hyperpasta
Sep 4, 03:13 PM
One more thing... iPod video projector!!! :)
Haha. Actually, it says its probably a new AirPort Express.
Haha. Actually, it says its probably a new AirPort Express.
Warbrain
Apr 20, 12:35 PM
and btw, google stores location data allll the time.
Every single search is localized in some sense. Google is keeping track of where you are based off GPS or IP address. This is why I don't have an issue with this; I'd rather have the file on my computer than with a company that we aren't sure is going to be on the good side for long.
Every single search is localized in some sense. Google is keeping track of where you are based off GPS or IP address. This is why I don't have an issue with this; I'd rather have the file on my computer than with a company that we aren't sure is going to be on the good side for long.
lilo777
Apr 19, 01:01 PM
+1 on the notifications
Who would want to have a s*itty radio tuner on their iphone? that's why I download music So I can listen to the music I want at good quality. with no commercials? And you can multi task any ways so what the big deal of streaming music? at least streaming is the genre you like haha
Did you know that Radio offers more than just music?
Who would want to have a s*itty radio tuner on their iphone? that's why I download music So I can listen to the music I want at good quality. with no commercials? And you can multi task any ways so what the big deal of streaming music? at least streaming is the genre you like haha
Did you know that Radio offers more than just music?
bbplayer5
Mar 23, 04:22 PM
No one likes drunk drivers. No one. Period. That being said, Apple should not pull the App. Speed trap apps will be next (Trapster)... Keep the app store open to everything thats legal. This is no different than a friend calling you telling you to avoid a check point. Neither is illegal.
braddouglass
Apr 19, 12:57 PM
Yep, he's the only iPhone user in the world who wants a better notication system, and a built in radio so he doesnt have to stream it over the internet. :rolleyes:
+1 on the notifications
Who would want to have a s*itty radio tuner on their iphone? that's why I download music So I can listen to the music I want at good quality. with no commercials? And you can multi task any ways so what the big deal of streaming music? at least streaming is the genre you like haha
+1 on the notifications
Who would want to have a s*itty radio tuner on their iphone? that's why I download music So I can listen to the music I want at good quality. with no commercials? And you can multi task any ways so what the big deal of streaming music? at least streaming is the genre you like haha
RollTide
Mar 22, 05:58 PM
As I posted in another thread, Amazon is showing low stock. The uk store also seems low, another user saw that first.
I wish we had a separate site to weed through the ios and mac rumors. Just me?
I wish we had a separate site to weed through the ios and mac rumors. Just me?
SBacklin
Apr 22, 11:15 AM
i didn't ignore anything. i stream pandora all the time when i'm on the go and while i'm at the house. my work has wifi so i just connect to that and my house wifi while i'm there. I have a buddy here at work that streams netflix and tons of other stuff but refuses to connect to wifi. he uses close to 10gb of data monthly and has still not received any message from AT&T.
My point is there are a lot of people that just don't connect to wifi when they are around it free, they just rely on their cell service instead. The reason i connect is bc when i'm looking online it's quicker internet wise then the 3g.
I'm not wanting anyone to change. but you're arguing that this service isn't great...when in reality it's just not great for you.
I like to live minimally....so having a dvd collection or cd collection of physical media does not interest me. Apparently, others think the same way or the cloud service would not exist. The service is not for you. Go back to ripping cds to your local storage device and making play list after play list and sync all ur music each time u want a variety.
Many people are the same way with books. My MIL has like 1,500 books in her house and just sees no value in a kindle and all that it provides.
I get it, people enjoy their "stuff".
Its also not great for many many many other people. You still base your ideas and arguments on the flawed notion that people have unlimited data and could still get it. I will also state again, I personally believe this will be some kind of add-on locker and not replacing local storage. I believe replacing local storage at this point would be a major mistake on Apple's part because it would negatively affect so many people...granted, not all.
My point is there are a lot of people that just don't connect to wifi when they are around it free, they just rely on their cell service instead. The reason i connect is bc when i'm looking online it's quicker internet wise then the 3g.
I'm not wanting anyone to change. but you're arguing that this service isn't great...when in reality it's just not great for you.
I like to live minimally....so having a dvd collection or cd collection of physical media does not interest me. Apparently, others think the same way or the cloud service would not exist. The service is not for you. Go back to ripping cds to your local storage device and making play list after play list and sync all ur music each time u want a variety.
Many people are the same way with books. My MIL has like 1,500 books in her house and just sees no value in a kindle and all that it provides.
I get it, people enjoy their "stuff".
Its also not great for many many many other people. You still base your ideas and arguments on the flawed notion that people have unlimited data and could still get it. I will also state again, I personally believe this will be some kind of add-on locker and not replacing local storage. I believe replacing local storage at this point would be a major mistake on Apple's part because it would negatively affect so many people...granted, not all.
ergle2
Sep 10, 01:41 AM
Please explain - I have no idea what "that" is....
---
Regardless of the tool, however, it is usually much better to let the OS dynamically schedule threads across the cores. Unless the programmer has some reason to try to control this, the alternative is some resources (CPUs) being overcommitted, while other CPUs are idle.
It doesn't matter who has the better tools - it's usually better to let the OS decide microsecond by microsecond how best to schedule the CPUs, than to have the developer make those decisions at edit time.
I've used the SetProcessAffinityMask APIs fairly often, but it's always been for specific test or benchmark situations. I have a hard time thinking of a situation where a general application would want to statically control the scheduler - it's just "bad think" to even try. (Except for those weird-a$$ NUMA Opterons - you can be really scr3wed if you have to go through HyperTransport to get to memory. I check NUMA topology, and use affinity to keep the AMD architecture from killing me.)
I've owned SMP machines in the past and often found it more useful to force CPU affinity of CPU-heavy tasks to a single processor, as Windows 2000 (which was current at the time) by default had a habit of swapping it between chips, resulting in a lot of cache-dirtying. I think it was the load balancing code, but it's been a while now and I don't have those machines handy currently. However, you could see some significant improvement in processing time on some non-parallelizable cpu-bound tasks.
I've no idea if MacOS does this, but at least in the case of Core 2 it shouldn't matter anywhere near as much, as the L2 is fully shared.
---
Regardless of the tool, however, it is usually much better to let the OS dynamically schedule threads across the cores. Unless the programmer has some reason to try to control this, the alternative is some resources (CPUs) being overcommitted, while other CPUs are idle.
It doesn't matter who has the better tools - it's usually better to let the OS decide microsecond by microsecond how best to schedule the CPUs, than to have the developer make those decisions at edit time.
I've used the SetProcessAffinityMask APIs fairly often, but it's always been for specific test or benchmark situations. I have a hard time thinking of a situation where a general application would want to statically control the scheduler - it's just "bad think" to even try. (Except for those weird-a$$ NUMA Opterons - you can be really scr3wed if you have to go through HyperTransport to get to memory. I check NUMA topology, and use affinity to keep the AMD architecture from killing me.)
I've owned SMP machines in the past and often found it more useful to force CPU affinity of CPU-heavy tasks to a single processor, as Windows 2000 (which was current at the time) by default had a habit of swapping it between chips, resulting in a lot of cache-dirtying. I think it was the load balancing code, but it's been a while now and I don't have those machines handy currently. However, you could see some significant improvement in processing time on some non-parallelizable cpu-bound tasks.
I've no idea if MacOS does this, but at least in the case of Core 2 it shouldn't matter anywhere near as much, as the L2 is fully shared.
cmcconkey
Sep 26, 02:35 PM
You sound like a pain in the ass to have as a customer.
No actually I just want my bills to be correct. If that makes me a pain in the ass, then so be it. If someone that I am paying to provide me a service keeps screwing up my bills, and then say that they will have it fixed on the next billing cycle and then it doens't show up until a quarter of a year later. I guess that is too much to expect out of a company. I also deal with customers on a daily basis, so I know what is expected from a service provider.
Christopher
No actually I just want my bills to be correct. If that makes me a pain in the ass, then so be it. If someone that I am paying to provide me a service keeps screwing up my bills, and then say that they will have it fixed on the next billing cycle and then it doens't show up until a quarter of a year later. I guess that is too much to expect out of a company. I also deal with customers on a daily basis, so I know what is expected from a service provider.
Christopher
Saladin
Sep 14, 09:59 PM
2. Apple's announcement a few days ago about the new iTunes store: (to quote Page 1) "TV shows will now be sold at 640x480 px h264. While the updated 5G iPods announced today will be able to play the new format, there has not been any indication from Apple of yet that the new shows will be playable on older 5G iPods. Apple's official knowledge-base article still states that h264-encoded movies must be 320 x 240 at 30 fps."
That's false information. I already downloaded Sacred Planet (640*480 h.264) from the iTunes Movie Store and loaded it onto my newly updated 5G iPod. The movie works perfectly. Since that would have been the strongest point in your argument for a multiple use device, I would now say your conclusion lacks weight. I'm not saying that they won't release one soon, just use better proofs to support your conclusion next time.
That's false information. I already downloaded Sacred Planet (640*480 h.264) from the iTunes Movie Store and loaded it onto my newly updated 5G iPod. The movie works perfectly. Since that would have been the strongest point in your argument for a multiple use device, I would now say your conclusion lacks weight. I'm not saying that they won't release one soon, just use better proofs to support your conclusion next time.
Christopher387A
Apr 25, 02:11 PM
I can't wait! :D
econgeek
Apr 14, 12:58 PM
The MBPs could have DisplayPort 1.2 if it were not for the damned connector merge.
The mini-display port connector is part of the DisplayPort 1.2 standard and is seemingly seeing wide adoption from PC laptop and display makers.
The DisplayPort 1.2 specification requires support for DisplayPort 1.1a on mini-display ports, but I don't see anything that precludes it supporting 1.2 signalling.
Can you point to an article that details how Thunderbolt is a problem for this? The Thunderbolt controller, when connected to a DisplayPort 1.2 (only) display, could fall back to DisplayPort mode like it does now, could it not?
Intel should have stood their ground on Thunderbolt... Would have pushed component manufacturers to make more Thunderbolt devices, now we're going to have a mish mash, and those of us with Macs are getting the shaft because we won't get USB 3.0 from Apple...
I wish they had announced that IvyBridge was USB 2.0 only, but this delays USB 3.0 adoption by a year.
There's been strong support for Thunderbolt, so that year might be enough to kill USB 3.0, which hasn't exactly taken off.
The mini-display port connector is part of the DisplayPort 1.2 standard and is seemingly seeing wide adoption from PC laptop and display makers.
The DisplayPort 1.2 specification requires support for DisplayPort 1.1a on mini-display ports, but I don't see anything that precludes it supporting 1.2 signalling.
Can you point to an article that details how Thunderbolt is a problem for this? The Thunderbolt controller, when connected to a DisplayPort 1.2 (only) display, could fall back to DisplayPort mode like it does now, could it not?
Intel should have stood their ground on Thunderbolt... Would have pushed component manufacturers to make more Thunderbolt devices, now we're going to have a mish mash, and those of us with Macs are getting the shaft because we won't get USB 3.0 from Apple...
I wish they had announced that IvyBridge was USB 2.0 only, but this delays USB 3.0 adoption by a year.
There's been strong support for Thunderbolt, so that year might be enough to kill USB 3.0, which hasn't exactly taken off.
cube
Apr 23, 09:19 AM
The 320M is CUDA-capable. Intel is still evaluating OpenCL.
tsugaru
Mar 22, 03:33 PM
One thing that will stink about the iMac update is that the GPU will most likely only get 8 PCIe lanes, as 4 of them will go to Thunderbolt. Sandy Bridge offers a max of 16 PCIe lanes. So Apple, maybe you feel like adding USB3 to the mix to use the last 4 lanes.
* yes I know the performance of a GPU doesn't drop THAT much going from x16 to x8, but still.
And toddy, a 6950 would be decent, but I don't see Apple offering it. I see the 6750 akin to the MacBook Pros going in (sadly.)
Even the 5750 in the 27" is around the same speed as the 4850. Apple just gimped the 4850 by using the GDDR3 version and only giving it 512MB /shakefist.
* yes I know the performance of a GPU doesn't drop THAT much going from x16 to x8, but still.
And toddy, a 6950 would be decent, but I don't see Apple offering it. I see the 6750 akin to the MacBook Pros going in (sadly.)
Even the 5750 in the 27" is around the same speed as the 4850. Apple just gimped the 4850 by using the GDDR3 version and only giving it 512MB /shakefist.
levitynyc
Sep 9, 11:53 AM
I'm not a gaming expert, but from what I've read, 512MB is no faster than 256MB for most current gaming applications, it's the throughput of the GPU that counts. Do any gamers out there want to comment on this?
I don't think that you could run Oblivion particularly well with only 256MB of Video Memory. Maybe you could, but you couldn't nearly max of the Graphics or else you would suffer some frame rate issues.
I don't think that you could run Oblivion particularly well with only 256MB of Video Memory. Maybe you could, but you couldn't nearly max of the Graphics or else you would suffer some frame rate issues.
KnightWRX
Apr 23, 02:04 PM
I kindly ask you to not put words in my mouth I've never written. I've never called you 'moron' or 'stupid' or using foul language about you. 'Keep your insults for yourself next time' is not a very kind thing to say, and I am actually wondering whether I should report you to the moderator.
I'm sorry, you're right, the other guy was saying we were "stupid", you were saying we were "addicts" for using a MBA to play games on. Much better and not insulting at all. :rolleyes:
As for my own "Keep your insults to yourself", please do report it. I don't even see what is "not nice" about telling you to not insult people here. I am not an addict because I play Civilization on my MBA, no matter what you think about it.
Just remember I didn't report you and the other guy for both making fun of people who game on MBAs.
I'm sorry, you're right, the other guy was saying we were "stupid", you were saying we were "addicts" for using a MBA to play games on. Much better and not insulting at all. :rolleyes:
As for my own "Keep your insults to yourself", please do report it. I don't even see what is "not nice" about telling you to not insult people here. I am not an addict because I play Civilization on my MBA, no matter what you think about it.
Just remember I didn't report you and the other guy for both making fun of people who game on MBAs.
apolloa
Apr 20, 11:07 AM
hahaha, if you read the original report by The Guardian link here:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2011/apr/20/iphone-tracking-prompts-privacy-fears
You will see that it does indeed state the Apple EULA at the end of the article, the part that seems to have been strangely left off all same reports in Mac Rumors, Engadget, 9TO5MAC all quoting The Guardian source :rolleyes::rolleyes:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2011/apr/20/iphone-tracking-prompts-privacy-fears
You will see that it does indeed state the Apple EULA at the end of the article, the part that seems to have been strangely left off all same reports in Mac Rumors, Engadget, 9TO5MAC all quoting The Guardian source :rolleyes::rolleyes:
URFloorMatt
Mar 30, 01:17 PM
After a bit of thought I think I'm siding with Apple... here's why:
The strongest argument I've read against the trademark is that 'App Store' is describing the very thing it actually is. Someone likened this to renaming 'Windows' to 'Operating System'.
However what isn't appreciated is that 'App' is in itself an abbreviation. It's debatable whether apple popularised it or not but thats not the point. Basically it would be like renaming 'Windows' to 'Ope System'.
I'd argue that 'Ope System' could be trademarked whereas 'Operating System' couldn't...Disagree because "Ope System" is not the accepted abbreviation: "OS" is. Do you think Microsoft should be able to rename Windows OS and then trademark OS? Of course not, and accordingly Apple shouldn't get a trademark on App Store.
Apple should lose this dispute on the merits. Whether they do or not will depend on the caliber of their lawyers. On the two briefs we've seen so far, Apple clearly has some advantage, so they might pull this out nonetheless.
The strongest argument I've read against the trademark is that 'App Store' is describing the very thing it actually is. Someone likened this to renaming 'Windows' to 'Operating System'.
However what isn't appreciated is that 'App' is in itself an abbreviation. It's debatable whether apple popularised it or not but thats not the point. Basically it would be like renaming 'Windows' to 'Ope System'.
I'd argue that 'Ope System' could be trademarked whereas 'Operating System' couldn't...Disagree because "Ope System" is not the accepted abbreviation: "OS" is. Do you think Microsoft should be able to rename Windows OS and then trademark OS? Of course not, and accordingly Apple shouldn't get a trademark on App Store.
Apple should lose this dispute on the merits. Whether they do or not will depend on the caliber of their lawyers. On the two briefs we've seen so far, Apple clearly has some advantage, so they might pull this out nonetheless.
Ugg
Apr 18, 10:02 AM
I don't know if i can. Give me some time. But doesn't it make sense that if u stop using something that killed disease spreading insects that the insects will continue to spread the disease?
Repelling bugs with Grapefruit (http://www.npr.org/2011/04/18/135468567/repelling-bugs-with-the-essence-of-grapefruit)
Safe Enough To Drink
That's why the CDC is pushing hard to develop a completely natural insect repellent made from a chemical called nootkatone, which is found in Alaska yellow cedar trees and citrus fruit.
Dolan says nootkatone "is nongreasy, dries very quickly, and it has a very pleasant, citrus-y grapefruit odor to it."
He recently demonstrated its effectiveness as a mosquito repellent, rubbing some on his hand and then sticking it into a cage containing 50 hungry mosquitoes. When he holds the treated hand near mosquitoes, they try to get away in the opposite direction as fast as they can.
Even after five minutes, Dolan has no bites on his nootkatone-treated hand.
Nootkatone is also effective against ticks, and scientists think it will work against bed bugs, head lice and other insects, too.
Moreover, nootkatone is so nontoxic you could drink it. In fact, it's already an approved food additive, officially classed as "Generally Considered Safe." It's also a natural ingredient in some foods.
The US became great, not because it relied on old ways of doing things, but because it created new ways that were more efficient.
Malaria has been a big problem for decades and you want to know why? Because it affects mostly poor Africans, people who don't have megabucks to pay for exotic cures. Now I realize that the chemical producers of the world would rather that everyone take their word as gospel and pretend that the harmful effects of DDT, BPA, Benzene, Formaldehyde, PVC amongst others are highly overblown and that if we just believe in the chemical companies and their shills, we'lll be living some sort of magical 50s sort of life.
If you'll read the article, you'll notice that the CDC owns the patents for nootkatone. Business is only interested in helping people when it fattens their bottom line. As a result, when it comes to things like malaria, it often takes government intervention to jump start issues.
So what do you want? A nation that always strives for the best solution or one that is only interested in getting by as long as it makes them money? It doesn't take a genius to see that by constantly supporting outdated technology, the US will soon be left behind.
Once again, what kind of world do you want to live in?
Repelling bugs with Grapefruit (http://www.npr.org/2011/04/18/135468567/repelling-bugs-with-the-essence-of-grapefruit)
Safe Enough To Drink
That's why the CDC is pushing hard to develop a completely natural insect repellent made from a chemical called nootkatone, which is found in Alaska yellow cedar trees and citrus fruit.
Dolan says nootkatone "is nongreasy, dries very quickly, and it has a very pleasant, citrus-y grapefruit odor to it."
He recently demonstrated its effectiveness as a mosquito repellent, rubbing some on his hand and then sticking it into a cage containing 50 hungry mosquitoes. When he holds the treated hand near mosquitoes, they try to get away in the opposite direction as fast as they can.
Even after five minutes, Dolan has no bites on his nootkatone-treated hand.
Nootkatone is also effective against ticks, and scientists think it will work against bed bugs, head lice and other insects, too.
Moreover, nootkatone is so nontoxic you could drink it. In fact, it's already an approved food additive, officially classed as "Generally Considered Safe." It's also a natural ingredient in some foods.
The US became great, not because it relied on old ways of doing things, but because it created new ways that were more efficient.
Malaria has been a big problem for decades and you want to know why? Because it affects mostly poor Africans, people who don't have megabucks to pay for exotic cures. Now I realize that the chemical producers of the world would rather that everyone take their word as gospel and pretend that the harmful effects of DDT, BPA, Benzene, Formaldehyde, PVC amongst others are highly overblown and that if we just believe in the chemical companies and their shills, we'lll be living some sort of magical 50s sort of life.
If you'll read the article, you'll notice that the CDC owns the patents for nootkatone. Business is only interested in helping people when it fattens their bottom line. As a result, when it comes to things like malaria, it often takes government intervention to jump start issues.
So what do you want? A nation that always strives for the best solution or one that is only interested in getting by as long as it makes them money? It doesn't take a genius to see that by constantly supporting outdated technology, the US will soon be left behind.
Once again, what kind of world do you want to live in?
blybug
Sep 5, 10:00 AM
Anyone else notice that Elgato have now pulled their Eyehome media streaming device without a replacement? Anything to do with rumors of a rival device from Apple?
I'd be overjoyed if Apple has "bought out" the EyeHome from Elgato and gives it the polish and compatibility only Apple could do. I've used EyeHome for over 2 years and it's at best "OK" as a media hub. The box itself is tacky (make it look like the mini or a stereo component...and give it an optical drive), the on-screen interface is pretty kludgy (replace it with Front Row), protected media cannot play (of course Apple can fix that), MP4 support/quality is inconsistent and H.264 support completely absent (again Apple can fix that).
I've always seen EyeHome as a good try by a 3rd party, but really needing some spit and shine that only Apple could provide. I bet the quiet disappearance of this product from Elgato will indeed prove itself to be the hardware analogy to SoundJam-->iTunes. The new Apple "EyeHome" (iHome??? hmmm...already taken...iPod Home?? Front Row Media Center??) should be a very stripped-down mac mini that boots up to Front Row with the addition of a "Settings" menu, and access to purchasing music and/or movies which end up in the iTunes library of a connected computer.
I was planning to buy a mini to replace my EyeHome as soon as it had Front Row available, but then the price went up by $100...simply not worth buying a whole computer for this use. Sell a device like this for $200 and you've got me!:D
I'd be overjoyed if Apple has "bought out" the EyeHome from Elgato and gives it the polish and compatibility only Apple could do. I've used EyeHome for over 2 years and it's at best "OK" as a media hub. The box itself is tacky (make it look like the mini or a stereo component...and give it an optical drive), the on-screen interface is pretty kludgy (replace it with Front Row), protected media cannot play (of course Apple can fix that), MP4 support/quality is inconsistent and H.264 support completely absent (again Apple can fix that).
I've always seen EyeHome as a good try by a 3rd party, but really needing some spit and shine that only Apple could provide. I bet the quiet disappearance of this product from Elgato will indeed prove itself to be the hardware analogy to SoundJam-->iTunes. The new Apple "EyeHome" (iHome??? hmmm...already taken...iPod Home?? Front Row Media Center??) should be a very stripped-down mac mini that boots up to Front Row with the addition of a "Settings" menu, and access to purchasing music and/or movies which end up in the iTunes library of a connected computer.
I was planning to buy a mini to replace my EyeHome as soon as it had Front Row available, but then the price went up by $100...simply not worth buying a whole computer for this use. Sell a device like this for $200 and you've got me!:D
EagerDragon
Aug 28, 05:03 PM
You try making something perfect the first time around.
I know, had that problem with the Avocado, the pit is too big.
I know, had that problem with the Avocado, the pit is too big.
Scuby
Apr 11, 08:35 AM
I agree with the guy who wants any iOS device to be the receiver of AirTunes music.
I hear all the comments about Home Sharing and Airfoil, but both are only partial solutions that work in specific cases. I, personally, nt my old iPod Touch to function as a battery powered airport express - with some battery powered speakers attached, I can stream music anywhere (including the garden, etc) at the same time - perfect for parties. I could do that with AirFoil, but that means when I want to stream from my iPad to my Apple TV or Airport Express speakers in the living room I need a different solution. Plus i'm not sure the Apple Remote app will allow me to switch AirFoil sources on and off, which means I have to go back to my Mac to change them, it's not properly integrated, so not a great solution. Acceptable, sure, but far from ideal.
Basically, having AirPlay supported natively just means the whole system works simply, flawlessly and in a fully-integrated way. No faff, no limitations on what device can play what audio to which other devices. A simple iOS app that allows my iPod Touch to function as an Airport Express will be fantastic!
David
I hear all the comments about Home Sharing and Airfoil, but both are only partial solutions that work in specific cases. I, personally, nt my old iPod Touch to function as a battery powered airport express - with some battery powered speakers attached, I can stream music anywhere (including the garden, etc) at the same time - perfect for parties. I could do that with AirFoil, but that means when I want to stream from my iPad to my Apple TV or Airport Express speakers in the living room I need a different solution. Plus i'm not sure the Apple Remote app will allow me to switch AirFoil sources on and off, which means I have to go back to my Mac to change them, it's not properly integrated, so not a great solution. Acceptable, sure, but far from ideal.
Basically, having AirPlay supported natively just means the whole system works simply, flawlessly and in a fully-integrated way. No faff, no limitations on what device can play what audio to which other devices. A simple iOS app that allows my iPod Touch to function as an Airport Express will be fantastic!
David
dime21
Apr 14, 03:41 PM
What about the MacBook and MacBook Air?
you missed the point. entirely. it flew right over your head like a bird.
you missed the point. entirely. it flew right over your head like a bird.
scoobydoo99
Apr 20, 10:07 AM
Will be interesting to see Apple's response to this. I don't necessarily mind the data being collected for things like find my iPhone and forensics but I'd like it to be very well secured.
Not sure what you are saying. You don't mind it being collected for forensics, yet you want it to be secured???
Forensics is the collection of data/information for legal purposes. This often entails surreptitious surveillance or electronic eavesdropping. By definition, the forensic investigation of your personal activities will NOT be "secured." On the contrary, a forensic investigation will seek to either covertly or directly obtain every available piece of personal information stored about you. Whether you are accused of a crime or just being surveilled and whether you are guilty or innocent is irrelevant. The point is, the information is available for anyone to obtain.
Not sure what you are saying. You don't mind it being collected for forensics, yet you want it to be secured???
Forensics is the collection of data/information for legal purposes. This often entails surreptitious surveillance or electronic eavesdropping. By definition, the forensic investigation of your personal activities will NOT be "secured." On the contrary, a forensic investigation will seek to either covertly or directly obtain every available piece of personal information stored about you. Whether you are accused of a crime or just being surveilled and whether you are guilty or innocent is irrelevant. The point is, the information is available for anyone to obtain.
0 comments:
Post a Comment