconsistent UI. Two, as others have mentioned, you can't always tell the difference between apps at a glance from little screenshots. So they went with icons in the end.
I don't think anyone doubts the machine can do the expose effect (the iPad 1 does it in Safari just fine).
There are plenty of reasons it might have been turned down for their final switcher implementation. One, the final iOS allows a variable number of programs to remain open depending on their memory requirements. The expose implementation implies that 9 can be open. That's inconsistent UI. Two, as others have mentioned, you can't always tell the difference between apps at a glance from little screenshots. So they went with icons in the end.
roadbloc
Apr 22, 06:56 PM
What I learned today: Mac users are hipster douches who think they are tech savvy, but still too dumb to run Windows.
Since when did MR allow 12 year old trolls onto the forums? :rolleyes:
Since when did MR allow 12 year old trolls onto the forums? :rolleyes:
more...
Doctor Q
Mar 23, 08:36 PM
Apple hasn't dipped its toe in the ruggedized computer business, has it? That's bound to be one aspect of army interest.
But perhaps computing devices that survive going to school with students should already be considered ruggedized.
But perhaps computing devices that survive going to school with students should already be considered ruggedized.
See Flat
Apr 14, 03:05 PM
You can take they guy out of microsoft.
Lets just hope they can take microsoft out of the guy. ;)
Lets just hope they can take microsoft out of the guy. ;)
more...
jms969
Apr 12, 11:11 PM
Gutted, seems there's still no support for syncing google calendars or am i missing something?
MS chose not to support calDEV, so no support for google calendars :(
MS chose not to support calDEV, so no support for google calendars :(
puckhead193
Apr 5, 10:48 AM
looks fake, you would think if they did get their paws on the new touch they would have you know at least focused the camera... just a thought :rolleyes:
smaffei
Mar 23, 01:17 PM
...it worked reliably from my Mac Mini (2010) to my iPad 2 without saying "you are not authorized to play this video" every other time, I would care.
Dreadnought
May 24, 12:59 PM
FYI, I've found you can have multiple instances running with different users in each. Now I can keep track of Dreadnought as well...:)
GRRRRRRRRRRRRRR :mad: I'll get you!! BTW when are you planning on overtaking me, I have been waiting for three months or so...
GRRRRRRRRRRRRRR :mad: I'll get you!! BTW when are you planning on overtaking me, I have been waiting for three months or so...
NakedPaulToast
May 2, 02:31 PM
Since when are white ones ever bigger than black ones?
freeny
Aug 14, 12:52 PM
Interesting article on how the Apple ads are turning off potential buyers in the recent InfoWorld. I blogged my thoughts on the campaign and WWDC here (http://www.donmappin.com/?p=189).
Apparently Apple is turning on more then it is turning off if you judge by their rising market share.
You cant make everyone happy. You also cant deny the adds are working.
Using the ploy where you show your cool, hip and better then the competition is an advertising angle that has been both used for decades as well as working to sell your product-
Pepsi vs. Coke (Pepsi was a smigeon of what Coke was before they began poking fun at Coke)
Chevy vs. Ford (Talk to any one who is an American truck enthusiest and they will be on one side or the other. Chevy and Ford have been prodding each other forever)
Burger King vs McDonalds vs Wendy's (Wheres the beef? Was one of the biggest ad campains ever and all it did was make fun of the competition)
I could go on and on but I hope you get the point
If you are going to judge Apple by its ads and not its products you are completely missing the point. I suggest you protest and go out and switch to a pc.
Apparently Apple is turning on more then it is turning off if you judge by their rising market share.
You cant make everyone happy. You also cant deny the adds are working.
Using the ploy where you show your cool, hip and better then the competition is an advertising angle that has been both used for decades as well as working to sell your product-
Pepsi vs. Coke (Pepsi was a smigeon of what Coke was before they began poking fun at Coke)
Chevy vs. Ford (Talk to any one who is an American truck enthusiest and they will be on one side or the other. Chevy and Ford have been prodding each other forever)
Burger King vs McDonalds vs Wendy's (Wheres the beef? Was one of the biggest ad campains ever and all it did was make fun of the competition)
I could go on and on but I hope you get the point
If you are going to judge Apple by its ads and not its products you are completely missing the point. I suggest you protest and go out and switch to a pc.
mlblacy
Mar 18, 07:05 AM
The one in bold is what I see the most. I've done photography for years and see new people get into the game and worry about the wrong things. Photoshop being one of them. Photoshop shouldn't even come to someones mind.
Learn the camera, learn composition, learn lighting, learn photographic techniques to get what you want such as second curtain sync, hyperfocal distancing, etc. Once you can get it done right in camera then you can take it to the next level in photoshop (skin smoothing, removing hair wisps, correcting lens distortion, etc.).
Too many people want to be a pro right out of the gate, they buy photoshop, get a NAPP membership, a fancy computer (that is 99% of the time overkill), raid storage when they've only shot 500 pictures, etc but never bother to learn the fundamentals.
I'm all for learning on Digital, I think it helps someone learn better, but focus on learning the most important and fundamental things first, then learn about the post processing. A picture can still look fantastic without running it through photoshop.
These days much of the craftsmanship that used to take place in the darkroom coaxing a master print from a negative now takes place digitally. A technically well exposed frame can still produce a crappy print at the end of a less skilled artist. Conversely, technical perfection (second curtain sync, hyperfocal distancing gobbledygook) has very little to do with art, or even creativity. Great "art" these days is even being shot on a cellphone.
Both camps (the technical-crats & the ones who are blissfully unaware of the minutiae) can produce "great" work.
Many beginners suffer from the same bad pshop skills (hey, look... I can make grass grow on his head, no make that two heads) and mistakes that beginning designers can (hey look, I can make EACH letter a different color, and a different font).
All that being said, if I was teaching beginning photographers I would remove almost everything to start (camera, lens, etc.) and go primitive and start with building pinhole cameras. Then I would progress to the end point which would be post-processing. Post-processing is huge though...
cheers,
michael
Learn the camera, learn composition, learn lighting, learn photographic techniques to get what you want such as second curtain sync, hyperfocal distancing, etc. Once you can get it done right in camera then you can take it to the next level in photoshop (skin smoothing, removing hair wisps, correcting lens distortion, etc.).
Too many people want to be a pro right out of the gate, they buy photoshop, get a NAPP membership, a fancy computer (that is 99% of the time overkill), raid storage when they've only shot 500 pictures, etc but never bother to learn the fundamentals.
I'm all for learning on Digital, I think it helps someone learn better, but focus on learning the most important and fundamental things first, then learn about the post processing. A picture can still look fantastic without running it through photoshop.
These days much of the craftsmanship that used to take place in the darkroom coaxing a master print from a negative now takes place digitally. A technically well exposed frame can still produce a crappy print at the end of a less skilled artist. Conversely, technical perfection (second curtain sync, hyperfocal distancing gobbledygook) has very little to do with art, or even creativity. Great "art" these days is even being shot on a cellphone.
Both camps (the technical-crats & the ones who are blissfully unaware of the minutiae) can produce "great" work.
Many beginners suffer from the same bad pshop skills (hey, look... I can make grass grow on his head, no make that two heads) and mistakes that beginning designers can (hey look, I can make EACH letter a different color, and a different font).
All that being said, if I was teaching beginning photographers I would remove almost everything to start (camera, lens, etc.) and go primitive and start with building pinhole cameras. Then I would progress to the end point which would be post-processing. Post-processing is huge though...
cheers,
michael
XIII
Sep 19, 02:59 PM
This plan's so smart, its retarded!
No comments:
Post a Comment