MacCoaster
Sep 22, 07:29 AM
Originally posted by avkills
Ok, so Intel has the Itanium, well they have the Itanium2 I guess if you want to get super current, so what! The Itanium is based on a brand new design that looks good on paper, but Intel will be the first to admit it has not performed as good as they hoped.
I simply meant the Itanium family, including both the original Itanium and the current Intamium 2.
Sun, IBM and SGI have had 64bit processors way before Intel. So if you say the Itanium is ok for the high-end consumer, then It's safe to say that a Sun Ultra10 or a SGI Octane would also be a high-end consumer machine.
Sure, okay. Compare the prices. The Itanium solution is much cheaper.
What makes you so sure that a 16 processor G4 machine would not perform, because of the bus speed. What about super high-end servers like the CM5 or the Cray T3D. I seriously doubt those machines have 500Mhz bus speeds, or DDR memory. I know for a fact that the CM5 had dedicated memory for each processor node, and each node had 2 vector units. If you want, I can find out specifics from my brother, who has actually programmed code for it, when he worked at Las Alamos. Whether a 16 processor G4 machine is relevant or not, it could be built and if built right, would be very fast.
Very irrevelant. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the G4 wasn't designed to be run in anything more than a dual configuration.
So the .NET family is limited to 32 processors huh....Weak, very weak. You can say what you want, UNIX still scales better than Windows, no matter what the flavor.
Windows isn't designed nor targeted at customers with more than 32 processors. If anyone wanted a 2048-way server, they'd either custom build it and load UNIX on it or have some large corporation develop the computer. It's a lot cheaper clustering 32 high-availablity servers than buying that one 2048-way server. Duh, Windows isn't scalable. It was NEVER designed primarily to be used on 2048-way supercomputers. That's way out of Microsoft's scope and market.
In my opinion, Microsoft is beginning to die a slow painful death. Everyone is tired of their ************ and half-assed attempts of secure computing. Everyone always complains that Macs are not open enough, well I think the opposite is true. Apple embraces open standards and even invents and shares them when none exist, while Microsoft shuns and sometimes even steals others work, in a attempt to push their own proprietary formats and stifle progress.
Funny that Microsoft pushed the ever-so-slow W3C to standardize further dynamic HTML/etc. technologies to become standard. Of course, W3C can't keep current to allow people to innovate in the web presentation standards. Microsoft is even pushing XML very hard with .NET Web Services. And yes, Macs are closed. Not in software, but in hardware. Maybe you were confused by the definition of Macs being closed. The older Macintosh hardware is so proprietary it's not funny. Recent Macs adopt technology that had been in PCs before, except FireWire of course, because Apple invented that. But the hardware is still proprietary. I don't see that we are able to take off-the-shelf high quality components and build our own PowerPC computers then slap Mac OS X on it. Also, Microsoft indeed is "against" open source, and yet they maintain a "shared source" implementation of .NET for FreeBSD. In fact, it's a very well done implementation -- not that most-feeble-possible-implementation that we thought could possible be.
I find it funny that Intel invented USB, but it was Apple that took the leap of faith and pushed it into the mainstream. Apple, in my opinion is the only company thinking "outside the box" and in the end, they will win because of it.
-mark
Maybe it was Apple and Microsoft (Windows 98) who popularized USB, but you've got to realize this. PCs have had USB a few years before Apple. It wasn't until iMac/Windows 98 (note, same year: 1998) that USB got popular.
Ok, so Intel has the Itanium, well they have the Itanium2 I guess if you want to get super current, so what! The Itanium is based on a brand new design that looks good on paper, but Intel will be the first to admit it has not performed as good as they hoped.
I simply meant the Itanium family, including both the original Itanium and the current Intamium 2.
Sun, IBM and SGI have had 64bit processors way before Intel. So if you say the Itanium is ok for the high-end consumer, then It's safe to say that a Sun Ultra10 or a SGI Octane would also be a high-end consumer machine.
Sure, okay. Compare the prices. The Itanium solution is much cheaper.
What makes you so sure that a 16 processor G4 machine would not perform, because of the bus speed. What about super high-end servers like the CM5 or the Cray T3D. I seriously doubt those machines have 500Mhz bus speeds, or DDR memory. I know for a fact that the CM5 had dedicated memory for each processor node, and each node had 2 vector units. If you want, I can find out specifics from my brother, who has actually programmed code for it, when he worked at Las Alamos. Whether a 16 processor G4 machine is relevant or not, it could be built and if built right, would be very fast.
Very irrevelant. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the G4 wasn't designed to be run in anything more than a dual configuration.
So the .NET family is limited to 32 processors huh....Weak, very weak. You can say what you want, UNIX still scales better than Windows, no matter what the flavor.
Windows isn't designed nor targeted at customers with more than 32 processors. If anyone wanted a 2048-way server, they'd either custom build it and load UNIX on it or have some large corporation develop the computer. It's a lot cheaper clustering 32 high-availablity servers than buying that one 2048-way server. Duh, Windows isn't scalable. It was NEVER designed primarily to be used on 2048-way supercomputers. That's way out of Microsoft's scope and market.
In my opinion, Microsoft is beginning to die a slow painful death. Everyone is tired of their ************ and half-assed attempts of secure computing. Everyone always complains that Macs are not open enough, well I think the opposite is true. Apple embraces open standards and even invents and shares them when none exist, while Microsoft shuns and sometimes even steals others work, in a attempt to push their own proprietary formats and stifle progress.
Funny that Microsoft pushed the ever-so-slow W3C to standardize further dynamic HTML/etc. technologies to become standard. Of course, W3C can't keep current to allow people to innovate in the web presentation standards. Microsoft is even pushing XML very hard with .NET Web Services. And yes, Macs are closed. Not in software, but in hardware. Maybe you were confused by the definition of Macs being closed. The older Macintosh hardware is so proprietary it's not funny. Recent Macs adopt technology that had been in PCs before, except FireWire of course, because Apple invented that. But the hardware is still proprietary. I don't see that we are able to take off-the-shelf high quality components and build our own PowerPC computers then slap Mac OS X on it. Also, Microsoft indeed is "against" open source, and yet they maintain a "shared source" implementation of .NET for FreeBSD. In fact, it's a very well done implementation -- not that most-feeble-possible-implementation that we thought could possible be.
I find it funny that Intel invented USB, but it was Apple that took the leap of faith and pushed it into the mainstream. Apple, in my opinion is the only company thinking "outside the box" and in the end, they will win because of it.
-mark
Maybe it was Apple and Microsoft (Windows 98) who popularized USB, but you've got to realize this. PCs have had USB a few years before Apple. It wasn't until iMac/Windows 98 (note, same year: 1998) that USB got popular.
SFStateStudent
Apr 12, 12:48 PM
I still use iWorks more often than MS Office...:cool:
840quadra
May 24, 08:58 PM
YAY!!
Now I need to remember this Thread when I get home and back to my Macintosh!!
Thanks for the hard work, and the link!!
Now I need to remember this Thread when I get home and back to my Macintosh!!
Thanks for the hard work, and the link!!
surf2snow1
Mar 24, 04:09 PM
Grrrrr, I can't decide. Looks like I'll probably get the 32GB.. 399 + $45 taxes. Anyone think $444 worth it for the older 32 or do better deals exist? I'm somewhat convinced since it is new.
I'm debating 16 or 32. It's for the wife to take to the gym with her.
I'm debating 16 or 32. It's for the wife to take to the gym with her.
more...
codo
Oct 26, 03:37 PM
I couldn't agree more. I use Audition/Cool Edit Pro at work (radio production) and have yet to find a suitable replacement for it on the Mac. Soundbooth has very limited usability without being able to bounce tracks into an integrated multitrack.
What's sad is that when I saw all the audio apps available for the Mac I thought Audition level functionality would be easy to find. I couldn't have been more wrong. I have tried Soundtrack and Peak, and each are good in their own way, but neither fill the needs of a typical radio station production load. It is very frustrating to me. Ironically, I sent an e-mail to Adobe just the other day requesting that they port Audition...when I saw the headline about Soundbooth, I got really excited until I realized it was a port of Cool Edit 2000. Still, I downloaded it and will test it on my iMac.
Please Adobe...give us Audition!
I use Audition for the same purpose. I preferred the application when it was Cool Edit, I feel Adobe have bloated it out ever so slightly. But beggars can't be choosers - It's an important tool for me.
I've had a go with "SoundBooth", its literally the most basic editing pulled from the original Cool Edit code with a few effects pallets. Defiantly not enough for me. It runs well though, nice-ish interface, not sluggish. I personally wouldn't pay more than �30 - �40 for it, its just too basic.
What's sad is that when I saw all the audio apps available for the Mac I thought Audition level functionality would be easy to find. I couldn't have been more wrong. I have tried Soundtrack and Peak, and each are good in their own way, but neither fill the needs of a typical radio station production load. It is very frustrating to me. Ironically, I sent an e-mail to Adobe just the other day requesting that they port Audition...when I saw the headline about Soundbooth, I got really excited until I realized it was a port of Cool Edit 2000. Still, I downloaded it and will test it on my iMac.
Please Adobe...give us Audition!
I use Audition for the same purpose. I preferred the application when it was Cool Edit, I feel Adobe have bloated it out ever so slightly. But beggars can't be choosers - It's an important tool for me.
I've had a go with "SoundBooth", its literally the most basic editing pulled from the original Cool Edit code with a few effects pallets. Defiantly not enough for me. It runs well though, nice-ish interface, not sluggish. I personally wouldn't pay more than �30 - �40 for it, its just too basic.
Eraserhead
Apr 7, 08:14 AM
The Mac Guides are a great resource for the website, however I think the categories of articles on the site aren't particularly great which makes finding information difficult.
I'd like to try and improve it, but part of the problem is the front page, which I can't edit and there should be a consensus on something that major.
There a some categories that contain very little good content, for example the "Companies" category. There are some which are fairly meaningless like the "Guides" category. And there are some which seem a little wishy-washy like the "Digital Lifestyle" category, what should go in there? I think the following categories on the front page would be good.
Main Categories
Mac Hardware - Apples Mac hardware and related articles such as the ones for RAM and upgrades. Subcategories for laptops, desktops, and possibly individual models.
Mac Software - Any software available for Mac OS X. Subcategories for Mac OS X, individual software titles and Programming.
iTunes - Anything related to iTunes for Mac or Windows.
iPod/Apple TV - Anything iPod or AppleTV (which is essentially an iPod that doesn't move :p) related.
iPhone/iPod Touch - Anything iPhone, or iPod Touch related. Subcategories for jailbreaking and individual software titles.
Gaming - The gaming articles are very popular (http://guides.macrumors.com/Special:Popularpages), and that Mac isn't always the best platform for gaming, so I think it should have its own category, including articles for connecting your console to your Mac. With subsections for iPod Game titles, Mac Game titles.
Networking and Internet - Internet Related Articles. Subcategory for Software titles.
People and Organisations - Any articles for companies and analysts and Apple CEO's.
Special Categories
MacRumors.com - Same as now.
Forum Posts - Same as now, but this should be a special category.
Uncategorised - Anything that doesn't fit in the above categories. Could possibly be renamed "Miscellaneous" or something.
Finally a link to the Help:Contents article from the front page would be useful.
Any thoughts? Anything major I've missed?
I'd like to try and improve it, but part of the problem is the front page, which I can't edit and there should be a consensus on something that major.
There a some categories that contain very little good content, for example the "Companies" category. There are some which are fairly meaningless like the "Guides" category. And there are some which seem a little wishy-washy like the "Digital Lifestyle" category, what should go in there? I think the following categories on the front page would be good.
Main Categories
Mac Hardware - Apples Mac hardware and related articles such as the ones for RAM and upgrades. Subcategories for laptops, desktops, and possibly individual models.
Mac Software - Any software available for Mac OS X. Subcategories for Mac OS X, individual software titles and Programming.
iTunes - Anything related to iTunes for Mac or Windows.
iPod/Apple TV - Anything iPod or AppleTV (which is essentially an iPod that doesn't move :p) related.
iPhone/iPod Touch - Anything iPhone, or iPod Touch related. Subcategories for jailbreaking and individual software titles.
Gaming - The gaming articles are very popular (http://guides.macrumors.com/Special:Popularpages), and that Mac isn't always the best platform for gaming, so I think it should have its own category, including articles for connecting your console to your Mac. With subsections for iPod Game titles, Mac Game titles.
Networking and Internet - Internet Related Articles. Subcategory for Software titles.
People and Organisations - Any articles for companies and analysts and Apple CEO's.
Special Categories
MacRumors.com - Same as now.
Forum Posts - Same as now, but this should be a special category.
Uncategorised - Anything that doesn't fit in the above categories. Could possibly be renamed "Miscellaneous" or something.
Finally a link to the Help:Contents article from the front page would be useful.
Any thoughts? Anything major I've missed?
more...
macman312
Apr 5, 06:09 PM
that's exactly what i was wondering about! i don't know if EU regulations apply to the ipad, but they certainly do apply to the iphone. and i think, apple has to include a miniUSB port (standardized charger) to the iphone 5 if they want to sell it here in europe. a simply dock connector just won't do.
Why the hell do you have to have a miniUSB for a phone in the EU?
what is wrong with just using a apple dock connector?? Apple is NEVER going to put a miniUSB port but they may make an adaptor for the idiots who want one (for what I ask)
Why the hell do you have to have a miniUSB for a phone in the EU?
what is wrong with just using a apple dock connector?? Apple is NEVER going to put a miniUSB port but they may make an adaptor for the idiots who want one (for what I ask)
BWhaler
Nov 15, 12:11 AM
And where is Jetblue in all of this??? :cool:
I wondered the same thing. JetBlue seems like an innovator, and if anyone is going to actually hit this launch date, it would be them.
i suspect the issue is their deal with directtv. just my guess.
I wondered the same thing. JetBlue seems like an innovator, and if anyone is going to actually hit this launch date, it would be them.
i suspect the issue is their deal with directtv. just my guess.
more...
4JNA
Apr 18, 08:23 PM
...I think that's applies here. Using a Mac is so simple, generally speaking, that the folding@home pages seem obtuse in comparison. The pages are all ugly, and instructions are unclear, and files seem to be missing that instruction pages reference.
To increase participation I recommend that a very clear communicator make a new thread (perhaops a sticky) with *dead simple* step by step instructions w/screenshorts on how to install and turn it on (circa 2010). Maybe even a screen flow that just shows exactly how to it, hosted on a service with crystal clear video like vimeo.com. Get our mirror neurons goin', yaknow?
i agree 100% with everything you just said. that said, which version, of which client, on which system, running which OS.... :confused::eek: you get the idea. it's a huge program with lots of different possible setups, and can be a real nightmare to get/keep running.
i know lots about folding, but have no idea how to help you with your current setup questions, the big units are way out of my league, and anything posted in a sticky will likely be out of date very quickly. it's dynamic and changes and updates on a regular basis. that's a good thing, but it makes keeping up with folding very difficult and time consuming.
forums like this and the official F@H forums are a really good place to start. asking questions (like you already did) is a great start, because everyone here/there want to fold and help others fold, as it's the point of the whole thing. more people folding is always better than less, therefore help all who ask. there are several here running clients on systems just like yours and will likely respond in turn. best of luck getting it sorted out.
To increase participation I recommend that a very clear communicator make a new thread (perhaops a sticky) with *dead simple* step by step instructions w/screenshorts on how to install and turn it on (circa 2010). Maybe even a screen flow that just shows exactly how to it, hosted on a service with crystal clear video like vimeo.com. Get our mirror neurons goin', yaknow?
i agree 100% with everything you just said. that said, which version, of which client, on which system, running which OS.... :confused::eek: you get the idea. it's a huge program with lots of different possible setups, and can be a real nightmare to get/keep running.
i know lots about folding, but have no idea how to help you with your current setup questions, the big units are way out of my league, and anything posted in a sticky will likely be out of date very quickly. it's dynamic and changes and updates on a regular basis. that's a good thing, but it makes keeping up with folding very difficult and time consuming.
forums like this and the official F@H forums are a really good place to start. asking questions (like you already did) is a great start, because everyone here/there want to fold and help others fold, as it's the point of the whole thing. more people folding is always better than less, therefore help all who ask. there are several here running clients on systems just like yours and will likely respond in turn. best of luck getting it sorted out.
jtara
Apr 12, 02:15 PM
Office for Mac or Office for Windows? Easy decision.
I haven't opened VMWare Fusion for months, since I installed Office for Mac.
YMMV.
Sure, some of us will have specific needs that are only available on Windows. But for most of us, the last thing we need that requires Windows (that we haven't already moved over to a native OSX solution) is Office.
Office for Mac and Office for Windows have been leap-frogging for some time, so you're going to have a slightly newer version depending on which platform you are on. Currently, the newer version is Mac. Next year I suppose it will be Windows.
But in any case, it's certainly no longer true (though it once was) that Office for Mac is the ugly step-sister.
I haven't opened VMWare Fusion for months, since I installed Office for Mac.
YMMV.
Sure, some of us will have specific needs that are only available on Windows. But for most of us, the last thing we need that requires Windows (that we haven't already moved over to a native OSX solution) is Office.
Office for Mac and Office for Windows have been leap-frogging for some time, so you're going to have a slightly newer version depending on which platform you are on. Currently, the newer version is Mac. Next year I suppose it will be Windows.
But in any case, it's certainly no longer true (though it once was) that Office for Mac is the ugly step-sister.
more...
optophobia
Feb 23, 03:54 PM
...or Apple could allow returns, like every "normal" store.
No it is NOT Apple's fault. This is CLEARLY the parents fault.
No it is NOT Apple's fault. This is CLEARLY the parents fault.
pmz
Apr 5, 10:51 AM
Have you ever gone to move your finger across the trackpad and find that it registered it as a tap instead? Drives me nuts.
That has never happened to me, or anyone, that is intentionally using Tap to Click.
That does happen to people who live with buttons, who aren't expecting it, and for some reason tend to mash their trackpad with giant gorilla hands.
People I know that use click instead of tap have broken the trackpads on white macbooks after a few years of use.
That has never happened to me, or anyone, that is intentionally using Tap to Click.
That does happen to people who live with buttons, who aren't expecting it, and for some reason tend to mash their trackpad with giant gorilla hands.
People I know that use click instead of tap have broken the trackpads on white macbooks after a few years of use.
more...
Roessnakhan
Apr 19, 12:47 PM
+1
I had such a great mental image:eek:
Its like someone shaking an expensive Etch-A-Sketch
I had such a great mental image:eek:
Its like someone shaking an expensive Etch-A-Sketch
chown33
Apr 16, 12:54 PM
Be specific.
Exactly which tutorials? Post the URLs.
Exactly where did you encounter a problem in the tutorial? Post the specific command that didn't work.
I did a simple google search for razorSQL. Found this page:
http://www.razorsql.com/articles/sqlite_mac.html
I have to say, I'm skeptical of razorSQL's quality. There are two blatant errors on this fairly simple page:
1. The command is misspelled as: sqilte3
2. Control-Z in Mac OS X Terminal is not EOF, control-D is.
Control-Z means something completely different.
Exactly which tutorials? Post the URLs.
Exactly where did you encounter a problem in the tutorial? Post the specific command that didn't work.
I did a simple google search for razorSQL. Found this page:
http://www.razorsql.com/articles/sqlite_mac.html
I have to say, I'm skeptical of razorSQL's quality. There are two blatant errors on this fairly simple page:
1. The command is misspelled as: sqilte3
2. Control-Z in Mac OS X Terminal is not EOF, control-D is.
Control-Z means something completely different.
more...
jaw04005
Oct 10, 04:15 PM
I can't wait. I love this game and played it not too long ago on emulation. I hope it translates well. A lot of the arcade ports don't translate well since they were designed with a higher level of difficulity in order to force you to spend more money.
I guess the Konami code would work though. I want X-Men Children of the Atom next.
I guess the Konami code would work though. I want X-Men Children of the Atom next.
RossoA
Oct 19, 12:53 PM
I have a few questions, as I will be in London all day and want to be one of the first 500 (i.e. T-Shirt time :D):
1. Do you there will be a long queue?
2. What time should I get there to make sure I'm one of the first?
Thanks
1. Do you there will be a long queue?
2. What time should I get there to make sure I'm one of the first?
Thanks
more...
ewinemiller
Sep 13, 07:25 AM
Originally posted by Haberdasher
Go ahead and flame me...I know that the Mhz of the G4 and P4 don't match up in performance, but there's too big of a speed gap for there to be any doubt in my mind of which is faster.
It's actually a little worse than you think, when the P4s first came out, they were clock for clock significantly slower than a G4, but with the release of the Northwood core and then the 533mhz bus, at least with the stuff I do, my P4 is clock for clock faster than my G4. I've got 6 classes of machines sitting around and when I hit render and then factor out mhz, this is the list fastest to slowest: PIII-mobile, P4-533mhz bus, PIII-coppermine, G4-quicksilver, G3, PII. Of course with the boosted bus on the new G4s, this ranking may well have changed, but the point is, the P4 is no longer the laggard it was at it's introduction. On top of that Intel keeps boosting the clockspeed and is about to introduce another boost in the form of hyperthreads to the consumer P4 line to push it even farther.
I really like my Mac, OSX is nice and I love the iApps. All the kid videos are done using 75% iMovie and iDVD (with a little Premier on the PC when I need something fancy), but frankly that's really not enough and I only keep the Mac to support my customers. When it comes to production, it's just not enough bang for the buck. I have to believe that Steve and Co. have something interesting up their sleeve because to follow Motorola's plodding updates to the G4 seems like a slow suicide and would be a terrible thing to do to the stockholders and fans of the platform.
Before I get flamed about how it's worth the performance hit and cost to avoid the PCs reputation for more downtime. I haven't a problem like that since NT4 with sp3 as long as I use a top tier vender like dell. The handful of homegrown machines I've built since then have been notoriously twitchy, but is probably more an indicator of my skills as a system integrator not of the platform in general.
Go ahead and flame me...I know that the Mhz of the G4 and P4 don't match up in performance, but there's too big of a speed gap for there to be any doubt in my mind of which is faster.
It's actually a little worse than you think, when the P4s first came out, they were clock for clock significantly slower than a G4, but with the release of the Northwood core and then the 533mhz bus, at least with the stuff I do, my P4 is clock for clock faster than my G4. I've got 6 classes of machines sitting around and when I hit render and then factor out mhz, this is the list fastest to slowest: PIII-mobile, P4-533mhz bus, PIII-coppermine, G4-quicksilver, G3, PII. Of course with the boosted bus on the new G4s, this ranking may well have changed, but the point is, the P4 is no longer the laggard it was at it's introduction. On top of that Intel keeps boosting the clockspeed and is about to introduce another boost in the form of hyperthreads to the consumer P4 line to push it even farther.
I really like my Mac, OSX is nice and I love the iApps. All the kid videos are done using 75% iMovie and iDVD (with a little Premier on the PC when I need something fancy), but frankly that's really not enough and I only keep the Mac to support my customers. When it comes to production, it's just not enough bang for the buck. I have to believe that Steve and Co. have something interesting up their sleeve because to follow Motorola's plodding updates to the G4 seems like a slow suicide and would be a terrible thing to do to the stockholders and fans of the platform.
Before I get flamed about how it's worth the performance hit and cost to avoid the PCs reputation for more downtime. I haven't a problem like that since NT4 with sp3 as long as I use a top tier vender like dell. The handful of homegrown machines I've built since then have been notoriously twitchy, but is probably more an indicator of my skills as a system integrator not of the platform in general.
skunk
Apr 14, 04:38 PM
Terrible analogy.
As soon as I can choose whether or not to buy the services your analogy becomes valid. That will be the day :rolleyes:You do so by exercising your voting rights. The services are sold as a bundle. You get to choose which bundle. In theory.
As soon as I can choose whether or not to buy the services your analogy becomes valid. That will be the day :rolleyes:You do so by exercising your voting rights. The services are sold as a bundle. You get to choose which bundle. In theory.
firewood
Mar 28, 07:12 PM
Sold out in less than half a day.
And Google IO sold out in less than an hour (but costs less that a third as much, minus airfare).
Mobile development is becoming like a wild land rush.
And Google IO sold out in less than an hour (but costs less that a third as much, minus airfare).
Mobile development is becoming like a wild land rush.
brucem91
May 9, 04:48 PM
Why do u need safari while you're in a game? Looking up a useful hack? ;)Nah. I got multiple monitors, and I do this frequently while in the battle.net menus, especially when I have the chat open.
nkawtg72
Nov 6, 10:27 AM
i can't believe all the paranoia on this thread.
first of all, if it is simply an RFID Reader, then it doesn't broadcast crap about you. it senses an RFID Tag in proximity to your reader and reads the tag. software on the device then utilizes that tags info for some purpose.
secondly, if there is a tag in the device (iphone/ipod) then you'd have to be in proximity of a reader for it to be sensed and read. i would imagine that for privacy reasons a tag could be disabled dynamically by the user. or maybe even the device alerts the user that a reader is attempting to read its RFID and asks how the user would like to handle the situation.
lastly, anyone who is even remotely paranoid about such a technology coming to the iPhone/iPod had better already be on a cash basis, own no cell phone, not have internet access in their home or use it anywhere else, have no bank accounts whatsoever, not be a member of any clubs or enrolled in school, or be employed anywhere.
believe me, 99% of people are already engaging in enough activities that if big brother or big business wanted to know something about you, they'd have no problem finding it.
first of all, if it is simply an RFID Reader, then it doesn't broadcast crap about you. it senses an RFID Tag in proximity to your reader and reads the tag. software on the device then utilizes that tags info for some purpose.
secondly, if there is a tag in the device (iphone/ipod) then you'd have to be in proximity of a reader for it to be sensed and read. i would imagine that for privacy reasons a tag could be disabled dynamically by the user. or maybe even the device alerts the user that a reader is attempting to read its RFID and asks how the user would like to handle the situation.
lastly, anyone who is even remotely paranoid about such a technology coming to the iPhone/iPod had better already be on a cash basis, own no cell phone, not have internet access in their home or use it anywhere else, have no bank accounts whatsoever, not be a member of any clubs or enrolled in school, or be employed anywhere.
believe me, 99% of people are already engaging in enough activities that if big brother or big business wanted to know something about you, they'd have no problem finding it.
thefnshow
Mar 18, 03:33 AM
i saw an interview with dana white the owner of ufc...he was talking about this on some sports show and he mentioned that the dept. of homeland security was involved in this matter..great,like dhs doesn't have anything more important to do
Doctor Q
Mar 22, 10:40 AM
They're too big to go into a pocket..., they can't be shared around like books, they'll need recharging if they're used heavily. The ipad is a lot of things, sure, but there's lots of things it isn't, too.
Can't fit in a pocket... that's an advantage for schools like the middle school I help, because they can't "walk off" with a student. We currently use carts with Mac laptops. They charge up while in the cart, then get handed out to students for a group project. If they were iPads they would take less space in a crowded classroom and boot up faster. I hope they would be as durable. They don't need to be shared like books. Each student would have one, but if two students had to share one it would be big enough for that too. And we'd save money over replacing the laptops with newer laptops as they age.
First-issue iPads would be fine for group projects that involve access to websites (without Flash) and word processing, but with suitable new applications I hope clever teachers would be able to find even more useful educational activities for their students. And I know the students would be enthusiastic about using them.
When we first started replacing chalkboards with digital whiteboards, some people thought it was a solution looking for a problem, but soon teachers found how to use the new potential to do much more than they could with an old-fashioned board. Despite the doubts of some posters above, I think schools like ours will have good uses for iPads (or their marketplace competitors) as educators experiment and innovate.
Can't fit in a pocket... that's an advantage for schools like the middle school I help, because they can't "walk off" with a student. We currently use carts with Mac laptops. They charge up while in the cart, then get handed out to students for a group project. If they were iPads they would take less space in a crowded classroom and boot up faster. I hope they would be as durable. They don't need to be shared like books. Each student would have one, but if two students had to share one it would be big enough for that too. And we'd save money over replacing the laptops with newer laptops as they age.
First-issue iPads would be fine for group projects that involve access to websites (without Flash) and word processing, but with suitable new applications I hope clever teachers would be able to find even more useful educational activities for their students. And I know the students would be enthusiastic about using them.
When we first started replacing chalkboards with digital whiteboards, some people thought it was a solution looking for a problem, but soon teachers found how to use the new potential to do much more than they could with an old-fashioned board. Despite the doubts of some posters above, I think schools like ours will have good uses for iPads (or their marketplace competitors) as educators experiment and innovate.
Sydde
Apr 25, 07:27 PM
That was fast. :p
As for Trump, I have to agree with mrkramer that he's the male version of Palin.
And, uh...you know he's got a penchant for naming everything after himself, right? How does The United States of Trump grab you?
Trumperor of this great Trumpire
As for Trump, I have to agree with mrkramer that he's the male version of Palin.
And, uh...you know he's got a penchant for naming everything after himself, right? How does The United States of Trump grab you?
Trumperor of this great Trumpire
No comments:
Post a Comment