ChazUK
Mar 29, 01:45 PM
What I see is Amazon being explicit here in that they can retain, use and disclose your data in any way they see fit. Period.
Do you see this differently?
Looking at what you've said there makes sense and I think I see it the same as you (it certainly looks like Amazon will have more "right" to access your data for less specific reasons).
Perhaps it's a bad judge of character but I do see Amazon along with Apple as top tier companies when it comes to privacy concerns so my concerns are dampened by their good reputations. :)
Hopefully some rogue element in Amazon doesn't abuse the levels of access they have.
Do you see this differently?
Looking at what you've said there makes sense and I think I see it the same as you (it certainly looks like Amazon will have more "right" to access your data for less specific reasons).
Perhaps it's a bad judge of character but I do see Amazon along with Apple as top tier companies when it comes to privacy concerns so my concerns are dampened by their good reputations. :)
Hopefully some rogue element in Amazon doesn't abuse the levels of access they have.
MovieCutter
Aug 4, 11:35 AM
How many people plan to dump their Core Duo Macs for Core 2 Duo Macs?
Already sold my MBP 17" and my 20" iMac and are shipping them out this weekend...he he he.
Then again, I have two reasons to have the latest and greatest shiny new thing.
1) I have a terrible disease that causes me to do this.
2) I edit everything from 30 second commercial spots to feature length documentaries and I need to have all the speed I can get.
Already sold my MBP 17" and my 20" iMac and are shipping them out this weekend...he he he.
Then again, I have two reasons to have the latest and greatest shiny new thing.
1) I have a terrible disease that causes me to do this.
2) I edit everything from 30 second commercial spots to feature length documentaries and I need to have all the speed I can get.
chasemac
Jul 30, 01:12 AM
I think it's real. No signs of photoshopping and the pic was taken in an elevator :D
Awesome!:) Its real. Go ahead, verify the source!:)
Awesome!:) Its real. Go ahead, verify the source!:)
Riemann Zeta
Mar 27, 11:40 AM
Yay let us all surrender our privacy to the cloud... Sometimes I feel like the only one that understands the long term implications cloud based computer has when we allow our content and log files on others' servers. Thankfully I know I'm not the only one though.
Nope, not the only one. Boo to the cloud and everything related to it. I'd rather not have all of my data on a massive public server, available to Apple, advertisers and any government agency at all times. Those claiming that "it's encrypted" are not fully appreciating the security implications of not having control over the implementation of said encryption. For example, SSL/HTTPS is "encrypted" as well, but since Certificate Authorities give signed master-key certificates to all government intelligence and law enforcement agencies, it isn't technically 100% secure (despite mathematically unbreakable encryption).
Taking off the tin-foil hat and simply thinking about economics: I still don't understand how cloud computing is actually going to become a dominant market force. There are now only 3 wireless providers in the US, forming a tight oligopoly, and all of them are incredibly stingy with data caps and limitations. Moreover, there are only a handful of unique internet providers in the US and all are cutting client bandwidth, raising prices and instituting throttling or monthly data caps. So it would seem that big software companies like Apple, Microsoft and Google are pushing the idea of streaming everything; but internet providers only want to supply bandwidth for their own cable TV services. Something just doesn't add up. How is one supposed to have no local storage and just stream music and video when their wireless connection only allows for 2GB/month and their home ISP throttles everything other than its own cable TV service?
Nope, not the only one. Boo to the cloud and everything related to it. I'd rather not have all of my data on a massive public server, available to Apple, advertisers and any government agency at all times. Those claiming that "it's encrypted" are not fully appreciating the security implications of not having control over the implementation of said encryption. For example, SSL/HTTPS is "encrypted" as well, but since Certificate Authorities give signed master-key certificates to all government intelligence and law enforcement agencies, it isn't technically 100% secure (despite mathematically unbreakable encryption).
Taking off the tin-foil hat and simply thinking about economics: I still don't understand how cloud computing is actually going to become a dominant market force. There are now only 3 wireless providers in the US, forming a tight oligopoly, and all of them are incredibly stingy with data caps and limitations. Moreover, there are only a handful of unique internet providers in the US and all are cutting client bandwidth, raising prices and instituting throttling or monthly data caps. So it would seem that big software companies like Apple, Microsoft and Google are pushing the idea of streaming everything; but internet providers only want to supply bandwidth for their own cable TV services. Something just doesn't add up. How is one supposed to have no local storage and just stream music and video when their wireless connection only allows for 2GB/month and their home ISP throttles everything other than its own cable TV service?
nastebu
Mar 29, 04:07 PM
Sorry, there is no comparison. US agriculture does not have anywhere near the level of protectionism as Japanese agriculture. Nor does any US industry, with the exception of defense contractors.
And what makes you think a small farmer is somehow superior to DelMonte?
As for who subsidizes agriculture more, I'm unsure, but it's probably close. From the wikipedia article: "A Canadian report claimed that for every dollar U.S. farmers earn, 62 cents comes from some form of government, with total aid in 2009 from all levels of government adding up to $180.8 billion." What's the comparative level in Japan?
The small farmer vs. delMonte is an interesting question. It's a question of values. DelMonte produces cheaper, lower quality food. Small farmers produce more expensive, generally higher quality food. So which you subsidize is a question of social policy.
In Japan, there are lots of small farmers who have kept their farms, and a very strong bias to eat locally. This means that food is of better quality and supports local communities. In the US, massive supermarket chains have tended to dominate food retail, and since they rely on national distribution, food tends to be very processed and have an enormous carbon footprint. It also means lots of mcJobs instead of local businesses.
I prefer the small farmer.
And what makes you think a small farmer is somehow superior to DelMonte?
As for who subsidizes agriculture more, I'm unsure, but it's probably close. From the wikipedia article: "A Canadian report claimed that for every dollar U.S. farmers earn, 62 cents comes from some form of government, with total aid in 2009 from all levels of government adding up to $180.8 billion." What's the comparative level in Japan?
The small farmer vs. delMonte is an interesting question. It's a question of values. DelMonte produces cheaper, lower quality food. Small farmers produce more expensive, generally higher quality food. So which you subsidize is a question of social policy.
In Japan, there are lots of small farmers who have kept their farms, and a very strong bias to eat locally. This means that food is of better quality and supports local communities. In the US, massive supermarket chains have tended to dominate food retail, and since they rely on national distribution, food tends to be very processed and have an enormous carbon footprint. It also means lots of mcJobs instead of local businesses.
I prefer the small farmer.
Eidorian
Aug 3, 10:44 PM
Yay, September...
BMcCoy
Mar 27, 01:00 PM
iPad 2 HD
coming september 2011
$999 / �799
same specs and design as 64GB iPad 2, but with 2048x1536 screen, at 264ppi.
coming september 2011
$999 / �799
same specs and design as 64GB iPad 2, but with 2048x1536 screen, at 264ppi.
itcheroni
Apr 21, 12:50 AM
I'd love it if you could point out where you addressed this, because as a tax accountant, I'm having a hard time thinking of a time when a realized capital gain isn't income - if you have a realized net gain (ie amount realized is greater than your basis in the capital asset), you certainly have income. Certainly you could reinvest that net gain, but that doesn't mean you don't have income, that just means you realized a gain and reinvested the old basis and the gain (income). You're only taxed on realized gains that are recognized by the code (and you can net against realized losses) - sure, I could have an unrealized capital gain that isn't income, but I wouldn't be taxed on it either. Not that I don't agree with some of your points, but I'd really love the same clarification on this that most other posters have been asking for.
I suppose what you are getting at as a trader is that you buy a capital asset for $1000 and sell two days latter for $1100, then reinvest the $1100 into another capital asset. You'd be taxed on the $100 of capital gain even though you effectively have no cash in your hands to pay the tax. Unfortunately for traders, income doesn't mean cash. But a person who was in the trade or business of being a professional trader wouldn't qualify for capital gains treatment anyways, it would all be ordinary income.
Okay, but just for you, dude (when you disagree with me, we both can at least understand what we're disagreeing on. Other people here, well, it's just a waste of time. They start responding before even understanding my point). I guess I didn't make it clear earlier but my perspective on capital gains is in relation to inflation. If there were 100 widgets and 100 dollars, let's say the value of one widget was 1 dollar. If the central bank in charge of dollars decides to do some quantitative easing and increases the money supply to 200 dollars. This will lead to inflation with one widget valued at approximately 2 dollars. Now, why should one pay capital gains on this when, most likely, everything else costs more too. You didn't really receive any gain; the measurement of value (dollars) decreased.
For example, let's say there was a tax for getting taller. If the measurement of an inch or foot keeps decreasing, you will have to keep paying even though you're not getting taller.
Earlier I gave an example of the time between buying an apple and biting into it, likening it to cost basis and realized gain. We would find it ridiculous to pay a tax for any capital gain in the apple, but if I choose to save my money in gold until I use it, most people think I'm actually gaining something. If I were holding stock in a company that paid dividends, that might be different.
So from my perspective, the inflation (capital gain) itself is a tax, and we have to pay a tax for that tax. Right now, I don't believe the economy is really improving; the Fed is just creating enough inflation to improve the numbers. Stocks may be going up, but I think food prices are going up even faster. So what is the point of a capital gains on stocks if the proceeds from the sale nets you even less groceries than at the time of your cost basis? If a 1 ounce gold coin a hundred years ago buys you roughly the same today, what is the point of charging a capital gains? In this case, the coin would have gone from $20 to $1500, adding up to a capital gain of $1480. Sure, you could have save the $20 in cash instead of gold, but then you're "taxed" by inflation. Instead of paying your rent for several months, $20 will now buy you a haircut. Forget the "tax the rich" aspect of this; this makes it really difficult for poor people to save money because they are the ones most likely to save cash.
My concern is, how will we save our purchasing power? The government is actively decreasing the value of our money and anything we do to try and save our purchasing power is stripped away by taxes.
I suppose what you are getting at as a trader is that you buy a capital asset for $1000 and sell two days latter for $1100, then reinvest the $1100 into another capital asset. You'd be taxed on the $100 of capital gain even though you effectively have no cash in your hands to pay the tax. Unfortunately for traders, income doesn't mean cash. But a person who was in the trade or business of being a professional trader wouldn't qualify for capital gains treatment anyways, it would all be ordinary income.
Okay, but just for you, dude (when you disagree with me, we both can at least understand what we're disagreeing on. Other people here, well, it's just a waste of time. They start responding before even understanding my point). I guess I didn't make it clear earlier but my perspective on capital gains is in relation to inflation. If there were 100 widgets and 100 dollars, let's say the value of one widget was 1 dollar. If the central bank in charge of dollars decides to do some quantitative easing and increases the money supply to 200 dollars. This will lead to inflation with one widget valued at approximately 2 dollars. Now, why should one pay capital gains on this when, most likely, everything else costs more too. You didn't really receive any gain; the measurement of value (dollars) decreased.
For example, let's say there was a tax for getting taller. If the measurement of an inch or foot keeps decreasing, you will have to keep paying even though you're not getting taller.
Earlier I gave an example of the time between buying an apple and biting into it, likening it to cost basis and realized gain. We would find it ridiculous to pay a tax for any capital gain in the apple, but if I choose to save my money in gold until I use it, most people think I'm actually gaining something. If I were holding stock in a company that paid dividends, that might be different.
So from my perspective, the inflation (capital gain) itself is a tax, and we have to pay a tax for that tax. Right now, I don't believe the economy is really improving; the Fed is just creating enough inflation to improve the numbers. Stocks may be going up, but I think food prices are going up even faster. So what is the point of a capital gains on stocks if the proceeds from the sale nets you even less groceries than at the time of your cost basis? If a 1 ounce gold coin a hundred years ago buys you roughly the same today, what is the point of charging a capital gains? In this case, the coin would have gone from $20 to $1500, adding up to a capital gain of $1480. Sure, you could have save the $20 in cash instead of gold, but then you're "taxed" by inflation. Instead of paying your rent for several months, $20 will now buy you a haircut. Forget the "tax the rich" aspect of this; this makes it really difficult for poor people to save money because they are the ones most likely to save cash.
My concern is, how will we save our purchasing power? The government is actively decreasing the value of our money and anything we do to try and save our purchasing power is stripped away by taxes.
bwillwall
Mar 30, 06:47 PM
Dear Apple
PLEASE can we have a UI update, even if it's a minor one (for instance, iTunes 10 scrollbars rather than the blue aqua ones). Just some extra polish really.
Signed
iFanboy
The iTunes scroll bars? They are much worse, what they need is either iOS scroll bars or a complete new design for them
PLEASE can we have a UI update, even if it's a minor one (for instance, iTunes 10 scrollbars rather than the blue aqua ones). Just some extra polish really.
Signed
iFanboy
The iTunes scroll bars? They are much worse, what they need is either iOS scroll bars or a complete new design for them
AppleInLVX
May 4, 03:56 PM
How hard would it be for wifi/app store to be baked into every Mac going forward? That is, if you wipe the machine, turn it on, and the first thing it does (after the logo) is detect Wifi, connect and offer the app store along with basic disc utilities right on the memory chip?
Mind you, it wouldn't help existing macs... hrm.
Mind you, it wouldn't help existing macs... hrm.
MrChurchyard
Mar 31, 01:15 AM
WOW. In my years of OS X development and beta releases, this is the first time I believe Apple has released a developer preview with little to no beta releases, and pushed right into a half arsed possible GM build without the numerous beta's for 10.X refinements. For developers and companies who have been accustomed to Apple pushing bi-weekly beta's as the GM release approaches. This may not bold well for developers and companies transitioning their products/applications in time and with little "bumps" in the road.
You (and others) are aware that "Developer Previews", when available, have always predated the Beta releases? It's not even a beta.
Apple says they will release Lion in summer, only Dev Previews have appeared so far, and suddenly people think it plausible for Apple to release a GM build in March?
And btw, I'm really disappointed in the reporting of the ludicrous "GM" rumour as it's pretty obviously wrong - usually MacRumors curates their news better than this.
You (and others) are aware that "Developer Previews", when available, have always predated the Beta releases? It's not even a beta.
Apple says they will release Lion in summer, only Dev Previews have appeared so far, and suddenly people think it plausible for Apple to release a GM build in March?
And btw, I'm really disappointed in the reporting of the ludicrous "GM" rumour as it's pretty obviously wrong - usually MacRumors curates their news better than this.
hobo.hopkins
Apr 23, 05:36 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_6 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8E200 Safari/6533.18.5)
Wow, that App Store icon devoured my whole screen (MBP 13)
Yeah. Barely fits on my screen and i have a 24" inch imac.
it would be sick to have a 30" retina ACD. /dream
Yeah a 1024 x 1024 icon is amazing considering I would bet a significant amount of 1024 x 768 monitors are still being used. Imagine not being able to view an icon in its entirety on a five-year-old monitor!
Wow, that App Store icon devoured my whole screen (MBP 13)
Yeah. Barely fits on my screen and i have a 24" inch imac.
it would be sick to have a 30" retina ACD. /dream
Yeah a 1024 x 1024 icon is amazing considering I would bet a significant amount of 1024 x 768 monitors are still being used. Imagine not being able to view an icon in its entirety on a five-year-old monitor!
danielwsmithee
Aug 11, 05:32 PM
Man, I tell ya... 2 years+ ago when I wanted a new laptop, that's ALL I ever heard... I think Apple should build a one-off G5 laptop just to appease us crazy people in here, LOL! It would be an awesome tip-of-the-hat to us, don'tcha think? ;)Yeah it would be like twice as thick as the current MBP and they could auction it off to the highest bidder. Here is guessing that some Apple finatic would pay a million dollars for it to display in his gallery.
Ommid
Apr 24, 06:19 AM
Very cool! But I hope it will not come until late 2012 :D
Why??
Why??
RebootD
Mar 30, 09:12 PM
I lol'd. No matter what people will complain. When Snow Leopard was released people wanted more UI changes and more features. Now when Lion is released all people want is under the hood improvements. SMH
No no no, we want useful UI improvements not iOS fluff.
No no no, we want useful UI improvements not iOS fluff.
bwillwall
Mar 30, 06:47 PM
Dear Apple
PLEASE can we have a UI update, even if it's a minor one (for instance, iTunes 10 scrollbars rather than the blue aqua ones). Just some extra polish really.
Signed
iFanboy
The iTunes scroll bars? They are much worse, what they need is either iOS scroll bars or a complete new design for them
PLEASE can we have a UI update, even if it's a minor one (for instance, iTunes 10 scrollbars rather than the blue aqua ones). Just some extra polish really.
Signed
iFanboy
The iTunes scroll bars? They are much worse, what they need is either iOS scroll bars or a complete new design for them
LegendKillerUK
Mar 26, 10:43 PM
iOS was last announced in April which was slightly later than the year before. I don't see it jumping from April to June for an announcement. It also won't be so heavily cloud based - it's simply wishful thinking.
TSX
Mar 26, 09:34 PM
iPhone 5 with no iOS 5, yea right
paul4339
Apr 26, 02:18 PM
it's interesting to see Windows mobile/WP7 at 7% of new purchases (compared to 25% for iOS) ... I didn't realize it was so popular.
P.
P.
itcheroni
Apr 19, 02:38 PM
Well, I'm willing to read about it and really try to understand your point of view.
I thought we were just having a conversation...what I'm really looking for is a succinct argument as a frame for further investigation. I'm not convinced by either "side" here, but I am challenging your assertions because I'm trying to get a stronger sense of your point of view and where its edges are. So, if it feels like I'm picking at you, it's only because I find your arguments interesting and strong enough to be worth chewing on.
I didn't think you were picking on me. I'm just saying that I might not be able to explain everything understandably. It's really hard to have a succinct discussion because everything depends on an understanding of other concepts. For example, I was saying capital gains taxes needs to be understood along with inflation which needs to be understood along with monetary policy, etc. I guess the point I was trying to make is that you won't be able to learn/unlearn economics on a message board. It's takes more serious research.
I thought we were just having a conversation...what I'm really looking for is a succinct argument as a frame for further investigation. I'm not convinced by either "side" here, but I am challenging your assertions because I'm trying to get a stronger sense of your point of view and where its edges are. So, if it feels like I'm picking at you, it's only because I find your arguments interesting and strong enough to be worth chewing on.
I didn't think you were picking on me. I'm just saying that I might not be able to explain everything understandably. It's really hard to have a succinct discussion because everything depends on an understanding of other concepts. For example, I was saying capital gains taxes needs to be understood along with inflation which needs to be understood along with monetary policy, etc. I guess the point I was trying to make is that you won't be able to learn/unlearn economics on a message board. It's takes more serious research.
Rocketman
May 7, 06:21 PM
Now I start thinking about it, I've never paid Google a single cent, but I use
***
You do not pay Google but advertisers on your splash pages pay Google. You help them make far more money than you would pay for the service and you do that for them for free. And spread the word.
On behalf of all Google stockholders worldwide, thank you for being one of our minions.
Rocketman
***
You do not pay Google but advertisers on your splash pages pay Google. You help them make far more money than you would pay for the service and you do that for them for free. And spread the word.
On behalf of all Google stockholders worldwide, thank you for being one of our minions.
Rocketman
ChickenSwartz
Aug 12, 06:32 PM
You're wrong. The promotion is for ANY mac before September 16, as Nuks said. They can't (and won't) change the terms of the promotion before it expires.
My thoughts exactly. The offer is valid for ANY Mac. They loose pratically no money on the Nano if the person buys on the iTunes store.
I'm planning to order a MBP and a nano right after Paris. If MBPs come out before Paris, I'm still going to wait to see if they revise the nano...that would make up for the 3 months of waiting to get the MBP.
I am ordering MBP as soon as they are updated OR Sept. 12th after Keynote which ever is first. I don't really care about the updated Nano, I am giving it away as a gift.
My thoughts exactly. The offer is valid for ANY Mac. They loose pratically no money on the Nano if the person buys on the iTunes store.
I'm planning to order a MBP and a nano right after Paris. If MBPs come out before Paris, I'm still going to wait to see if they revise the nano...that would make up for the 3 months of waiting to get the MBP.
I am ordering MBP as soon as they are updated OR Sept. 12th after Keynote which ever is first. I don't really care about the updated Nano, I am giving it away as a gift.
wschutz
Mar 30, 05:55 PM
Dear Apple
PLEASE can we have a UI update, even if it's a minor one (for instance, iTunes 10 scrollbars rather than the blue aqua ones). Just some extra polish really.
Signed
iFanboy
Enjoy your brand new 129$ Mac OS X latest revision (the most advanced, the most unique, the most... bla bla bla bla...) carrying more than XXX features (aka... just making the Mac OS X experience more iOS-alike so you get used to AppStore since soon you'll have to go through this method of delivery as there won't be any other one, because Mr. Jobs wants more money...)
Yep... I think that 129$ sounds quite ok, for nothing :D
Though I'm not surprise... there's nothing shocking that they can implement. This "update" is aimed at training people into AppStore (aka money)... and they even charge for it :D
PLEASE can we have a UI update, even if it's a minor one (for instance, iTunes 10 scrollbars rather than the blue aqua ones). Just some extra polish really.
Signed
iFanboy
Enjoy your brand new 129$ Mac OS X latest revision (the most advanced, the most unique, the most... bla bla bla bla...) carrying more than XXX features (aka... just making the Mac OS X experience more iOS-alike so you get used to AppStore since soon you'll have to go through this method of delivery as there won't be any other one, because Mr. Jobs wants more money...)
Yep... I think that 129$ sounds quite ok, for nothing :D
Though I'm not surprise... there's nothing shocking that they can implement. This "update" is aimed at training people into AppStore (aka money)... and they even charge for it :D
MacBoobsPro
Aug 7, 02:34 PM
If i stuck 4x nvidia whatchamacallit would it make any difference to gaming etc on one monitor? Or is an extra graphics card just for extra monitors?
:confused:
:confused: