Eidorian
Jul 17, 10:55 AM
Merom to launch July 23rd according to the latest Intel roadmap from this site :
http://www.hkepc.com/bbs/itnews.php?tid=631837I sure hope it's July 23rd.
http://www.hkepc.com/bbs/itnews.php?tid=631837I sure hope it's July 23rd.
stagi
Sep 19, 11:47 PM
Is everyone forgetting about the "special" dock kit Apple sells with "yellow" and S-video as well as audio out jacks on it, and a nice little remote AND another charger and sync cable? With the old 320x240 shows, it was barely watchable, lots of artifacts and about like fair quality VCR tape. With the new 640 x 480, the output is VERY watchable, not quite as good as DVD but better than my DirecTV digital signal. And, this little bundle of usefulness costs $99 and is available NOW. I have used one since about Christmas of last year, and it works pretty well. You DON'T have to wait for the iTV or confine your viewing to the computer screen or an ipod.
http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE/WebObjects/AppleStore.woa/wo/2.RSLID?mco=E868E117&nplm=MA242LL%2FA
Or I have been using my regular dock with a seperate monster cable I bought.
With the new Res. I think it looks awesome. The only bummer is the battery life on my 30GB video ipod.
http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE/WebObjects/AppleStore.woa/wo/2.RSLID?mco=E868E117&nplm=MA242LL%2FA
Or I have been using my regular dock with a seperate monster cable I bought.
With the new Res. I think it looks awesome. The only bummer is the battery life on my 30GB video ipod.
CalfCanuck
Sep 14, 07:16 PM
That'd be very nice, but I think that's too niche for Apple to get into. Although Apple does take its photography seriously, it only really produces hardware that is versatile and can be used for many different tasks - i.e. although the Mac Pro is serious photograhpy equipment, it can also be serious movie editing or CAD equipment. Infact, I can't think of any hardware made by Apple that is specifically photography directed.
Then again, there's nothing to say they won't break the habit of a lifetime.
While I have nothing to back up this idea beyond wild speculation, it makes sense if you think about it for a while.
I used the name "Aperture.iPod" just for this thread. I think the APerture features would be targeted to special audience, but even the Photo uploading features (plus integration into iPhoto) would give it the broader appeal you correctly discuss.
Several reason why this might happen:
1. Apple has had a product called the Photo iPod since October 2004. The fact that few of it's users probably use it for Photos merely points out that it failed in it's targeted market for a number of reasons (probably lack of easy uploading from cameras when not at a computer, small screen, and lack of support for RAW).
2. Apple's announcement a few days ago about the new iTunes store: (to quote Page 1) "TV shows will now be sold at 640x480 px h264. While the updated 5G iPods announced today will be able to play the new format, there has not been any indication from Apple of yet that the new shows will be playable on older 5G iPods. Apple's official knowledge-base article still states that h264-encoded movies must be 320 x 240 at 30 fps."
So why will Apple start selling a video size that isn't designed for the current iPod? While it could be for the "iTV" device, I'd image that is a bit too small a resolution to get people excited about. And even if it is, why start selling it 6 months before the device ships?
3. If Apple was to introduce a new Video iPod with a larger screen, this new larger box would allow a number of things that can''t fit on a small iPod and are perfect for both video AND photography - a large 640 x 480 screen, FW or USB2 connections, and potentially CF/SD card slots (or at least an IO for a fast adapter via the USB2 connection.)
Hence my conclusion (based on pure speculation) - all these things point to a dual use device. Handheld, but larger than normal iPods, and suitable for both consumer video playback AND photography.
What better place to introduce this than the biggest consumer photo show in the world?
Then again, there's nothing to say they won't break the habit of a lifetime.
While I have nothing to back up this idea beyond wild speculation, it makes sense if you think about it for a while.
I used the name "Aperture.iPod" just for this thread. I think the APerture features would be targeted to special audience, but even the Photo uploading features (plus integration into iPhoto) would give it the broader appeal you correctly discuss.
Several reason why this might happen:
1. Apple has had a product called the Photo iPod since October 2004. The fact that few of it's users probably use it for Photos merely points out that it failed in it's targeted market for a number of reasons (probably lack of easy uploading from cameras when not at a computer, small screen, and lack of support for RAW).
2. Apple's announcement a few days ago about the new iTunes store: (to quote Page 1) "TV shows will now be sold at 640x480 px h264. While the updated 5G iPods announced today will be able to play the new format, there has not been any indication from Apple of yet that the new shows will be playable on older 5G iPods. Apple's official knowledge-base article still states that h264-encoded movies must be 320 x 240 at 30 fps."
So why will Apple start selling a video size that isn't designed for the current iPod? While it could be for the "iTV" device, I'd image that is a bit too small a resolution to get people excited about. And even if it is, why start selling it 6 months before the device ships?
3. If Apple was to introduce a new Video iPod with a larger screen, this new larger box would allow a number of things that can''t fit on a small iPod and are perfect for both video AND photography - a large 640 x 480 screen, FW or USB2 connections, and potentially CF/SD card slots (or at least an IO for a fast adapter via the USB2 connection.)
Hence my conclusion (based on pure speculation) - all these things point to a dual use device. Handheld, but larger than normal iPods, and suitable for both consumer video playback AND photography.
What better place to introduce this than the biggest consumer photo show in the world?
Joshuarocks
Apr 19, 11:45 AM
I'm salaried (aka "Exempt") in my job. We used to clock in and out but they made us quit several years ago and now there is no tracking of our hours. I was told at the time it was a legal requirement that we not be made to clock in and out.
In any event, there are rules defining what jobs are and are not eligible as exempt. There are lots of references online with information.
http://www.ehow.com/facts_5179644_exempt-salary-vs_-non-exempt.html
There is an upside to being exempt. While it's true I don't get paid extra if I work 45 hours this week, I will also not be paid less if I work 35 hours next week. In my job one is just as likely as the other.
Mind me asking you how high your unemployment rate is, and do you believe what your media tells you is true, or is the rate much higher than what is known?
In any event, there are rules defining what jobs are and are not eligible as exempt. There are lots of references online with information.
http://www.ehow.com/facts_5179644_exempt-salary-vs_-non-exempt.html
There is an upside to being exempt. While it's true I don't get paid extra if I work 45 hours this week, I will also not be paid less if I work 35 hours next week. In my job one is just as likely as the other.
Mind me asking you how high your unemployment rate is, and do you believe what your media tells you is true, or is the rate much higher than what is known?
monaarts
Apr 4, 12:30 PM
Apple needs to start paying it's employees better... Seriously, it seems like there is a robbery at an Apple Store every other day. Maybe TLC will make a movie about it soon, "The Deadliest Retail Job" HAHA
- Joe
- Joe
cwt1nospam
Apr 11, 05:16 AM
Yeah, let's all waste time worrying about a "possible" threat that hasn't proved to be any significant danger in the wild. It's even better that we can worry about it in an obsolete version of the OS!
:rolleyes:
:rolleyes:
linux2mac
Apr 4, 12:53 PM
It's only fantasy because not enough law-abiding civilians are toting guns.
Virginia Tech, Trolley Square, Columbine, Ft. Hood, the list goes on and on - someone trained, armed, and on location in any of those tragedies could have been a godsend.
The fact an off-duty policeman was onsite at Trolley Square certainly saved many lives, but an armed, trained civilian could have done the same.
+1
Criminals have the edge because they know most law abiding citizens are not armed.
Virginia Tech, Trolley Square, Columbine, Ft. Hood, the list goes on and on - someone trained, armed, and on location in any of those tragedies could have been a godsend.
The fact an off-duty policeman was onsite at Trolley Square certainly saved many lives, but an armed, trained civilian could have done the same.
+1
Criminals have the edge because they know most law abiding citizens are not armed.
calculus
Oct 12, 01:27 PM
As long as it doesn't have any Bono or Oprah-related crap engraved on it, we're golden.
That is a worry...
That is a worry...
Dmac77
Apr 25, 01:18 AM
umm good luck with that. My father has a ticket to prove other wise. He made the mistake and cut off a guy who was speeding by mistake. Cop handed him a ticket for illegal lane changed and the other guy a ticket for doing 20 over the limit.
It was declared a no fault and both were on their own. Both cars totaled.
You cut her off therefor made an unsafe lane changed. Legally you should of given her enough room to be able to adjust for you. Add to the fact you are 16 and chances are would be a witness or 2 saying you were speeding. Your word vs hers and your word is pretty worthless.
And if you did if they can prove malice or road rage you just increased your charges and heck could be nailed for insurance fraud as well.
You are proving to us all that you should not have a DL. You just are increasing the case that you should not be behind a wheel of a car.
On and do not use the argument that the car can do 186 mph. Sorry that is for another country. Top it off I am pretty sure my car can out handle your car.
Well I'm sorry to hear that happened to your father. My mother was in a similar situation a few years back. She cut off an idiot doing 20 under the speed limit, slammed on the brakes, and there was a wreck. The guy she cut off was found to be at fault for not maintaining a proper distance, my mother was not found at fault. She openly told the cops that she had just passed the guy, and after she passed she thought she saw a squirrel enter the road, so she slammed on the breaks. On top of doing $15,000 grand worth of damage to the guys car (which he had to pay for due to not having broadform insurance) she then sued him for her $2,000 deductible, and won. Sucks to be him, maybe he does the speed limit now.
EDIT: @ EricNau - what do you guys not understand about "she was doing 65mph is a 70mph zone" which she then lowered to 55mph after brakechecking me????????
-Don
It was declared a no fault and both were on their own. Both cars totaled.
You cut her off therefor made an unsafe lane changed. Legally you should of given her enough room to be able to adjust for you. Add to the fact you are 16 and chances are would be a witness or 2 saying you were speeding. Your word vs hers and your word is pretty worthless.
And if you did if they can prove malice or road rage you just increased your charges and heck could be nailed for insurance fraud as well.
You are proving to us all that you should not have a DL. You just are increasing the case that you should not be behind a wheel of a car.
On and do not use the argument that the car can do 186 mph. Sorry that is for another country. Top it off I am pretty sure my car can out handle your car.
Well I'm sorry to hear that happened to your father. My mother was in a similar situation a few years back. She cut off an idiot doing 20 under the speed limit, slammed on the brakes, and there was a wreck. The guy she cut off was found to be at fault for not maintaining a proper distance, my mother was not found at fault. She openly told the cops that she had just passed the guy, and after she passed she thought she saw a squirrel enter the road, so she slammed on the breaks. On top of doing $15,000 grand worth of damage to the guys car (which he had to pay for due to not having broadform insurance) she then sued him for her $2,000 deductible, and won. Sucks to be him, maybe he does the speed limit now.
EDIT: @ EricNau - what do you guys not understand about "she was doing 65mph is a 70mph zone" which she then lowered to 55mph after brakechecking me????????
-Don
jacollins
Apr 20, 11:17 AM
Unless I'm missing it in the thread, I didn't see anything on this particular question. Does anyone know if this database on the iPhone is accessible by apps? ie. can you download some app that then scans the database and uploads your information elsewhere behind the scenes?
iRun26.2
Apr 26, 06:49 AM
I don't question the gaming issue, I just wonder what percentage of MBP buyers would not buy because of the Intel graphics. My uneducated guess would be a very small percentage. Remember, Apple caters to the average consumer, not the geeks.
That may be true but Apple does have the reputation of being 'a cut above the rest' when it comes to video and graphics.
That may be true but Apple does have the reputation of being 'a cut above the rest' when it comes to video and graphics.
Huntn
Apr 20, 08:40 PM
We need unions to protect people from abusive BS like this (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/12/walmart-contracted-warehouse-workers_n_848262.html). Either that or we just need to have a limit on how big a company can get before it has to become the property of the employees.
The lower we sink, the more popular unions will become, that is if Republican's don't succeed in outlawing them.
The lower we sink, the more popular unions will become, that is if Republican's don't succeed in outlawing them.
Some_Big_Spoon
Sep 10, 09:18 PM
Flame me if you must, but what is the sense in having multiple cores if the software running on it doesn't take advantage of it? Same thing with advertising the new chips as being 64 bit. That's great, but I don't have anything (not in beta) that can use it.
Apple themselves have never been great at making use of multiple processors (in tandem), so I'm not getting how 4, 8, 32 cores makes much difference?
Apple themselves have never been great at making use of multiple processors (in tandem), so I'm not getting how 4, 8, 32 cores makes much difference?
relimw
Sep 14, 10:21 AM
Yup. I agree. And I bet the new MBPs will ship immediately as well. What would be really cool is if Apple lowered the price of Aperture to $199 or so to make it more affordable to the photo piddlers among us. After all, surely Aperture 2 is going to have massive hardware and GPU requirements (read: QuadCore Mac + 4GB RAM + X1900 video card). That is really where Apple makes it's cash. Just dreaming, of course, because I can't justify a $300 software package when I'm just a dabbler. Lightroom beta has been fun though.
No MBPs.
Obviously, you didn't buy Aperture when it first came out, only to find out you were beta testing software for Apple. Now, if I can just figure out what to buy with my $200 store rebate. Maybe update from PS7 to CS2...hmm.
No MBPs.
Obviously, you didn't buy Aperture when it first came out, only to find out you were beta testing software for Apple. Now, if I can just figure out what to buy with my $200 store rebate. Maybe update from PS7 to CS2...hmm.
kettle
Oct 27, 03:28 PM
What seriously kills me about all this is that those sensationalist chimpanzees from GP rally against a computer company that presently has roughly 6% (or less) of the computer market....almost every throw away computer I've ever seen were Compaqs, HP's, Dells, Gateways/e-Machines, and a few other generic crap boxes from some nameless plastic factory stuffing windoze in a toaster. Seriously, Greenpeace goofballs should stop stargazing up their rectums and take a look at the largest contributors of hardware refuse. Macs as far as I know are not easily tossed out. apple computers have been primarily hand me downs unless some terrible accident happened rendering it useless. seriously, no one throws away a functioning mac, unless they decided lead paint makes for good breakfast cereal.
How many of these sap-chugging numbskulls go after Dell for making computers that generally end up being sidewalk fodder? perhaps they should invest their energies into designing the green computer, since they seem to have so much gloriously skilled scientists at their disposal to expose the evil apple. Go team planet!
yeah, Team Planet.
If it really mattered the chain would be broken at the top of the pyramid, instead they just farm us for every last cent in our pockets.
They quote facts as if they actually believe that people are 'that stupid', it becomes a stumbling block for their statistics. How many people give just 'yeah, whatever' answers to people collecting 'market research' because actually they are too busy to give an honest answer to an 'in reality' a very complex question.
If you ask stupid questions, you get stupid answers.
Popular science 'the GREEN movement' seems to thrive on a consensus of simple answers to very complex questions.
How much of our lives is now governed by a computer model that has trouble predicting tomorrows weather let alone the demise of the human race.
Oh spare me the guilt and the need to confess for my consumer driven instincts, will you forgive me and all the other 'sinners' if we pay for a whole new layer of religion to 'lord it' over our daily doings?
If you look on the fake apple site and look at the pictures, there are apple machines everywhere, how is that likely? About as likely as an apple turning up into some kids pram at a Mac Expo propaganda photo shoot.
Please greenpeace, if you have something to say, tell me the facts straight, otherwise I'm too busy paying my taxes for a work shy troop of pseudo scientists to go around telling me how much further bureaucracy will be required to save the world. (please do not mistake this for stupidity) (oh and get a job, preferably one that doesn't recycle other people's tax into more paranoid and privacy invading bureaucratic waste.)
I think the point that most people are trying to avoid is that at worse, there are too many people using too few resources and there's a whole lot of squawking 'chicken littles' who seem to think if we repent our sins that some how nature will not jump the artificial gap that has been built between us and our environment.
You can't buck the market.
and before someone points out undeniables like the value of making better products for our environment, I say great, lets start this new found efficiency and exercise it top down.
I would gladly pay less tax for a more efficient government and spend the savings on more expensive products resulting from costs passed on to me by highly regulated manufacturers.
I will however, grow tired of paying for this never ending environmental 'gravy train'.
Perhaps, but the sooner man is extinguished from this planet the sooner the planet can recover to it's equilibrium.
The truth kinda hurts.
How many of these sap-chugging numbskulls go after Dell for making computers that generally end up being sidewalk fodder? perhaps they should invest their energies into designing the green computer, since they seem to have so much gloriously skilled scientists at their disposal to expose the evil apple. Go team planet!
yeah, Team Planet.
If it really mattered the chain would be broken at the top of the pyramid, instead they just farm us for every last cent in our pockets.
They quote facts as if they actually believe that people are 'that stupid', it becomes a stumbling block for their statistics. How many people give just 'yeah, whatever' answers to people collecting 'market research' because actually they are too busy to give an honest answer to an 'in reality' a very complex question.
If you ask stupid questions, you get stupid answers.
Popular science 'the GREEN movement' seems to thrive on a consensus of simple answers to very complex questions.
How much of our lives is now governed by a computer model that has trouble predicting tomorrows weather let alone the demise of the human race.
Oh spare me the guilt and the need to confess for my consumer driven instincts, will you forgive me and all the other 'sinners' if we pay for a whole new layer of religion to 'lord it' over our daily doings?
If you look on the fake apple site and look at the pictures, there are apple machines everywhere, how is that likely? About as likely as an apple turning up into some kids pram at a Mac Expo propaganda photo shoot.
Please greenpeace, if you have something to say, tell me the facts straight, otherwise I'm too busy paying my taxes for a work shy troop of pseudo scientists to go around telling me how much further bureaucracy will be required to save the world. (please do not mistake this for stupidity) (oh and get a job, preferably one that doesn't recycle other people's tax into more paranoid and privacy invading bureaucratic waste.)
I think the point that most people are trying to avoid is that at worse, there are too many people using too few resources and there's a whole lot of squawking 'chicken littles' who seem to think if we repent our sins that some how nature will not jump the artificial gap that has been built between us and our environment.
You can't buck the market.
and before someone points out undeniables like the value of making better products for our environment, I say great, lets start this new found efficiency and exercise it top down.
I would gladly pay less tax for a more efficient government and spend the savings on more expensive products resulting from costs passed on to me by highly regulated manufacturers.
I will however, grow tired of paying for this never ending environmental 'gravy train'.
Perhaps, but the sooner man is extinguished from this planet the sooner the planet can recover to it's equilibrium.
The truth kinda hurts.
callme
Mar 29, 01:14 PM
Now read through the rest of the posts after that and discover that Finder does not support Cut and Paste.
And where in the first post from the OP did they mention 'in the Finder'?
And where in the first post from the OP did they mention 'in the Finder'?
cozmot
Mar 17, 07:31 AM
It this utter ignorance and false sense of security in the Mac user base that I would use to my advantage if I were a cyber-criminal. While I completely appreciate the lack of malware OSX has enjoyed thus far, I've seen more than enough evidence over the past few years to tell me that it's far from safe. The latest Safari/Webkit hacking contest result alone should be enough to cause any reasonable person to take notice. I think a few people will be changing their tunes the day the crap finally hits the fan.
For some reason, a certain famous quote from The Hitchhiker's Guide to The Galaxy about the Sirius Cybernetics Corporation comes to mind regarding certain people who will be the first against the wall when the revolution comes.... ;)
So you're not a cyber-criminal, but there are many out there, yet they haven't used this "sense of security in the Mac user base" to their advantage, have they? The latest hacking contest (I assume you're referring to Pwn2Own 2011) resulted in Safari and IE 8 being hacked. A browser is not an OS. Note that Goggle Chrome came out with flying colors, yet one of its platforms - Windows - has been hacked many times.
Simply put, there are underlying vulnerabilities to Windows that do not exist with OS X. That said, the real dangers to your computer are how you use it. Don't have a password on your wireless router? Use easy-to-guess passwords on your online accounts? Never change your passwords? Use the same password on all your accounts? Visit porn sites a lot and download that stuff? Download movies illegally? Click on links in emails from people you don't know? Or, from those you do, don't look at the source to see if it's a valid link? Respond to emails telling you that your [fill in the blank] account has been temporarily disabled, and that you need to "verify" your information to reactivate it? If so to any of the above, you're asking for trouble, even if you do have AV software "protecting" you.
There are many security experts who do not use AV software. Steve Gibson http://www.grc.com is one of them. Why? They practice safe computing and use common sense. No amount of AV or Internet security software is going to protect people who practice unsafe computing.
We've been hearing about the crap hitting the fan for years, and will for years to come. Yawn.
For some reason, a certain famous quote from The Hitchhiker's Guide to The Galaxy about the Sirius Cybernetics Corporation comes to mind regarding certain people who will be the first against the wall when the revolution comes.... ;)
So you're not a cyber-criminal, but there are many out there, yet they haven't used this "sense of security in the Mac user base" to their advantage, have they? The latest hacking contest (I assume you're referring to Pwn2Own 2011) resulted in Safari and IE 8 being hacked. A browser is not an OS. Note that Goggle Chrome came out with flying colors, yet one of its platforms - Windows - has been hacked many times.
Simply put, there are underlying vulnerabilities to Windows that do not exist with OS X. That said, the real dangers to your computer are how you use it. Don't have a password on your wireless router? Use easy-to-guess passwords on your online accounts? Never change your passwords? Use the same password on all your accounts? Visit porn sites a lot and download that stuff? Download movies illegally? Click on links in emails from people you don't know? Or, from those you do, don't look at the source to see if it's a valid link? Respond to emails telling you that your [fill in the blank] account has been temporarily disabled, and that you need to "verify" your information to reactivate it? If so to any of the above, you're asking for trouble, even if you do have AV software "protecting" you.
There are many security experts who do not use AV software. Steve Gibson http://www.grc.com is one of them. Why? They practice safe computing and use common sense. No amount of AV or Internet security software is going to protect people who practice unsafe computing.
We've been hearing about the crap hitting the fan for years, and will for years to come. Yawn.
theman5725
Sep 15, 05:46 PM
why is the US so far behind Europe with this kind of technology?
(edit: maybe it isn't i haven't shopped for a phone in nearly a year)
Because US cell phone carriers suck. :/
(edit: maybe it isn't i haven't shopped for a phone in nearly a year)
Because US cell phone carriers suck. :/
Avicdar
Sep 14, 01:15 AM
I just do not think Apple is going to introduce a cellular phone. The ideas sound great around here, but I don't see any good busness model for such a device. What is Apple going to make money on selling such a product?
With all of this noise about 'I wont buy it if it isn't a blackberry killer', etc its no wonder people are having trouble seeing the forest through all the trees.
Apple = simplicity in form and function.
The number ONE feature of this device is that it eliminates the need to carry both a phone AND an iPod. Thats it - simple. You have dropped the need to carry around an iPod and a phone without losing either.
The click wheel is going to make finding people in your list and calling them a breeze.
My only hope is that they throw away address book and give us something nicer to keep track of our contact lists. I hate address book, it really bites.
With all of this noise about 'I wont buy it if it isn't a blackberry killer', etc its no wonder people are having trouble seeing the forest through all the trees.
Apple = simplicity in form and function.
The number ONE feature of this device is that it eliminates the need to carry both a phone AND an iPod. Thats it - simple. You have dropped the need to carry around an iPod and a phone without losing either.
The click wheel is going to make finding people in your list and calling them a breeze.
My only hope is that they throw away address book and give us something nicer to keep track of our contact lists. I hate address book, it really bites.
mike2q
Oct 27, 06:01 PM
I think someone was right when they pointed out that Apple was attacked because Green Peace believed that we as Mac lovers are all tree hugging hippies. I think this thread alone put an end to that train of thought.
This has NOTHING to do with environmentalism, president Bush, or freedom of speech. It has to do with a the organizers of a privately held event kicking out an attendee for violating the terms it had set. As the organizer and funder of the event it had every right to kick out anyone it saw fit for any reason. If green peace was making it slightly uncomfortable for Apples other attendees then they are very justified in their reaction.
Just my 2 cents.
This has NOTHING to do with environmentalism, president Bush, or freedom of speech. It has to do with a the organizers of a privately held event kicking out an attendee for violating the terms it had set. As the organizer and funder of the event it had every right to kick out anyone it saw fit for any reason. If green peace was making it slightly uncomfortable for Apples other attendees then they are very justified in their reaction.
Just my 2 cents.
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.
mattsh
Aug 29, 06:41 AM
As stated earlier in this thread, this is absolutely not true. The MacPros are included in the rebate and they were NOT available when the promotion started. They were added as elgible purchases after release.
Its almost 7:30 EST, and the store is still up. Not a good sign for action today.
--HG
Ok well I stand corrected then. Keep in mind.. the store doesn't "open" until 8am EST... So we still have 20 minutes :P
Its almost 7:30 EST, and the store is still up. Not a good sign for action today.
--HG
Ok well I stand corrected then. Keep in mind.. the store doesn't "open" until 8am EST... So we still have 20 minutes :P
GGJstudios
Apr 12, 07:28 PM
Can anybody running Leopard confirm what users/groups have write privileges to Safari, Mail, & etc.
Just want to clarify if the permissions on that Leopard system have been modified?
Leopard:
281058 281059 281060
Snow Leopard:
281066
Just want to clarify if the permissions on that Leopard system have been modified?
Leopard:
281058 281059 281060
Snow Leopard:
281066
charlituna
May 3, 11:05 AM
So when is the ACD gonna support thunderbolt?
Likely never. At least by Apple. That is old school tech that they want you to replace.
Likely never. At least by Apple. That is old school tech that they want you to replace.