cozmot
Mar 18, 12:00 AM
The Safari exploit launched a Mac OSX program. How is that NOT an "OS" issue? The exploit could have just as easily told the Mac to delete a directory on the hard drive, for instance. So it's not just Safari that's an issue but the fact that OSX would let Safari execute a program outside the browser.
I'd like to know where this idea that "many have tried" to create viruses and/or malware for OSX comes from. How do you know what people have done or tried? I'm not saying Unix is easy to exploit, but I know darn well it's not invulnerable. If they held an OS hacking event with a prize, I'm sure someone would prove my point for me.
And this idea that nothing can be done on the Mac until a virus or other malware exploit shows up on a news site is absurd. There are plenty of tools out there, for instance, to point out dangerous web sites that could be a threat to a computer. Most OSX users wouldn't bother to install one if one was offered to them because they believe themselves invulnerable. So why worry about visiting a malware site? Some exploits are potentially cross-platform (adobe flash, for example). Again, I say most OSX users are far too comfortable in a foolish belief that they are not in danger from anything out there.
Before I could even get to this, cwt1nospam and GGJstudios jumped on it. I'll add that a Safari exploit just can't take over an OS X system. It can do some minor things, but doesn't give admin or root access to the OS.
You nervous Windows users -- and you have every right to be -- are used to exploits commandeering your computers. It's your every day reality. For Mac users, it doesn't happen. Never has. But to characterize us as engaging in "foolish belief" that we're not in danger out there is a false argument.
Rather than go through the laborious repeat of my earlier post to you, please re-read it. Mac users don't deny the dangers. Unlike Windows users we're just not lulled into installing expensive, beastly software that drags our systems down that gives us a false sense of security that we're safe and protected. Most exploits come from unsafe computing, including the incomplete list I assembled above. Mac users don't take this dope, and have clearer minds about the proper steps to protect their systems.
I have multiple lines of defense built up against attackers using malware, viruses, worms, Trojan Horses and the like. It starts with the firewall in my wireless router, OpenDNS, safe practices and other methods I've learned from Mac and other forums.
I have never experienced a hack, a virus, a worm, a Trojan Horse or any other exploit in over 20 years because of this. And in the next 20 I will not either, because I'll keep learning and building up my defenses, without wasting a dollar on beastly software that gives me a false sense of security and relieves me of my responsibility for safe computing.
I'd like to know where this idea that "many have tried" to create viruses and/or malware for OSX comes from. How do you know what people have done or tried? I'm not saying Unix is easy to exploit, but I know darn well it's not invulnerable. If they held an OS hacking event with a prize, I'm sure someone would prove my point for me.
And this idea that nothing can be done on the Mac until a virus or other malware exploit shows up on a news site is absurd. There are plenty of tools out there, for instance, to point out dangerous web sites that could be a threat to a computer. Most OSX users wouldn't bother to install one if one was offered to them because they believe themselves invulnerable. So why worry about visiting a malware site? Some exploits are potentially cross-platform (adobe flash, for example). Again, I say most OSX users are far too comfortable in a foolish belief that they are not in danger from anything out there.
Before I could even get to this, cwt1nospam and GGJstudios jumped on it. I'll add that a Safari exploit just can't take over an OS X system. It can do some minor things, but doesn't give admin or root access to the OS.
You nervous Windows users -- and you have every right to be -- are used to exploits commandeering your computers. It's your every day reality. For Mac users, it doesn't happen. Never has. But to characterize us as engaging in "foolish belief" that we're not in danger out there is a false argument.
Rather than go through the laborious repeat of my earlier post to you, please re-read it. Mac users don't deny the dangers. Unlike Windows users we're just not lulled into installing expensive, beastly software that drags our systems down that gives us a false sense of security that we're safe and protected. Most exploits come from unsafe computing, including the incomplete list I assembled above. Mac users don't take this dope, and have clearer minds about the proper steps to protect their systems.
I have multiple lines of defense built up against attackers using malware, viruses, worms, Trojan Horses and the like. It starts with the firewall in my wireless router, OpenDNS, safe practices and other methods I've learned from Mac and other forums.
I have never experienced a hack, a virus, a worm, a Trojan Horse or any other exploit in over 20 years because of this. And in the next 20 I will not either, because I'll keep learning and building up my defenses, without wasting a dollar on beastly software that gives me a false sense of security and relieves me of my responsibility for safe computing.
kurosov
Mar 29, 11:41 AM
So basically their prediction is that all those with a current nokia phone, even non smartphones will simply switch over to the wp7 nokia phones by 2015?
not likely.
not likely.
LOLaMac
Mar 29, 02:55 PM
using the keyboard, how quaint
Far faster than using the mouse. Mac OS X is very good at providing keyboard shortcuts, far better than Windows, although that may have changed with Windows 7.
I don't even get the point of your snarky comment. You know damn well that the functions are also available via the menus and right mouse button too.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0092007/
Far faster than using the mouse. Mac OS X is very good at providing keyboard shortcuts, far better than Windows, although that may have changed with Windows 7.
I don't even get the point of your snarky comment. You know damn well that the functions are also available via the menus and right mouse button too.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0092007/
rdowns
Apr 25, 10:09 AM
He's definitely lying about some stuff
http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=7705428&postcount=15
In less than 3 years, your mom went to law school, passed the bar exam, and became the top attorney in the biggest law firm in your state? Impressive.
http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=10945954&postcount=40
http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=8149540&postcount=65
So which is it? M5, Prius or big SUV?
Of course, this isn't the first time he's shown hate for the cops:
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=8410206&#post8410206
I just love it when people get what's coming to them. :)
http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=7705428&postcount=15
In less than 3 years, your mom went to law school, passed the bar exam, and became the top attorney in the biggest law firm in your state? Impressive.
http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=10945954&postcount=40
http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=8149540&postcount=65
So which is it? M5, Prius or big SUV?
Of course, this isn't the first time he's shown hate for the cops:
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=8410206&#post8410206
I just love it when people get what's coming to them. :)
cube
Mar 30, 01:28 PM
deleted
P-Worm
Sep 13, 08:58 PM
No way, it might actually happen...
P-Worm
P-Worm
rotobadger
Mar 30, 12:47 PM
back here in the UK Hoover were able to trade mark Hoover as their name despite the fact that hoover is the generic term for a vacuum cleaner!
Well, we ask for a "Kleenex", not a tissue.
We drink a "Coke", not a soda.
We use a "Band-Aid", not an adhesive bandage.
We like to "Roller Blade", not inline skate.
Although we don't "Hoover" here in the United States, I think "Hoover" falls into the "Coke, Kleenex, Band-aid, etc." catagory in England.
Well, we ask for a "Kleenex", not a tissue.
We drink a "Coke", not a soda.
We use a "Band-Aid", not an adhesive bandage.
We like to "Roller Blade", not inline skate.
Although we don't "Hoover" here in the United States, I think "Hoover" falls into the "Coke, Kleenex, Band-aid, etc." catagory in England.
LarryC
Apr 30, 11:35 PM
Aurichie,
Thank you, for your comments. You make some very valid points. I don't really know much about this whole cloud storage thing. I suppose I really need to read up on that. Is this just another name for something like the commercials I am hearing a lot lately about a company called carbonite? Just an offsite storage method that we pay a yearly fee for? If so, then I could certainly see a real benefit to something like that. I currently have over 132GB of iTunes media. I know it's a lot. I have a huge number of audio books, an even larger Podcast collection and a pretty good amount of music. I will have to look into this cloud storage and see what it offers. Thanks again.
Thank you, for your comments. You make some very valid points. I don't really know much about this whole cloud storage thing. I suppose I really need to read up on that. Is this just another name for something like the commercials I am hearing a lot lately about a company called carbonite? Just an offsite storage method that we pay a yearly fee for? If so, then I could certainly see a real benefit to something like that. I currently have over 132GB of iTunes media. I know it's a lot. I have a huge number of audio books, an even larger Podcast collection and a pretty good amount of music. I will have to look into this cloud storage and see what it offers. Thanks again.
Evangelion
Aug 23, 11:45 PM
Steve Jobs knew this was a BS patent and it shows in his comments. Absolutely Stupid. Hell, the LISA had a Hierarchal File System.
Not Hierarchial File System! Hierarchial MENU System!
Now, we can freely discuss the "merits" of this patent, but fact is that Apple lost, fair 'n square. If Apple thought that Creatives patent was bogus, they would have NOT paid. 100 million dollars is a lot of cash, no matter how you slice it. If the patent was bogus, and they still paid, Apple would be sending other companies a message that said "Want some cash? Sue us with bogus patents, we'll gladly pay!". No, Apple paid because they felt that they were really infringing and that if they had proceedd with the lawsuit, they would have lost a lot more than 100 million.
Bottom line: Creative knew this was a BS patent, too, but they figured they had to try.
If it's a BS patent, why did Apple pay? Clearly, it was NOT a BS patent. Truem the patent-system might be screwed up, but that is not the point of this discussion.
The question is: Will they go after Microsoft, too? It would be hypocritical not to, after all.
If it's UI infringes on the patentt, sure. If it doesn't, why sue?
Creative is only worth $500 million, how come Apple didn't just buy them?
Because it would have cost the five times more than it did now? Because Creative has very little of interest for Apple? Because if they did that, everyone would be suing Apple with hopes that Apple would just buy them as well?
Wong Hoo to Creative engineer: "This is no good, i give you $1000000 more and i want something much much better"
unCreative engineer: "Wooo Hooo, thanks Mr, Hoo, i'll do it in 128 different colors, am sure that it will turn the market upside-down"
As Jobs said in his most recent keynote more money in R&D isn't everything, and if he says so i believe him.
Unless Woo has something extraordinary under his sleeve - which he doesn't cause if he did he would not need more money - i see Creative in the same position in a couple of years from now. And then they'll try to sue somebody else.
The article you are quoting was published two years ago....
Not Hierarchial File System! Hierarchial MENU System!
Now, we can freely discuss the "merits" of this patent, but fact is that Apple lost, fair 'n square. If Apple thought that Creatives patent was bogus, they would have NOT paid. 100 million dollars is a lot of cash, no matter how you slice it. If the patent was bogus, and they still paid, Apple would be sending other companies a message that said "Want some cash? Sue us with bogus patents, we'll gladly pay!". No, Apple paid because they felt that they were really infringing and that if they had proceedd with the lawsuit, they would have lost a lot more than 100 million.
Bottom line: Creative knew this was a BS patent, too, but they figured they had to try.
If it's a BS patent, why did Apple pay? Clearly, it was NOT a BS patent. Truem the patent-system might be screwed up, but that is not the point of this discussion.
The question is: Will they go after Microsoft, too? It would be hypocritical not to, after all.
If it's UI infringes on the patentt, sure. If it doesn't, why sue?
Creative is only worth $500 million, how come Apple didn't just buy them?
Because it would have cost the five times more than it did now? Because Creative has very little of interest for Apple? Because if they did that, everyone would be suing Apple with hopes that Apple would just buy them as well?
Wong Hoo to Creative engineer: "This is no good, i give you $1000000 more and i want something much much better"
unCreative engineer: "Wooo Hooo, thanks Mr, Hoo, i'll do it in 128 different colors, am sure that it will turn the market upside-down"
As Jobs said in his most recent keynote more money in R&D isn't everything, and if he says so i believe him.
Unless Woo has something extraordinary under his sleeve - which he doesn't cause if he did he would not need more money - i see Creative in the same position in a couple of years from now. And then they'll try to sue somebody else.
The article you are quoting was published two years ago....
Hattig
Mar 29, 11:32 AM
The issue is that people don't care about Nokia phones any more.
Back in the day they had a big market in feature phones - what Symbian did quite well back in the day. However Symbian hasn't migrated to the SmartPhone era well. In that same vein, neither have Nokia's traditional customers, who have no reason to stick with Nokia if forced to get a SmartPhone.
And I think this research drastically underestimates HP's efforts with WebOS, which should start seeing results later this year.
Back in the day they had a big market in feature phones - what Symbian did quite well back in the day. However Symbian hasn't migrated to the SmartPhone era well. In that same vein, neither have Nokia's traditional customers, who have no reason to stick with Nokia if forced to get a SmartPhone.
And I think this research drastically underestimates HP's efforts with WebOS, which should start seeing results later this year.
Dorkington
Apr 18, 11:57 AM
Minimum wage needs to be increased, national healthcare needs to be implemented and tax holes closed. This country would be in a lot better shape as far as it's lower classes go, imo.
Sobering
Sep 4, 03:32 PM
New iMacs? Are you freakin kidding me? I just bought a damn iMac and now there is already new ones! Pffff...
Lightivity
Sep 20, 04:30 AM
Sorry if the question has been answered before, but here goes:
Is any of the film content in iTunes Store in 16x9 encoded? In other words, is it enhanced for widescreen displays (commonly known as anamorphically encoded)?
Is any of the film content in iTunes Store in 16x9 encoded? In other words, is it enhanced for widescreen displays (commonly known as anamorphically encoded)?
theelysium
May 3, 04:08 PM
I think there is an error on the iMac performance page.
It shows:
For i5
283912
Then for i7
283913
Shouldn't it show faster performance for the i7?:confused:
I sent an email to someone who works on their website asking them to double check that.:D
I thught was strange as well at first, but I believe that the comparison is between i5 1st gen vs 2nd gen and i7 1st gen vs 2nd gen.
Perhaps they're comparing the old i7 to the new i7?
I think Fraaaa is correct. I re-read the quote at the bottom which shows what they compared. They don't say specifically say how they conducted it, but they say the different models and there are two for each of course. The logical answer is that the i5 got a bigger performance boos then the i7, but Apple should have made that chart clearer and also offered another chart showing how much faster the NEW i5 was to the NEW i7. Having a third chart in the diagram would have easily cleared up any confusion when reading it.:cool:
It shows:
For i5
283912
Then for i7
283913
Shouldn't it show faster performance for the i7?:confused:
I sent an email to someone who works on their website asking them to double check that.:D
I thught was strange as well at first, but I believe that the comparison is between i5 1st gen vs 2nd gen and i7 1st gen vs 2nd gen.
Perhaps they're comparing the old i7 to the new i7?
I think Fraaaa is correct. I re-read the quote at the bottom which shows what they compared. They don't say specifically say how they conducted it, but they say the different models and there are two for each of course. The logical answer is that the i5 got a bigger performance boos then the i7, but Apple should have made that chart clearer and also offered another chart showing how much faster the NEW i5 was to the NEW i7. Having a third chart in the diagram would have easily cleared up any confusion when reading it.:cool:
aristotle
Nov 13, 05:08 PM
So I guess this puts every iPhone VNC client in violation of Apple's terms as it would be displaying Apple copyrighted images...
I'm on RA's side on this one!
No, VNC displaying the entire screen from the computer and Apple has a built in VNC server in their OS. This is a matter of taking the icon images themselves and using them for another purpose in a client/server application rather than in an app running on the mac itself. It is a clear case of copyright infringement. RA could have avoided all of this by simply providing their own licensed icons.
@guet: You should read what you wrote. You are proving yourself wrong with your own points. They are licensed for use on a mac, not for distribution to a client machine be it an iphone, Blackberry or Android.
I'm on RA's side on this one!
No, VNC displaying the entire screen from the computer and Apple has a built in VNC server in their OS. This is a matter of taking the icon images themselves and using them for another purpose in a client/server application rather than in an app running on the mac itself. It is a clear case of copyright infringement. RA could have avoided all of this by simply providing their own licensed icons.
@guet: You should read what you wrote. You are proving yourself wrong with your own points. They are licensed for use on a mac, not for distribution to a client machine be it an iphone, Blackberry or Android.
levitynyc
Sep 9, 11:53 AM
I'm not a gaming expert, but from what I've read, 512MB is no faster than 256MB for most current gaming applications, it's the throughput of the GPU that counts. Do any gamers out there want to comment on this?
I don't think that you could run Oblivion particularly well with only 256MB of Video Memory. Maybe you could, but you couldn't nearly max of the Graphics or else you would suffer some frame rate issues.
I don't think that you could run Oblivion particularly well with only 256MB of Video Memory. Maybe you could, but you couldn't nearly max of the Graphics or else you would suffer some frame rate issues.
LarryC
Apr 22, 03:03 PM
Err... and how is that relevant? I'm sure Blu-Ray will live on in other notebooks, but Apple's? Unlikely.
There were 100GB BDXL when Apple refreshed the MacBook Pro's this year.
Maybe when Steve Jobs is gone for good then Apple can finally have Blu-Ray and a laptop with a right-click mouse.
There were 100GB BDXL when Apple refreshed the MacBook Pro's this year.
Maybe when Steve Jobs is gone for good then Apple can finally have Blu-Ray and a laptop with a right-click mouse.
Bomino
Apr 25, 01:51 AM
I really don't think it is necessary to call me or any member of my family "pathetic." There's nothing wrong with manipulating the system to your advantage, if you do it for a valid purpose (such as teaching a crappy driver a lesson).
-Don
nothing wrong? and what if she didnt swerve, hit you in the back, and the collision causes the death of, lets say, 1 or 2 people. but you, mr. safe driver felt obligated to teach her a lesson.
-Don
nothing wrong? and what if she didnt swerve, hit you in the back, and the collision causes the death of, lets say, 1 or 2 people. but you, mr. safe driver felt obligated to teach her a lesson.
jakerichva
Apr 20, 01:59 PM
I don't usually read SLA's, but it's all right there, Page 1, Section 4, subsection b. And if don't want your iPhone to collect this data, turn off the feature.
http://images.apple.com/legal/sla/docs/iphone4.pdf
http://images.apple.com/legal/sla/docs/iPadSoftwareLicense.pdfAs you said, we've all agreed to it. Here is the appropriate paragraph for the iPad, for those who didn't bother to check the links
Section 4.b
(b) Location Data. Apple and its partners and licensees may provide certain services through your iPad that rely upon location information. To provide these services,
where available, Apple and its partners and licensees may transmit, collect, maintain, process and use your location data, including the real-time geographic location of
your iPad. The location data collected by Apple is collected in a form that does not personally identify you and may be used by Apple and its partners and licensees to
provide location-based products and services. By using any location-based services on your iPad, you agree and consent to Apple's and its partners' and licensees'
transmission, collection, maintenance, processing and use of your location data to provide location-based products and services. You may withdraw this consent
at any time by not using the location-based features or by turning o! the Location Services setting on your iPad. Not using these features will not impact the non locationbased functionality of your iPad. When using third party applications or services on the iPad that use or provide location data, you are subject to and should review such
third party's terms and privacy policy on use of location data by such third party applications or services.
http://images.apple.com/legal/sla/docs/iphone4.pdf
http://images.apple.com/legal/sla/docs/iPadSoftwareLicense.pdfAs you said, we've all agreed to it. Here is the appropriate paragraph for the iPad, for those who didn't bother to check the links
Section 4.b
(b) Location Data. Apple and its partners and licensees may provide certain services through your iPad that rely upon location information. To provide these services,
where available, Apple and its partners and licensees may transmit, collect, maintain, process and use your location data, including the real-time geographic location of
your iPad. The location data collected by Apple is collected in a form that does not personally identify you and may be used by Apple and its partners and licensees to
provide location-based products and services. By using any location-based services on your iPad, you agree and consent to Apple's and its partners' and licensees'
transmission, collection, maintenance, processing and use of your location data to provide location-based products and services. You may withdraw this consent
at any time by not using the location-based features or by turning o! the Location Services setting on your iPad. Not using these features will not impact the non locationbased functionality of your iPad. When using third party applications or services on the iPad that use or provide location data, you are subject to and should review such
third party's terms and privacy policy on use of location data by such third party applications or services.
TheManOfSilver
Sep 4, 08:01 PM
If you're like me, you don't have your Mac right next to your TV. Not only would I have to string a DVI/HDMI cable aaaall the way across the room, I would also have to get an equally long digital audio cable. Probably end up costing about the same as a video AirPort Express (if they keep the prices the same) but with the added hassle of getting those cables across the room.
This would be a lot less expensive than buying a Mac mini, especially if you already have a powerful desktop just waiting to play some HD videos...
Exactly! I think other potential twists would include a video Airport Express with a built-in TV tuner (to stream tv content back to your iMac/Mac Pro for recording, or an optional built-in HD for local storage when you don't have your Mac on or something.
This would be a lot less expensive than buying a Mac mini, especially if you already have a powerful desktop just waiting to play some HD videos...
Exactly! I think other potential twists would include a video Airport Express with a built-in TV tuner (to stream tv content back to your iMac/Mac Pro for recording, or an optional built-in HD for local storage when you don't have your Mac on or something.
Ganymede
Sep 5, 01:34 PM
OH PLEEASE let it be the phone...i need a new one now!!!
I've been hoping for this for a long, long time. I would love for this to be in the cards, but it just seems too different from iTMS to be announced. But hope springs eternal....
I've been hoping for this for a long, long time. I would love for this to be in the cards, but it just seems too different from iTMS to be announced. But hope springs eternal....
twlott
Mar 29, 02:56 PM
Microsoft partnered with Nokia out of desperation. Not because there products are going to be any good.
Hodapp
Sep 26, 09:59 AM
I can't wait to get my hands on an iPhone- I'm getting tired of my SLVR. As soon as the iPhone launches I'm throwing my SLVR in to a river. This is starting to become tradition, there must be a half dozen old cell phones of mine which have been cast in to the briny deep. What a liberating experience.
cdallen
Mar 29, 11:25 AM
I'm surprised they even opened this up for conversation in a mac forum
