djrod
Mar 31, 01:36 AM
Is frontrow back?
dshan
May 6, 07:26 AM
I can't see them making another architecture transition. The switch to intel was enough...
Why not? They've already done it twice - don't forget the 68K to PPC transition. I went through that too, and all I can say is: no, no, please, not again! I couldn't stand another transition.
CPU architecture transitions waste years of time, cost Apple and their customers huge amounts of money. The only way it's worth it is if the architecture you're going from is dead or dying, and the new one is much better, faster and cheaper. This was true for the 68K and sadly later for the PPC too, but there's no sign of the x86 losing it's edge in the price/performance stakes for laptops and above.
While it's not totally impossible that ARM might one day challenge Intel's x86 in the low-end notebook and el cheapo desktop space I can't see them ever seriously getting near Intel (or AMD) in the real desktop, server and serious MacBook Pro space. Intel's process lead, now a full generation and soon with 3D transistors too, will likely keep them ahead of any alternative architecture (barring perhaps a breakthrough in quantum computing or somesuch) for the foreseeable future. I can't see how Apple would gain anything real from moving away from x86 for the Mac. In fact, by 2013 the Atom may be seriously challenging ARM in the low-power performance stakes for tablets (and even possibly phones), so it might make more sense for iOS to transition to x86 rather than the reverse. Maybe.
Why not? They've already done it twice - don't forget the 68K to PPC transition. I went through that too, and all I can say is: no, no, please, not again! I couldn't stand another transition.
CPU architecture transitions waste years of time, cost Apple and their customers huge amounts of money. The only way it's worth it is if the architecture you're going from is dead or dying, and the new one is much better, faster and cheaper. This was true for the 68K and sadly later for the PPC too, but there's no sign of the x86 losing it's edge in the price/performance stakes for laptops and above.
While it's not totally impossible that ARM might one day challenge Intel's x86 in the low-end notebook and el cheapo desktop space I can't see them ever seriously getting near Intel (or AMD) in the real desktop, server and serious MacBook Pro space. Intel's process lead, now a full generation and soon with 3D transistors too, will likely keep them ahead of any alternative architecture (barring perhaps a breakthrough in quantum computing or somesuch) for the foreseeable future. I can't see how Apple would gain anything real from moving away from x86 for the Mac. In fact, by 2013 the Atom may be seriously challenging ARM in the low-power performance stakes for tablets (and even possibly phones), so it might make more sense for iOS to transition to x86 rather than the reverse. Maybe.
bigpics
Apr 25, 10:30 AM
Too late for that: http://www.spokeo.com/Holy Guacamole. But I'm not worried. It doesn't know my favorite pizza. Yet.
And in my case - not much fuel for password hackers to know my challenge question answers, but the fact is that more and more info about us can be reverse engineered from our digital "tracks" to build up quite a picture.
Speaking of pictures, I was just hearing that it's possible to gather other bits, e.g., from EXIF data on Flickr, Picasa, etc., including user annotations, avatar names from forums, etc. Also mentioned was a technique of "surrounding" your IP address from the servers it interacts with over time to pin its location down. And there are a growing number of other sources - e.g., facebook (besides what most of us make public there, just start some stupid app that requires "access to your basic information" and give the app away for the info) and other social and dating sites.
The "net" result (so to speak) is that little to none of the data may compromise you on its own - but when assembled could be quite a portfolio of info about you (and your associations and patterns of associations) that could be used to hack your ID, track you and more.
Not to mention if you live in any major city and go to stores, public buildings, etc., you're being photographed many, many times per day. (In London, up to thousands of times per day, e.g.)
But for all the arguing in the larger media and here, the simple question of why THIS file exists, and what its real intended use is hasn't yet been directly addressed by nearly anyone, especially anyone in a position to actually know.
It's not there for no reason and didn't program itself to exist. That doesn't pass any Occam's Razor or smell test. So what the hell IS the story with it??
Meanwhile, for get off the grid wishers, your moment of zen:
Transmit the message, to the receiver
Hope for an answer some day
I got three passports, couple of visas
Don't even know my real name
High on a hillside, trucks are loading
Everything's ready to roll, I, I
I sleep in the daytime, I work in the nigh time
I might not ever get home
This ain't no party, this ain't no disco
This ain't no fooling around
This ain't no mud club, or C. B. G. B.
I ain't got time for that now
This ain't no party, this ain't no disco
This ain't no fooling around
No time for dancing, or lovey dovey
I ain't got time for that now
Heard about Houston? Heard about Detroit?
Heard about Pittsburgh, PA?
You ought to know not to stand by the window
Somebody see you up there
I got some groceries, some peanut butter
To last a couple of days
But I ain't got no speakers
Ain't got no headphones
Ain't got no records to play
~David Byrne (Life During Wartime)
And in my case - not much fuel for password hackers to know my challenge question answers, but the fact is that more and more info about us can be reverse engineered from our digital "tracks" to build up quite a picture.
Speaking of pictures, I was just hearing that it's possible to gather other bits, e.g., from EXIF data on Flickr, Picasa, etc., including user annotations, avatar names from forums, etc. Also mentioned was a technique of "surrounding" your IP address from the servers it interacts with over time to pin its location down. And there are a growing number of other sources - e.g., facebook (besides what most of us make public there, just start some stupid app that requires "access to your basic information" and give the app away for the info) and other social and dating sites.
The "net" result (so to speak) is that little to none of the data may compromise you on its own - but when assembled could be quite a portfolio of info about you (and your associations and patterns of associations) that could be used to hack your ID, track you and more.
Not to mention if you live in any major city and go to stores, public buildings, etc., you're being photographed many, many times per day. (In London, up to thousands of times per day, e.g.)
But for all the arguing in the larger media and here, the simple question of why THIS file exists, and what its real intended use is hasn't yet been directly addressed by nearly anyone, especially anyone in a position to actually know.
It's not there for no reason and didn't program itself to exist. That doesn't pass any Occam's Razor or smell test. So what the hell IS the story with it??
Meanwhile, for get off the grid wishers, your moment of zen:
Transmit the message, to the receiver
Hope for an answer some day
I got three passports, couple of visas
Don't even know my real name
High on a hillside, trucks are loading
Everything's ready to roll, I, I
I sleep in the daytime, I work in the nigh time
I might not ever get home
This ain't no party, this ain't no disco
This ain't no fooling around
This ain't no mud club, or C. B. G. B.
I ain't got time for that now
This ain't no party, this ain't no disco
This ain't no fooling around
No time for dancing, or lovey dovey
I ain't got time for that now
Heard about Houston? Heard about Detroit?
Heard about Pittsburgh, PA?
You ought to know not to stand by the window
Somebody see you up there
I got some groceries, some peanut butter
To last a couple of days
But I ain't got no speakers
Ain't got no headphones
Ain't got no records to play
~David Byrne (Life During Wartime)
Don't panic
May 4, 08:59 AM
Alright, i am getting bored of listening to my beard growing, so i'll go ahead:
R1T1: Loras group explores the start room.
with raven's latest explanation of the trap rule, there is no significant difference between explore-move and move-explore, and i decided to be conservative in case the jokesters upstairs put a trap right away at the start.
at level one we are very weak and any encounter with a trap or lowest-level monster means certain death for at least one of us. we need to uplevel asap.
R1T1: Loras group explores the start room.
with raven's latest explanation of the trap rule, there is no significant difference between explore-move and move-explore, and i decided to be conservative in case the jokesters upstairs put a trap right away at the start.
at level one we are very weak and any encounter with a trap or lowest-level monster means certain death for at least one of us. we need to uplevel asap.
QCassidy352
Jul 21, 02:54 PM
wow, most importantly on slide 3 they say that they launched the 965 chipset. that means they can switch to the 965 integrated GPU across the board for consumer macs. that would certainly help the heat issues, make the macs cheaper and less complicated to design for apple. standard parts and boards allow for even faster updates. good news.
mmm... GMA965. :D That should be a very nice improvement over the 950!
mmm... GMA965. :D That should be a very nice improvement over the 950!
DakotaGuy
May 6, 12:44 AM
Another option:
they may include an instant-on iOS in addition to an intel OSX environment. Several other manufacturers have done something similar.
Unless they want to make you pay for something you don't need... not necessary. The new Intel Macs that are being released right now have so much power that they could run every iOS app in emulated mode and the processor would hardly even notice it. That's today. Imagine where Intel will be in a couple of years? An ARM chip sitting next to an Intel powerhouse is not needed. As far as being instant on... I'd say my iMac wakes up from a sleep just about as fast as my iPad.
they may include an instant-on iOS in addition to an intel OSX environment. Several other manufacturers have done something similar.
Unless they want to make you pay for something you don't need... not necessary. The new Intel Macs that are being released right now have so much power that they could run every iOS app in emulated mode and the processor would hardly even notice it. That's today. Imagine where Intel will be in a couple of years? An ARM chip sitting next to an Intel powerhouse is not needed. As far as being instant on... I'd say my iMac wakes up from a sleep just about as fast as my iPad.
cmaier
Apr 18, 03:05 PM
Apple had the same problem with the original LISA UI. It was so simplistic that they lost the lawsuits. Same may happen here.
That's not at all what happened.
That's not at all what happened.
gnasher729
Apr 25, 09:58 AM
Is there a link to a site showing that Google logs the tracking info on their servers?
http://samy.pl/androidmap/
It finds my router within 150 meters. This is something that should _not_ be possible. Apple claims that it is not possible to access the location data on their servers, unless you are an iPhone asking for its location. So you should only be able to get the location of WiFi base stations nearby - but you know their location anyway.
It's inaccurate because it doesn't track YOUR location, just the location of your nearest Cell Tower.
It's not about cell towers, it is about Wifi base stations. And it is not about _your_ location, it is about the location of these WiFi base stations.
that is the point that apple is critizised for. this is a gaping security hole! nobody has claimed apple is using this information for malicious purposes.
however Steve answered the question if apple is tracking users. a classic strawman.
Give us a realistic scenario where this would be an actually security problem. Where a person can access your phone, and has the time to extract this data without being noticed, finds places where you have been, uses this information to hurt you, and could not get this information or hurt you in another way. That's the important thing: It is only a risk if that information, and nothing else, allows someone to hurt you.
http://samy.pl/androidmap/
It finds my router within 150 meters. This is something that should _not_ be possible. Apple claims that it is not possible to access the location data on their servers, unless you are an iPhone asking for its location. So you should only be able to get the location of WiFi base stations nearby - but you know their location anyway.
It's inaccurate because it doesn't track YOUR location, just the location of your nearest Cell Tower.
It's not about cell towers, it is about Wifi base stations. And it is not about _your_ location, it is about the location of these WiFi base stations.
that is the point that apple is critizised for. this is a gaping security hole! nobody has claimed apple is using this information for malicious purposes.
however Steve answered the question if apple is tracking users. a classic strawman.
Give us a realistic scenario where this would be an actually security problem. Where a person can access your phone, and has the time to extract this data without being noticed, finds places where you have been, uses this information to hurt you, and could not get this information or hurt you in another way. That's the important thing: It is only a risk if that information, and nothing else, allows someone to hurt you.
i.mac
Apr 5, 01:10 PM
Honestly, I hope Toyota tells Apple to stuff it.
Jail break is legal for personal use. Corporate use of jail break may be another thing altogether.
Jail break is legal for personal use. Corporate use of jail break may be another thing altogether.
Cavepainter
Mar 30, 02:36 PM
I hardly think $1 for 20 gigabytes of available anywhere storage is very unreasonable.
Maybe that rate wouldn't be bad, but if you read the article, that's not what they're charging. Beyond the initial free amount, its $1 per 1 gig, not $1 per 20 gigs. A terabyte per year is a thousand dollars a year. That's not too cheap. And this isn't including bandwidth usage, which is gonna cost money too, of course. Plus, what do you think, are these rates and bandwidth usage costs gonna be higher or lower in the future?
They (banks) aren't storing physical cash somewhere anymore, it's all just a line of electronic code that states what your balance is.
Well, it actually it still exists as money, but of course banks aren't storing it all in a vault- they're loaning it out to other people, at rates 10 to 100 times greater than the interest rate they are offering you for using that money- and they're using your money to make them money. I'm sure they could loan out money at much lower rates and still do fine, but that's what we're used to paying, so there you go. But anyway, back on track-
If you want premium content, you pay for it.
That premium content you're happy to be paying lots of money for is actually making the provider plenty of money on the back end too- remember cable and satellite television still has plenty of advertisements. Again, they could probably charge you a third of what you currently pay and it would still be profitable. (I'm just sayin'...)
People just think it's ridiculous to spend money on music because avenues have popped up where you can get it for free.
True, but for me, no, I actually buy my music and support the artists- I just think its ridiculous to buy my music and pay someone else over and over and over again, forever, just to be able listen to it.
I have 2 computers at home, a laptop, a phone that has storage, a DVR, even my Xbox can store music files..... How nice to be able to visit my parents, or go on vacation, or be at a friend's house, log on to their computer, and have my entire music library instantly available at my fingertips.
80 gigs of music in a computer's memory doesn't actually "weigh" all that much. You can have all those files right there on your devices right now, unless you have terabytes of things to store. As storage continues to grow on computers, I think you'll find that the prices will be more and more appealing for larger and larger amounts of storage.
Look, I understand your points, and if you have multiple platforms that need to share and sync enormous amounts of files, that can be a challenge and the cloud would be convenient. But for the amount of music and photography and other files I have and the way I would store it and access it, I personally would rather just have all the files I need right there on my computer at my fingertips without having to pay someone to access it from a remote location. You're certainly free to spend money to access things you already purchased, but its not for me. To each their own.
Maybe that rate wouldn't be bad, but if you read the article, that's not what they're charging. Beyond the initial free amount, its $1 per 1 gig, not $1 per 20 gigs. A terabyte per year is a thousand dollars a year. That's not too cheap. And this isn't including bandwidth usage, which is gonna cost money too, of course. Plus, what do you think, are these rates and bandwidth usage costs gonna be higher or lower in the future?
They (banks) aren't storing physical cash somewhere anymore, it's all just a line of electronic code that states what your balance is.
Well, it actually it still exists as money, but of course banks aren't storing it all in a vault- they're loaning it out to other people, at rates 10 to 100 times greater than the interest rate they are offering you for using that money- and they're using your money to make them money. I'm sure they could loan out money at much lower rates and still do fine, but that's what we're used to paying, so there you go. But anyway, back on track-
If you want premium content, you pay for it.
That premium content you're happy to be paying lots of money for is actually making the provider plenty of money on the back end too- remember cable and satellite television still has plenty of advertisements. Again, they could probably charge you a third of what you currently pay and it would still be profitable. (I'm just sayin'...)
People just think it's ridiculous to spend money on music because avenues have popped up where you can get it for free.
True, but for me, no, I actually buy my music and support the artists- I just think its ridiculous to buy my music and pay someone else over and over and over again, forever, just to be able listen to it.
I have 2 computers at home, a laptop, a phone that has storage, a DVR, even my Xbox can store music files..... How nice to be able to visit my parents, or go on vacation, or be at a friend's house, log on to their computer, and have my entire music library instantly available at my fingertips.
80 gigs of music in a computer's memory doesn't actually "weigh" all that much. You can have all those files right there on your devices right now, unless you have terabytes of things to store. As storage continues to grow on computers, I think you'll find that the prices will be more and more appealing for larger and larger amounts of storage.
Look, I understand your points, and if you have multiple platforms that need to share and sync enormous amounts of files, that can be a challenge and the cloud would be convenient. But for the amount of music and photography and other files I have and the way I would store it and access it, I personally would rather just have all the files I need right there on my computer at my fingertips without having to pay someone to access it from a remote location. You're certainly free to spend money to access things you already purchased, but its not for me. To each their own.
costmo
Apr 7, 10:51 AM
Deep pockets alone are not enough ... you also need some strategic planing to know ahead what you need and make sure that you get it.
All hail Tim Cook!
Seriously though, I think people are going to be surprised at how well RIM rebounds. Not that they are going to stop or even slow the iPad or iPhone train, but I will surprised if they don't carve themselves out a pretty good niche.
They're a much more resilient company than that for which they are given credit. Do some serious research into the company as though you were looking to invest, and you'll find out that they got a little too complacent for a time, but they have some vision that will surprise people in the coming years.
All hail Tim Cook!
Seriously though, I think people are going to be surprised at how well RIM rebounds. Not that they are going to stop or even slow the iPad or iPhone train, but I will surprised if they don't carve themselves out a pretty good niche.
They're a much more resilient company than that for which they are given credit. Do some serious research into the company as though you were looking to invest, and you'll find out that they got a little too complacent for a time, but they have some vision that will surprise people in the coming years.
ergle2
Sep 17, 02:44 AM
I Doubt Merom Supplies Are Off Allocation Yet � It's Unlikely Apple Can Get All They Need yet. Therefore MacBook will get Merom later and mini last.
Indeed. The big question is when they can update the MB?
Santa Rosa is currently expected no earlier than April. Assuming the MB's can't get Merom til, say, December, is it worth going C2D for ~4 months? (Assuming Santa Rosa is on-time -- which, to be fair, Intel's been pretty good at lately).
If the current enclosure is viable for Merom, then probably, but any late? Difficult to say.
The mini's probably less of a risk in that sense, and doesn't use CPUs in the same speed-range as the notebook systems, so it wouldn't surprise me to see it move up to C2D at the same time as the MB. I agree before the MB seems unlike for commercial reasons.
Indeed. The big question is when they can update the MB?
Santa Rosa is currently expected no earlier than April. Assuming the MB's can't get Merom til, say, December, is it worth going C2D for ~4 months? (Assuming Santa Rosa is on-time -- which, to be fair, Intel's been pretty good at lately).
If the current enclosure is viable for Merom, then probably, but any late? Difficult to say.
The mini's probably less of a risk in that sense, and doesn't use CPUs in the same speed-range as the notebook systems, so it wouldn't surprise me to see it move up to C2D at the same time as the MB. I agree before the MB seems unlike for commercial reasons.
miamialley
Apr 5, 02:04 PM
Geez, Apple is relentless with this ******.
boncellis
Jul 23, 06:35 PM
Personally, i'd love Apple releasing a intermediate desktop solution (between iMac and Mac Pro) sporting a not-yet-released 3.2GHz Conroe porcessor. That would be my dream machine BUT this is unlikely as its clocked higher than the top Woodcrest chip which tops out at 3.0GHz.
I might just get a windows box and dump linux on it....after all i already own a mac (PowerBook) with lots of life left. So if i miss Mac OS X i'll simply use my PB.
Other alternative would be to buy any conroe machine and just swap out the CPU with the 3.2 GHz chip launches. Too bad conroes will most likely be launching on iMacs though.
Don't do it man! You deserve better!
I might just get a windows box and dump linux on it....after all i already own a mac (PowerBook) with lots of life left. So if i miss Mac OS X i'll simply use my PB.
Other alternative would be to buy any conroe machine and just swap out the CPU with the 3.2 GHz chip launches. Too bad conroes will most likely be launching on iMacs though.
Don't do it man! You deserve better!
acurafan
May 7, 01:23 PM
that would be awesome, free is good! i'd sign up and use it as honeypot for all useless mail and spam (same as my gmail and yahoo) :D
Detlev
Aug 4, 09:55 AM
Agreed. So that means...
Leopard - seemless Windows intergration...
I'd rather see the Apple OS built as a virus and slowly take over the Windows OS partition. Windows users wouldn't even notice the difference. They would get used to the new key strokes thinking this is the way it is supposed to be.
If they really wanted to make it Windows like, Apple could accomplish the assimilation within thirty days and then kill the offending OS.
Leopard - seemless Windows intergration...
I'd rather see the Apple OS built as a virus and slowly take over the Windows OS partition. Windows users wouldn't even notice the difference. They would get used to the new key strokes thinking this is the way it is supposed to be.
If they really wanted to make it Windows like, Apple could accomplish the assimilation within thirty days and then kill the offending OS.
ergle2
Sep 15, 11:09 PM
If you really want longer battery life, then you should be hoping to keep the X1600. It's regarded as having the best "performance per watt" of recent mobile GPUs.
I'd rather have a bigger battery and a Go 7700. I've not seen any decent figures for power draw on the mobile chips. The 7700 is manufactured on an 80nm process tho', so that should help some.
Personally, I hope (well, pipe dream actually) they'll make MBP build-to-order like Mac Pro. I'd downgrade the CPU to the 2.0GHz version. It wholesales for $130 less than the 2.16, and $340 less than the 2.33. That's way too much to pay for a fractional speed increase.
OTOH, the 2.0 Xeon is $370 less than the 2.66 and Apple only cuts the price $75 for two of them. That's robbery. So I guess MBP BTO probably wouldn't help me even if they did it.
Bear in mind custom options effectively "cost" Apple a lot more due to requiring special attention in a way the rest of the line doesn't. More so with the laptop line due to the processor being socketted rather than soldered.
Personally, I think the 2.33GHz part price is insane considering the small speed-bump, but that's up to Apple.
I'd rather have a bigger battery and a Go 7700. I've not seen any decent figures for power draw on the mobile chips. The 7700 is manufactured on an 80nm process tho', so that should help some.
Personally, I hope (well, pipe dream actually) they'll make MBP build-to-order like Mac Pro. I'd downgrade the CPU to the 2.0GHz version. It wholesales for $130 less than the 2.16, and $340 less than the 2.33. That's way too much to pay for a fractional speed increase.
OTOH, the 2.0 Xeon is $370 less than the 2.66 and Apple only cuts the price $75 for two of them. That's robbery. So I guess MBP BTO probably wouldn't help me even if they did it.
Bear in mind custom options effectively "cost" Apple a lot more due to requiring special attention in a way the rest of the line doesn't. More so with the laptop line due to the processor being socketted rather than soldered.
Personally, I think the 2.33GHz part price is insane considering the small speed-bump, but that's up to Apple.
newbididewbidie
Apr 20, 12:23 AM
New processor...same package. Works for me!
JoeG4
Nov 22, 09:40 PM
Actually, I just realized the real irony in this comment Palm made!
:D :D
It's rather funny, Palm is saying "PC guys" can't design a phone, but last I checked, Palm got their butt whooped so bad by some "PC guys" that run a little company called Microsoft, that all of their new products run that OS!
Hypocritical, no? :eek: :D
:D :D
It's rather funny, Palm is saying "PC guys" can't design a phone, but last I checked, Palm got their butt whooped so bad by some "PC guys" that run a little company called Microsoft, that all of their new products run that OS!
Hypocritical, no? :eek: :D
0815
Apr 25, 09:01 AM
Call me naive (or perhaps paranoid) but I've been assuming my location is being tracked since I bought my first smart phone years ago.
I guess the fine point of difference is: It is stored on your phone (and computer where you do the backup), but it is never send to anyone ... so Apple is not tracking you since they never see that information. Saying Apple tracks you would mean that information collected is send to Apple, which is not the case.
I guess the fine point of difference is: It is stored on your phone (and computer where you do the backup), but it is never send to anyone ... so Apple is not tracking you since they never see that information. Saying Apple tracks you would mean that information collected is send to Apple, which is not the case.
iMacZealot
Jul 30, 07:37 PM
I have Verizon, my wife T-Mobile. T-Mobile works fine in New York City, and so does Verizon. Especially in the past year Verizon has spent literally a fortune improving their reception, so that dead spots are much fewer than they used to be. I believe this is why they ignore "cool" phones, they are going for reliability with companies who buy in bulk for their employees, not really for consumers - go to a Verizon store if you want to be convinced they don't really care about the common man -
but what I am trying to say is, that I disagree about reception of Verizon: it's very good, and especially so outside of the major business cities like NYC and Washington. My wife's T-Mobile often is out of range when we travel, and we have to use my Verizon phone.
That said, Verizon rarely, with the exception of the recent Treo 700p, gets the really cool phones, so will probably bypass Apple as well.
I do agree that Verizon does not care about the layman, but I never get very good service here in Denver or if I visit my sisters in the bay area. I don't know why, but I just never get three bars or above usually at my house. Whenever I go to NYC, I spend most, if not all my time in Times Square and it just seems to constantly go in and out. I think T-Mobile is actually the best choice when it comes to international travel. Sprint is $1.50/min. and didn't even work in Rome, T-Mobile is $.99/min., and let's not even think about VZW's plans. T-Mobile worked for me from Here to LAX to TPE to SIN to KUL to even REP. Besides, they have a better minutes/dollar ratio than any of the other three major carriers and the coverage checker I checked works in every city I visit normally which are NYC, the Lamorinda Area, Vail, Boston, Denver (my home), and of course, everywhere else in the world.
but what I am trying to say is, that I disagree about reception of Verizon: it's very good, and especially so outside of the major business cities like NYC and Washington. My wife's T-Mobile often is out of range when we travel, and we have to use my Verizon phone.
That said, Verizon rarely, with the exception of the recent Treo 700p, gets the really cool phones, so will probably bypass Apple as well.
I do agree that Verizon does not care about the layman, but I never get very good service here in Denver or if I visit my sisters in the bay area. I don't know why, but I just never get three bars or above usually at my house. Whenever I go to NYC, I spend most, if not all my time in Times Square and it just seems to constantly go in and out. I think T-Mobile is actually the best choice when it comes to international travel. Sprint is $1.50/min. and didn't even work in Rome, T-Mobile is $.99/min., and let's not even think about VZW's plans. T-Mobile worked for me from Here to LAX to TPE to SIN to KUL to even REP. Besides, they have a better minutes/dollar ratio than any of the other three major carriers and the coverage checker I checked works in every city I visit normally which are NYC, the Lamorinda Area, Vail, Boston, Denver (my home), and of course, everywhere else in the world.
Watabou
Apr 23, 04:44 PM
That is awesome. I can't wait for a Retina display Macbook Pro. Yeah!
alent1234
Apr 25, 10:56 AM
So Steve is saying there is no database of locations? Thats just an outright lie.
iOS uses services from a company called Skyhook to help with location tracking. they use GPS and wifi access points to pinpoint locations faster than GPS.
a lot of android phones used to use it as well but in 2.1 or 2.2 google made it very hard to use anything except google for location. this is why a lot of android phones have slow GPS or it doesn't work as well indoors.
if the data is sent to anyone it's probably to skyhook to improve their service. or maybe apple is doing something similar and building their own location database. do you really think that every time you use GPS it really sends a signal to outer space?
iOS uses services from a company called Skyhook to help with location tracking. they use GPS and wifi access points to pinpoint locations faster than GPS.
a lot of android phones used to use it as well but in 2.1 or 2.2 google made it very hard to use anything except google for location. this is why a lot of android phones have slow GPS or it doesn't work as well indoors.
if the data is sent to anyone it's probably to skyhook to improve their service. or maybe apple is doing something similar and building their own location database. do you really think that every time you use GPS it really sends a signal to outer space?
aldejesus
Mar 30, 08:50 PM
Installed fine on mine.
Thanks, will install as soon as the download finish.
Thanks, will install as soon as the download finish.
