jpg
Apr 27, 12:48 PM
Raise a glass to the home server!
Many of us have been streaming our music for years.
This is where I think the puck is headed.
Make your own cloud.... With our all new TimeCapsule, now called iServer :apple:
Many of us have been streaming our music for years.
This is where I think the puck is headed.
Make your own cloud.... With our all new TimeCapsule, now called iServer :apple:
hob
Nov 4, 10:05 AM
Maybe I need more RAM, but I was dissapointed to be reminded of Virtual PC, the way it totally slows the rest of my Mac down...
http://static.flickr.com/118/288535502_996a0fc6b1.jpg (http://static.flickr.com/118/288535502_996a0fc6b1_o.jpg)
[click for bigger image]
http://static.flickr.com/118/288535502_996a0fc6b1.jpg (http://static.flickr.com/118/288535502_996a0fc6b1_o.jpg)
[click for bigger image]
Compile 'em all
Nov 11, 07:52 AM
just goes to show people still want to be able to see flash on their iphones reguardless of how bloated
I assume this means everyone want to be able to use iFart on their iPhones too?
Just because an app climbed up the charts doesn't mean they absolutely need the app. This is not how charting in the App Store works or means. I am pretty sure millions of iPhone users will be just fine without Angry Birds.
I assume this means everyone want to be able to use iFart on their iPhones too?
Just because an app climbed up the charts doesn't mean they absolutely need the app. This is not how charting in the App Store works or means. I am pretty sure millions of iPhone users will be just fine without Angry Birds.
TheOnlyJon
Sep 17, 09:35 AM
Dude I've been looking for a shirt like that! Where'd you buy it???
Target :o $19.99!
Target :o $19.99!
more...
Daveway
Jul 24, 08:44 PM
I can see many first time user scratching their heads on this kind of design.
Wilz
Oct 24, 09:02 AM
FINALLY!
credit card at the ready, macbook pro will be mine soon
credit card at the ready, macbook pro will be mine soon
more...
littleman23408
Sep 13, 01:10 AM
Wat? :confused: $5????!!
That is by far my fav gaming franchise.
Yea, those games are awesome!
Got some more records!
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4085/4985258575_495756eda1_m.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4133/4985258781_1a64bbb9cb_m.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4105/4985859420_9284cd2166_m.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4132/4985259265_3f38193539_m.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4133/4985859978_7637a8d686_m.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4107/4985860206_a46f42232c_m.jpg
...more great purchases to come! :D
That is by far my fav gaming franchise.
Yea, those games are awesome!
Got some more records!
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4085/4985258575_495756eda1_m.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4133/4985258781_1a64bbb9cb_m.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4105/4985859420_9284cd2166_m.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4132/4985259265_3f38193539_m.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4133/4985859978_7637a8d686_m.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4107/4985860206_a46f42232c_m.jpg
...more great purchases to come! :D
coachingguy
Mar 31, 02:47 PM
When I got my iPad, the first app I fell in love with was the Cal. I remember saying to multiple people that I hope this makes its way in the Apple Os... This is a huge improvement!
Coachingguy
Coachingguy
more...
Thunderhawks
Apr 13, 02:03 PM
Highly unlikely that Apple will release an actual tv. More probable are televsions from major manufacturers that have air play functionality built in.
Agreed.
Why would anybody with limited know how about TV manufacturing go into that field?
USING somebody elses TV to display whatever makes much more sense.
I could see them coming in with a blockbuster smart projector device.
Now we are talking:-)
Agreed.
Why would anybody with limited know how about TV manufacturing go into that field?
USING somebody elses TV to display whatever makes much more sense.
I could see them coming in with a blockbuster smart projector device.
Now we are talking:-)
DynaFXD
May 4, 11:48 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
Meh. I was not upgrading until the "6" anyway.
Meh. I was not upgrading until the "6" anyway.
more...
lordonuthin
Oct 26, 10:00 PM
wait, you cant get gpu2 to work in windows?
I haven't tried windows but from reading posts elsewhere it seems to be a problem in windows as well. As with most things electronic it is likely only a few who have trouble. I'm just better at bad luck than most people are.
dang that's fast. on a 2.26 mac pro? it's taking me like just under or right at 36 min on my i7 920 running at 3.5 ghz. hey now, if you could do these on your 920 then you could really put up some points
If you only have 4 cores and I have 8 that isn't very much of a difference even taking into account the mhz discrepency. It might be worth trying to see if my 920 would be ok at stock speed with bigadv units.
I haven't tried windows but from reading posts elsewhere it seems to be a problem in windows as well. As with most things electronic it is likely only a few who have trouble. I'm just better at bad luck than most people are.
dang that's fast. on a 2.26 mac pro? it's taking me like just under or right at 36 min on my i7 920 running at 3.5 ghz. hey now, if you could do these on your 920 then you could really put up some points
If you only have 4 cores and I have 8 that isn't very much of a difference even taking into account the mhz discrepency. It might be worth trying to see if my 920 would be ok at stock speed with bigadv units.
ciTiger
Apr 14, 01:11 PM
Any baseband update on this?
more...
Mister Snitch
Apr 14, 07:58 AM
yah the white iPhone looks fresh as hell!
Looks like a bar of soap. Which I guess is OK. It IS different, 'fresh', and will make a fashion statement for those who care about such things.
Looks like a bar of soap. Which I guess is OK. It IS different, 'fresh', and will make a fashion statement for those who care about such things.
BRLawyer
Oct 19, 03:17 AM
With such astounding results, you may repeat after me:
Dell is DEAD. HP is DEAD. Apple RULES!
Dell is DEAD. HP is DEAD. Apple RULES!
more...
KnightWRX
Apr 15, 02:18 PM
Learn from Google? What has Google developed that's anything close to an OS? And no, Chrome OS doesn't count...it's a giant web browser, with Cloud Apps...
By that same vein, what has Apple ever developed that's anything close to a OS ? And no, Mac OS X, a bunch of components bought/taken from the open source community doesn't count... it's just a Unix distribution with a GUI layer on top. :rolleyes:
It's easy to discount anything going with that mentality. The fact is, Chrome OS is as much an undertaking as OS X was. It's more than just a "Web browser" since web browsers cannot be booted and don't provide graphical sub-systems, input management and process scheduling obviously.
(yes, I do realise Mac OS Classic existed).
And to answer your question directly : Android. ;)
By that same vein, what has Apple ever developed that's anything close to a OS ? And no, Mac OS X, a bunch of components bought/taken from the open source community doesn't count... it's just a Unix distribution with a GUI layer on top. :rolleyes:
It's easy to discount anything going with that mentality. The fact is, Chrome OS is as much an undertaking as OS X was. It's more than just a "Web browser" since web browsers cannot be booted and don't provide graphical sub-systems, input management and process scheduling obviously.
(yes, I do realise Mac OS Classic existed).
And to answer your question directly : Android. ;)
Wontu
Apr 15, 06:53 AM
Does anyone have any id�a how come it took such a long time? Isn't the only difference the color of the plastic? oO
Glass, actually.
Glass, actually.
more...
grinny11
Mar 12, 02:16 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
Cerritos just got their shipment. Ups guy had nine boxes. They said they weren't all iPads in there. Well see 20th in line now
Cerritos just got their shipment. Ups guy had nine boxes. They said they weren't all iPads in there. Well see 20th in line now
Platform
Oct 24, 09:06 AM
Does anyone know if they are available from today in the retail stores?
The new MacBook Pros are available from the online Apple Store. The new MacBook Pros will ship next week.
That was in the story :confused:
The new MacBook Pros are available from the online Apple Store. The new MacBook Pros will ship next week.
That was in the story :confused:
edesignuk
Sep 30, 07:44 AM
wow, how spectacularly awful.
OllyW
Apr 22, 07:46 AM
Look, Windows Media Player stole iTunes "look and feel", and method of starting playback of media content, sue em' Apple!
282522
Looks completely different to me. ;)
282522
Looks completely different to me. ;)
mahicantu
Apr 26, 11:00 PM
I bought an iMac April 16. If apple releases a new model May 3rd, will they pity recent buyers and allow exchange/return for the new iMac????
copykris
Jan 30, 07:42 AM
There is NOTHING wrong with grown men playing Pokemon...
if you say so...
if you say so...
FloatingBones
Nov 23, 12:46 AM
That's not why I called him a Communist. I call him a Communist because he acts like a 1-person dictator.
He's the CEO of a company: accountable to the Board of Directors and the stockholders of the publicly-traded company. There's no comparison between that and a communist dictator. Goofy.
Anyone who can provide a rational reason why these two things are comparable, please chime in.
Flash for iOS is no more of a security risk than it is for OSX in general or any other plugin from PDF readers to Javascript.
That's a terrible argument for having bundled Adobe products on iOS.
Adobe products are a large risk on Mac OS X. It's unbelievable to me that 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 you only view PDF files, you shouldn't even have Adobe Reader installed on your OS X computer. Apple Preview is better, faster, and far less bug-prone.
Steve Jobs "reason" for not including Flash is supposedly mostly about performance not security risks.
It's about both the performance and the security risks.
It's also about the identity-leaking through Flash cookies. Perhaps you missed that security discussion: 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). Flash cookies do not honor the cookie privacy settings of the browser; many users don't even know that Flash maintains its own set of cookies.
It's about the quirky UI interactions with Flash. Scrolling works differently when the mouse is over a Flash region. Certain keyboard shortcuts cease to work. Text that is displayed 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.
Then why are they allowing Flash in regular OSX?
Software is much more tightly-controlled on iOS devices. There is a file system firewall between every app. Third-party apps must be submitted to Apple before they can be distributed, and Apple has the capability to remotely disable any third party app that begins to exhibit a malware-like behavior in the field.
Some of those controls are about advances in OS development since Mac OS X. Some have to do with the nature of the device: handhelds are more appliances than laptops.
One other reason to ban Flash on iOS: Flash apps can be packaged as iOS apps. This should be safe because of the way that iOS apps are firewalled from each other and the kill switch that Apple can use if an app is found to be rogue.
There are fundamental differences between iOS devices and laptops/desktops. Also, Apple no longer ships Adobe Flash on their newest computers. (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1034486) I'm guessing that Apple will ship Flash on no computers starting with the release of OS X 10.7 next year.
By your logic that would mean that Microsoft must be the most incompetent company out there.
I don't believe you read that headline carefully: 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).
On the contrary, it indicates they are POPULAR.
No reason to shout.
Perhaps it indicates they have some fundamental problems in their software engineering. Did you read the podcast transcript about the latest Adobe bug? Adobe Reader has the same zero-day glitch as Flash. How does a PDF viewer get executable bugs like this?
How often does Apple update their security? I guess they're clueless too by your account. You won't admit that, however because you have an emotional investment in Apple.
Apple updates their software when updates are needed.
The point is that quarterly updates are far too infrequent. Did you read the transcript of the Security Now! podcast? Given the continuing number of Adobe zero-day bugs, Gibson asks:
"[Adobe:] how is that quarterly update cycle going for you?" (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt)
That is not what I said or what I proposed.
You proposed that Apple include Flash with iOS Safari and that users could turn it on. How you can possibly ensure that not a single iOS user will not lose anything the next time there's a zero day Adobe bug (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt). You can't.
He's the CEO of a company: accountable to the Board of Directors and the stockholders of the publicly-traded company. There's no comparison between that and a communist dictator. Goofy.
Anyone who can provide a rational reason why these two things are comparable, please chime in.
Flash for iOS is no more of a security risk than it is for OSX in general or any other plugin from PDF readers to Javascript.
That's a terrible argument for having bundled Adobe products on iOS.
Adobe products are a large risk on Mac OS X. It's unbelievable to me that 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 you only view PDF files, you shouldn't even have Adobe Reader installed on your OS X computer. Apple Preview is better, faster, and far less bug-prone.
Steve Jobs "reason" for not including Flash is supposedly mostly about performance not security risks.
It's about both the performance and the security risks.
It's also about the identity-leaking through Flash cookies. Perhaps you missed that security discussion: 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). Flash cookies do not honor the cookie privacy settings of the browser; many users don't even know that Flash maintains its own set of cookies.
It's about the quirky UI interactions with Flash. Scrolling works differently when the mouse is over a Flash region. Certain keyboard shortcuts cease to work. Text that is displayed 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.
Then why are they allowing Flash in regular OSX?
Software is much more tightly-controlled on iOS devices. There is a file system firewall between every app. Third-party apps must be submitted to Apple before they can be distributed, and Apple has the capability to remotely disable any third party app that begins to exhibit a malware-like behavior in the field.
Some of those controls are about advances in OS development since Mac OS X. Some have to do with the nature of the device: handhelds are more appliances than laptops.
One other reason to ban Flash on iOS: Flash apps can be packaged as iOS apps. This should be safe because of the way that iOS apps are firewalled from each other and the kill switch that Apple can use if an app is found to be rogue.
There are fundamental differences between iOS devices and laptops/desktops. Also, Apple no longer ships Adobe Flash on their newest computers. (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1034486) I'm guessing that Apple will ship Flash on no computers starting with the release of OS X 10.7 next year.
By your logic that would mean that Microsoft must be the most incompetent company out there.
I don't believe you read that headline carefully: 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).
On the contrary, it indicates they are POPULAR.
No reason to shout.
Perhaps it indicates they have some fundamental problems in their software engineering. Did you read the podcast transcript about the latest Adobe bug? Adobe Reader has the same zero-day glitch as Flash. How does a PDF viewer get executable bugs like this?
How often does Apple update their security? I guess they're clueless too by your account. You won't admit that, however because you have an emotional investment in Apple.
Apple updates their software when updates are needed.
The point is that quarterly updates are far too infrequent. Did you read the transcript of the Security Now! podcast? Given the continuing number of Adobe zero-day bugs, Gibson asks:
"[Adobe:] how is that quarterly update cycle going for you?" (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt)
That is not what I said or what I proposed.
You proposed that Apple include Flash with iOS Safari and that users could turn it on. How you can possibly ensure that not a single iOS user will not lose anything the next time there's a zero day Adobe bug (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt). You can't.
MagnusVonMagnum
Nov 20, 10:40 AM
If you don't address those very good reasons, your argument won't be very convincing. We do not want the CPU suck, the identity leaking, the UI inconsistencies, and the very real risk of "zero day" Adobe bugs.
Whom am I trying to convince? Illogical and irrational people who worship Steve Jobs and hate what he hates? Such people will not care or listen to any form of reason. That's why the word fanatic is in fanboy. No, I talk about an option to turn Flash on or off at will and you find it offensive to even offer an option. That is irrational at best.
Everything you fear would be avoided if someone just turned Flash OFF (or it could default to off and have to be turned on). I've said since the first post the word OPTION. You don't seem to comprehend that word or understand why those of us that would want the choice of having Flash are not asking you to give up anything in the process. You could always turn it off if it were present. We cannot turn it on if it's not present.
In other words, you are not competent to carry on a rational discussion. You're just here to vent.
No, I just don't see any point in trying to carry on a logical, rational discussion with someone whose "argument" is based purely on emotion. If it weren't, you wouldn't object to an option for those of us that don't agree with Steve Jobs point of view because an option satisfies all your arguments against having Flash because you can always just leave it OFF. It cannot do harm if it's off no matter how paranoid you may become about having it on your device.
Many millions of people have Flash installed on their Macs (let alone those using Windows and Linux) and they could remove it. They know that if they do, some web sites will cease to function properly and thus they leave it on. The security concerns you mentioned will be addressed as all security bugs are in both OSX and Windows.
Users of those 120M+ devices don't have to hope. They are already free of Flash!
Free of Flash? You say that in a tone that sounds like they're free of slavery or something. No, what they're free of is the ability to access millions of web sites that require Flash to view them or much of their content and I do not see that as a good thing. But my point of view doesn't require you to see it. I said from the first post I wanted an option to use Flash. You could still choose to turn it off if it were there. I cannot turn on what is not present nor should I have to buy some absurd 3rd party converter that requires their web site to be running to use it.
The analogy makes no sense. Nobody is forcing you to use any Apple product.
And so that makes it OK for him to behave as he does? A lot of us like Apple products, but we would like them a lot better if Steve would just stick to making the products unfettered instead of trying to force his opinions and world view on people in the process. He doesn't like Flash so he decides for everyone they should not use Flash. What if Steve decided iOS shall no longer support MP3 files, only AAC? I suppose you would accept that as OK too? Update iOS and your MP3s no longer function. Yes, that would be just wonderful if they did that. After all, AAC is superior to MP3, so why should Apple support a legacy inferior heavily pirated format? By your logic, they should not.
If you really want the "full web experience" of zero-day Adobe bugs, get an Android phone. Note: Android phones were vulnerable to the last zero-day Adobe bug. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt)
I don't want a phone period guy. I only want and use an iPod Touch. Is there an Android iPod Touch? Android didn't exist when Apple made the claims of accessing the full Internet either and it doesn't make that any less a lie.
The fact that I can't catch zero-day Adobe attacks on my iPhone is a great reason to praise Apple's decision.
You act as if Apple has no vulnerabilities to attack. That is extremely naive to the point of emotionalism once again. In fact it's just the opposite. Apple's security is rated as bad compared to Windows and only the fact that there are so few Mac users compared to Windows has saved it thus far. As the popularity of iOS devices has exploded, it's inevitable that it will start attracting malware. It's only a matter of time. Will you wish you never bought an iPhone on that day or will you recognize that companies simply have to find and patch vulnerabilities. Apple has patched numerous security flaws in OSX over the years. Should we plug our ears and say there is no such thing?
Do tell: what exact sites are you talking about? What exact legacy flash applications are running on those sites to which you can find no substitute?
A quick search (you do know how to do that don't you?) reveals offhand a few example sites that don't use HTML5 video (which could and may in the future, but that doesn't help someone today):
Gametrailers
GiantBomb
Vimeo
Playstation Blog
Stiq of Joy
Engadget
Try some of these effects on this site this with HTML5:
http://superior-web-solutions.com/
Maybe read this article on Flash. Most HTML5 is just a video player. Flash isn't just a video player and it didn't even start as one.
http://www.andrewgreig.com/2010/06/html5-is-not-a-flash-replacement-and-shouldnt-be-seen-that-way/
Perhaps you want an open standard? So when does Apple stop requiring Quicktime on their web sites? :rolleyes:
Nobody is holding a gun to your head. Nobody is holding you hostage.
If you don't like the choices that Apple made, then ditch your iOS device and get an Android. Simple.
No, they're just boring me to death with emotional arguments why everyone should either worship Steve Jobs or leave the platform and get an Android instead similar to the "love OSX or leave it" arguments the fanboys regularly produce.
This is the first little lie in your rant. The iOS users don't find it inconvenient. If Flash were so damn important to them, they would have bought some device that could run Flash.
The fact that you think my statement is a "lie" based on a subjective opinion tells me you cannot even tell fact from fiction let alone lies from opinions. Trying to see someone else's point of view is completely foreign to you. You view the world through tinted lenses. What you say is akin to if you don't like something about OSX, go buy a Windows machine, as if there aren't any compromises along the way on that platform either (not to mention having to replace possibly thousands and thousands of dollars worth of software for a given platform to do so). Not liking something about a given platform and wanting to change it doesn't mean another platform is more viable in ALL areas or that a person may wish to spend a lot of money to make that change just because of that one issue. Perhaps you'd like to send me a free Android phone to replace my aging 1st Gen iPod Touch that I bought before Android even existed? I'd happily consider such an offer. Of course I'll need replacement apps as well.
The people who bought those 120M+ devices disagree with you.
You seem to forge that I and others that actually want Flash are part of those people dude. Get over yourself. Just because you don't like Flash doesn't mean the rest of us have hatred for it. Some of us simply don't like our iPhones, iPads and iPod Touches crippled for no reason. Besides, how you try to turn my initial argument that I'd prefer to see an option to use Flash for those of us that want it rather than no option into this flipping crusade against all things Apple and Flash alike is beyond me. You are making mountains out of mole hills and lies out of opinions. For what? I can't make you see things the way I see them. I never wanted to try. That's why I said OPTION. But you would deny everyone who wants that option to have it just like Steve Jobs. Steve does it because he's a control freak (he was once ousted from Apple for this very reason). I imagine you do it because you love Apple. Sadly, I actually prefer Steve's reason.
This is the second little lie. Apple did provide a choice: they approved the SkyFire App. They didn't have to do that.
Didn't they? It doesn't violate their rules for an app so how could they not approve it without being outright liars? Oh wait. They have done that before so I can see your point. ;)
Apple has also announced they will approve Flash Apps using Adobe's cross-compiler for iOS. If there actually are crucial Flash apps -- you haven't named a single specific one so far -- the owners of those apps should be able to easily cross-compile their apps for the iOS App Store.
Apple formerly announced they would NOT support it. Why did they change their minds? Could it have something to do with the Justice Department starting an investigation into anti-trust behaviors by Apple policies? Noooo....it couldn't be that. Apple is allowed to single out companies it doesn't like and compete with to just willy-nilly throw specifically into their license agreements.
And that is the third little lie. Flash is a proprietary and legacy platform. It's on the way down now.
I say if you don't have Flash you don't have the full Internet and you call that a "lie" based on the above quote? What freaking UNIVERSE do you live in??????? ROTFLMAO. You cannot tell a statement of fact from an idea in your head that somehow says that the "full internet" doesn't include sites that use "propriety" formats. Come on man. That position not only ignore reality it even invalidiates Apple's own web site as being part of the "full Internet" !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You need to try harder. Calling someone a liar when they are obviously stating facts and/or opinions just makes you look immature.
because accusing someone of lying when it's obvious
Even Adobe has acknowledged that a Flash-only choice is a bankrupt strategy (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999). After websites start offering their content with an open standard, you've gotta ask: what exactly is the value in continuing to prop up Flash?
First of all, you are the one that is calling it a "bankrupt strategy". I see nothing in that thread by Adobe that even addresses the matter. Adobe is simply trying to sell products and if they can easily sell more products to Apple users by providing an easy way to convert their hard work Flash sites into HTML5, they are going to do so and laugh all the way to the bank. That in NO WAY invalidates the fact that there are still plenty of Flash only sites out there and plenty of flash uses (e.g. Flash games) that HTML5 is no simple substitute for regardless. Until the Internet is Flash free, there is going to be a need and a will by people to have the option to view Flash.
The mere fact that this Skyfire app has raked in over $1 MILLION in sales already shows just how big that will is. Yet you reject the desire to be able to use Flash web sites as meaningless and unnecessary while the thread title alone proves you wrong.
Whom am I trying to convince? Illogical and irrational people who worship Steve Jobs and hate what he hates? Such people will not care or listen to any form of reason. That's why the word fanatic is in fanboy. No, I talk about an option to turn Flash on or off at will and you find it offensive to even offer an option. That is irrational at best.
Everything you fear would be avoided if someone just turned Flash OFF (or it could default to off and have to be turned on). I've said since the first post the word OPTION. You don't seem to comprehend that word or understand why those of us that would want the choice of having Flash are not asking you to give up anything in the process. You could always turn it off if it were present. We cannot turn it on if it's not present.
In other words, you are not competent to carry on a rational discussion. You're just here to vent.
No, I just don't see any point in trying to carry on a logical, rational discussion with someone whose "argument" is based purely on emotion. If it weren't, you wouldn't object to an option for those of us that don't agree with Steve Jobs point of view because an option satisfies all your arguments against having Flash because you can always just leave it OFF. It cannot do harm if it's off no matter how paranoid you may become about having it on your device.
Many millions of people have Flash installed on their Macs (let alone those using Windows and Linux) and they could remove it. They know that if they do, some web sites will cease to function properly and thus they leave it on. The security concerns you mentioned will be addressed as all security bugs are in both OSX and Windows.
Users of those 120M+ devices don't have to hope. They are already free of Flash!
Free of Flash? You say that in a tone that sounds like they're free of slavery or something. No, what they're free of is the ability to access millions of web sites that require Flash to view them or much of their content and I do not see that as a good thing. But my point of view doesn't require you to see it. I said from the first post I wanted an option to use Flash. You could still choose to turn it off if it were there. I cannot turn on what is not present nor should I have to buy some absurd 3rd party converter that requires their web site to be running to use it.
The analogy makes no sense. Nobody is forcing you to use any Apple product.
And so that makes it OK for him to behave as he does? A lot of us like Apple products, but we would like them a lot better if Steve would just stick to making the products unfettered instead of trying to force his opinions and world view on people in the process. He doesn't like Flash so he decides for everyone they should not use Flash. What if Steve decided iOS shall no longer support MP3 files, only AAC? I suppose you would accept that as OK too? Update iOS and your MP3s no longer function. Yes, that would be just wonderful if they did that. After all, AAC is superior to MP3, so why should Apple support a legacy inferior heavily pirated format? By your logic, they should not.
If you really want the "full web experience" of zero-day Adobe bugs, get an Android phone. Note: Android phones were vulnerable to the last zero-day Adobe bug. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt)
I don't want a phone period guy. I only want and use an iPod Touch. Is there an Android iPod Touch? Android didn't exist when Apple made the claims of accessing the full Internet either and it doesn't make that any less a lie.
The fact that I can't catch zero-day Adobe attacks on my iPhone is a great reason to praise Apple's decision.
You act as if Apple has no vulnerabilities to attack. That is extremely naive to the point of emotionalism once again. In fact it's just the opposite. Apple's security is rated as bad compared to Windows and only the fact that there are so few Mac users compared to Windows has saved it thus far. As the popularity of iOS devices has exploded, it's inevitable that it will start attracting malware. It's only a matter of time. Will you wish you never bought an iPhone on that day or will you recognize that companies simply have to find and patch vulnerabilities. Apple has patched numerous security flaws in OSX over the years. Should we plug our ears and say there is no such thing?
Do tell: what exact sites are you talking about? What exact legacy flash applications are running on those sites to which you can find no substitute?
A quick search (you do know how to do that don't you?) reveals offhand a few example sites that don't use HTML5 video (which could and may in the future, but that doesn't help someone today):
Gametrailers
GiantBomb
Vimeo
Playstation Blog
Stiq of Joy
Engadget
Try some of these effects on this site this with HTML5:
http://superior-web-solutions.com/
Maybe read this article on Flash. Most HTML5 is just a video player. Flash isn't just a video player and it didn't even start as one.
http://www.andrewgreig.com/2010/06/html5-is-not-a-flash-replacement-and-shouldnt-be-seen-that-way/
Perhaps you want an open standard? So when does Apple stop requiring Quicktime on their web sites? :rolleyes:
Nobody is holding a gun to your head. Nobody is holding you hostage.
If you don't like the choices that Apple made, then ditch your iOS device and get an Android. Simple.
No, they're just boring me to death with emotional arguments why everyone should either worship Steve Jobs or leave the platform and get an Android instead similar to the "love OSX or leave it" arguments the fanboys regularly produce.
This is the first little lie in your rant. The iOS users don't find it inconvenient. If Flash were so damn important to them, they would have bought some device that could run Flash.
The fact that you think my statement is a "lie" based on a subjective opinion tells me you cannot even tell fact from fiction let alone lies from opinions. Trying to see someone else's point of view is completely foreign to you. You view the world through tinted lenses. What you say is akin to if you don't like something about OSX, go buy a Windows machine, as if there aren't any compromises along the way on that platform either (not to mention having to replace possibly thousands and thousands of dollars worth of software for a given platform to do so). Not liking something about a given platform and wanting to change it doesn't mean another platform is more viable in ALL areas or that a person may wish to spend a lot of money to make that change just because of that one issue. Perhaps you'd like to send me a free Android phone to replace my aging 1st Gen iPod Touch that I bought before Android even existed? I'd happily consider such an offer. Of course I'll need replacement apps as well.
The people who bought those 120M+ devices disagree with you.
You seem to forge that I and others that actually want Flash are part of those people dude. Get over yourself. Just because you don't like Flash doesn't mean the rest of us have hatred for it. Some of us simply don't like our iPhones, iPads and iPod Touches crippled for no reason. Besides, how you try to turn my initial argument that I'd prefer to see an option to use Flash for those of us that want it rather than no option into this flipping crusade against all things Apple and Flash alike is beyond me. You are making mountains out of mole hills and lies out of opinions. For what? I can't make you see things the way I see them. I never wanted to try. That's why I said OPTION. But you would deny everyone who wants that option to have it just like Steve Jobs. Steve does it because he's a control freak (he was once ousted from Apple for this very reason). I imagine you do it because you love Apple. Sadly, I actually prefer Steve's reason.
This is the second little lie. Apple did provide a choice: they approved the SkyFire App. They didn't have to do that.
Didn't they? It doesn't violate their rules for an app so how could they not approve it without being outright liars? Oh wait. They have done that before so I can see your point. ;)
Apple has also announced they will approve Flash Apps using Adobe's cross-compiler for iOS. If there actually are crucial Flash apps -- you haven't named a single specific one so far -- the owners of those apps should be able to easily cross-compile their apps for the iOS App Store.
Apple formerly announced they would NOT support it. Why did they change their minds? Could it have something to do with the Justice Department starting an investigation into anti-trust behaviors by Apple policies? Noooo....it couldn't be that. Apple is allowed to single out companies it doesn't like and compete with to just willy-nilly throw specifically into their license agreements.
And that is the third little lie. Flash is a proprietary and legacy platform. It's on the way down now.
I say if you don't have Flash you don't have the full Internet and you call that a "lie" based on the above quote? What freaking UNIVERSE do you live in??????? ROTFLMAO. You cannot tell a statement of fact from an idea in your head that somehow says that the "full internet" doesn't include sites that use "propriety" formats. Come on man. That position not only ignore reality it even invalidiates Apple's own web site as being part of the "full Internet" !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You need to try harder. Calling someone a liar when they are obviously stating facts and/or opinions just makes you look immature.
because accusing someone of lying when it's obvious
Even Adobe has acknowledged that a Flash-only choice is a bankrupt strategy (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999). After websites start offering their content with an open standard, you've gotta ask: what exactly is the value in continuing to prop up Flash?
First of all, you are the one that is calling it a "bankrupt strategy". I see nothing in that thread by Adobe that even addresses the matter. Adobe is simply trying to sell products and if they can easily sell more products to Apple users by providing an easy way to convert their hard work Flash sites into HTML5, they are going to do so and laugh all the way to the bank. That in NO WAY invalidates the fact that there are still plenty of Flash only sites out there and plenty of flash uses (e.g. Flash games) that HTML5 is no simple substitute for regardless. Until the Internet is Flash free, there is going to be a need and a will by people to have the option to view Flash.
The mere fact that this Skyfire app has raked in over $1 MILLION in sales already shows just how big that will is. Yet you reject the desire to be able to use Flash web sites as meaningless and unnecessary while the thread title alone proves you wrong.
Walang komento:
Mag-post ng isang Komento