b_scott
Apr 15, 11:36 AM
I did that but it still does not work. I rebooted my macbook, installed the latest security updates, wiped my 3GS, tried restoring and then updating to 4.3.2 - same thing just happened.
Slim02
Apr 30, 03:11 AM
notices something. Most of those devices are a lot newer. Like I said my car from 2004 can play MP3 but not AAC files. Things from back then it was iffy at best if it it could play AAC.
Mp3 plays on everything. AAC does not. MP3 is supported on older devices. AAC is not.
AAC is just not as widely support as MP3 end of story.
Top it off Mp3 is smaller at the same bit rate
http://ipod.about.com/od/introductiontoitunes/a/sound_qual_test.htm
At a certain point you really are not gaining anything. Amazon VBR is a great way to give great quality sound for a smaller file size.
The Xbox360 is only one year newer then you car, so it is not that much newer... The same for PSP too.. the first portable digital audio player to play MP3 was 1998. MP3 1995-96. AAC was 1997...
Roselyn Sanchez and Eric
Roselyn Sanchez
Roselyn Sanchez
Roselyn Sanchez
Roselyn Sanchez
Roselyn Sanchez :: Picture
Roselyn Sanchez Bra Size,
roselyn- sanchez-16 picture by
Roselyn Sanchez
Roselyn Sanchez
Roselyn Sanchez authentic
Roselyn Sanchez Sexy Maxim
Roselyn Sanchez
Roselyn Sanchez
Roselyn Sanchez - Seventh
Roselyn sanchez pictures
Roselyn Sanchez
Mp3 plays on everything. AAC does not. MP3 is supported on older devices. AAC is not.
AAC is just not as widely support as MP3 end of story.
Top it off Mp3 is smaller at the same bit rate
http://ipod.about.com/od/introductiontoitunes/a/sound_qual_test.htm
At a certain point you really are not gaining anything. Amazon VBR is a great way to give great quality sound for a smaller file size.
The Xbox360 is only one year newer then you car, so it is not that much newer... The same for PSP too.. the first portable digital audio player to play MP3 was 1998. MP3 1995-96. AAC was 1997...
cocky jeremy
Jan 26, 01:01 AM
http://www.nutritionexpress.com/images/products/9Q/9Q-00017-X500.gif
I have one of these. Very nice for protein shakes.
I have one of these. Very nice for protein shakes.
SciFrog
Nov 30, 07:59 PM
But you have to run windows... GPU3 will apparently allow macs to run the gpu client because of open CL, and also help ATI which are fairings very poorly right now in Folding.
NT1440
May 1, 10:16 PM
Anyone with a clue knows these.
Still a significant blow to have the 'figure head' taken out regardless.
For PR reasons, yes, significant. As for combatting terrorism, if anything its going to cause blowback.
Still a significant blow to have the 'figure head' taken out regardless.
For PR reasons, yes, significant. As for combatting terrorism, if anything its going to cause blowback.
NickZac
Dec 29, 01:51 PM
How can she afford that?!
puckhead193
Sep 14, 10:12 AM
Halo Reach. Got it at Best Buy and it came with a free $20 gift card and a blow-up blade :D
http://www.geeky-gadgets.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/halo-reach-leaked.jpg
http://www.geeky-gadgets.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/halo-reach-leaked.jpg
hansiedejong
Jan 27, 10:34 AM
Why? I'd love to buy some Beats headphones. Like the style of it.
chrispholt
Jun 6, 05:49 AM
My brother has a android phone (:mad:) and if he buys an app from the android market and doesn't like it he can get a refund and it is deleted. I think it is in a 15 minute time gap.
However this would be a nice feature to the apple app store.
However this would be a nice feature to the apple app store.
pudrums
Sep 17, 09:41 AM
@iqwertyi: Have a look at Fanatec's Porsche wheels. They are available in different price ranges and their 911 Turbo model currently is the best model on the market!
Legion93
May 1, 10:56 PM
you do that :rolleyes: ... your textbook on terrorism now needs to be updated with Osama dead
My textbook is 7 years old.
My textbook is 7 years old.
Mord
Apr 24, 02:42 PM
Why are you trying to turn the assault into bullying / an LGBT hate crime? I know MacRumors PRSI is obsessed with the issue, but there's no evidence for it.
Other than, you know, all the evidence, such as the verbal abuse that was filmed, the witnesses.
You think these girls decided to attack this girl out of love? No, they were bullies who picked out a vulnerable target they felt they could take.
From what I understand:
- transgendered guy walks into the women's restroom at a ghetto McD
- a couple of women in the restroom see him peeing while standing up and/or his penis
- they feel threatened and freak out
- beating ensues
I don't want to blame the victim nor do I think the beating was in any way justified, but if I were a transgendered guy, I would not be going to the women's room in the ghetto when there are hood rats around.
That's pretty much exactly what you're doing.
She's a transgendered woman. Suggesting she use the mens is inappropriate.
Other than, you know, all the evidence, such as the verbal abuse that was filmed, the witnesses.
You think these girls decided to attack this girl out of love? No, they were bullies who picked out a vulnerable target they felt they could take.
From what I understand:
- transgendered guy walks into the women's restroom at a ghetto McD
- a couple of women in the restroom see him peeing while standing up and/or his penis
- they feel threatened and freak out
- beating ensues
I don't want to blame the victim nor do I think the beating was in any way justified, but if I were a transgendered guy, I would not be going to the women's room in the ghetto when there are hood rats around.
That's pretty much exactly what you're doing.
She's a transgendered woman. Suggesting she use the mens is inappropriate.
spacepower7
May 3, 12:22 AM
Ok a couple of things
Assume Apple and Amazon have the same deals with the record labels which is most likely the case.
Let's rough estimate that for every $0.99 song sold by Apple or Amazon then 69 cents go to the label. Therefore Amazon does not lose money on the sale but maybe a tiny fraction of a cent on infrastructure and credit card processing.
If Amazon sold the songs for $0.68 then that would be considered "dumping" by the FTC and WTO, and that is an illegal action, especially if it was intended to gain market share.
Competition is good - and then results benefit the consumer.
If Amazon has an incredible increase of market share by selling low, they either have to raise prices eventually or renege their contracts with the labels making music downloads cheaper. If they are successful at lowering prices then Apple will do the same, and we all benefit. ;)
Assume Apple and Amazon have the same deals with the record labels which is most likely the case.
Let's rough estimate that for every $0.99 song sold by Apple or Amazon then 69 cents go to the label. Therefore Amazon does not lose money on the sale but maybe a tiny fraction of a cent on infrastructure and credit card processing.
If Amazon sold the songs for $0.68 then that would be considered "dumping" by the FTC and WTO, and that is an illegal action, especially if it was intended to gain market share.
Competition is good - and then results benefit the consumer.
If Amazon has an incredible increase of market share by selling low, they either have to raise prices eventually or renege their contracts with the labels making music downloads cheaper. If they are successful at lowering prices then Apple will do the same, and we all benefit. ;)
sciwizam
Apr 23, 04:17 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
Seriously? An apple rumors forum is no place fo a shareholder? That's absurd.
"As you can see 260K people bought HTC Thunderbolt since Verizon started selling them (about a month). This translates to about 3 million phones annually. Clearly the demand is there. Also, you keep forgetting that other phones have swappable batteries."
If you want to play numbers, the iPhone on Verizon (same carrier as thunderbolt) sold 2.2 million in two months, compared to a quarter million in one month for tbolt. Saying that equals 3million annually 1) makes it compete better with the iPhone over two months on a single carrier and 2) assumes that the numbers remain constant. Being that people are figuring out that the battery life is dreadful (and you forget that the majority of the market doesn't want to swap batteries like it's 1999) and that android phones have a short cycle of being the hottest new thing, I don't think there's a basis to assume consistent sales in line with their opening month. Numbers can say anything when there's no common sense behind it.
Correction: 260000 HTC Thunderbolts in 2 weeks.
http://i.zdnet.com/blogs/vz042111a.png
Seriously? An apple rumors forum is no place fo a shareholder? That's absurd.
"As you can see 260K people bought HTC Thunderbolt since Verizon started selling them (about a month). This translates to about 3 million phones annually. Clearly the demand is there. Also, you keep forgetting that other phones have swappable batteries."
If you want to play numbers, the iPhone on Verizon (same carrier as thunderbolt) sold 2.2 million in two months, compared to a quarter million in one month for tbolt. Saying that equals 3million annually 1) makes it compete better with the iPhone over two months on a single carrier and 2) assumes that the numbers remain constant. Being that people are figuring out that the battery life is dreadful (and you forget that the majority of the market doesn't want to swap batteries like it's 1999) and that android phones have a short cycle of being the hottest new thing, I don't think there's a basis to assume consistent sales in line with their opening month. Numbers can say anything when there's no common sense behind it.
Correction: 260000 HTC Thunderbolts in 2 weeks.
http://i.zdnet.com/blogs/vz042111a.png
sushi
Oct 18, 06:18 PM
This is what interests me:
“Looking forward, 2007 is likely to be one of the most exciting new product years in Apple’s history.”
Yep. Good things happening at Apple!
Looks like we can expect to see some nice innovations in 2007.
“Looking forward, 2007 is likely to be one of the most exciting new product years in Apple’s history.”
Yep. Good things happening at Apple!
Looks like we can expect to see some nice innovations in 2007.
twoodcc
Oct 29, 01:02 PM
for now, we'll see what happens in the long term.
sounds good. it would be great if you run bigadv units on that machine. you saw what it can do from whiterabbit's stats.
sounds good. it would be great if you run bigadv units on that machine. you saw what it can do from whiterabbit's stats.
Corey Grandy
Nov 1, 09:08 AM
Some shirts:
http://img266.imageshack.us/img266/4564/binxs.jpghttp://img155.imageshack.us/img155/9789/bravener.png
The greatest show:
http://img534.imageshack.us/img534/9161/howimetyourmotherseason.jpg
Adult, Clothbound Harry Potter collection:
http://img522.imageshack.us/img522/1835/hpotter.jpg
Some games for the 360:
http://img266.imageshack.us/img266/3509/enus111xbox360starwarsf.pnghttp://img218.imageshack.us/img218/5922/portadadesmackdownvsraw.pnghttp://img213.imageshack.us/img213/5751/screenshot20101101at105.png
http://img266.imageshack.us/img266/4564/binxs.jpghttp://img155.imageshack.us/img155/9789/bravener.png
The greatest show:
http://img534.imageshack.us/img534/9161/howimetyourmotherseason.jpg
Adult, Clothbound Harry Potter collection:
http://img522.imageshack.us/img522/1835/hpotter.jpg
Some games for the 360:
http://img266.imageshack.us/img266/3509/enus111xbox360starwarsf.pnghttp://img218.imageshack.us/img218/5922/portadadesmackdownvsraw.pnghttp://img213.imageshack.us/img213/5751/screenshot20101101at105.png
Swinny
Jul 28, 07:29 AM
Its interesting to see Microsoft's strategy on this - I think its only a good thing that somebody is trying to look at the whole player/content ecosystem in the same way that Apple have...that competition can only be a good thing surely?
However...some of the comments do seem to suggest they already expect to be losing the battle though - surely if you really thought you could compete with iPod/iTunes you would be a little bolder? Makes it sound half-hearted, and thats a shame.
However...some of the comments do seem to suggest they already expect to be losing the battle though - surely if you really thought you could compete with iPod/iTunes you would be a little bolder? Makes it sound half-hearted, and thats a shame.
DotComName
Apr 28, 03:59 PM
I'm pretty sure it's just an illusion because of the color difference and the angle of the shot. Makes no sense why Apple would need to or want to do that.
Full of Win
Apr 24, 10:13 PM
whats not to say someone just changed the carrier name? I don't own an iphone but I did search and its totally possible.
There is more to this than the carrier tag.
I don't see a reason apple would need to create an iPhone for T-Mobile if the AT&T plan goes through. If it's rejected than maybe thats a reason then to possibly go on T-Mobile.
As noted in this thread... adding an extra band opens oter networks besides TM. Also, if purchased, TM cannot flick a switch on all their towers to make them at&t compliant.
There is more to this than the carrier tag.
I don't see a reason apple would need to create an iPhone for T-Mobile if the AT&T plan goes through. If it's rejected than maybe thats a reason then to possibly go on T-Mobile.
As noted in this thread... adding an extra band opens oter networks besides TM. Also, if purchased, TM cannot flick a switch on all their towers to make them at&t compliant.
FloatingBones
Nov 26, 11:43 PM
this very thread and the sales thereof indicate a HUGE interest in being able to view Flash on iOS devices and no amount of BS nonsense on your part will change that fact.
The popularity of SkyFire is a wake-up call to website owners to update their media inventory from legacy Flash wrappers to HTML5.
Your implication that people would return an iOS device based on just a single feature alone is ludicrous.
Flash is either a mission-critical for people or it is not. Evidently it is not mission-critical to the owners of 120M+ iOS devices.
I've pointed out there is no equivalent of the iPod Touch from Android and therefore no reasonable alternative regardless of one's feelings about the inability to view Flash web sites.
Makes no difference. If Flash were mission-critical, they wouldn't be using an iPad.
Instead of just acknowledging that not everyone likes Steve Jobs decision to not allow Flash
We're all very clear you don't like the decision. There are plenty of Flash fanboys. If they want Flash in browsers, they shouldn't use iPhones, iPads, or iPod Touches.
The owners of 120M+ iOS devices are doing just fine without Flash. There are serious problems with Flash on laptop and desktop computers:
Too many laptop users are tired of the CPU loading and battery suck of Flash apps.
Too many users don't like that Flash alters the UI inside of the browsers: altered scrolling behavior, keyboard shortcuts that don't work in Flash, text searches that don't work with text in a Flash app.
Too many privacy advocates are bothered that Flash maintains a separate set of cookies and those cookies do not honor the privacy settings of the browser. Commercial websites are using those Flash cookies to track users.
Too many security advocates are wary of using Adobe products because of Adobe's poor track record against security attacks.
You can't competently address those serious concerns with Flash in a browser.
(hardly an unreasonable opinion to have and clearly shared by everyone who bought this app to be able to view those sites)
See above. There are serious fundamental problems with Flash on websites. There's also a fundamental problem with Flash for advertisers: more users are blocking their ads with click-to-flash blockers every day. Putting your content in Flash now decreases the odds that it will be seen by users.
Adobe understands all of this. They are providing tools to update sites from Flash to HTML5 (http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2010/10/adobe-demos-flash-to-html5-conversion-tool.html). Sites should do the same and get their videos updated to HTML5. Lose the Flash, and you'll be able to serve up your content to all browser users on all platforms.
I'm sure there's some reason you're unhappy with that solution. That's fine. You're welcome to be a Flash Luddite if you wish.
The popularity of SkyFire is a wake-up call to website owners to update their media inventory from legacy Flash wrappers to HTML5.
Your implication that people would return an iOS device based on just a single feature alone is ludicrous.
Flash is either a mission-critical for people or it is not. Evidently it is not mission-critical to the owners of 120M+ iOS devices.
I've pointed out there is no equivalent of the iPod Touch from Android and therefore no reasonable alternative regardless of one's feelings about the inability to view Flash web sites.
Makes no difference. If Flash were mission-critical, they wouldn't be using an iPad.
Instead of just acknowledging that not everyone likes Steve Jobs decision to not allow Flash
We're all very clear you don't like the decision. There are plenty of Flash fanboys. If they want Flash in browsers, they shouldn't use iPhones, iPads, or iPod Touches.
The owners of 120M+ iOS devices are doing just fine without Flash. There are serious problems with Flash on laptop and desktop computers:
Too many laptop users are tired of the CPU loading and battery suck of Flash apps.
Too many users don't like that Flash alters the UI inside of the browsers: altered scrolling behavior, keyboard shortcuts that don't work in Flash, text searches that don't work with text in a Flash app.
Too many privacy advocates are bothered that Flash maintains a separate set of cookies and those cookies do not honor the privacy settings of the browser. Commercial websites are using those Flash cookies to track users.
Too many security advocates are wary of using Adobe products because of Adobe's poor track record against security attacks.
You can't competently address those serious concerns with Flash in a browser.
(hardly an unreasonable opinion to have and clearly shared by everyone who bought this app to be able to view those sites)
See above. There are serious fundamental problems with Flash on websites. There's also a fundamental problem with Flash for advertisers: more users are blocking their ads with click-to-flash blockers every day. Putting your content in Flash now decreases the odds that it will be seen by users.
Adobe understands all of this. They are providing tools to update sites from Flash to HTML5 (http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2010/10/adobe-demos-flash-to-html5-conversion-tool.html). Sites should do the same and get their videos updated to HTML5. Lose the Flash, and you'll be able to serve up your content to all browser users on all platforms.
I'm sure there's some reason you're unhappy with that solution. That's fine. You're welcome to be a Flash Luddite if you wish.
DakotaGuy
Apr 13, 07:52 PM
Why won't this rumor die?! Seriously. It makes MUCH more sense to make a set top box that is compatible with any tv, and thus have wider appeal and adoption than to make a TV that has to compete with every other TV manufacturer out there. This is not Apple's game. Their game it to look at a market that is not currently being exploited to its full extent, figure out what people may want, then come in and redefine that niche. Worked with the iPod, iPhone, and iPad. There were predecessor in each of these markets but Apple came in and completely dominated it because they redefined it and tied it into a (relatively) easy to use ecosystem. Ok, it a really easy to use ecosystem, just slow and bloated. :D
I agree this is a silly idea. Who in the world would want the Apple TV integrated into a TV? What happens when an updated Apple TV is released the next year? Toss out the TV and buy another? Most people going in and buying a new large screen HDTV are planning to keep it a lot longer then the peripherals attached to it. If some new device comes out, no problem, just plug it into your TV. The other thing is that the TV market is very a very mature and saturated market with some big well known brands behind it.
I suppose they could make the content device separate like the current Apple TV which can be attached with an HDMI cable. If they do that what is the point of an Apple branded TV which would likely be built by another company like Samsung, LG or Sharp? Styling and a logo with a higher price? Nonsense.
I agree this is a silly idea. Who in the world would want the Apple TV integrated into a TV? What happens when an updated Apple TV is released the next year? Toss out the TV and buy another? Most people going in and buying a new large screen HDTV are planning to keep it a lot longer then the peripherals attached to it. If some new device comes out, no problem, just plug it into your TV. The other thing is that the TV market is very a very mature and saturated market with some big well known brands behind it.
I suppose they could make the content device separate like the current Apple TV which can be attached with an HDMI cable. If they do that what is the point of an Apple branded TV which would likely be built by another company like Samsung, LG or Sharp? Styling and a logo with a higher price? Nonsense.
MacYale
Apr 22, 06:59 PM
The iphone 4 has an amazing design. the metal band is epic. the consistent thickness from top to bottom is ideal. it's incredible. the only thing i want improved is a larger screen�i was hoping for 4", but i'll take 3.7. i really don't see why they would do a design after 1 gen, especially one that seems to step backward into the ipod touch again. in fact, i would believe it more likely tha the next ipod touch would look more like the iphone 4.
twoodcc
Oct 21, 08:28 AM
Might as well right, the fan is pretty much on 24/7 at 6200RPM when I'm at home lol. The only time I see 2500/4000 RPM fans is when I'm at the library or in class. At home, I have music blazing in the background so a little fan noise don't matter.
yeah i guess. just don't try and use it in your lap though
yeah i guess. just don't try and use it in your lap though