Keebler
Dec 31, 11:18 AM
Since when did a persons lifestyle choice become everyone else's business? Jesus, I didn't realize being fat was such an ethical decision... :rolleyes:
And to actually bring in healthcare and politics into this? Seriously? Then you guys should:
1) stop smoking cigarettes,
2) stop eating fast food,
3) stop sitting on your ass typing on mac rumors (maybe go for a run?)
4) avoid ever single carcinogen on the planet, like say, the sun (UV radiation?)...
5) stop driving cars, or doing anything that involves fast or dangerous movement, like say sports?
6) be the perfect most healthy person ever...
...because it's my problem. I'm paying for it in my taxes. HOW COULD YOU BE SO SELFISH!?
This is her choice. It effects her and her family, not you. I forgot how God declared that fat people go straight to hell, because being fat is so evil...
i think you missed my point - it's about her probably having a mental issue thinking her goal is 'ok'.
Raising healthcare is an issue - it's common sense that 'fit' people will probably have a smaller impact on healthcare than someone who is unfit. Being fit doesn't guarantee perfect health, but it's like having a flat tire on a car vs a car without a flat - which one is going to go farther and requires less repairs???
And to actually bring in healthcare and politics into this? Seriously? Then you guys should:
1) stop smoking cigarettes,
2) stop eating fast food,
3) stop sitting on your ass typing on mac rumors (maybe go for a run?)
4) avoid ever single carcinogen on the planet, like say, the sun (UV radiation?)...
5) stop driving cars, or doing anything that involves fast or dangerous movement, like say sports?
6) be the perfect most healthy person ever...
...because it's my problem. I'm paying for it in my taxes. HOW COULD YOU BE SO SELFISH!?
This is her choice. It effects her and her family, not you. I forgot how God declared that fat people go straight to hell, because being fat is so evil...
i think you missed my point - it's about her probably having a mental issue thinking her goal is 'ok'.
Raising healthcare is an issue - it's common sense that 'fit' people will probably have a smaller impact on healthcare than someone who is unfit. Being fit doesn't guarantee perfect health, but it's like having a flat tire on a car vs a car without a flat - which one is going to go farther and requires less repairs???
BRLawyer
Dec 2, 05:48 AM
I agree with the few others that are concerned about this.
Our Mac OS innocence is coming to an end. Part of this is due to the growing market share, and popularity in the Operating system. The other issue I feel that is of concern, is the new challenge this OS provides for Script kiddies, and bored coders. If you have an ego, and want to get your name out, why not do what hasn't been done before, as opposed to doing what everyone else does ?
This is going to be a growing trend, and the amount of Mac Haters in the wild is quite high! Once code tricks and secrets start to get out, it is only a matter of time before OS X is targeted by thousands, much like XP!
Apple has time to take this very seriously, and work to keep this system tight and secure! Hopefully this is going to be a big part of the focus on Leopard, but only developers will really know this!
These current headlines aside
1. Pay attention to what warning messages pop up when browsing the web.
2. Only download and install software from sources that you trust, and if you do trust them, take an extra moment to think about why you trust them, and if you really need to install that piece of 3rd party software!
3. Keep your firewalls on if possible
4. Don't permanently unlock preferences, folders, or other security areas on your system using your keychain, unless you really need to do so!
There are others, however that is a good baseline to follow for some minimal security checks and balances!
And here we go again with the "security through obscurity" myth...please, don't spread such things again, because they are not true.
The mere fact that some kernel vulnerabilities were discovered in an event SPECIFICALLY devoted to finding such things does not mean our OS X is unsafe. It is by far the MOST secure system out there, with 40 million or 400 million users, and nobody has been able to prove the opposite so far.
Besides, some (or many) of the arguments posed by this "anonymous" LMH were already debunked by other security analysts. Just an example:
"Apple DMG flaw not so serious? SecurityFocus reports on the controversy surrounding a disk image denial of service potentiality in Mac OS X. "While the common wisdom in the security world is that crashes are exploitable, Mac programmer Alastair Houghton published his kernel-code analysis showing that this particular vulnerability is not. "In fact, all (the MoKB) has found here is a bug that causes a kernel panic," Houghton wrote in his analysis. "Not a security flaw. Not a memory corruption bug. Just a completely orderly kernel panic." Following the analysis, Secunia downgraded their severity rating of the vulnerability from "highly critical" to "not critical." Several other companies still have the vulnerability rated as critical. The actions follow a heated exchange between Houghton and the founder of the Month of Kernel Bugs (MoKB) Project, a person who identifies himself as only L.M.H. Because of the exchange, Houghton decided to spend three days analyzing the issue and had his final analysis checked by Thomas Ptacek, a security researcher and founder of Matasano Security."
http://www.macfixit.com/
So please...before spreading more FUD in this forum, check the facts and take some time before believing some strange guys pretending to be specialists...
Our Mac OS innocence is coming to an end. Part of this is due to the growing market share, and popularity in the Operating system. The other issue I feel that is of concern, is the new challenge this OS provides for Script kiddies, and bored coders. If you have an ego, and want to get your name out, why not do what hasn't been done before, as opposed to doing what everyone else does ?
This is going to be a growing trend, and the amount of Mac Haters in the wild is quite high! Once code tricks and secrets start to get out, it is only a matter of time before OS X is targeted by thousands, much like XP!
Apple has time to take this very seriously, and work to keep this system tight and secure! Hopefully this is going to be a big part of the focus on Leopard, but only developers will really know this!
These current headlines aside
1. Pay attention to what warning messages pop up when browsing the web.
2. Only download and install software from sources that you trust, and if you do trust them, take an extra moment to think about why you trust them, and if you really need to install that piece of 3rd party software!
3. Keep your firewalls on if possible
4. Don't permanently unlock preferences, folders, or other security areas on your system using your keychain, unless you really need to do so!
There are others, however that is a good baseline to follow for some minimal security checks and balances!
And here we go again with the "security through obscurity" myth...please, don't spread such things again, because they are not true.
The mere fact that some kernel vulnerabilities were discovered in an event SPECIFICALLY devoted to finding such things does not mean our OS X is unsafe. It is by far the MOST secure system out there, with 40 million or 400 million users, and nobody has been able to prove the opposite so far.
Besides, some (or many) of the arguments posed by this "anonymous" LMH were already debunked by other security analysts. Just an example:
"Apple DMG flaw not so serious? SecurityFocus reports on the controversy surrounding a disk image denial of service potentiality in Mac OS X. "While the common wisdom in the security world is that crashes are exploitable, Mac programmer Alastair Houghton published his kernel-code analysis showing that this particular vulnerability is not. "In fact, all (the MoKB) has found here is a bug that causes a kernel panic," Houghton wrote in his analysis. "Not a security flaw. Not a memory corruption bug. Just a completely orderly kernel panic." Following the analysis, Secunia downgraded their severity rating of the vulnerability from "highly critical" to "not critical." Several other companies still have the vulnerability rated as critical. The actions follow a heated exchange between Houghton and the founder of the Month of Kernel Bugs (MoKB) Project, a person who identifies himself as only L.M.H. Because of the exchange, Houghton decided to spend three days analyzing the issue and had his final analysis checked by Thomas Ptacek, a security researcher and founder of Matasano Security."
http://www.macfixit.com/
So please...before spreading more FUD in this forum, check the facts and take some time before believing some strange guys pretending to be specialists...
MacProCpo
Nov 27, 03:44 AM
8 WUs down, working on 9, and one more to go before I can get into bigadv.......:D
Does anyone have experience working with GPU2 and ATI cards? I've been playing around with my 4870 GPUs in Windoze and they don't seem to be running any faster then SMP in OSX. I've followed the the ATI GPU install guide on the f@h website i just don't know what I'm supposed to be seeing with regards to productivity.
Cheers and Happy Thanksgiving!
Does anyone have experience working with GPU2 and ATI cards? I've been playing around with my 4870 GPUs in Windoze and they don't seem to be running any faster then SMP in OSX. I've followed the the ATI GPU install guide on the f@h website i just don't know what I'm supposed to be seeing with regards to productivity.
Cheers and Happy Thanksgiving!
gri
Jun 17, 02:12 PM
Your sarcasm is inappropriate. This poster has a right to her/his opinion. There are plenty of folks that think that kids are a bad idea, especially in their case. I'm proud of the fact I don't have kids: I'd beat them just like Joan Crawford did in Mommy Dearest. :mad:
http://www2.newpaltz.edu/~walterme/violence/CPSmain.html
http://www2.newpaltz.edu/~walterme/violence/CPSmain.html
RichP
Oct 24, 07:53 AM
Just as I said and expected, only minor changes. I think its great Apple is giving 2GB of memory in standard configs, that is hopefully a sign of things to come in the pro line overall.
lawrencewinkler
Oct 23, 06:40 PM
Regardless if you believe that you can install Vista Home under VMWare or Parallels, the real legal problem is MS has put VMWare and Parallels under legal notice that they may not write their software to allow the operation of Vista Home under their products, else they will be sued for contributory infringement.
So, technical theory aside, if MS has the legal right to restrict such behavior, there will be no way VMWare or Parallels will produce such software, otherwise MS will sue them out of existence.
So, technical theory aside, if MS has the legal right to restrict such behavior, there will be no way VMWare or Parallels will produce such software, otherwise MS will sue them out of existence.
caspersoong
Apr 29, 03:52 AM
Great! Can't wait for the universal iPhone.
SolarJ
May 3, 09:06 AM
I was hoping for the 24" to come back:(:(
ezekielrage_99
Jul 29, 04:45 AM
It will suck like all Microsoft products except for the MS Mouse that is good.
How come pretty much everthing Apple makes is good except for the Mouse :confused:
How come pretty much everthing Apple makes is good except for the Mouse :confused:
Moyank24
Apr 29, 07:50 PM
Look a the bright side. You are also stuck with Plutonius.
Right you are. Can we vote Appleguy out of the afterlife if he starts annoying me?
Right you are. Can we vote Appleguy out of the afterlife if he starts annoying me?
lPHONE
Apr 22, 06:02 PM
I want screen on both sides.
AcesHigh87
Apr 27, 11:38 AM
I don't feel like reading through 6 pages of comments but, I can attest that most retail stores will tell you to call the cops but not get involved. I've never worked fast food but have been told that from working in a drug store for several years.
At the same time, however, some common sense is needed. I'm pretty sure if I was in this situation, policy or not, I'd be stopping them. This isn't like one little slap and some yelling, this is a brutal assault. For that matter, I get the feeling that the person taking the video isn't an employee, just a hunch. If so, why the hell didn't they think to do anything but pull out their damn cell phone and video tape it? For that matter, they were laughing at one point which is just downright heartless.
At the same time, however, some common sense is needed. I'm pretty sure if I was in this situation, policy or not, I'd be stopping them. This isn't like one little slap and some yelling, this is a brutal assault. For that matter, I get the feeling that the person taking the video isn't an employee, just a hunch. If so, why the hell didn't they think to do anything but pull out their damn cell phone and video tape it? For that matter, they were laughing at one point which is just downright heartless.
Tones2
Apr 22, 10:01 AM
Give us a 4.3" screen so the phone would have to be somewhat bigger - big enough to support two chips for 3G and 4G.
Tony
Tony
upekkharich
Sep 30, 09:41 AM
which AT&T representative said that this is normal?
Oh, I see, it was a technician writing a repair report.
so it is normal. this does not mean that anyone, technician or CEO, said it is acceptable. the technicians notes, imho, seem to merely state that the phone works as expected, normally, regardless of the networks issues.
maybe i have a problem because i do not live in NYC or SF, drop very few calls. Forgive me for being sympathetic. Albeit premature, I haven't yet had my hissy fit that I blame on the world not being the one I invented in my workshop.
Oh, I see, it was a technician writing a repair report.
so it is normal. this does not mean that anyone, technician or CEO, said it is acceptable. the technicians notes, imho, seem to merely state that the phone works as expected, normally, regardless of the networks issues.
maybe i have a problem because i do not live in NYC or SF, drop very few calls. Forgive me for being sympathetic. Albeit premature, I haven't yet had my hissy fit that I blame on the world not being the one I invented in my workshop.
appleguy123
Apr 27, 08:28 PM
It seems like my vote for nies isn't going to count for anything. Maybe tomorrow...
eldiablojo
eldiablojo
renewed
Mar 3, 04:22 PM
What about the millions of people worldwide that it has helped?
I would argue they helped themselves. They may have needed some sort of boost but they helped themselves. Someone can make a conscious decision to help themselves if they are strong enough. No one is addicted to alcohol. I would argue people are not addicted to drugs. Mind over will. Try it. Like Charlie said that Nike says, Don't attempt it, "Just Do It".
I would argue they helped themselves. They may have needed some sort of boost but they helped themselves. Someone can make a conscious decision to help themselves if they are strong enough. No one is addicted to alcohol. I would argue people are not addicted to drugs. Mind over will. Try it. Like Charlie said that Nike says, Don't attempt it, "Just Do It".
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.
arteries and veins diagram.
arteries, and veins are
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.
bartelby
Feb 25, 11:35 AM
This loser is your idol? Damn, your life sucks.
That's kinda what I was thinking too...
That's kinda what I was thinking too...
blackout8
Jul 28, 07:22 AM
If it has any features like Pandora or Last.fm i'll be very interested... albeit I already have those two for free... As long as the 'finding new music' feature is better than the iTunes Mini store, which is down right bad. Bring on a pandora like stream but with intergrated purchasing features, so that you can in a way try before you buy, as well as find more music.
That would work wouldn't it - i know it would get me purchasing more music online. O WAIT! DRM... nevermind ignore this whole post :rolleyes:
That would work wouldn't it - i know it would get me purchasing more music online. O WAIT! DRM... nevermind ignore this whole post :rolleyes:
FasterQuieter
Mar 31, 01:12 PM
Really really ugly. It is bad enough on the iPad, but yikes, this takes the cake.
The "leather" that is. The stuff beneath it looks fine. I think if this were my only option, I would seek a third party alternative.
The "leather" that is. The stuff beneath it looks fine. I think if this were my only option, I would seek a third party alternative.
Vegasman
Apr 26, 12:32 PM
Can you point me to were you are getting your 2TB hard drives for free? :cool:
You need the local drive anyway. Are you saying you will delete all your songs from your local drive once you put them in the cloud? Now that seems impractical.
You need the local drive anyway. Are you saying you will delete all your songs from your local drive once you put them in the cloud? Now that seems impractical.
DTphonehome
Jul 21, 02:05 PM
I'll get excited when/if Apple's Market share reaches 10%. Other than that, it's not such a big deal, IMO. :o
You can't get to 10% from 4% without passing through 4.8%
You can't get to 10% from 4% without passing through 4.8%
jsw
Aug 15, 02:32 PM
also how about ability to have bookmarks in a click menu, like yahoo toolbar, where it can be shared among a login on your .mac acct? across all your computers, ie laptop and workstation?
You can already sync bookmarks with .Mac, as well as access them online.
You can already sync bookmarks with .Mac, as well as access them online.
gorgeousninja
Apr 28, 09:45 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)
Not often that the 'best' also means the best-selling.
Not often that the 'best' also means the best-selling.
No comments:
Post a Comment