PetMac
Aug 27, 03:38 PM
Long live PBG5NT. It reminds us how great it is to have frequent updates and powerful portables again.
cbronfman
Apr 11, 06:44 PM
Doesn't this make sense? I think I'm close, I'm sure I forgot something / not perfectly accurate, but this seems like what Apple is shooting for. Makes sense to me...
Jan: iPhone (like original)
Mar: iPad
May: iMac/MacPro
June/Jul: Software
Sept: iPods
Nov: Laptops
The original iPhone which I purchased was released on June 29th, 2007 (I guess - wow that's a while ago) although it was announced much earlier.
Jan: iPhone (like original)
Mar: iPad
May: iMac/MacPro
June/Jul: Software
Sept: iPods
Nov: Laptops
The original iPhone which I purchased was released on June 29th, 2007 (I guess - wow that's a while ago) although it was announced much earlier.
BGil
Aug 8, 04:32 AM
Have to agree with you on just about everything. If MS tried to release something like this, as anything other than a service pack, their user base would (quite rightly) crucify them.
The TimeMachine mirrors the same functionality that was announced for Vista about a week ago,
It's kinda unfair to say Microsoft just announced PreviousDocs/Shadow Copy "about a week ago" because it's been in every build for the last year.
Winsupersite on build 5219:
Windows Vista build 5219 also includes an integrated Shadow Copy client, which you manage from the Shadow Copies tab of the Properties dialog for your hard drive (Figure). This feature, which first originated in Windows Server lets you cache older versions of data files so that you can recover information in the event of an error. So if you overwrite a critical file, or inadvertently change part of a document, you can "go back in time" and access older versions.
Let's see how this works. First, you need to enable Shadow Copies from the aforementioned dialog. Then, after you've mucked up a file, you can access its Properties dialog in Explorer and navigate to the Previous Versions pane (Figure). Here, you can select between various different versions of the document (and your time travel experience is complete). This is a great feature, and I'm glad to see it being added to the Windows client.
http://www.winsupersite.com/images/reviews/vista-5219-review-26.jpg
http://www.winsupersite.com/images/reviews/vista-5219-review-25.jpg
That build was released in September of 2005.
http://www.winsupersite.com/reviews/winvista_5219.asp
Even before that Bob Muglia, who head the Longhorn Server project, said it would be integrated into NTFS.
MS also ships a shadow copy client for XP.
If anything, Apple has known about Previous Docs for over a year now.
The TimeMachine mirrors the same functionality that was announced for Vista about a week ago,
It's kinda unfair to say Microsoft just announced PreviousDocs/Shadow Copy "about a week ago" because it's been in every build for the last year.
Winsupersite on build 5219:
Windows Vista build 5219 also includes an integrated Shadow Copy client, which you manage from the Shadow Copies tab of the Properties dialog for your hard drive (Figure). This feature, which first originated in Windows Server lets you cache older versions of data files so that you can recover information in the event of an error. So if you overwrite a critical file, or inadvertently change part of a document, you can "go back in time" and access older versions.
Let's see how this works. First, you need to enable Shadow Copies from the aforementioned dialog. Then, after you've mucked up a file, you can access its Properties dialog in Explorer and navigate to the Previous Versions pane (Figure). Here, you can select between various different versions of the document (and your time travel experience is complete). This is a great feature, and I'm glad to see it being added to the Windows client.
http://www.winsupersite.com/images/reviews/vista-5219-review-26.jpg
http://www.winsupersite.com/images/reviews/vista-5219-review-25.jpg
That build was released in September of 2005.
http://www.winsupersite.com/reviews/winvista_5219.asp
Even before that Bob Muglia, who head the Longhorn Server project, said it would be integrated into NTFS.
MS also ships a shadow copy client for XP.
If anything, Apple has known about Previous Docs for over a year now.
weckart
Apr 8, 02:48 AM
Really? C'mon. Most Best Buys don't even have an employee maning the Apple section.
Our local BB has an Apple employee looking after the Apple section. There is no way it could pull any stunt in breach of Apple's agreement with BB without Apple's finding out.
Maybe things are different in the US.
Our local BB has an Apple employee looking after the Apple section. There is no way it could pull any stunt in breach of Apple's agreement with BB without Apple's finding out.
Maybe things are different in the US.
rdowns
Feb 28, 06:29 PM
Lee, I agree with you about what you say, but he clearly did say that this was only his opinion. People are allowed that, even if it is hateful and exclusionist.
Agreed, but when you air your opinions in public, others have the right to challenge them.
Agreed, but when you air your opinions in public, others have the right to challenge them.
mediasorcerer
Mar 31, 10:41 PM
Whether they're right to start regulating or not, they're still shamless hypocrites. What happened to all the principles that they waved around in the air? Andy Rubin himself said that the "definition of open" was that anyone could download the Android source and do whatever they wanted to it. Now people have to kiss his ring?
Google are the ones who waved the bloody shirt and shrieked about how Android-vs-the-iPhone was about freedom. Just because they're forced to backtrack now doesn't mean it's not blatant hypocrisy.
it is hypocrisy,and its to be expected from google too,lets face it,they are the data miners right hand man,they went around stealing peoples wifi details recently,and were caught,what sort of a company does that i ask you?thieving personal info!!!!
ive never heard of apple doing that.
Google are the ones who waved the bloody shirt and shrieked about how Android-vs-the-iPhone was about freedom. Just because they're forced to backtrack now doesn't mean it's not blatant hypocrisy.
it is hypocrisy,and its to be expected from google too,lets face it,they are the data miners right hand man,they went around stealing peoples wifi details recently,and were caught,what sort of a company does that i ask you?thieving personal info!!!!
ive never heard of apple doing that.
Brandon4692
Jun 22, 12:43 AM
I would sell the 3GS privately. You're almost guaranteed to get more for it. Post it somewhere tonight and I'll bet you that you get more for it than what Radio Shack will offer you.
Radio Shack's trade-in program is a decent option, but one could do much better with a little leg work.
Yeah I thought about that... But I'd rather not go through the hassle of craigs list and eBay... Just to many unknown factors. Who they are shipping meeting up with strangers scams I just feel safer trading it into the store but hey if you can get more for you phone all the power to you! I'm just a wimp about it lol
Radio Shack's trade-in program is a decent option, but one could do much better with a little leg work.
Yeah I thought about that... But I'd rather not go through the hassle of craigs list and eBay... Just to many unknown factors. Who they are shipping meeting up with strangers scams I just feel safer trading it into the store but hey if you can get more for you phone all the power to you! I'm just a wimp about it lol
Rend It
Aug 5, 06:07 PM
snippet
Why is Front Row dependent on iSight ?
No good, clear reason. It's just that Front Row usually goes along with PhotoBooth, so.... Also, it seems that Apple might be really pushing iChat with Leopard, especially video chatting, and the iMac, MBP, and MB all have iSights. It doesn't seem too crazy to believe that perhaps Apple wants a built-in camera in all of their hardware. In the case of the Mac Pro, Xserve, and Mini, the natural place for such a device is a display.
Pure speculation, of course. :D
Why is Front Row dependent on iSight ?
No good, clear reason. It's just that Front Row usually goes along with PhotoBooth, so.... Also, it seems that Apple might be really pushing iChat with Leopard, especially video chatting, and the iMac, MBP, and MB all have iSights. It doesn't seem too crazy to believe that perhaps Apple wants a built-in camera in all of their hardware. In the case of the Mac Pro, Xserve, and Mini, the natural place for such a device is a display.
Pure speculation, of course. :D
The-Pro
Apr 6, 11:57 AM
well the CPU in the 13" macbook air has a 1066 Mhz frontside bus, only the 11" has a 800 Mhz FSB, so that quote thing was wrong :D
hleewell
Apr 6, 10:24 PM
If June 2011 is set, then i would expect:
11.6"
Sandy Bridge
4GB RAM default
256GB SSD max
Thunderbolt
13"
Sandy Bridge
4GB RAM default
512GB SSD max
Thunderbolt
Back-lit keyboard
Ext Superdrive free (hi end model)
Rejoice!
11.6"
Sandy Bridge
4GB RAM default
256GB SSD max
Thunderbolt
13"
Sandy Bridge
4GB RAM default
512GB SSD max
Thunderbolt
Back-lit keyboard
Ext Superdrive free (hi end model)
Rejoice!
Silentwave
Aug 26, 10:47 PM
This is interesting, BUT, from what I know, Intel announced the desktop (Conroe) Core 2 Duo proccessor on July 27, and as far as I know, no Conroe systems are shipping right now, almost a month later.
Dell has announced some Conroe systems that you can order, but as far as I know they aren't readily shipping yet.
I believe Intel has been having trouble getting the required chipsets out on time to the desktop market.
You can get the chips themselves without much trouble- the retail versions are available at Newegg for the 1.86, 2.13, 2.66, and 2.93 Extreme Core 2 Duo chips, with the sole out of stock chip being the 2.4GHz chip, with an estimated time of arrival being Sept. 1st at 2:30PM.
Dell has announced some Conroe systems that you can order, but as far as I know they aren't readily shipping yet.
I believe Intel has been having trouble getting the required chipsets out on time to the desktop market.
You can get the chips themselves without much trouble- the retail versions are available at Newegg for the 1.86, 2.13, 2.66, and 2.93 Extreme Core 2 Duo chips, with the sole out of stock chip being the 2.4GHz chip, with an estimated time of arrival being Sept. 1st at 2:30PM.
littleman23408
Dec 6, 08:15 PM
I got an 03 Lotus Elise :rolleyes:
Its a nice car, i just have no use for it. Idk if there are Lotus-only races later on so i didnt sell it yet.
I noticed in my garage that theres an option for sharing cars online. I havent read the GT5 manual so i have no idea what it does, but i assume it would allow my PSN friends to drive my cars if i'm not using them. I shared my Citroen, if someone is logged on later check the Online tab of your garage and see if its there. Just dont put too many miles on it ;)
Werd, I'll check later. I know I noticed you online earlier. I wanted to send you a message so we could race. I went in the lobby and was just :confused:
So how do we go about setting up a two (or more) race?
Its a nice car, i just have no use for it. Idk if there are Lotus-only races later on so i didnt sell it yet.
I noticed in my garage that theres an option for sharing cars online. I havent read the GT5 manual so i have no idea what it does, but i assume it would allow my PSN friends to drive my cars if i'm not using them. I shared my Citroen, if someone is logged on later check the Online tab of your garage and see if its there. Just dont put too many miles on it ;)
Werd, I'll check later. I know I noticed you online earlier. I wanted to send you a message so we could race. I went in the lobby and was just :confused:
So how do we go about setting up a two (or more) race?
coyote
Mar 31, 02:49 PM
This wont end androids openness. It will make is so that there is more of a consistent experience amung all android devices.
Oh, then I can take the Honeycomb source code and do whatever I want with it?
Oh, wait, I can't? Then how doesn't this make Android 'closed source'?
Oh, then I can take the Honeycomb source code and do whatever I want with it?
Oh, wait, I can't? Then how doesn't this make Android 'closed source'?
NebulaClash
Apr 6, 01:31 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
Motorola doesn't "get" tablets yet, but the G1 didn't sell well either. Let's look at the market again in two years, I bet it'll look a lot different.
In two years the iPad 4 will be trouncing whatever tablets are trying to top the year-old iPad 3s.
Motorola doesn't "get" tablets yet, but the G1 didn't sell well either. Let's look at the market again in two years, I bet it'll look a lot different.
In two years the iPad 4 will be trouncing whatever tablets are trying to top the year-old iPad 3s.
DStaal
Jul 20, 09:18 AM
But as some already pointed out, many applications can't use multiple cores, therefore you won't get any performance improvements with multi cores.
Not on an application level, but we will on a system level.
Not on an application level, but we will on a system level.
vgermax
Jul 14, 03:02 PM
It would be unlikely that Apple wouldn't utilize the highest clocked Xeons available. Also, quad configurations should be present in more than just the top-end unit as that is one of the main advantages of going with the Woodcrest versus Conroe, that and a higher default FSB.
The video card configurations are also previous generation. I don't know for certain, but it seems the PCIe configuration isn't consistent with the information available on the i5000X. The standard Intel design is 1 x16, 2 x4 (with x8 slots) for a total of 24 lanes, not 16 or 32 as might be interpreted from the "spec" sheet.
It might also be reasonable to expect an optional RAID configuration as a RAID controller is built-in to the southbridge.
The video card configurations are also previous generation. I don't know for certain, but it seems the PCIe configuration isn't consistent with the information available on the i5000X. The standard Intel design is 1 x16, 2 x4 (with x8 slots) for a total of 24 lanes, not 16 or 32 as might be interpreted from the "spec" sheet.
It might also be reasonable to expect an optional RAID configuration as a RAID controller is built-in to the southbridge.
oldwatery
Apr 19, 02:03 PM
Apple as Big Brother.
How ironic!
How ironic!
nunes013
Mar 25, 10:34 PM
maybe they will release it in late july instead of late august like snow leopard. does anyone remember how much leopard cost. snow leopard wasnt really a new OS. just a speed bump from leopard so thats why it was $30. i just want to get an idea of what they price lion at because i heard $120 a while ago.
demeni
Mar 31, 04:04 PM
Having had an Android phone I can say that the experience was mixed at best. It has potential to compete with IOS but the openess is hurting the overall customer experience not so much because of Google but more because of the attitude and the thoughtlessness of the manufacturers, and in the UK, the network providers.
You couldn't update the software because the manufacturer had to first add its layers to Android and then the network had to cripple it with their rubbish so you couldn't forget who you had a contract with. So updates were virtually non existent unless you rooted and the manufacturer was doing its best to make sure you couldn't do that.
What a farce! And now they want to impose this on people buying tablets!
Android is doomed because of the same problems that haunt Windoze - no control over the hardware / software marriage so nothing will ever be robust enough. It'll never 'Just work'. I do still like some Google stuff (search engine / email) and Apple needs the threat of competition. They need to concentrate on their hardware / software efforts and forget about an open Mobile OS.
You couldn't update the software because the manufacturer had to first add its layers to Android and then the network had to cripple it with their rubbish so you couldn't forget who you had a contract with. So updates were virtually non existent unless you rooted and the manufacturer was doing its best to make sure you couldn't do that.
What a farce! And now they want to impose this on people buying tablets!
Android is doomed because of the same problems that haunt Windoze - no control over the hardware / software marriage so nothing will ever be robust enough. It'll never 'Just work'. I do still like some Google stuff (search engine / email) and Apple needs the threat of competition. They need to concentrate on their hardware / software efforts and forget about an open Mobile OS.
JGowan
Mar 26, 11:44 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_1_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7D11 Safari/528.16)
How can you say this. The one release since Leopard was Snow Leopard which was simply a rewritten version of Leopard to make it leaner & meaner.
How can you say this. The one release since Leopard was Snow Leopard which was simply a rewritten version of Leopard to make it leaner & meaner.
shamino
Jul 14, 05:26 PM
Kind of odd/funny how we seem to be going backwards in processor speeds. Instead of 3.6 GHz Pentiums, we are looking at 2.x GHz Intel Cores. It would be interesting to see how well a single Core processor matches up to PowerPC, or a Pentium, or AMD.
It just means that Intel has finally publicly recognized the validity of the MHz Myth.
Raw clock speed is meaningless. You can get better performance at a slower clock speed if you can increase parallelism. This includes features like superscalar architecture (where multiple instructions are executed per clock), deep pipelining, hyperthreading, SIMD instructions, and multi-core chips.
However, I am finding one of my predicitions finally happen...it appears that a ceiling has been currently met on how fast the current line of processors can go, and now we are relying on multiple cores/processors to distribute work, instead of relying on just one fast chip.
That's a part of the equation, but not all of it.
Higher clock speeds are possible, but it's not worth the effort. Pumping up the clock speed creates serious problems in terms of power consumption and heat dissipation. Leaving the clock speed lower, but increasing parallelism will also boost performance, and keeps the power curve down at manageable levels.
It's worth noting that Intel has shipped P4-series chips at 3.4GHz. But the new chips (Woodcrest and Conroe) aren't being sold at speeds above 3GHz.
So when will we start seeing 8 chips in a computer? Perhaps this will become the new measurement...not processor speeds, but the number of processors (or cores).
Pay attention. The answer is "sooner than you think".
There have already been technology briefings from Intel that talk about 4-core chips in early and 32-core chips by 2010. Similar offerings are expected from AMD.
And the Xeon-MP series processors (which will, of course, eventually get all this tech) are designed with 8-way SMP in mind. A theoretical Xeon-MP based on this 32-core tech would produce a system with 256 cores. Of course, it is doubtful that anything other than a large server would be able to take proper advantage of this, so I wouldn't ever expect to find one on a desktop.
(FWIW, Intel is looking to Sun as a rival here. Sun's latest chip - the UltraSPARC T1 (http://www.sun.com/processors/UltraSPARC-T1/) - currently ships in an 8-core configuration, with each core capable of running four threads at a time, and only consuming 72W of power. Even at 1.2GHz - the top speed they're currently shipping at - this makes for a very nice server.)
It just means that Intel has finally publicly recognized the validity of the MHz Myth.
Raw clock speed is meaningless. You can get better performance at a slower clock speed if you can increase parallelism. This includes features like superscalar architecture (where multiple instructions are executed per clock), deep pipelining, hyperthreading, SIMD instructions, and multi-core chips.
However, I am finding one of my predicitions finally happen...it appears that a ceiling has been currently met on how fast the current line of processors can go, and now we are relying on multiple cores/processors to distribute work, instead of relying on just one fast chip.
That's a part of the equation, but not all of it.
Higher clock speeds are possible, but it's not worth the effort. Pumping up the clock speed creates serious problems in terms of power consumption and heat dissipation. Leaving the clock speed lower, but increasing parallelism will also boost performance, and keeps the power curve down at manageable levels.
It's worth noting that Intel has shipped P4-series chips at 3.4GHz. But the new chips (Woodcrest and Conroe) aren't being sold at speeds above 3GHz.
So when will we start seeing 8 chips in a computer? Perhaps this will become the new measurement...not processor speeds, but the number of processors (or cores).
Pay attention. The answer is "sooner than you think".
There have already been technology briefings from Intel that talk about 4-core chips in early and 32-core chips by 2010. Similar offerings are expected from AMD.
And the Xeon-MP series processors (which will, of course, eventually get all this tech) are designed with 8-way SMP in mind. A theoretical Xeon-MP based on this 32-core tech would produce a system with 256 cores. Of course, it is doubtful that anything other than a large server would be able to take proper advantage of this, so I wouldn't ever expect to find one on a desktop.
(FWIW, Intel is looking to Sun as a rival here. Sun's latest chip - the UltraSPARC T1 (http://www.sun.com/processors/UltraSPARC-T1/) - currently ships in an 8-core configuration, with each core capable of running four threads at a time, and only consuming 72W of power. Even at 1.2GHz - the top speed they're currently shipping at - this makes for a very nice server.)
Multimedia
Jul 20, 06:58 PM
Merom Already Shipping
According to Daily Tech Merom is already shipping! Intel announced it during Intel's Q2'06 earnings report. Is an upgraded MBP going to make an appearance at the WWDC?
"...Otellini confirmed that quad-core isn't the only processor series moved up. The CEO confirmed Merom has been moved up and is already shipping to revenue, as was reported by HKEPC (English) several days ago. Intel's Tulsa processors for Xeon MP are also already shipping to revenue according to Otellini, but the availability of these processors has largely been overshadowed by yesterday's launch of Itanium 2 Montecito and the recent launch of Xeon DP Woodcrest.
Typically there is a two to three week lag between revenue shipments and retail availability, so expect to see many of these new "shipping to revenue" processors before the end of the month." (http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=3421)Wow, if true and Apple is ready with the new body, we might see the all new Mobile Pro Core 2 Duo Mac sooner than any of us expected. That would be great. :) Only 18 days until we find out. :D
According to Daily Tech Merom is already shipping! Intel announced it during Intel's Q2'06 earnings report. Is an upgraded MBP going to make an appearance at the WWDC?
"...Otellini confirmed that quad-core isn't the only processor series moved up. The CEO confirmed Merom has been moved up and is already shipping to revenue, as was reported by HKEPC (English) several days ago. Intel's Tulsa processors for Xeon MP are also already shipping to revenue according to Otellini, but the availability of these processors has largely been overshadowed by yesterday's launch of Itanium 2 Montecito and the recent launch of Xeon DP Woodcrest.
Typically there is a two to three week lag between revenue shipments and retail availability, so expect to see many of these new "shipping to revenue" processors before the end of the month." (http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=3421)Wow, if true and Apple is ready with the new body, we might see the all new Mobile Pro Core 2 Duo Mac sooner than any of us expected. That would be great. :) Only 18 days until we find out. :D
LethalWolfe
Apr 10, 02:21 AM
It's not like they threatened anyone. They likely went to the organizers and said "We'd like to make a really cool announcement at your event but we'd need most of your presentation and sponsorship space to do it." SuperMeet said sure, Apple paid, and here we are. It's not like the other sponsors didn't get their money back (I'm assuming.)
The other presenters just had to toss months of planning out the window and scramble to reschedule events w/less than a weeks notice during the industry's biggest annual convention. Hopefully the members of the audience that signed up to see the original line-up will be able to make it to all the reschedule events and, on top of that, everyone going to the SuperMeet has now paid money for tickets to what is nothing more than an Apple PR event.
Dick move by Apple but all will be forgiven as long as they release the holy grail of editing on Tuesday. If they preview 'iMovie Pro' lord help them...
He is asked if he will update his editing studio's workflow to the new Final Cut, and he basically danced around the question, pleaded the 5th, and made it pretty clear that he is holding back some reservations about how the industry will adapt to the changes.
To be fair to Mark (the head of Post at Bunim/Murray) there really isn't anything he could say due to the NDA. Just because what he saw of the new FCP might not lead him to believe it would work in Bunim/Murray's current workflow doesn't mean it might not be awesome for someone else's work flow. It was a tough spot for Mark to be in and I'm not exactly sure why he even kicked off the meeting with "I was there, but don't ask me about it because I'm under NDA". He could've never even have brought it up and it wouldn't have altered the course of the conversation at all.
Lethal
The other presenters just had to toss months of planning out the window and scramble to reschedule events w/less than a weeks notice during the industry's biggest annual convention. Hopefully the members of the audience that signed up to see the original line-up will be able to make it to all the reschedule events and, on top of that, everyone going to the SuperMeet has now paid money for tickets to what is nothing more than an Apple PR event.
Dick move by Apple but all will be forgiven as long as they release the holy grail of editing on Tuesday. If they preview 'iMovie Pro' lord help them...
He is asked if he will update his editing studio's workflow to the new Final Cut, and he basically danced around the question, pleaded the 5th, and made it pretty clear that he is holding back some reservations about how the industry will adapt to the changes.
To be fair to Mark (the head of Post at Bunim/Murray) there really isn't anything he could say due to the NDA. Just because what he saw of the new FCP might not lead him to believe it would work in Bunim/Murray's current workflow doesn't mean it might not be awesome for someone else's work flow. It was a tough spot for Mark to be in and I'm not exactly sure why he even kicked off the meeting with "I was there, but don't ask me about it because I'm under NDA". He could've never even have brought it up and it wouldn't have altered the course of the conversation at all.
Lethal
rtdunham
Apr 27, 09:49 AM
I'm old-fashined I guess because I have no interest in having a smartphone in the first place. I just have a standard flip-phone. By owning a smartphone, you are always going to be faced with privacy issues...
Did you know dumb phones record every call you make? That they record who you call, and how long you talk to them? That when landlines are involved, nubmers are recorded that pinpoint the location? That your phone transmits that information to your phone company? Look at your next phone bill. Your standard flip phone even records who calls YOU and tells THAT to your phone company, too. AND if you lose your phone bill--as is the case if you lose your phone--all that data's available, in unencrypted form, to anyone and everyone!
My take: Yeah, the data should've been encrypted, and prudence would have had it deleted after a short time. They're fixing that now. But it serves a purpose we all value, facilitating calling and optimizing location services when we want them. It's a glitch, nothing more, exaggerated by media attention (and i'm part of the media, so I'm not unfairly finger-pointing) just as happened with antenna-gate and the fuss over Toyotas accelerating out of control (where almost always the conclusion is someone put their foot on the accelerator instead of the brake, by mistake). Ten years from now someone will write an entertaining book about the gap between public hysteria and reality on these issues and many others (birtherism, anyone? or if your political views swing in a different way, government spending way beyond its means?)
I'm not saying the location database is operator error. Clearly not. I'm just trying to keep it in perspective. (It's not time-stamped? It's accurate sometimes only to 50 or 81 miles, as in cases reported in this thread? My phone, using the data that's recorded, consistently puts me five miles from my home, in a different county, across a river, four or five cities away, due to some oddity of cell tower location).
Look, your credit cards not only keep track of where you've been, but how much you spent there, and when, with precise geographic accuracy. Sometimes they even tell what you've bought. Just look at your next bill. Did you know your bank keeps track of every check you write, and to whom, and sends that information to you unencrypted via the mail? Did you know...
I think we should keep this situation in perspective. Too many people here see the privacy sky falling on them, when they're really swimming in it. (Did you know the device you're using to read this doesn't protect you from being victimized by horrible unencrypted metaphors...?)
Did you know dumb phones record every call you make? That they record who you call, and how long you talk to them? That when landlines are involved, nubmers are recorded that pinpoint the location? That your phone transmits that information to your phone company? Look at your next phone bill. Your standard flip phone even records who calls YOU and tells THAT to your phone company, too. AND if you lose your phone bill--as is the case if you lose your phone--all that data's available, in unencrypted form, to anyone and everyone!
My take: Yeah, the data should've been encrypted, and prudence would have had it deleted after a short time. They're fixing that now. But it serves a purpose we all value, facilitating calling and optimizing location services when we want them. It's a glitch, nothing more, exaggerated by media attention (and i'm part of the media, so I'm not unfairly finger-pointing) just as happened with antenna-gate and the fuss over Toyotas accelerating out of control (where almost always the conclusion is someone put their foot on the accelerator instead of the brake, by mistake). Ten years from now someone will write an entertaining book about the gap between public hysteria and reality on these issues and many others (birtherism, anyone? or if your political views swing in a different way, government spending way beyond its means?)
I'm not saying the location database is operator error. Clearly not. I'm just trying to keep it in perspective. (It's not time-stamped? It's accurate sometimes only to 50 or 81 miles, as in cases reported in this thread? My phone, using the data that's recorded, consistently puts me five miles from my home, in a different county, across a river, four or five cities away, due to some oddity of cell tower location).
Look, your credit cards not only keep track of where you've been, but how much you spent there, and when, with precise geographic accuracy. Sometimes they even tell what you've bought. Just look at your next bill. Did you know your bank keeps track of every check you write, and to whom, and sends that information to you unencrypted via the mail? Did you know...
I think we should keep this situation in perspective. Too many people here see the privacy sky falling on them, when they're really swimming in it. (Did you know the device you're using to read this doesn't protect you from being victimized by horrible unencrypted metaphors...?)
0 comments:
Post a Comment