IJ Reilly
Aug 24, 06:47 PM
It may be a bookkeeping trick, but it's considered part of Generally Accepted Accounting Procedures (GAAP). The IRS and the SEC certainly doesn't have problem with it and ammorization is actually encouraged. Apple used the same method to record the $250 million cash investment in flash memory plants last year, as well as the $400 million it is setting aside for the new Cupertino campus. Neither of those big cash outlays really affected their profit recording.
I didn't mean to imply that it was somehow illegal or improper. My point was, even an amortized expense is an expense, and booking it as an asset doesn't mean it will produce a return on investment. All those numbers go on the expense side of the ledger, one way or another. Spread out over years or taken as a lump sum, they're still spending the money.
I didn't mean to imply that it was somehow illegal or improper. My point was, even an amortized expense is an expense, and booking it as an asset doesn't mean it will produce a return on investment. All those numbers go on the expense side of the ledger, one way or another. Spread out over years or taken as a lump sum, they're still spending the money.
EricNau
Apr 25, 01:51 AM
I wouldn't go so far as to kill someone. If I killed them, how could they learn a lesson?
-Don
What if your actions unintentionally led to the death of another? What would it take for you to learn your lesson?
Your car is a lethal piece of machinery over which you have only limited control, even less so when you go over the speed limit.
Remember, no one enters their car with the intention of making a lethal mistake, but it happens all across the country every day to hundreds of individuals, many of which thought exactly what you're thinking right now.
Just ponder it.
-Don
What if your actions unintentionally led to the death of another? What would it take for you to learn your lesson?
Your car is a lethal piece of machinery over which you have only limited control, even less so when you go over the speed limit.
Remember, no one enters their car with the intention of making a lethal mistake, but it happens all across the country every day to hundreds of individuals, many of which thought exactly what you're thinking right now.
Just ponder it.
fabianjj
Apr 22, 11:26 AM
I'm amazed that no-one is seeing the very dangerous path we could be heading down here. Will people only see it when it's too late?
Are we looking into the jaws of the future where you pay, but never OWN anything? Music, Movies, Apps.
You pay to have the right to listen/watch/use the data.
The data is never downloaded to your device to do as you wish, it's always held by the owners. or distributors.
I can see this coming like a flashing red warning sign.
Well it's not like you've ever owned anything you've purchsed earlier, when you buy a CD you buy a physical object as well but what you're paying for is the right to play it in a private setting.
After using Spotify as my primary source of music for a couple of years now I can say that I prefer this renting method. Spotify has virtually any song I'd care to listen to and I can listen to them all instantly, and by using a premium subscription I can store up 3333 songs offline per device (very handy when traveling/commuting).
Are we looking into the jaws of the future where you pay, but never OWN anything? Music, Movies, Apps.
You pay to have the right to listen/watch/use the data.
The data is never downloaded to your device to do as you wish, it's always held by the owners. or distributors.
I can see this coming like a flashing red warning sign.
Well it's not like you've ever owned anything you've purchsed earlier, when you buy a CD you buy a physical object as well but what you're paying for is the right to play it in a private setting.
After using Spotify as my primary source of music for a couple of years now I can say that I prefer this renting method. Spotify has virtually any song I'd care to listen to and I can listen to them all instantly, and by using a premium subscription I can store up 3333 songs offline per device (very handy when traveling/commuting).
RabidBear
Apr 4, 12:22 PM
Guys if you read the article the robber completely deserved it. Gunfire was exchanged, meaning they shot at the security guard who rightfully dispatched the piece of **** criminal.
I know for many in this thread its easy to play armchair security guard but in real life, if someone shoots at you and you know its you or them I'm pretty sure you'd shoot back.
A couple of the articles also mention that over 40 rounds were fired. That is a lot of shots being exchanged. The fact the security guard was able to defend himself and take down an armed suspect under that kind fire is pretty amazing. Good riddance to bad rubbish.
I know for many in this thread its easy to play armchair security guard but in real life, if someone shoots at you and you know its you or them I'm pretty sure you'd shoot back.
A couple of the articles also mention that over 40 rounds were fired. That is a lot of shots being exchanged. The fact the security guard was able to defend himself and take down an armed suspect under that kind fire is pretty amazing. Good riddance to bad rubbish.
rdlink
Apr 22, 07:53 PM
Enjoy it, I love my 13" :cool:.
+1
I've owned an early 2009 Macbook Aluminum, an early 2009 MBP with 8GB of RAM, an I7 iMac, and a Mac Mini server to go along with various Windows machines over the years. My MBA is the best computer I've ever owned. Fabulous!
+1
I've owned an early 2009 Macbook Aluminum, an early 2009 MBP with 8GB of RAM, an I7 iMac, and a Mac Mini server to go along with various Windows machines over the years. My MBA is the best computer I've ever owned. Fabulous!
briansolomon
Sep 12, 02:29 PM
I very much would like to have seen the prices remain the same and include an AC adapter again.
nlr
Apr 30, 04:05 PM
I hope we get a decent graphics card now :)
puma1552
Apr 22, 08:28 AM
Problems:
--Dependence on an internet connection. Deal breaker right there. Subways? Forget it.
--Buffer times
--Connection instability/loss
--Already way overstrained data networks contributing to the above
--Battery life will suffer if it's wifi
--And if it's 3G, well there's another bill in the mail every month. A recurring bill in the form of data charges to listen to my music I already paid for? No thank you. No, no, no thank you.
Since when did every device in the house need a monthly bill to go with it? AT&T provides a pretty crappy service as it is to begin with, why shuffle any more money right into their pockets?
Dependence on an internet connection and a bill in the mail are enormous deal breakers.
To the people saying "Oh, well Apple isn't taking your hard drive away", no, they aren't, but this is the first step. In 20 years hard drives will be obsolete, as everything will be cloud based, and you'll be forced into the cloud whether you want to be or not.
This service is a completely stupid idea for anyone who has an iPod with a big enough hard drive to store their stuff. I can see the appeal for those with more than 160 GB of music, but other than those people, I see literally zero benefits to be had by this, and a slew of problems/frustrations to be gained.
--Dependence on an internet connection. Deal breaker right there. Subways? Forget it.
--Buffer times
--Connection instability/loss
--Already way overstrained data networks contributing to the above
--Battery life will suffer if it's wifi
--And if it's 3G, well there's another bill in the mail every month. A recurring bill in the form of data charges to listen to my music I already paid for? No thank you. No, no, no thank you.
Since when did every device in the house need a monthly bill to go with it? AT&T provides a pretty crappy service as it is to begin with, why shuffle any more money right into their pockets?
Dependence on an internet connection and a bill in the mail are enormous deal breakers.
To the people saying "Oh, well Apple isn't taking your hard drive away", no, they aren't, but this is the first step. In 20 years hard drives will be obsolete, as everything will be cloud based, and you'll be forced into the cloud whether you want to be or not.
This service is a completely stupid idea for anyone who has an iPod with a big enough hard drive to store their stuff. I can see the appeal for those with more than 160 GB of music, but other than those people, I see literally zero benefits to be had by this, and a slew of problems/frustrations to be gained.
Dr.Gargoyle
Sep 14, 06:01 AM
I think it would be kinda cool in a retro way. Just put the numbers on the click wheel. while most people just select the person on the list. which the iPod are really good at.
How many times do you actually punch in the numbers on your cellphone today? I tend to find more or less all numbers I call from my phone book or push "call back". It is very rare that I use the keypad.
How many times do you actually punch in the numbers on your cellphone today? I tend to find more or less all numbers I call from my phone book or push "call back". It is very rare that I use the keypad.
MacRumors
Sep 14, 08:02 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
Macworld has received an invitation to an Apple special event (http://www.macworld.com/news/2006/09/14/photokina/index.php) on September 25th, right before Photokina. Indications from the invitation are an Aperture-related announcement. An Aperture update had previously been rumored on page 2 (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/08/20060822235447.shtml).
http://guides.macrumors.com/images/1/1b/Photokina.jpg
Digg This (http://www.digg.com/apple/Apple_To_Hold_Sept_24th_Special_Event_Photokina)
Macworld has received an invitation to an Apple special event (http://www.macworld.com/news/2006/09/14/photokina/index.php) on September 25th, right before Photokina. Indications from the invitation are an Aperture-related announcement. An Aperture update had previously been rumored on page 2 (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/08/20060822235447.shtml).
http://guides.macrumors.com/images/1/1b/Photokina.jpg
Digg This (http://www.digg.com/apple/Apple_To_Hold_Sept_24th_Special_Event_Photokina)
cwt1nospam
Mar 20, 04:45 PM
I've never once even hinted that anti-viral software would be helpful on a Mac. But apparently you wish I had made that 'argument' (even though you just made an absurd claim that I haven't presented as argument...and so why are you even replying with a counter-argument? :rolleyes: That is called a logical absurdity. ;) ) Sophos does, however, make free software that deals with over 100 possible threats to OSX.
I just love the irony! You state that you haven't claimed AV software would be useful and in the same paragraph claim that it can deal with 100 possible threats! :p
You're quite the Snake Oil salesman.
I just love the irony! You state that you haven't claimed AV software would be useful and in the same paragraph claim that it can deal with 100 possible threats! :p
You're quite the Snake Oil salesman.
obeygiant
Apr 10, 08:26 PM
LA Times (http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-ikea-union-20110410,0,4172495,full.story)
Well, the right has gotten what it wants. Low wages, no benefits, non-union jobs.
What next? Reintroduction of slavery?
Current and former plant employees said they resented the unpredictable work hours and high-pressure atmosphere. The plant assesses penalty points for violations of work rules; workers who accumulate nine of them can be fired.
"It's the most strict place I have ever worked," said Janis Wilborne, 63, who worked at the plant for two years and quit last year.
Six African American employees have filed discrimination complaints with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, claiming that black workers at Swedwood's U.S. factory are assigned to the lowest-paying departments and to the least desirable third shift, from 11 p.m. to 7 a.m.
"If we put in for a better job, we wouldn't get it � it would always go to a white person," said Jackie Maubin, who worked the night shift in the packing department until last year, when she was fired on her birthday.
Swedwood has been trying to settle four of the discrimination complaints through mediation. The company initially offered Maubin $1,000. She settled for $2,000. She said she needed the money to keep her car from being repossessed.
This sounds like IKEA is the one being a bitch.
Some of the Virginia plant's 335 workers are trying to form a union. The International Assn. of Machinists and Aerospace Workers said a majority of eligible employees had signed cards expressing interest.
In response, the factory � part of Ikea's manufacturing subsidiary, Swedwood � hired the law firm Jackson Lewis, which has made its reputation keeping unions out of companies. Workers said Swedwood officials required employees to attend meetings at which management discouraged union membership.
Plant officials didn't return calls and declined to meet with a Times reporter who visited the Virginia facility. Swedwood spokeswoman Ingrid Steen in Sweden called the situation in Danville "sad" but said she could not discuss the complaints of specific employees. She said she had heard "rumors" about anti-union meetings at the plant but added that "this wouldn't be anything that would be approved by the group management in Sweden."
I can't see how this is "the right's" fault. If so, why doesn't "the left" step in a help out?
Well, the right has gotten what it wants. Low wages, no benefits, non-union jobs.
What next? Reintroduction of slavery?
Current and former plant employees said they resented the unpredictable work hours and high-pressure atmosphere. The plant assesses penalty points for violations of work rules; workers who accumulate nine of them can be fired.
"It's the most strict place I have ever worked," said Janis Wilborne, 63, who worked at the plant for two years and quit last year.
Six African American employees have filed discrimination complaints with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, claiming that black workers at Swedwood's U.S. factory are assigned to the lowest-paying departments and to the least desirable third shift, from 11 p.m. to 7 a.m.
"If we put in for a better job, we wouldn't get it � it would always go to a white person," said Jackie Maubin, who worked the night shift in the packing department until last year, when she was fired on her birthday.
Swedwood has been trying to settle four of the discrimination complaints through mediation. The company initially offered Maubin $1,000. She settled for $2,000. She said she needed the money to keep her car from being repossessed.
This sounds like IKEA is the one being a bitch.
Some of the Virginia plant's 335 workers are trying to form a union. The International Assn. of Machinists and Aerospace Workers said a majority of eligible employees had signed cards expressing interest.
In response, the factory � part of Ikea's manufacturing subsidiary, Swedwood � hired the law firm Jackson Lewis, which has made its reputation keeping unions out of companies. Workers said Swedwood officials required employees to attend meetings at which management discouraged union membership.
Plant officials didn't return calls and declined to meet with a Times reporter who visited the Virginia facility. Swedwood spokeswoman Ingrid Steen in Sweden called the situation in Danville "sad" but said she could not discuss the complaints of specific employees. She said she had heard "rumors" about anti-union meetings at the plant but added that "this wouldn't be anything that would be approved by the group management in Sweden."
I can't see how this is "the right's" fault. If so, why doesn't "the left" step in a help out?
kresh
Sep 9, 02:12 AM
I guess I've got mind whip lash from the transition to Intel. It's still kinda hard to wrap the mind around these speed improvments. I'm still used to the very modest speed bumps from the PPC days.
How wonderfully refreshing it is to see these leaps in speed with each product update. I hope this pace keeps up. Some may disagree, but I think it's spectacular compared to what we used to get from Moto/Freescale/IBM.
I find myself thinking about what the Adobe CEO, Bruce Chizen, said to Steve when it was announced Apple was switching to Intel.
"What took you so long"!
edit: had to change my signature.
How wonderfully refreshing it is to see these leaps in speed with each product update. I hope this pace keeps up. Some may disagree, but I think it's spectacular compared to what we used to get from Moto/Freescale/IBM.
I find myself thinking about what the Adobe CEO, Bruce Chizen, said to Steve when it was announced Apple was switching to Intel.
"What took you so long"!
edit: had to change my signature.
nomik2
Mar 29, 12:03 PM
Seems believable...all those people that bought Nokia phones obviously did not care that Symbian was outdated. Why will they not buy Nokia with a much modern OS under the hood?
peharri
Sep 21, 08:10 AM
Finally, someone gets it right.
CDMA is technically superior to GSM just about any way you care to measure it. GSM's widespread adoption in Europe was by fiat as a protectionist measure for European telecom companies, primarily because the European technology providers did not want to license CDMA from an American company. CDMA was basically slandered six ways to Sunday to justify using GSM. It was nothing more than a case of Not Invented Here writ large and turf protection. This early rapid push to standardize on GSM in as many places as possible as a strategic hedge gave them a strong market position in most of the rest of the world. In the US, the various protocols had to fight it out on the open market which took time to sort itself out.
There's a lot of nonsense about IS-95 ("CDMA" as implemented by Qualcomm) that's promoted by Qualcomm shills (some openly, like Steve De Beste) that I'd be very careful about taking claims of "superiority" at face value. The above is so full of the kind mis-representations I've seen posted everywhere I have to respond.
1. CDMA is not "technically superior to GSM just about any way you care to measure". CDMA (by which I assume you mean IS95, because comparing GSM to CDMA air interface technology is like comparing a minivan to a car tire - the conflation of TDMA and GSM has, and the deliberate underplaying of the 95% of IS-95 that has nothing to do with the air-interface, has been a standard tool in the shills toolbox) has an air-interface technology which has better capacity than GSM's TDMA, but the rest of IS-95 really isn't as mature or consumer friendly as GSM. In particular, IS-95 leaves decisions as to support for SIM cards, and network codes, to operators, which means in practice that there's no standardization and few benefits to an end user who chooses it. Most US operators seem to have, surprise surprise, avoided SIM cards and network standardization seems to be based upon US analog dialing star codes (eg *72, etc)
2. "GSM's widespread adoption in Europe was by fiat as a protectionist measure for European telecom companies, primarily because the European technology providers did not want to license CDMA from an American company." is objectively untrue. GSM was developed in the mid-eighties as a method to move towards a standardized mobile phone system for Europe, which at the time had different systems running on different frequencies in pretty much every country (unlike the US where AMPS was available in every state.)
By the time IS-95 was developed, GSM was already an established standard in practically all of Europe. While 900MHz services were mandated as GSM and legacy analogy only by the EC, countries were free to allow other standards on other frequencies until one became dominant on a particular frequency. With 1800MHz, the first operators given the band choose GSM, as it was clearly more advanced than what Qualcomm was offering, and handset makers would have little or no difficulty making multifrequency handsets. (Today GSM is also mandated on 1800MHz, but that wasn't true at the time one2one and Orange, and many that followed, choose GSM.)
The only aspect of IS95 that could be described as "superior" that would require licensing is the CDMA air interface technology. European operators and phone makers have, indeed, licensed that technology (albeit not to Qualcomm's specifications) and it's present in pretty much all implementations of UMTS. So much for that.
3. "CDMA was basically slandered six ways to Sunday to justify using GSM." Funny, I could have sworn I saw the exact opposite.
I came to the US in 1998, GSM wasn't available in my market area at the time, and I picked up an IS-95 phone believing it to be superior based upon what was said on newsgroups, US media, and other sources. I was shocked. IS-95 was better than IS-136 ("D-AMPS"), but not by much, and it was considerably less reliable. At that time, IS-95, as providing by most US operators, didn't support two way text messaging or data. It didn't support - much to my astonishment - SIM cards. ISDN integration was nil. Network services were a jumbled mess. Call drops were common, even when signal strengths were high.
Much of this has been fixed since. But what amazed me looking back on it was the sheer nonsense being directed at GSM by IS-95 advocates. GSM was, according to them, identical to IS-136, which they called TDMA. It had identical problems. Apparently on GSM, calls would drop every time you changed tower. GSM only had a 7km range! It only worked in Europe because everyone lives in cities! And GSM was a government owned standard, imposed by the EU on unwilling mobile phone operators.
Every single one of these facts was completely untrue. IS-136 was closer in form to IS-95 than GSM. IS-136, unlike GSM and like IS-95, was essentially built around the same mobile phone model as AMPS, with little or no network services standardization and an inherent assumption that the all calls would be to POTS or other similarly limited cellphones as itself. Like IS-95 and unlike GSM, in IS-136 your phone was your identifier, you couldn't change phones without your operator's permission. Like IS-95 at the time, messaging and data was barely implemented in IS-136 - when I left the UK I'd been browsing the web and using IRC (via Demon's telnetable IRC client) on my Nokia 9000 on a regular basis.
No TDMA system I'm aware of routinely drops calls when you change towers. In practice, I had far more call drops under Sprint PCS then I had under any other operator, namely because IS-95's capacity improvement was over-exaggerated and operators at the time routinely overloaded their networks.
GSM's range, which is around 20km, while technically a limitation of the air interface technology, isn't much different to what a .25W cellphone's range is in practice. You're not going to find many cellphones capable of getting a signal from a tower that far, regardless of what technology you use. The whole "Everyone lives in cities" thing is a myth, as certain countries, notably Finland, have far more US-like demographics in that respect (but what do they know about cellphones in Finland (http://www.nokia.com)?)
GSM was a standard built by the operators after the EU told them to create at least one standard that would be supported across the continent. Only the concept of "standardization" was forced upon operators, the standard - a development of work being done by France Telecom at the time - was made and agreed to by the operators. Those same operators would have looked at IS-95, or even at CDMA incorporated into GSM at the air interface level - had it been a mature, viable, technology at the time. It wasn't.
The only practical advantage IS-95 had over GSM was better capacity. This in theory meant cheaper minutes. For a time, that was true. Today, most US operators offer close to identical tariffs and close to identical reliability. But I can choose which GSM phone I leave the house with, and I know it'll work consistantly regardless of where I am.
Ultimately, the GSM consortium lost and Qualcomm got the last laugh because the technology does not scale as well as CDMA. Every last telecom equipment provider in Europe has since licensed the CDMA technology, and some version of the technology is part of the next generation cellular infrastructure under a few different names.
This paragraph is bizarrely misleading and I'm wondering if you just worded it poorly. GSM is still the worldwide standard. The newest version, UMTS, uses a CDMA air interface but is otherwise a clear development of GSM. It has virtually nothing in common with IS-95. "The GSM consortium" consists of GSM operators and handset makers. They're doing pretty well. What have they lost? Are you saying that because GSM's latest version includes one aspect of the IS-95 standard that GSM is worse? Or that IS-95 is suddenly better?
While GSM has better interoperability globally, I would make the observation that CDMA works just fine in the US, which is no small region of the planet and the third most populous country. For many people, the better quality is worth it.
Given the choice between 2G IS-95 or GSM, I'd pick GSM every time. Given the choice between 3G IS-95 (CDMA2000) and UMTS, I'd pick UMTS every time. The quality is generally better with the GSM equivalent - you're getting a well designed, digitial, integrated, network with GSM with all the features you'd expect. The advantages of the IS-95 equivalent are harder to come by. Slightly better data rates with 3G seems to be the only major one. Well, maybe the only one. Capacity? That's an operator issue. Indeed, with the move to UMA (presumably there'll be an IS-95 equivalent), it wouldn't surprise me if operators need less towers in the future regardless of which network technology they picked. The only other "advantages" IS-95 brings to the table seem to be imaginary.
CDMA is technically superior to GSM just about any way you care to measure it. GSM's widespread adoption in Europe was by fiat as a protectionist measure for European telecom companies, primarily because the European technology providers did not want to license CDMA from an American company. CDMA was basically slandered six ways to Sunday to justify using GSM. It was nothing more than a case of Not Invented Here writ large and turf protection. This early rapid push to standardize on GSM in as many places as possible as a strategic hedge gave them a strong market position in most of the rest of the world. In the US, the various protocols had to fight it out on the open market which took time to sort itself out.
There's a lot of nonsense about IS-95 ("CDMA" as implemented by Qualcomm) that's promoted by Qualcomm shills (some openly, like Steve De Beste) that I'd be very careful about taking claims of "superiority" at face value. The above is so full of the kind mis-representations I've seen posted everywhere I have to respond.
1. CDMA is not "technically superior to GSM just about any way you care to measure". CDMA (by which I assume you mean IS95, because comparing GSM to CDMA air interface technology is like comparing a minivan to a car tire - the conflation of TDMA and GSM has, and the deliberate underplaying of the 95% of IS-95 that has nothing to do with the air-interface, has been a standard tool in the shills toolbox) has an air-interface technology which has better capacity than GSM's TDMA, but the rest of IS-95 really isn't as mature or consumer friendly as GSM. In particular, IS-95 leaves decisions as to support for SIM cards, and network codes, to operators, which means in practice that there's no standardization and few benefits to an end user who chooses it. Most US operators seem to have, surprise surprise, avoided SIM cards and network standardization seems to be based upon US analog dialing star codes (eg *72, etc)
2. "GSM's widespread adoption in Europe was by fiat as a protectionist measure for European telecom companies, primarily because the European technology providers did not want to license CDMA from an American company." is objectively untrue. GSM was developed in the mid-eighties as a method to move towards a standardized mobile phone system for Europe, which at the time had different systems running on different frequencies in pretty much every country (unlike the US where AMPS was available in every state.)
By the time IS-95 was developed, GSM was already an established standard in practically all of Europe. While 900MHz services were mandated as GSM and legacy analogy only by the EC, countries were free to allow other standards on other frequencies until one became dominant on a particular frequency. With 1800MHz, the first operators given the band choose GSM, as it was clearly more advanced than what Qualcomm was offering, and handset makers would have little or no difficulty making multifrequency handsets. (Today GSM is also mandated on 1800MHz, but that wasn't true at the time one2one and Orange, and many that followed, choose GSM.)
The only aspect of IS95 that could be described as "superior" that would require licensing is the CDMA air interface technology. European operators and phone makers have, indeed, licensed that technology (albeit not to Qualcomm's specifications) and it's present in pretty much all implementations of UMTS. So much for that.
3. "CDMA was basically slandered six ways to Sunday to justify using GSM." Funny, I could have sworn I saw the exact opposite.
I came to the US in 1998, GSM wasn't available in my market area at the time, and I picked up an IS-95 phone believing it to be superior based upon what was said on newsgroups, US media, and other sources. I was shocked. IS-95 was better than IS-136 ("D-AMPS"), but not by much, and it was considerably less reliable. At that time, IS-95, as providing by most US operators, didn't support two way text messaging or data. It didn't support - much to my astonishment - SIM cards. ISDN integration was nil. Network services were a jumbled mess. Call drops were common, even when signal strengths were high.
Much of this has been fixed since. But what amazed me looking back on it was the sheer nonsense being directed at GSM by IS-95 advocates. GSM was, according to them, identical to IS-136, which they called TDMA. It had identical problems. Apparently on GSM, calls would drop every time you changed tower. GSM only had a 7km range! It only worked in Europe because everyone lives in cities! And GSM was a government owned standard, imposed by the EU on unwilling mobile phone operators.
Every single one of these facts was completely untrue. IS-136 was closer in form to IS-95 than GSM. IS-136, unlike GSM and like IS-95, was essentially built around the same mobile phone model as AMPS, with little or no network services standardization and an inherent assumption that the all calls would be to POTS or other similarly limited cellphones as itself. Like IS-95 and unlike GSM, in IS-136 your phone was your identifier, you couldn't change phones without your operator's permission. Like IS-95 at the time, messaging and data was barely implemented in IS-136 - when I left the UK I'd been browsing the web and using IRC (via Demon's telnetable IRC client) on my Nokia 9000 on a regular basis.
No TDMA system I'm aware of routinely drops calls when you change towers. In practice, I had far more call drops under Sprint PCS then I had under any other operator, namely because IS-95's capacity improvement was over-exaggerated and operators at the time routinely overloaded their networks.
GSM's range, which is around 20km, while technically a limitation of the air interface technology, isn't much different to what a .25W cellphone's range is in practice. You're not going to find many cellphones capable of getting a signal from a tower that far, regardless of what technology you use. The whole "Everyone lives in cities" thing is a myth, as certain countries, notably Finland, have far more US-like demographics in that respect (but what do they know about cellphones in Finland (http://www.nokia.com)?)
GSM was a standard built by the operators after the EU told them to create at least one standard that would be supported across the continent. Only the concept of "standardization" was forced upon operators, the standard - a development of work being done by France Telecom at the time - was made and agreed to by the operators. Those same operators would have looked at IS-95, or even at CDMA incorporated into GSM at the air interface level - had it been a mature, viable, technology at the time. It wasn't.
The only practical advantage IS-95 had over GSM was better capacity. This in theory meant cheaper minutes. For a time, that was true. Today, most US operators offer close to identical tariffs and close to identical reliability. But I can choose which GSM phone I leave the house with, and I know it'll work consistantly regardless of where I am.
Ultimately, the GSM consortium lost and Qualcomm got the last laugh because the technology does not scale as well as CDMA. Every last telecom equipment provider in Europe has since licensed the CDMA technology, and some version of the technology is part of the next generation cellular infrastructure under a few different names.
This paragraph is bizarrely misleading and I'm wondering if you just worded it poorly. GSM is still the worldwide standard. The newest version, UMTS, uses a CDMA air interface but is otherwise a clear development of GSM. It has virtually nothing in common with IS-95. "The GSM consortium" consists of GSM operators and handset makers. They're doing pretty well. What have they lost? Are you saying that because GSM's latest version includes one aspect of the IS-95 standard that GSM is worse? Or that IS-95 is suddenly better?
While GSM has better interoperability globally, I would make the observation that CDMA works just fine in the US, which is no small region of the planet and the third most populous country. For many people, the better quality is worth it.
Given the choice between 2G IS-95 or GSM, I'd pick GSM every time. Given the choice between 3G IS-95 (CDMA2000) and UMTS, I'd pick UMTS every time. The quality is generally better with the GSM equivalent - you're getting a well designed, digitial, integrated, network with GSM with all the features you'd expect. The advantages of the IS-95 equivalent are harder to come by. Slightly better data rates with 3G seems to be the only major one. Well, maybe the only one. Capacity? That's an operator issue. Indeed, with the move to UMA (presumably there'll be an IS-95 equivalent), it wouldn't surprise me if operators need less towers in the future regardless of which network technology they picked. The only other "advantages" IS-95 brings to the table seem to be imaginary.
moxxey
Mar 22, 05:25 PM
And if you are looking for specs from unannounced products from Apple, you are going to quickly get used to being disappointed.
Mate I've been following MacRumors for many years. I don't need a description of the website.
You miss the point entirely. The site is all about speculation, fact or fiction, about forthcoming products. However, there's nothing in this "news" piece that's worth speculating. Nothing we can't figure ourselves.
It's still news whether it's classed as a rumor or not. However, there's no substance of worth in this news. That was the point.
Mate I've been following MacRumors for many years. I don't need a description of the website.
You miss the point entirely. The site is all about speculation, fact or fiction, about forthcoming products. However, there's nothing in this "news" piece that's worth speculating. Nothing we can't figure ourselves.
It's still news whether it's classed as a rumor or not. However, there's no substance of worth in this news. That was the point.
hyperpasta
Sep 4, 03:10 PM
Although the semi-official word out of Apple Americas is that invitations to the event have "not been sent" out, a seemingly inadvertent leak out of Apple Europe last week pinned the affair for Tuesday, September 12. It will be hosted by Jobs in a yet-to-be disclosed California location and beamed via satellite throughout the world.
Jobs will have much to talk about during the event, sources familiar with the chief executive's plans have said, including new iMacs and a much-anticipated update to the iPod nano. But the real push, they say, will be tied to the big screen.
Read on and be wowed:
http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=2016
Jobs will have much to talk about during the event, sources familiar with the chief executive's plans have said, including new iMacs and a much-anticipated update to the iPod nano. But the real push, they say, will be tied to the big screen.
Read on and be wowed:
http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=2016
bretm
Sep 20, 11:23 PM
Well after 8 pages I'm not sure my 2 cents counts for much, but after buying MY "test movie" last night (the brilliant Romy and Michele's High School Reunion), I have a few observations.
Video Quality: Definitely looks a little soft on my widescreen 34" Sony HDTV, but not really bothersome. I'd argue with those who say you can't tell the difference from a DVD, but then again if you just threw the digital file on, I doubt anyone would complain.
Download speed: I must be lucky, because I got the entire movie in 20 minutes flat on my Cable modem. I don't expect that to be the standard, though.
Audio quality: Granted, this was not Revenge of the Sith, but the audio was totally satisfactory. I listened on headphones to get a better sense and the sound was perfectly fine.
My initial reaction was similar to many, in that I couldnt' imagine why people would want a digital file with no physical media, no artwork, and digital rights management, but I've begun to feel this will gain the same appeal as digital audio has. When iTunes started selling music, I was the first to poo-pooh the concept. I am a rabid music collector and couldn't imagine paying for a product without the jewel case, liner notes, etc... now I buy most of my music from iTunes (most, not all) and I don't regret it. I realized i really didn't WANT to cart around cases and discs when I could just have it all digitally, ready to watch, on my device. It's too early to say the same will happen with movies (which, admittedly, are a different animal) but I can definitely see the possibility of lightning striking twice.
I'd have to say most people care almost nothing about a case or liner notes for DVDs since there really isn't anything of substance. Usually a synopsis and a chapter listing. With DVDs the good stuff is actually on the DVD, and hopefully the download is the same, with menus and different audio tracks, etc. If not, there is no point to downloading movies.
But geez, ditch the jewel cases and liner notes and grow up already. Unless you're not grown up, in which case I envy you. Enjoy!
Video Quality: Definitely looks a little soft on my widescreen 34" Sony HDTV, but not really bothersome. I'd argue with those who say you can't tell the difference from a DVD, but then again if you just threw the digital file on, I doubt anyone would complain.
Download speed: I must be lucky, because I got the entire movie in 20 minutes flat on my Cable modem. I don't expect that to be the standard, though.
Audio quality: Granted, this was not Revenge of the Sith, but the audio was totally satisfactory. I listened on headphones to get a better sense and the sound was perfectly fine.
My initial reaction was similar to many, in that I couldnt' imagine why people would want a digital file with no physical media, no artwork, and digital rights management, but I've begun to feel this will gain the same appeal as digital audio has. When iTunes started selling music, I was the first to poo-pooh the concept. I am a rabid music collector and couldn't imagine paying for a product without the jewel case, liner notes, etc... now I buy most of my music from iTunes (most, not all) and I don't regret it. I realized i really didn't WANT to cart around cases and discs when I could just have it all digitally, ready to watch, on my device. It's too early to say the same will happen with movies (which, admittedly, are a different animal) but I can definitely see the possibility of lightning striking twice.
I'd have to say most people care almost nothing about a case or liner notes for DVDs since there really isn't anything of substance. Usually a synopsis and a chapter listing. With DVDs the good stuff is actually on the DVD, and hopefully the download is the same, with menus and different audio tracks, etc. If not, there is no point to downloading movies.
But geez, ditch the jewel cases and liner notes and grow up already. Unless you're not grown up, in which case I envy you. Enjoy!
Mac Fly (film)
Sep 14, 10:03 PM
one of the best predictions i have heard to date...
Why thank you!
Why thank you!
Detrius
Mar 16, 10:31 AM
I can just imagine that future Apple operating systems might very well include native protection that wold continue to thwart people wanting to sell anti-malware for Apple OS.
OS X Server ships with clamav for filtering viruses through the email server. Lion merges client and server. Therefore, there will be an antivirus program shipping with 10.7.
OS X Server ships with clamav for filtering viruses through the email server. Lion merges client and server. Therefore, there will be an antivirus program shipping with 10.7.
conradzoo
Sep 5, 12:50 PM
Well, well, so if they do movies then can I please have a higher bitrate on my iTunes songs? I mean talkng about bandwith, songs are nothing in comparison to movies.
So again, please a higher bitrate on songs.
cheers:o
So again, please a higher bitrate on songs.
cheers:o
ngenerator
Apr 30, 02:32 PM
Still loving my 21.5 inch i3 iMac.
I am hoping it gets a chassis redesign though.
I'm still loving mine too :) I did, however, just put it up for sale on CL though. Just to see if I get any bites. I'm not going to worry if I do or don't sell it though. It's still an amazing machine
I am hoping it gets a chassis redesign though.
I'm still loving mine too :) I did, however, just put it up for sale on CL though. Just to see if I get any bites. I'm not going to worry if I do or don't sell it though. It's still an amazing machine
deputy_doofy
Sep 14, 09:34 AM
Admittedly, I am definitely waiting for the C2D, but I am joking in this particular thread. It's always possible they could release it, but it's not likely. I didn't expect any computer upgrades at the iPod/iTunes show either.
The most I use photo stuff is connect my gf's camera to my powerbook and steal.... *ahem*, I mean, archive.... her pictures. :D
The most I use photo stuff is connect my gf's camera to my powerbook and steal.... *ahem*, I mean, archive.... her pictures. :D
breakfastcrew
Aug 28, 07:30 PM
ha ha I predict nothing until after the school rebate in the US is over. ;) at least the consumer products.
0 comments:
Post a Comment