JackSYi
Jul 24, 10:00 PM
Although it sounds sketchy on paper, Steve will convince you that its the next big thing.
solussd
Apr 14, 12:47 PM
You don't need Rosetta, iOS is Intel 64 native. You get a copy with Xcode called the Simulator.
Just because iOS can be/has been built for x86 doesn't mean you wouldn't need a Rosetta-like instruction translation layer to run AppStore iOS apps. Those apps are all compiled for Arm6/7. Apple could support some sort of Universal binary in the future, but apps in the AppStore would have to be rebuilt by their creators.
Just because iOS can be/has been built for x86 doesn't mean you wouldn't need a Rosetta-like instruction translation layer to run AppStore iOS apps. Those apps are all compiled for Arm6/7. Apple could support some sort of Universal binary in the future, but apps in the AppStore would have to be rebuilt by their creators.
Apple OC
May 1, 09:47 PM
waiting for an announcement from President Obama on CNN live ... Osama Bin Laden is indeed Dead
I wonder if he was found in Pakistan?
I wonder if he was found in Pakistan?
yac_moda
Jul 26, 05:04 PM
I sent Apple a long description about how to build a GPS location service into .Mac, iPods, PowerMacs, and with a proximity sensor.
This was right after the kid in NY was killed for his iPod.
Remember SJ promised a fix for this.
I wonder if the proximity sensor will be wiresless disposable earphones :confused:
As for REMOTE TOUCH I still think all touch screen actions will work best with the fingers on the BACK of the device and with them graphically and transparently reflected over the interface.
And probably the ULTIMATE use of finger laser tracking would be a keyboard that has keys with multiple depths, dispose of those shift keys ! I also sent them a suggestion for a keyboard like this but that idea did not use laser tracking, it used a new type of button :eek:
If the touch area for the hands were just flat wings on the back the swung outwards, they could also act as a support for the screen EXACTLY LIKE the traditional book holder:eek: :eek: :eek:
This was right after the kid in NY was killed for his iPod.
Remember SJ promised a fix for this.
I wonder if the proximity sensor will be wiresless disposable earphones :confused:
As for REMOTE TOUCH I still think all touch screen actions will work best with the fingers on the BACK of the device and with them graphically and transparently reflected over the interface.
And probably the ULTIMATE use of finger laser tracking would be a keyboard that has keys with multiple depths, dispose of those shift keys ! I also sent them a suggestion for a keyboard like this but that idea did not use laser tracking, it used a new type of button :eek:
If the touch area for the hands were just flat wings on the back the swung outwards, they could also act as a support for the screen EXACTLY LIKE the traditional book holder:eek: :eek: :eek:
more...
Snips
Apr 22, 05:02 PM
I would be really disappointed to see a metal backing like iPod Touch has. My previous iPods from the past are so jacked up on the backside with scratches and dents. I know I'm not alone with this.
I'd prefer if the iPhone retained a glass backing like on the iPhone 4; I think it's just so sexy. But if they were going to move to metal I'd prefer an iPad-style backing.
I really hope they don't adopt the shiny InstaScratch backing, that would suck bad.
I'd prefer if the iPhone retained a glass backing like on the iPhone 4; I think it's just so sexy. But if they were going to move to metal I'd prefer an iPad-style backing.
I really hope they don't adopt the shiny InstaScratch backing, that would suck bad.
Chase817
Apr 14, 07:15 PM
I believe that it isn't suggesting anything at all. When you go to list the devices that your application is compatible with, that is likely just an exposed extra field for if you wanted to include another device that is capable. It is in my opinion, nothing but a little bug. (Though emulating iOS apps om my Mac would be cool :P)
more...
bboucher790
Apr 22, 11:40 AM
All I want is a reliable, fast, 3G network. I don't feel like paying more $$ per month. I'm totally satisfied with 2mbit speeds (on a mobile device). ATT's inconsistency, however, sucks.
And Verizon's 3G network is too slow, so yea.
And Verizon's 3G network is too slow, so yea.
JoeG4
Dec 1, 11:21 PM
I wish they'd spend that time being productive writing new and cool things instead of worrying about what may possibly happen.
Security should be something that's handled at the low level, not something we have to sit here BSing about all day long and installing programs for. That's the part that bugs me about these stupid &W%@#%*( companies and MS' "anti crapware" program. THE PROBLEMS SHOULD NOT EXIST IN THE FIRST PLACE. Boy, that's what patches are for.
Looking for em is fine, but when people stop making stuff and worry more about designing security crap - **** we'll all be driving aronud armored cars.
Security should be something that's handled at the low level, not something we have to sit here BSing about all day long and installing programs for. That's the part that bugs me about these stupid &W%@#%*( companies and MS' "anti crapware" program. THE PROBLEMS SHOULD NOT EXIST IN THE FIRST PLACE. Boy, that's what patches are for.
Looking for em is fine, but when people stop making stuff and worry more about designing security crap - **** we'll all be driving aronud armored cars.
more...
jholzner
Dec 1, 02:14 PM
I'm glad they did this and I hope Apple acts on all the things they found ASAP!
rnelan7
Dec 4, 06:27 PM
hahahah I probably have more experience with guns then most people, I own 9 guns of my own already.
a .223 ruger mini 14 a couple .22's and a couple shotguns a .22 pistol.. and a couple others...
I don't doubt you, but in honor of A Christmas Story I had to say it :D
a .223 ruger mini 14 a couple .22's and a couple shotguns a .22 pistol.. and a couple others...
I don't doubt you, but in honor of A Christmas Story I had to say it :D
more...
slowtreme
Mar 31, 12:58 PM
I haven't logged in for over 5 years, but I did today just to post how ugly this leather title bar is.
Welcome, slowtreme.
You last visited: Aug 14, 2005 at 08:40 AM
Private Messages: Unread 0, Total 2.
Welcome, slowtreme.
You last visited: Aug 14, 2005 at 08:40 AM
Private Messages: Unread 0, Total 2.
alexf
Oct 18, 04:42 PM
Pity you didn't read the figures before commenting:
more...
%IMG_DESC_13%
%IMG_DESC_14%
more...
%IMG_DESC_15%
%IMG_DESC_16%
more...
%IMG_DESC_17%
%IMG_DESC_18%
%IMG_DESC_19%
more...
rmwebs
Apr 28, 04:39 PM
It was on a slope. I used a guide line in Photoshop and rotated the original photo 0.9 degrees CCW to remove the slope. Check my photo vs. the original.
(Updated my post, not sure if you saw it)
Photoshop will enhance/correct photos when levelling so by rotating it you are distorting the image, thus making the results invalid. Its simply not possible to get an accurate result on an image you've had to distort.
Either way, this is a pointless argument/analysis as its impossible to tell without being able to physically put a few iPhones from different batches together to get a real physical comparison.
(Updated my post, not sure if you saw it)
Photoshop will enhance/correct photos when levelling so by rotating it you are distorting the image, thus making the results invalid. Its simply not possible to get an accurate result on an image you've had to distort.
Either way, this is a pointless argument/analysis as its impossible to tell without being able to physically put a few iPhones from different batches together to get a real physical comparison.
ScottInTheOC
Mar 17, 10:21 AM
Spectrum only got 12 units today, 6 16gb black wifi and 6 32gb black wifi - I got the 12th voucher - for a 16gb black wifi!
what time did you get there this morning? Looks like it was a good thing I didn't head out, 12 units isn't very much...
what time did you get there this morning? Looks like it was a good thing I didn't head out, 12 units isn't very much...
more...
gmanist1000
Apr 28, 06:01 PM
Sounds like a "who cares?" kind of thing, but that's actually kind of a big deal if it creates case fragmentation. Not good. Hopefully inaccurate.
I'm sure Apple doesn't care wether or not 3rd party case manufactures have to change their cases because of their iPhone.
I'm sure Apple doesn't care wether or not 3rd party case manufactures have to change their cases because of their iPhone.
garethlewis2
Jan 29, 12:50 AM
Actually that is stupid. Investment Banks and Hedge Funds are the largest shareholders of Apple. They use the MTM (Mark to Market) price to determine their profit and loss portfolio of what their shares are worth. They are going to so pissed off with Apples performance they will at the shareholder meeting be asking for some ones head. So yes, technically you don't lose money until you sell, but that is a very very very, ad-infinitum, very naive view.
more...
fkalwar
Jul 24, 08:35 PM
so would this be incorporated into the upcoming iPod, or the "next" update to the iPod?
satty
Jul 24, 05:12 PM
AppleInsider has a series of photos of the Bluetooth Might Mouse
http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1909
Very nice pictures. Looks like an "inside job" :cool:
http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1909
Very nice pictures. Looks like an "inside job" :cool:
KnightWRX
Dec 30, 10:43 PM
Under normal circumstances, you're more or less right.
No, I'm 100% right. Weight control is about calories. End of story. Calories in < Calories out and you lose weight. Opposite and you gain weight. There's no more or less here, that is the very basic premise. You want to discuss specifics that affect calories in/calories out, but that's flawed. Teach people the base first, and let them balance themselves out. You can very easily test your metabolic rate.
However, many supersize people have participated in crash diets, drugs and other questionable regimens over the years in search of quick-fix thinness. Doing so can, after a while, sabotage the body's normal metabolic rate and endocrine output, making it much harder for these people to find the balance in their caloric equation without depriving themselves of needed micronutrients (vitamins, minerals).
So you're saying these people have abnormally low "Calories out". It still comes down to that very simple equation. These people first have to fix their calories out, get their metabolism back straight, then they can fix their calories in.
It is that easy to lose weight. People don't know this very simple and basic concept, they think "Fat/Sugar" has to do with weight, which is completely false. "Low Saturated Fat!" on a box of cookies means squat if the cookies are 170 calories for 3 vs 180 calories for 3 of the same cookies with normal saturated fat. You still can't eat the whole box in one sitting and think "hey, it's low fat, I can't gain weight from this".
You'd be surprised how many people think this way.
I don't have a dog in this fight, but the question that runs through my mind is: if it's so easy, why do people struggle with it? Why are there entire industries built around people that struggle with losing weight on their own?
People struggle because like someone pointed out, they lack willpower and I'll add that they lack education. Calorie control is the only way to lose weight. There's seriously no other way, since weight is based off of calories and calories alone. To lose weight, you need a calorie deficiency. To be more precise, 3500 calories = 1 lbs, each way. So you need to create a calorie deficiency of 3500 calories before you lose 1 lbs. My metabolic rate is around 1740, that's what I burn each day without lifting a finger. Add in my normal routine, and I'm around the magic 2000 calorie diet. Let's not add in my gym routine. So to lose 1 lbs in 7 days, I need to go on a 1500 calorie diet per day. That's going to give me a deficiency of 500 per day, times 7 days, 1 lbs lost.
There's entire industries because they profit from it. Some people like to buy "instant" solutions. 1 lbs in 7 days ? Bah humbug, too long, I have 100 to lose! There's no instant solutions to weight loss, quite the contrary, the entire weight loss industry makes money by keeping people fat and coming back for miracle cures. Their proposed plans of "1 shake/bar for breakfeast, same for lunch and a balanced diner" is awful. First, it should be the opposite, a good breakfeast and then their bars/shakes for lunch and diner. Breakfeast is where you get your day's energy. Second, that's not calorie control since it doesn't explain that it is trying to create a calorie deficit. So people just still overeat, they compensate the calories they didn't eat at breakfeast/lunch with a huge "balanced" diner.
I'm going to just assume you are young and have time on your hands. Because when I was young and had time staying trim was quite easy., Let's talk when you're in your 30's and are a busy professional :rolleyes:
I'm 32, work 35 hours per week in IT (sitting down on my ass), am on call with tons of pages coming in once every 2 weeks. I have a girlfriend, a mortgage and a dog.
Again, staying trim has nothing to do with having time or being busy or not. If you spend less calories, eat less calories. Balance your calories in to your calories out and you'll stay trim. Sure it means doing a bit more research into what you're eating, but that's not impossible. It also means listening to your body. Feeling "stuffed" means you overate. You should never feel full or stuffed. A donut is not faster to mow down than an Apple. It's not more filling either. It's tons more calories though.
You made an assumption about me and you were wrong. You should look at yourself and what you are or aren't doing that is making you fat, not make up excuses.
look. I'm not trying to make excuses. I'm not THAT out of shape. I do bikram yoga 4 times per week and walk a lot. I just can't be as extensive about it as I was in my youthful years. I'm very healthy but I do need to drop 20ish lbs. per doctors orders. I've completely cut out any sugar drinks other than water and a few organic smoothies and an occaional glass of wine here and there. But at my age and with my busy schedule it's just not as easy as it was when I was 25. Not an excuse, just a simple fact.
But again, it's just because you don't understand your caloric need for a day and you either overeat or eat just the right amount to maintain your weight. You don't even need to exercise to create a calorie deficiency. I think you're the perfect example of what I'm talking about, you don't understand the very basic concept, which has nothing to do with time spent, but rather food ingested.
People need to get it out of their heads that it is about exercise. It's 10% working out, 90% food. Get your nutrition right and you won't need to exercise a day in your life. If you want to get fit however, make sure to balance your nutrition around your added caloric need to not drop weight too fast or at all if your goal is maintaining.
No, I'm 100% right. Weight control is about calories. End of story. Calories in < Calories out and you lose weight. Opposite and you gain weight. There's no more or less here, that is the very basic premise. You want to discuss specifics that affect calories in/calories out, but that's flawed. Teach people the base first, and let them balance themselves out. You can very easily test your metabolic rate.
However, many supersize people have participated in crash diets, drugs and other questionable regimens over the years in search of quick-fix thinness. Doing so can, after a while, sabotage the body's normal metabolic rate and endocrine output, making it much harder for these people to find the balance in their caloric equation without depriving themselves of needed micronutrients (vitamins, minerals).
So you're saying these people have abnormally low "Calories out". It still comes down to that very simple equation. These people first have to fix their calories out, get their metabolism back straight, then they can fix their calories in.
It is that easy to lose weight. People don't know this very simple and basic concept, they think "Fat/Sugar" has to do with weight, which is completely false. "Low Saturated Fat!" on a box of cookies means squat if the cookies are 170 calories for 3 vs 180 calories for 3 of the same cookies with normal saturated fat. You still can't eat the whole box in one sitting and think "hey, it's low fat, I can't gain weight from this".
You'd be surprised how many people think this way.
I don't have a dog in this fight, but the question that runs through my mind is: if it's so easy, why do people struggle with it? Why are there entire industries built around people that struggle with losing weight on their own?
People struggle because like someone pointed out, they lack willpower and I'll add that they lack education. Calorie control is the only way to lose weight. There's seriously no other way, since weight is based off of calories and calories alone. To lose weight, you need a calorie deficiency. To be more precise, 3500 calories = 1 lbs, each way. So you need to create a calorie deficiency of 3500 calories before you lose 1 lbs. My metabolic rate is around 1740, that's what I burn each day without lifting a finger. Add in my normal routine, and I'm around the magic 2000 calorie diet. Let's not add in my gym routine. So to lose 1 lbs in 7 days, I need to go on a 1500 calorie diet per day. That's going to give me a deficiency of 500 per day, times 7 days, 1 lbs lost.
There's entire industries because they profit from it. Some people like to buy "instant" solutions. 1 lbs in 7 days ? Bah humbug, too long, I have 100 to lose! There's no instant solutions to weight loss, quite the contrary, the entire weight loss industry makes money by keeping people fat and coming back for miracle cures. Their proposed plans of "1 shake/bar for breakfeast, same for lunch and a balanced diner" is awful. First, it should be the opposite, a good breakfeast and then their bars/shakes for lunch and diner. Breakfeast is where you get your day's energy. Second, that's not calorie control since it doesn't explain that it is trying to create a calorie deficit. So people just still overeat, they compensate the calories they didn't eat at breakfeast/lunch with a huge "balanced" diner.
I'm going to just assume you are young and have time on your hands. Because when I was young and had time staying trim was quite easy., Let's talk when you're in your 30's and are a busy professional :rolleyes:
I'm 32, work 35 hours per week in IT (sitting down on my ass), am on call with tons of pages coming in once every 2 weeks. I have a girlfriend, a mortgage and a dog.
Again, staying trim has nothing to do with having time or being busy or not. If you spend less calories, eat less calories. Balance your calories in to your calories out and you'll stay trim. Sure it means doing a bit more research into what you're eating, but that's not impossible. It also means listening to your body. Feeling "stuffed" means you overate. You should never feel full or stuffed. A donut is not faster to mow down than an Apple. It's not more filling either. It's tons more calories though.
You made an assumption about me and you were wrong. You should look at yourself and what you are or aren't doing that is making you fat, not make up excuses.
look. I'm not trying to make excuses. I'm not THAT out of shape. I do bikram yoga 4 times per week and walk a lot. I just can't be as extensive about it as I was in my youthful years. I'm very healthy but I do need to drop 20ish lbs. per doctors orders. I've completely cut out any sugar drinks other than water and a few organic smoothies and an occaional glass of wine here and there. But at my age and with my busy schedule it's just not as easy as it was when I was 25. Not an excuse, just a simple fact.
But again, it's just because you don't understand your caloric need for a day and you either overeat or eat just the right amount to maintain your weight. You don't even need to exercise to create a calorie deficiency. I think you're the perfect example of what I'm talking about, you don't understand the very basic concept, which has nothing to do with time spent, but rather food ingested.
People need to get it out of their heads that it is about exercise. It's 10% working out, 90% food. Get your nutrition right and you won't need to exercise a day in your life. If you want to get fit however, make sure to balance your nutrition around your added caloric need to not drop weight too fast or at all if your goal is maintaining.
sishaw
Mar 4, 03:34 PM
So we have...
-A few porn stars
-A Ferrari
-A briefcase of cocaine
-Excessive alcohol consumption
-A $30,000 check to a porn star
...how is this any different than 'Two and a Half Men'?
I love this man.
I agree, and it makes me wonder if the whole thing is a publicity stunt. Like the Joaquin Phoenix "meltdown."
-A few porn stars
-A Ferrari
-A briefcase of cocaine
-Excessive alcohol consumption
-A $30,000 check to a porn star
...how is this any different than 'Two and a Half Men'?
I love this man.
I agree, and it makes me wonder if the whole thing is a publicity stunt. Like the Joaquin Phoenix "meltdown."
Pragmatic67
Oct 23, 07:54 AM
just to clear up the confusion, is this a legal or technical restriction? Can you still do this with the basic edition technically, but illegally. Or are there technical restrictions being applied?
Burgess07
Apr 15, 07:17 PM
Although I find the slider buttons pretty, I think these are just a step to touch-interface. It makes sense when you have to actually slide the button (with your fingers). But when using a mouse/trackpad, it is more logical to point at the option you want and the selection will slide to the requested option.
I think this will return when touch-based interface will make its entry.
Apple could make them an option in System Preferences :p
281525
I think this will return when touch-based interface will make its entry.
Apple could make them an option in System Preferences :p
281525
Abstract
Oct 23, 07:51 AM
As if that's going to stop people. Most people don't even know about these usage restrictions.
ufkdo
Apr 13, 03:26 PM
I will most likely need to buy a TV on the middle of next year, so this would be awesome :)
ليست هناك تعليقات:
إرسال تعليق