gaseby
Aug 2, 02:58 PM
hi,
I have had a chance to browse through the reply (allthough parts of it was cencored):
- License agreement. Apple distinguish between license agreement for iTunes Jukebox and iTunes Music Store and they mean the government have been mixin this up
- License agreement. They will do som smaller adjustments (clarifications) around the issue of changes to the license agreement would have effect on previously purchased music, the intention was not to have any effect on previously purchased music
- License agreement. They will do changes so it will be clearer to the user when the license agreement has been changed
- DRM, usage of iTunes music files in other players than iPod. They do not give in on this, their argument is 1) it is playable on the PC 2) it may be burned on a CD and played on other CD players. They also blend into the argument that Norway has a fairly new law with respect to music download and copy/usage rights and the different plotical parties and politicians have said "this and that" which may support Apples case. I would assume that sooner or later there will be a court case in order to put more details on the law and its interpretation. This may be it (or not).
With respect to this having impact on other countries there are some arguments in the letter which quotes EU/E�S laws, however their DRM arguments is mainly reflecting their interpretation of Norwegian law.
I have had a chance to browse through the reply (allthough parts of it was cencored):
- License agreement. Apple distinguish between license agreement for iTunes Jukebox and iTunes Music Store and they mean the government have been mixin this up
- License agreement. They will do som smaller adjustments (clarifications) around the issue of changes to the license agreement would have effect on previously purchased music, the intention was not to have any effect on previously purchased music
- License agreement. They will do changes so it will be clearer to the user when the license agreement has been changed
- DRM, usage of iTunes music files in other players than iPod. They do not give in on this, their argument is 1) it is playable on the PC 2) it may be burned on a CD and played on other CD players. They also blend into the argument that Norway has a fairly new law with respect to music download and copy/usage rights and the different plotical parties and politicians have said "this and that" which may support Apples case. I would assume that sooner or later there will be a court case in order to put more details on the law and its interpretation. This may be it (or not).
With respect to this having impact on other countries there are some arguments in the letter which quotes EU/E�S laws, however their DRM arguments is mainly reflecting their interpretation of Norwegian law.
RalfTheDog
Apr 8, 12:48 PM
Why would you run a promotion on something that sells out the moment they come into inventory? Sales are for Android products that can't be moved any other way.
Perhaps it is something like, "Purchase an Android device and we will let you buy an iPad."
Perhaps it is something like, "Purchase an Android device and we will let you buy an iPad."
Dragonforce
Mar 24, 03:10 PM
Yay! Now, where's the cake...
The cake is a lie.
The cake is a lie.
err404
May 2, 09:41 AM
I'm glad that Apple listened to the user demand for this change, despite their feeling that this wasn't a big deal. They could have just as easily ignored the issue saying that it is functioning as intended.
ivladster
Mar 28, 04:20 PM
Welcome to 1984.
You know there are plenty of other platforms and OS, so no it's not 1984, it's 2011!
You know there are plenty of other platforms and OS, so no it's not 1984, it's 2011!
NT1440
Mar 4, 02:10 PM
They realize that a hand-out is NEVER the same as a hand-up, and that wealth earned is not generally earned at the expense of others, but rather to their benefit.
What truly amazing rhetoric. :rolleyes:
What truly amazing rhetoric. :rolleyes:
JAT
Apr 6, 04:50 PM
Considering it was released on April 5 (that's today), you either:
formal letter examples ks
+for+formal+letter+writing
formal letter writing examples
formal letter writing examples
formal letter writing samples.
Formal letter (Example)
formal letter examples ks
a formal letter example,
Sample Business Letter Writing
a formal letter example,
a formal letter example,
FORMAL LETTER WRITING EXAMPLES
mgguy
Mar 3, 09:35 PM
I heard somewhere that federal employees are not able to collectively bargain for their benefits package. If this is true, why are recent states' attempts to restrict unionized bargaining seen as being so draconian, and why isn't there an outcry to give federal employees the same "rights"?
obeygiant
Apr 15, 02:26 PM
How is "gay history" different than regular history? lol
eric_n_dfw
Oct 28, 04:57 PM
The thin veneer is off the vast majority of people that clamor for OSS.
Whenever I hear the OSS crowd scream "Software should be FREE!" I translate that to mean "I refuse to pay someone for their work, thus I will STEAL it"!
I don't blame Apple. The OSS community abused what they had and turned to piracy by stealing the GUI. Kudos Apple.
:rolleyes:
Anyone who understands what OSS and or "free software" is knows that they're not talking about money when they say it should be "free".
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software (emphasis added):
To help distinguish libre (freedom) software from gratis (zero price) software, Richard Stallman, founder of the free software movement, developed the following explanation: "Free software is a matter of liberty, not price. To understand the concept, you should think of 'free' as in 'free speech', not as in 'free beer'". More specifically, free software means that computer users have the freedom to cooperate with whom they choose, and to control the software they use.
Are there people who steal software, yes - but that has nothing to do with what we're talking about here.
FWIW: I work every day developing commercial web sites with free software (JBoss, Tomcat, Ant, Apache, gcc, Red Hat Enterprise Linux, Eclipse, etc...). Why? Because we don't want to pay for it? Hell no! We pay a lot of money in licenses and support contracts just like we would for non-OSS products. The difference is that, when needed, we can see why the software acts the way it does and even can change it if we find it necessary. We don't have to rely solely on a vendor's promise about how secure or optimized their code is because it's wide open for all to see. THAT is what OSS is all about.
Whenever I hear the OSS crowd scream "Software should be FREE!" I translate that to mean "I refuse to pay someone for their work, thus I will STEAL it"!
I don't blame Apple. The OSS community abused what they had and turned to piracy by stealing the GUI. Kudos Apple.
:rolleyes:
Anyone who understands what OSS and or "free software" is knows that they're not talking about money when they say it should be "free".
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software (emphasis added):
To help distinguish libre (freedom) software from gratis (zero price) software, Richard Stallman, founder of the free software movement, developed the following explanation: "Free software is a matter of liberty, not price. To understand the concept, you should think of 'free' as in 'free speech', not as in 'free beer'". More specifically, free software means that computer users have the freedom to cooperate with whom they choose, and to control the software they use.
Are there people who steal software, yes - but that has nothing to do with what we're talking about here.
FWIW: I work every day developing commercial web sites with free software (JBoss, Tomcat, Ant, Apache, gcc, Red Hat Enterprise Linux, Eclipse, etc...). Why? Because we don't want to pay for it? Hell no! We pay a lot of money in licenses and support contracts just like we would for non-OSS products. The difference is that, when needed, we can see why the software acts the way it does and even can change it if we find it necessary. We don't have to rely solely on a vendor's promise about how secure or optimized their code is because it's wide open for all to see. THAT is what OSS is all about.
Full of Win
Mar 28, 02:18 PM
BS. Pure, BS.
When did good design become contigent on devs accepting a lop-sided TOS?
When did good design become contigent on devs accepting a lop-sided TOS?
macenforcer
Oct 10, 10:49 PM
The wireless will be used to buy music right from itunes. I can't wait.
mauka
Nov 24, 12:46 PM
At the Honolulu Apple Store I was able to buy a black MacBook, using govt employee discount less black friday discount, total price $1309.00. At first they were saying no double discounts, but after a bit of a stand down myself and another unrelated buyer got the deal. :)
schwell
Oct 22, 07:29 PM
Thanks. However, that site doesn't seem to update its information. Some of it dates back at least five years.
For example, I looked around my area, and most of the well known dead zones marked on the map were resolved a few years ago with new towers.
The site does update the information. Zoom in and click on the "deadspots" The date reported is shown. I clicked on 25 for Verizon and 25 for AT&T they were all reported in 2008 or 2009.
For example, I looked around my area, and most of the well known dead zones marked on the map were resolved a few years ago with new towers.
The site does update the information. Zoom in and click on the "deadspots" The date reported is shown. I clicked on 25 for Verizon and 25 for AT&T they were all reported in 2008 or 2009.
sunfast
Nov 16, 12:41 PM
I can't see Apple ditching intel this early somehow.
unless Intel ****s up...
slips up? Tell me I'm right! :D
unless Intel ****s up...
slips up? Tell me I'm right! :D
840quadra
Jan 5, 09:29 AM
There is also no guarantee that the link will be active during the keynote (aka live) . I made the mistake of Digging WWDC 2006's QT link. It got to the front page, but it wasn't live..
I was :o
I was :o
asxtb
Sep 12, 07:34 AM
You'd have thought Apple could upload the new stuff to different servers then just switch them at the right time, are they trying to hype this up further!:p
Yeah. Steve, using is Powerbook G5, is here reading all these messages having a good laugh at all of our excitement.
Yeah. Steve, using is Powerbook G5, is here reading all these messages having a good laugh at all of our excitement.
bdj21ya
Oct 10, 05:20 PM
They can't be bummed since they aren't advertising it. The average consumer probably couldn't even tell it's been upgraded (except for the screen brightness)
Hey now, don't forget games, search feature, and alpha transparency letter scrolling :rolleyes:.
No, I think that this was just a stop gap to keep demand up at least a little more while they get the real update ready for market. However, I don't think that real update is coming until at least January, unless this last update was really just to get rid of excess components. But then, I'm with those who say the new update will be released above the current model's price point, not as a replacement (though that would be a few too many models for Steve to think we could comprehend).
Hey now, don't forget games, search feature, and alpha transparency letter scrolling :rolleyes:.
No, I think that this was just a stop gap to keep demand up at least a little more while they get the real update ready for market. However, I don't think that real update is coming until at least January, unless this last update was really just to get rid of excess components. But then, I'm with those who say the new update will be released above the current model's price point, not as a replacement (though that would be a few too many models for Steve to think we could comprehend).
adouglas2001
Jan 15, 04:11 PM
Everyone is harping on the MacBook Air because of it's lack of ports or an optical drive, but at the end of the day people are still going to want to buy it. It's a nice product.
I agree. It's a machine for a particular kind of user, one who values portability above all else. Looked at that way instead of from the "gee, it lacks...." point of view, it makes a lot of sense.
What often gets lost in these wish-list, "it should be easy to do THIS" discussions is the reality that all machines are compromises. What we get is driven by a lot of factors far beyond what is theoretically possible in a perfect world. Parts availability, cost of manufacture, market forces, engineering tradeoffs, etc. etc.
You need ports and an internal optical drive? You'll just have to live with a chassis big enough to hold them. Like that oh-so-CLUNKY (I mean it's a whole INCH thick! Horrors!), terribly obsolescent, dinosaur-like MacBook Pro. :rolleyes:
I agree. It's a machine for a particular kind of user, one who values portability above all else. Looked at that way instead of from the "gee, it lacks...." point of view, it makes a lot of sense.
What often gets lost in these wish-list, "it should be easy to do THIS" discussions is the reality that all machines are compromises. What we get is driven by a lot of factors far beyond what is theoretically possible in a perfect world. Parts availability, cost of manufacture, market forces, engineering tradeoffs, etc. etc.
You need ports and an internal optical drive? You'll just have to live with a chassis big enough to hold them. Like that oh-so-CLUNKY (I mean it's a whole INCH thick! Horrors!), terribly obsolescent, dinosaur-like MacBook Pro. :rolleyes:
KnightWRX
Apr 26, 08:43 PM
I want to tell one timer to start and if I press cancel, invalidate it. Then If I press start again, call the second timer. (I do this because I read that you can't reuse a timer after you invalidate it).
You don't need to do this. You can use the same NSTimer * pointer multiple times, you will just need to assign a new NSTimer object to it after you invalidated your first NSTimer object (or 2nd, or 3rd, etc..).
Basically, you only need 1 NSTimer object pointer, setup as an instance variable and your various IBActions :
(now, sorry for any syntax/compile error, I'm not opening Xcode here, just typing it out)
@interface ATimerViewController: UIViewController {
You don't need to do this. You can use the same NSTimer * pointer multiple times, you will just need to assign a new NSTimer object to it after you invalidated your first NSTimer object (or 2nd, or 3rd, etc..).
Basically, you only need 1 NSTimer object pointer, setup as an instance variable and your various IBActions :
(now, sorry for any syntax/compile error, I'm not opening Xcode here, just typing it out)
@interface ATimerViewController: UIViewController {
m-dogg
Jan 5, 04:06 PM
This is a great idea for those that would like this option. MR rocks as always!
Me though, I prefer the frequent frantic checks to the site as I try to get all my 'real work' done at the office.
One year everyone was going out to lunch and I lied and said I had too much work to do...just so I could eat at my desk and get all the late-breaking news. My co-workers would think I was weird if I said why I really wasn't going...
Yes, I'm a geek. :p
Me though, I prefer the frequent frantic checks to the site as I try to get all my 'real work' done at the office.
One year everyone was going out to lunch and I lied and said I had too much work to do...just so I could eat at my desk and get all the late-breaking news. My co-workers would think I was weird if I said why I really wasn't going...
Yes, I'm a geek. :p
Lord Blackadder
May 5, 06:24 PM
If we were to implement restrictions it would have to be nation-wide, or else it would be too easily thwarted.
What do we do with the 200 million legally owned guns? Not to mention the unknown (but surely quite significant) number of illegally owned or stolen guns we can't even track?
I think any talk of a blanket ban is pure folly and ignores the reality of the situation.
The biggest problem is just how far apart people are on this issue. People with little or no exposure to guns generally fear them and support draconian bans; people who grew up surrounded by them are much more likely to support some level of gun ownership, but a vocal minority of them want to do away with most or all regulation. I think both extreme positions (seeking to ban most/all guns vs advocating little/no regulation) are unrealistic and need to be abandoned.
The NRA's current policy leans heavily towards automatic knee-jerk attacks towards any person or organization that might appear to criticise or question any aspect of firearms ownership, or to undertake any scientific study involving guns, safety, culture, crime, etc etc. Speaking as a gun owner myself, I think the NRA is a wayward, counterproductive organization that is far too combative and has strayed too far from their original purpose, becoming in the process a horrible caricature of itself. On the other hand, a large chunk of the anti-gun lobby consists of fearmongers who are themselves largely ignorant when it comes to firearms and prey on the ignorance and fear of people to gain support.
The whole political debate is broken, and I see no evidence that this will ever change. Both sides fear nothing more than concession to their opponent, so an eternal stalemate will continue.
The OP is an example of just how far from reality the "gun debate" in this country has strayed.
What do we do with the 200 million legally owned guns? Not to mention the unknown (but surely quite significant) number of illegally owned or stolen guns we can't even track?
I think any talk of a blanket ban is pure folly and ignores the reality of the situation.
The biggest problem is just how far apart people are on this issue. People with little or no exposure to guns generally fear them and support draconian bans; people who grew up surrounded by them are much more likely to support some level of gun ownership, but a vocal minority of them want to do away with most or all regulation. I think both extreme positions (seeking to ban most/all guns vs advocating little/no regulation) are unrealistic and need to be abandoned.
The NRA's current policy leans heavily towards automatic knee-jerk attacks towards any person or organization that might appear to criticise or question any aspect of firearms ownership, or to undertake any scientific study involving guns, safety, culture, crime, etc etc. Speaking as a gun owner myself, I think the NRA is a wayward, counterproductive organization that is far too combative and has strayed too far from their original purpose, becoming in the process a horrible caricature of itself. On the other hand, a large chunk of the anti-gun lobby consists of fearmongers who are themselves largely ignorant when it comes to firearms and prey on the ignorance and fear of people to gain support.
The whole political debate is broken, and I see no evidence that this will ever change. Both sides fear nothing more than concession to their opponent, so an eternal stalemate will continue.
The OP is an example of just how far from reality the "gun debate" in this country has strayed.
spazzcat
May 2, 12:16 PM
unless you where asleep, every single device was tracked, whether or not Apple themselves collected the info is like asking if the CIA eavesdrops on every single US citizen, answer is no, but the history of the devices unique ID, locations can help connect via remote desktop and collect political views, which was what Apple is really been questioned about by Congress,
rjwill246
Oct 28, 04:03 PM
The thin veneer is off the vast majority of people that clamor for OSS.
Whenever I hear the OSS crowd scream "Software should be FREE!" I translate that to mean "I refuse to pay someone for their work, thus I will STEAL it"!
Even when you talk to these people they eventually get around to saying that everything "digital" should be free. I assume they don't really work for a living and think that welfare should be universal and include them de novo, probably play/sing " The Internationale" at sunrise and bedtime and have never paid taxes or at least intend not to.
I would NEVER hire anyone like this since they obviously have NO problem with stealing others' hard work.
Whenever I hear the OSS crowd scream "Software should be FREE!" I translate that to mean "I refuse to pay someone for their work, thus I will STEAL it"!
Even when you talk to these people they eventually get around to saying that everything "digital" should be free. I assume they don't really work for a living and think that welfare should be universal and include them de novo, probably play/sing " The Internationale" at sunrise and bedtime and have never paid taxes or at least intend not to.
I would NEVER hire anyone like this since they obviously have NO problem with stealing others' hard work.
No comments:
Post a Comment