BrianKonarsMac
Jun 6, 03:19 PM
15 minutes?
45 Seconds is all it took to get the facts...
Google search: "android market return policy"
First result: http://www.google.com/mobile/android/market-policies.html
For those too lazy to click...
"Returns: You have 24 hours from the time of purchase (not download) to return any applications purchased from Android Market for a full refund of any applicable fees."
Summary: 24 Hours, not 15 minutes.
Yep, I've bought a few apps that weren't worth the money and returned them for a refund. It's a nice system, because you can then see if the app is actually worth the purchase to you.
45 Seconds is all it took to get the facts...
Google search: "android market return policy"
First result: http://www.google.com/mobile/android/market-policies.html
For those too lazy to click...
"Returns: You have 24 hours from the time of purchase (not download) to return any applications purchased from Android Market for a full refund of any applicable fees."
Summary: 24 Hours, not 15 minutes.
Yep, I've bought a few apps that weren't worth the money and returned them for a refund. It's a nice system, because you can then see if the app is actually worth the purchase to you.
FloatingBones
Nov 25, 12:34 AM
For the last time, STOP SPEAKING FOR OTHER PEOPLE!!! You have NO right what-so-ever to speak for anyone but yourself and yet you continue to state that EVER SINGLE iOS USER hates Flash and is glad to be rid of it and yet this Skyfire app proves just the opposite.
What I said: Users of the 120M+ iOS devices are doing just fine without Flash plugins is completely true. There are no Flash plugins for this device. Nobody can run a shred of Flash content in their browser on this device.
No amount of nonsensical shouting will change the facts.
You have every right to give your opinion on the matter, but it is your opinion, not the opinion of every single iOS user in existence.
But owners of those 120M+ iOS devices are doing just fine without Flash. Nobody forced them to buy those devices. If they were somehow "disappointed" because there are no Flash plugins available, nobody prevented them from returning them or reselling them.
That is NOT a shortcoming of Flash dude.
Also incorrect. There are huge shortcomings of Flash, and you've never addressed them.
You've never addressed the identity-leaking of Flash cookies: Flash doesn't honor the cookie privacy settings of the browser. More than half of the top 100 websites are now using Flash cookies to track users and store information about them. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-209.txt) Do you actually like the fact that those sites do an end-run around the cookie privacy settings by using Flash? I can't find a single rational person that likes the identity-leaking.
You've never addressed the quirkiness that Flash brings to the browser UI. On my Mac, scrolling works differently when my mouse is over a Flash region. Certain keyboard shortcuts cease to work. Text that appears in a Flash window is not searchable with the browser's text-finding feature. My Mac doesn't behave like a Mac inside of a Flash window.
The engineering choice made for iOS is simplicity. Layering Flash on top of the browser would compromise that simplicity. Click-to-flash semantics would add yet another layer of clutter and obfuscation to the UI.
You've never addressed Adobe's inability to deal competently to secure their software. Security experts believe that Adobe is going to surpass Microsoft as the #1 target for security attacks. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-231.htm) Besides Flash, Adobe Reader is a vector for zero day bugs (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt). I really don't know how you do that: it's a PDF reader! The bugs have been around in Adobe Reader for years and Adobe still hasn't fixed them.
If Apple enabled Flash in iOS Safari, they would be farming out the correct operation of their iOS browser to a company that has proven to be one of the least competent companies in dealing with malware attacks. Noted security expert Steve Gibson mocks their cluelessness:
"[Adobe:] how is that quarterly update cycle going for you?" (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt)
I have yet to find a single Flash enthusiast who can address those issues. I'm hardly surprised that you can't address them, either.
That is a shortcoming of Steve Jobs' choosing.
Nonsense. They are engineering and design choices. If Apple made bad engineering and design choices, they would never have sold 120M+ of these devices.
If you think they are a "shortcoming": there are simple solutions. Don't buy an iOS device. If you did buy one, sell it. Or maybe you can see if it will blend (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAl28d6tbko).
One thing is certain: Apple will not compromise their iOS browser with Flash, and complaining about that is rather silly.
Even if Flash is on the road to becoming obsolete, that doesn't mean people don't want to be able to access the entire Web in the here and now.
Adobe Flash is on the road to becoming obsolete. Even Adobe acknowledges the fact (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999).
Between the 120M+ iOS devices, the click-to-flash plugins disable Flash downloads on Windows, Mac OS X and Linux machines, and Adobe's new Flash-to-HTML5 conversion tools (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999), the abandonment of Flash will continue to accelerate.
You just don't seem to comprehend that.
You are correct. Flash is a legacy technology, and its day has passed.
You seem to have this deep seated hatred of Flash
There are fundamental failings in both the design and deployment of Flash. I listed three of those earlier in my reply.
The thing that got my attention was when I realized that Flash was maintaining its own set of cookies and that those cookies did not honor the privacy settings of my browser. I then learned about click-to-flash plugins to minimize my exposure to Flash. The shocking thing to me was how much disabling Flash improved the browsing experience: faster page loads, less flashing advertisements, and far less CPU usage.
and I can tell that if Steve had said "I LOVE Flash" instead you would almost undoubtedly be here fighting against HTML5 and for Flash.
You imply that I blindly agree with Apple's (and Jobs's) decisions. That is not the case.
I strongly disagree with Apple's decision to prevent Hypermac from selling external batteries for Mac computers (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1032695). Hypermac makes a quality product, and they are filling a niche that Apple ignores. Magsafe is a wonderful technology, but they should be licensing this tech to third-party vendors. I fondly hope that Apple addresses this deficiency in their strategy and product accessories soon.
If you search, you can find where I commented on this in the public record weeks ago.
Yes, I honestly believe that. You have no vested interest in either one. You're just being Steve's doormat.
Now you know better.
I see no reason why ANYONE should have to convert to HTML5.
Too many laptop users are tired of the CPU loading and battery suck of Flash apps.
Too many users don't like that Flash alters the UI inside of the browsers: altered scrolling behavior, keyboard shortcuts that don't work in Flash, text searches that don't work with text in a Flash app.
Too many privacy advocates are bothered that Flash maintains a separate set of cookies and those cookies do not honor the privacy settings of the browser. Commercial websites are using those Flash cookies to track users. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-209.txt)
Too many security advocates are wary of using Adobe products because of Adobe's poor track record against security attacks.
Even if all those four large concerns were addressed, websites have to deal with the growing number of users that use Flash-blocking plugins. Advertisers that deliver their ads with Flash have no guarantee that users will allow those Flash apps to be downloaded and run on their machines.
Those are the reasons why Flash's viability for delivering web content is in decline. Even if you don't see the reasons, Adobe does (http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2010/10/adobe-demos-flash-to-html5-conversion-tool.html).
What I said: Users of the 120M+ iOS devices are doing just fine without Flash plugins is completely true. There are no Flash plugins for this device. Nobody can run a shred of Flash content in their browser on this device.
No amount of nonsensical shouting will change the facts.
You have every right to give your opinion on the matter, but it is your opinion, not the opinion of every single iOS user in existence.
But owners of those 120M+ iOS devices are doing just fine without Flash. Nobody forced them to buy those devices. If they were somehow "disappointed" because there are no Flash plugins available, nobody prevented them from returning them or reselling them.
That is NOT a shortcoming of Flash dude.
Also incorrect. There are huge shortcomings of Flash, and you've never addressed them.
You've never addressed the identity-leaking of Flash cookies: Flash doesn't honor the cookie privacy settings of the browser. More than half of the top 100 websites are now using Flash cookies to track users and store information about them. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-209.txt) Do you actually like the fact that those sites do an end-run around the cookie privacy settings by using Flash? I can't find a single rational person that likes the identity-leaking.
You've never addressed the quirkiness that Flash brings to the browser UI. On my Mac, scrolling works differently when my mouse is over a Flash region. Certain keyboard shortcuts cease to work. Text that appears in a Flash window is not searchable with the browser's text-finding feature. My Mac doesn't behave like a Mac inside of a Flash window.
The engineering choice made for iOS is simplicity. Layering Flash on top of the browser would compromise that simplicity. Click-to-flash semantics would add yet another layer of clutter and obfuscation to the UI.
You've never addressed Adobe's inability to deal competently to secure their software. Security experts believe that Adobe is going to surpass Microsoft as the #1 target for security attacks. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-231.htm) Besides Flash, Adobe Reader is a vector for zero day bugs (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt). I really don't know how you do that: it's a PDF reader! The bugs have been around in Adobe Reader for years and Adobe still hasn't fixed them.
If Apple enabled Flash in iOS Safari, they would be farming out the correct operation of their iOS browser to a company that has proven to be one of the least competent companies in dealing with malware attacks. Noted security expert Steve Gibson mocks their cluelessness:
"[Adobe:] how is that quarterly update cycle going for you?" (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt)
I have yet to find a single Flash enthusiast who can address those issues. I'm hardly surprised that you can't address them, either.
That is a shortcoming of Steve Jobs' choosing.
Nonsense. They are engineering and design choices. If Apple made bad engineering and design choices, they would never have sold 120M+ of these devices.
If you think they are a "shortcoming": there are simple solutions. Don't buy an iOS device. If you did buy one, sell it. Or maybe you can see if it will blend (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAl28d6tbko).
One thing is certain: Apple will not compromise their iOS browser with Flash, and complaining about that is rather silly.
Even if Flash is on the road to becoming obsolete, that doesn't mean people don't want to be able to access the entire Web in the here and now.
Adobe Flash is on the road to becoming obsolete. Even Adobe acknowledges the fact (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999).
Between the 120M+ iOS devices, the click-to-flash plugins disable Flash downloads on Windows, Mac OS X and Linux machines, and Adobe's new Flash-to-HTML5 conversion tools (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999), the abandonment of Flash will continue to accelerate.
You just don't seem to comprehend that.
You are correct. Flash is a legacy technology, and its day has passed.
You seem to have this deep seated hatred of Flash
There are fundamental failings in both the design and deployment of Flash. I listed three of those earlier in my reply.
The thing that got my attention was when I realized that Flash was maintaining its own set of cookies and that those cookies did not honor the privacy settings of my browser. I then learned about click-to-flash plugins to minimize my exposure to Flash. The shocking thing to me was how much disabling Flash improved the browsing experience: faster page loads, less flashing advertisements, and far less CPU usage.
and I can tell that if Steve had said "I LOVE Flash" instead you would almost undoubtedly be here fighting against HTML5 and for Flash.
You imply that I blindly agree with Apple's (and Jobs's) decisions. That is not the case.
I strongly disagree with Apple's decision to prevent Hypermac from selling external batteries for Mac computers (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1032695). Hypermac makes a quality product, and they are filling a niche that Apple ignores. Magsafe is a wonderful technology, but they should be licensing this tech to third-party vendors. I fondly hope that Apple addresses this deficiency in their strategy and product accessories soon.
If you search, you can find where I commented on this in the public record weeks ago.
Yes, I honestly believe that. You have no vested interest in either one. You're just being Steve's doormat.
Now you know better.
I see no reason why ANYONE should have to convert to HTML5.
Too many laptop users are tired of the CPU loading and battery suck of Flash apps.
Too many users don't like that Flash alters the UI inside of the browsers: altered scrolling behavior, keyboard shortcuts that don't work in Flash, text searches that don't work with text in a Flash app.
Too many privacy advocates are bothered that Flash maintains a separate set of cookies and those cookies do not honor the privacy settings of the browser. Commercial websites are using those Flash cookies to track users. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-209.txt)
Too many security advocates are wary of using Adobe products because of Adobe's poor track record against security attacks.
Even if all those four large concerns were addressed, websites have to deal with the growing number of users that use Flash-blocking plugins. Advertisers that deliver their ads with Flash have no guarantee that users will allow those Flash apps to be downloaded and run on their machines.
Those are the reasons why Flash's viability for delivering web content is in decline. Even if you don't see the reasons, Adobe does (http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2010/10/adobe-demos-flash-to-html5-conversion-tool.html).
joeshell383
Oct 19, 05:30 AM
Apple didn't update the form factors was to ease people into Intel. Apple had to convince upgraders that they were still using a Mac, and that the inside was the only thing that changed (for the better). Now that Gen 1 Intel is complete Apple can update the form factors as they have proved Macs will always be Macs.
yg17
Mar 7, 05:55 PM
I guess we're down to one and a half men.
more...
Apple OC
May 1, 10:21 PM
So the figure head who has had little to nothing to do with Al-Queada (a leaderless brand name of extremists at this point) since 9/11 is dead. Woo hoo. Meanwhile, terrorism in the world has only increased since the "war on terror" (something that was predicted and well known by US planners when gearing up for it).
Time to start the USA chants. :rolleyes:
I expected your post to be something along this view ... can you source the fact he has little or nothing to do with Al-Queda?
he was still the #1 leader of Al-Queda ... I predicted he was in Pakistan all along.
Killed by US forces ... Excellent news
Time to start the USA chants. :rolleyes:
I expected your post to be something along this view ... can you source the fact he has little or nothing to do with Al-Queda?
he was still the #1 leader of Al-Queda ... I predicted he was in Pakistan all along.
Killed by US forces ... Excellent news
jon1987
Apr 28, 04:58 PM
Surely by now there is someone out there with a White iPhone, a messuring tape or calipers that can just tell us these photos are nonsense? Please? Pretty please? Xxx
more...
Dr.Gargoyle
Jul 28, 08:15 AM
This news will hopefully inspire Apple to make the next generation iPods even more amazing. However, I don't see MS as the biggest threat to the iPod. I am much more concerned about mp3 cellphones with 4Gb flash (see e.g. SonyEricsson).
Apple needs come up with a revolutionary device that integrates an iPod with a cellphone and possibly even a GPS, in order to keep their mp3 marketshare.
Apple needs come up with a revolutionary device that integrates an iPod with a cellphone and possibly even a GPS, in order to keep their mp3 marketshare.
MythicFrost
Nov 26, 05:09 AM
I'd say one of the biggest reasons why Apple won't let flash on iOS is simply because flash doesn't mix well with multi-touch.
People are going to encounter lots of flash that doesn't work or doesn't work well, and it will cause potential security issues, crashing, etc., Apple doesn't want their named tarnished -- your typical user isn't really going to understand that flash is crashing, not the actual browser, so Apple gets the blame instead of Adobe.
The fact is, flash is useful for somethings but is also being used for many things it shouldn't (or would be better suited for something else), flash is everywhere, and personally, I think it needs to die so we can start anew with HTML5 or another codec which fixes Flashes shortcomings.
People are going to encounter lots of flash that doesn't work or doesn't work well, and it will cause potential security issues, crashing, etc., Apple doesn't want their named tarnished -- your typical user isn't really going to understand that flash is crashing, not the actual browser, so Apple gets the blame instead of Adobe.
The fact is, flash is useful for somethings but is also being used for many things it shouldn't (or would be better suited for something else), flash is everywhere, and personally, I think it needs to die so we can start anew with HTML5 or another codec which fixes Flashes shortcomings.
more...
hamis92
Apr 22, 04:41 PM
I agree. I think iPhone 5 will be if not literally then at least from feature perspective "iPhone 4S".
And I agree with you. I think it would make sense to call it iPhone 5 though - I think the "ProductName ProductVersion#" naming convention Apple has started using lately makes a lot of sense and is way simpler to understand for the average Joe than something like iPhone 3GS.
And I agree with you. I think it would make sense to call it iPhone 5 though - I think the "ProductName ProductVersion#" naming convention Apple has started using lately makes a lot of sense and is way simpler to understand for the average Joe than something like iPhone 3GS.
bodeh6
Oct 24, 08:43 AM
as others have mentioned, i'm a little surprised that only the 17inch model has a 7200rpm drive option. i'm going to check with apple directly to see if i can get a custom 15inch with a 7200 drive. my audio apps don't work well with the anything slower.
having said that, the ram, fw800 and dual layer burner are a nice addition
That is weird but according to the website Apple.com in the specs page, the 15" has the following options
-120GB @5400 RPM
-160GB @5400 RPM Add $100
-200GB @7200 RPM Add $200
While the 17" has
-100GB @7200 RPM Subtract $100
-160GB @5400 RPM
-200GB @4200 RPM Add $100
having said that, the ram, fw800 and dual layer burner are a nice addition
That is weird but according to the website Apple.com in the specs page, the 15" has the following options
-120GB @5400 RPM
-160GB @5400 RPM Add $100
-200GB @7200 RPM Add $200
While the 17" has
-100GB @7200 RPM Subtract $100
-160GB @5400 RPM
-200GB @4200 RPM Add $100
more...
Apple Corps
Apr 13, 09:02 AM
http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/26/exclusive-apple-dictated-light-peak-creation-to-intel-could-be/
None taken - I'm just posting a "citation" that comments on Apple's major role - might be accurate - might be wrong.
None taken - I'm just posting a "citation" that comments on Apple's major role - might be accurate - might be wrong.
Moyank24
Apr 28, 03:57 PM
The would be the best narrative EVER.
MRVille is brothel, and 2 girls have stds.
The seer is a health department screener.
The hunter is a condom distributor.
It might have to go to the PRSI, though.
:eek:
I am speechless.
MRVille is brothel, and 2 girls have stds.
The seer is a health department screener.
The hunter is a condom distributor.
It might have to go to the PRSI, though.
:eek:
I am speechless.
more...
kentkomine
Apr 14, 10:45 AM
I would've bought the white iPhone if Apple had put it on the shelves at release, but now that its April, I've decided to wait for the fifth-gen iPhone... Hopefully they won't have any problems with that one
RavageScourge
Nov 16, 04:38 PM
I am getting an iPhone now YAY, along with a �30/mo contract but the phone costs �149 so the �149 is my christmas present... then i'll have a macbook (got that 2 months ago and loving it) and an iPhone two things i've wanted for ages
more...
IJ Reilly
Jul 10, 11:15 AM
I'm going to a MFA writing program in the fall; would love to see how this turns out. I use Word exclusively but can't shake the feeling that there's a better way to do things.
There already is. ;)
There already is. ;)
aafuss1
Jul 25, 10:33 AM
Microsoft has a Wireless Laser Mouse 6000-that works on PC's and is laser too-unlike Apple that won't support those trying to get the the wireless Mighty Mouse to work on a PC. And my fav-Logitech has the G7 that works quite fine on Macs.
more...
snebes
Apr 23, 06:24 PM
The T-Mobile deal isn't a for sure thing. Likely, but the FTC could block it. Also, as the article states T-Mobile's towers use a different frequencies.
That doesn't mean that Apple wouldn't be testing handset for them now. Just being an optimist. If AT&T/T-Mobile purchase does go through, it doesn't mean that T-Mobiles 2G/3G network goes away. It will be around for many more years. AT&T may require their handsets to support the T-Mobile 3G bands as well as their own.
That doesn't mean that Apple wouldn't be testing handset for them now. Just being an optimist. If AT&T/T-Mobile purchase does go through, it doesn't mean that T-Mobiles 2G/3G network goes away. It will be around for many more years. AT&T may require their handsets to support the T-Mobile 3G bands as well as their own.
hulugu
Dec 5, 01:10 PM
Indeed on first read, I'd say that he presents a convincing argument. I'll go along with his diagnosis that there's no hole that could open you up to arbitrary code execution. If that's your definition of a security hole, then it follows that there's no security hole there. But it's still leaving you open the possibility that the operating system may crash for no apparent reason, causing you to lose any unsaved work.
Lost work... Depending on how productive you are, that can easily result in monetary damage being done.
As I posted previously, that leaves you in no worse a situation than you always are if you're running a desktop computer without a UPS. But I think that it still warrants attention.
At best it still qualifies as an inconvenience, because the savvy user who saves her work regularly will only have lost 5 or 6 minutes of productivity including the reboot. At worst, it can result in hours of lost work for the user who doesn't understand the "save your work" mantra -- especially if we're talking about somebody who's protected by a battery backup and doesn't think that unexpected reboots should be possible on such an inherently stable operating system.
And it's undoubtedly a bug inside Apple's software that's causing this problem, therefore it is absolutely appropriate that Apple should be expected to fix it. I appreciate anybody's effort to bring such bugs to light, because that increases the probability that Apple will find out about it and fix it.
I'm saying Apple shouldn't fix it, I'm merely pointing out that many people are reacting to the MOKB as a wealth of major security flaws.
This is a bug, an annoying bug that should be fixed, but that's very different from a security flaw in which a crash can be used to inject malicious code. MOKB's author LMH was wrong about this particular instance and he did not do the research required of a security professional in this particular problem.
Again, don't dismiss the MOKB or the warnings from Secunia or F-Secure or even the demonstrations by Ellrich and Johnny Cache, instead we need to assess the problem as best we can.
I would say that you probably shouldn't be installing .dmgs while you're doing important work that hasn't been saved, that's just asking for trouble.
Lost work... Depending on how productive you are, that can easily result in monetary damage being done.
As I posted previously, that leaves you in no worse a situation than you always are if you're running a desktop computer without a UPS. But I think that it still warrants attention.
At best it still qualifies as an inconvenience, because the savvy user who saves her work regularly will only have lost 5 or 6 minutes of productivity including the reboot. At worst, it can result in hours of lost work for the user who doesn't understand the "save your work" mantra -- especially if we're talking about somebody who's protected by a battery backup and doesn't think that unexpected reboots should be possible on such an inherently stable operating system.
And it's undoubtedly a bug inside Apple's software that's causing this problem, therefore it is absolutely appropriate that Apple should be expected to fix it. I appreciate anybody's effort to bring such bugs to light, because that increases the probability that Apple will find out about it and fix it.
I'm saying Apple shouldn't fix it, I'm merely pointing out that many people are reacting to the MOKB as a wealth of major security flaws.
This is a bug, an annoying bug that should be fixed, but that's very different from a security flaw in which a crash can be used to inject malicious code. MOKB's author LMH was wrong about this particular instance and he did not do the research required of a security professional in this particular problem.
Again, don't dismiss the MOKB or the warnings from Secunia or F-Secure or even the demonstrations by Ellrich and Johnny Cache, instead we need to assess the problem as best we can.
I would say that you probably shouldn't be installing .dmgs while you're doing important work that hasn't been saved, that's just asking for trouble.
kernkraft
Oct 26, 09:58 PM
I want world peace and everybody in the world be safe, fed and loved.
I'm only kidding. I want my well-deserved anal.
I'm only kidding. I want my well-deserved anal.
syc23
Apr 26, 03:28 PM
You wouldn't work for your boss for zero salary so why would you expect Apple to invest millions in their data centers and give this away for free?
OrganMusic
Apr 11, 10:22 PM
+1 for TB "Target disk mode"! I am happy they kept FW800 on the newest MBPs though.
Anyone think TB will be eventually used for connecting things like cameras as well?
Anyone think TB will be eventually used for connecting things like cameras as well?
rhett7660
Mar 10, 10:09 PM
I have stayed out of this one for a while, but now he has gone from "sick" to "awesome" with this video on Funny or Die.
http://FunnyOrDie.com/m/5cwg
Wow. Dude has seriously lost it me thinks.
http://FunnyOrDie.com/m/5cwg
Wow. Dude has seriously lost it me thinks.
bedifferent
Apr 22, 05:15 PM
Because the hardware is in the CDMA phone on Verizon. The AT&T iphone 4 doesn't have the same chip. If the iphone 5 does, it's still up to apple and at&t to enable it.
Ah cool, didn't know that, thanks!
Ah cool, didn't know that, thanks!
Thunderhawks
Apr 15, 02:51 PM
nope .. refresh happening in the next 3-4 weeks ... they want you to purchase the machine first then pay to upgrade to lion
nope......they usually provide a cut off date , i.e. if you bought a new Mac before (date) you can upgrade for FREE.
All others get out your credit cards:-) $ 179 or so for a Family pack of 5.
nope......they usually provide a cut off date , i.e. if you bought a new Mac before (date) you can upgrade for FREE.
All others get out your credit cards:-) $ 179 or so for a Family pack of 5.
No comments:
Post a Comment