corbijnal
Jan 6, 06:35 PM
Not really sure of the point of push as emails come through about facebook activity anyway.....
Contacts sync is an awesome idea though! Just did it and it downloads the photos and puts a link to the facebook page in each contact....
It doesn't mess up your contacts at all!
Contacts sync is an awesome idea though! Just did it and it downloads the photos and puts a link to the facebook page in each contact....
It doesn't mess up your contacts at all!
sehix
Nov 11, 05:34 PM
American Camera? Err.... I don't know any American brand that makes cameras... :rolleyes:
There's a minor outfit called something odd. Kodak, or something like that.
There's a minor outfit called something odd. Kodak, or something like that.
PodPacker
Oct 6, 09:52 PM
So the iPod Nano and Shuffle are failures in the same context?
The iPod line relied on the music library of the owner and the usage options. The iPhone is a smart phone. It's main usage is constant. The iPod had varied usage depending on model. iPos shuffle extreme portability for sports and style for women, iPod nano for the casual user who wanted more features and for those with active lifestyles and the iPod classic for the owners of large music libraries and wanted portable video as well as the power user who accessed the device as a portable hard drive.
The iPod line relied on the music library of the owner and the usage options. The iPhone is a smart phone. It's main usage is constant. The iPod had varied usage depending on model. iPos shuffle extreme portability for sports and style for women, iPod nano for the casual user who wanted more features and for those with active lifestyles and the iPod classic for the owners of large music libraries and wanted portable video as well as the power user who accessed the device as a portable hard drive.
onemoof
Sep 14, 07:10 PM
Someone asked the difference between RISC and CISC.
First thing, there isn't that distinction anymore. RISC originally meant that the processor had fixed width instructions (so it wouldn't have to waste time asking the software how big the next instruction will be). CISC mean that the processor had variable width instructions (meaning time would have to be taken to figure out how long the next instruction is before fetching it.) However, Intel has addressed this problem by making it possible for the processor to switch to a fixed-width mode for special processor intensive purposes. The PowerPC is stuck with fixed-width and has no ability to enjoy the flexibility of variable-width instructions for non-processor-intensive tasks. This means that CISC is now better than RISC. (Using the terms to loosely define Pentium as CISC and PowerPC as RISC.)
Apple will never switch to IA32 (Pentium) because 32 bit processors are a dead-end and maybe have a couple years left. The reason is because they can only have a maximum of 4 GB of RAM [ (2^32)/(1 Billion) = 4.29 GB ]. This limit is very close to being reached in current desktop computers. Apple MAY at some point decide to jump to IA64 in my opinion, and I think they should. Obviously the Intel family of processors is unbeatable unless they have some sort of catastrophe happen to them. If Apple jumped on they'd be back on track. Unfortunately I don't believe IA64 is yet cheap enough for desktops.
First thing, there isn't that distinction anymore. RISC originally meant that the processor had fixed width instructions (so it wouldn't have to waste time asking the software how big the next instruction will be). CISC mean that the processor had variable width instructions (meaning time would have to be taken to figure out how long the next instruction is before fetching it.) However, Intel has addressed this problem by making it possible for the processor to switch to a fixed-width mode for special processor intensive purposes. The PowerPC is stuck with fixed-width and has no ability to enjoy the flexibility of variable-width instructions for non-processor-intensive tasks. This means that CISC is now better than RISC. (Using the terms to loosely define Pentium as CISC and PowerPC as RISC.)
Apple will never switch to IA32 (Pentium) because 32 bit processors are a dead-end and maybe have a couple years left. The reason is because they can only have a maximum of 4 GB of RAM [ (2^32)/(1 Billion) = 4.29 GB ]. This limit is very close to being reached in current desktop computers. Apple MAY at some point decide to jump to IA64 in my opinion, and I think they should. Obviously the Intel family of processors is unbeatable unless they have some sort of catastrophe happen to them. If Apple jumped on they'd be back on track. Unfortunately I don't believe IA64 is yet cheap enough for desktops.
more...
mdelvecchio
Mar 23, 04:17 PM
Meh. Integrated stuff always fails first. See VHS/TV and DVD/TV combo units, or the lack of updates (and eventual phase-out) for TVs with built-in cable or sat tuners. I'll take it separately, thanks.
so you have a stand-alone tuner, then, i take it? same thing.
so you have a stand-alone tuner, then, i take it? same thing.
macwebcaster
Nov 12, 11:23 PM
...
i also study in japan, and have never seen it that way as conversation, maybe only sometime in newspaper... but who am i to say? i'm no schoolkid, just a uni student...
"Kon-nichi-wa" is sometimes used in the beginning of a public speech, not only to school kids but to adult people.
i also study in japan, and have never seen it that way as conversation, maybe only sometime in newspaper... but who am i to say? i'm no schoolkid, just a uni student...
"Kon-nichi-wa" is sometimes used in the beginning of a public speech, not only to school kids but to adult people.
more...
WillEH
Apr 27, 06:46 PM
no, he doesn't. and thankfully it should mean that he'll have no chance of getting anywhere near being President.
I didn't know who he was before I googled his name. Thought he was the model for Ken, from the Barbie range. (When he was younger) he looks like plastic.
I didn't know who he was before I googled his name. Thought he was the model for Ken, from the Barbie range. (When he was younger) he looks like plastic.
Zadillo
Sep 25, 10:19 AM
If the MBP's or other hardware is not updated at this event, then when is the next public event to have this happen?
Note that you don't need a public event. Remember, the iMacs were upgraded with Core 2 Duo processors silently. And if I remember correctly, the last time the MBP was updated (with the processor speedbumps from 1.83 and 2.0 to 2.0 and 2.16), it was silent as well.
Note that you don't need a public event. Remember, the iMacs were upgraded with Core 2 Duo processors silently. And if I remember correctly, the last time the MBP was updated (with the processor speedbumps from 1.83 and 2.0 to 2.0 and 2.16), it was silent as well.
more...
mahonmeister
Aug 28, 04:59 AM
I don't care to argue about the effectiveness of the adds. But I will say that the Angel/Devil one was kinda stupid. It didn't even advertise Macs. I think I am tiring of the format of the commercials. I would like to see one show just what can be done with OS X.
OdduWon
Oct 10, 11:41 AM
Is this an extra MacBook model in addition to the other MacBooks?
it will be called macboo and come in dingy white and instead of "moo's" we will hear.... Boos?
it will be called macboo and come in dingy white and instead of "moo's" we will hear.... Boos?
more...
robbieduncan
Sep 27, 12:11 PM
Lucky you.
5D, not so much.
Could be that the 400D came with the latest software. Have you tried getting an update from the Canon website (DPP 2.2 etc). I can PM you the version numbers of the various utilities later on if you want?
5D, not so much.
Could be that the 400D came with the latest software. Have you tried getting an update from the Canon website (DPP 2.2 etc). I can PM you the version numbers of the various utilities later on if you want?
buckwheat987
Mar 18, 05:25 PM
Great info here for a novice, which I certainly am.
I just picked up a nikon d3100 today after several weeks of reading here and other sites.
Hope to at least become decent over time.
Thanks for all the tips. Keep them coming.
I just picked up a nikon d3100 today after several weeks of reading here and other sites.
Hope to at least become decent over time.
Thanks for all the tips. Keep them coming.
more...
Clive At Five
Dec 1, 12:13 PM
It's interesting, really. Apple has really high standards, that much is clear. Don't get me wrong, it's part of what makes them a great company. If there's one thing that can be said about this story, however, it's that that other people's standards are clearly not as high.
It begs the question: How many projects have Apple put the kibosh on, that people would've bought... at a premium, no less??
xMac, anyone?
-Clive
It begs the question: How many projects have Apple put the kibosh on, that people would've bought... at a premium, no less??
xMac, anyone?
-Clive
powerofmac
Aug 19, 10:00 AM
This new location feature is screaming "Im not at home, please break into my house!"
more...
PBF
May 3, 06:33 PM
Received one today too. Gotta love Apple's timeliness. :rolleyes:
Ugg
Apr 29, 11:58 AM
The Economist, that stalwart of conservatism has this to say (http://www.economist.com/node/18620944?story_id=18620944) about the state of US transportation.
America is known for its huge highways, but ..... American traffic congestion is worse than western Europe�s. ....More time on lower quality roads also makes for a deadlier transport network. With some 15 deaths a year for every 100,000 people, the road fatality rate in America is 60% above the OECD average; 33,000 Americans were killed on roads in 2010.
America�s economy remains the world�s largest; its citizens are among the world�s richest. The government is not constitutionally opposed to grand public works. The country stitched its continental expanse together through two centuries of ambitious earthmoving. Almost from the beginning of the republic the federal government encouraged the building of critical canals and roadways. In the 19th century Congress provided funding for a transcontinental railway linking the east and west coasts. And between 1956 and 1992 America constructed the interstate system, among the largest public-works projects in history, which criss-crossed the continent with nearly 50,000 miles of motorways.
But modern America is stingier. Total public spending on transport and water infrastructure has fallen steadily since the 1960s and now stands at 2.4% of GDP. Europe, by contrast, invests 5% of GDP in its infrastructure, while China is racing into the future at 9%. America�s spending as a share of GDP has not come close to European levels for over 50 years. Over that time funds for both capital investments and operations and maintenance have steadily dropped (see chart 2).
Although America still builds roads with enthusiasm, according to the OECD�s International Transport Forum, it spends considerably less than Europe on maintaining them. In 2006 America spent more than twice as much per person as Britain on new construction; but Britain spent 23% more per person maintaining its roads.
America�s petrol tax is low by international standards, and has not gone up since 1993 (see chart 3). While the real value of the tax has eroded, the cost of building and maintaining infrastructure has gone up. As a result, the highway trust fund no longer supports even current spending. Congress has repeatedly been forced to top up the trust fund, with $30 billion since 2008.
Other rich nations avoid these problems. The cost of car ownership in Germany is 50% higher than it is in America, thanks to higher taxes on cars and petrol and higher fees on drivers� licences. The result is a more sustainably funded transport system. In 2006 German road fees brought in 2.6 times the money spent building and maintaining roads. American road taxes collected at the federal, state and local level covered just 72% of the money spent on highways that year, according to the Brookings Institution, a think-tank.
Supporters of a National Infrastructure Bank�Mr Obama among them�believe it offers America just such a shortcut. A bank would use strict cost-benefit analyses as a matter of course, and could make interstate investments easier. A European analogue, the European Investment Bank, has turned out to work well. Co-owned by the member states of the European Union, the EIB holds some $300 billion in capital which it uses to provide loans to deserving projects across the continent. EIB funding may provide up to half the cost for projects that satisfy EU objectives and are judged cost-effective by a panel of experts.
American leaders hungrily eye the private money the EIB attracts, spying a potential solution to their own fiscal dilemma.
The upshot is that we built too much, too fast and are unwilling to pay to maintain it although we continue to build bridges and highways (http://dc.streetsblog.org/2011/04/28/third-houston-outerbelt-would-turn-prairies-into-texas-toast/) to nowhere.
America is known for its huge highways, but ..... American traffic congestion is worse than western Europe�s. ....More time on lower quality roads also makes for a deadlier transport network. With some 15 deaths a year for every 100,000 people, the road fatality rate in America is 60% above the OECD average; 33,000 Americans were killed on roads in 2010.
America�s economy remains the world�s largest; its citizens are among the world�s richest. The government is not constitutionally opposed to grand public works. The country stitched its continental expanse together through two centuries of ambitious earthmoving. Almost from the beginning of the republic the federal government encouraged the building of critical canals and roadways. In the 19th century Congress provided funding for a transcontinental railway linking the east and west coasts. And between 1956 and 1992 America constructed the interstate system, among the largest public-works projects in history, which criss-crossed the continent with nearly 50,000 miles of motorways.
But modern America is stingier. Total public spending on transport and water infrastructure has fallen steadily since the 1960s and now stands at 2.4% of GDP. Europe, by contrast, invests 5% of GDP in its infrastructure, while China is racing into the future at 9%. America�s spending as a share of GDP has not come close to European levels for over 50 years. Over that time funds for both capital investments and operations and maintenance have steadily dropped (see chart 2).
Although America still builds roads with enthusiasm, according to the OECD�s International Transport Forum, it spends considerably less than Europe on maintaining them. In 2006 America spent more than twice as much per person as Britain on new construction; but Britain spent 23% more per person maintaining its roads.
America�s petrol tax is low by international standards, and has not gone up since 1993 (see chart 3). While the real value of the tax has eroded, the cost of building and maintaining infrastructure has gone up. As a result, the highway trust fund no longer supports even current spending. Congress has repeatedly been forced to top up the trust fund, with $30 billion since 2008.
Other rich nations avoid these problems. The cost of car ownership in Germany is 50% higher than it is in America, thanks to higher taxes on cars and petrol and higher fees on drivers� licences. The result is a more sustainably funded transport system. In 2006 German road fees brought in 2.6 times the money spent building and maintaining roads. American road taxes collected at the federal, state and local level covered just 72% of the money spent on highways that year, according to the Brookings Institution, a think-tank.
Supporters of a National Infrastructure Bank�Mr Obama among them�believe it offers America just such a shortcut. A bank would use strict cost-benefit analyses as a matter of course, and could make interstate investments easier. A European analogue, the European Investment Bank, has turned out to work well. Co-owned by the member states of the European Union, the EIB holds some $300 billion in capital which it uses to provide loans to deserving projects across the continent. EIB funding may provide up to half the cost for projects that satisfy EU objectives and are judged cost-effective by a panel of experts.
American leaders hungrily eye the private money the EIB attracts, spying a potential solution to their own fiscal dilemma.
The upshot is that we built too much, too fast and are unwilling to pay to maintain it although we continue to build bridges and highways (http://dc.streetsblog.org/2011/04/28/third-houston-outerbelt-would-turn-prairies-into-texas-toast/) to nowhere.
more...
bruinsrme
Nov 18, 04:19 AM
Unfortunately, you're wrong on most if not all counts.
First, it would be patented material, not copyrighted material. And patent infringement, especially design patents, is really quite easy to pursue.
Second, the Chinese supplier is "Foxconn", not "Foxcomm".
Third, and finally, in cases like these, as a general rule, even though Foxconn is the supplier, Apple is the owner of the parts. If Apple ordered that the parts in question be destroyed, putting them in a box and taking them home doesn't count, and certainly neither does selling them to a friend in the US. If they are the actual parts produced for Apple, then it is quite likely that they are, indeed stolen goods, and both this boy and the employee who got the parts for him are in trouble.
However, if the people involved were a bit smarter, then these parts would be from a production run not ordered by Apple. Under those circumstances, depending on how the contract is worded, there may have been enough wiggle room for them to sell these parts, especially given the fact that the actual Apple parts never went into formal production.
Finally, while it's arguably quite impressive that this kid was able to sell about 450 kits, to the tune of $130K, it's important to remember that this doesn't mean that he's made $130K. I would think it much more likely that he's getting maybe 10%-20% of that. Still, $13,000-$26,000 is not a bad haul for a couple months work...
Do you have proof apple ordered the destruction of the products?
There are a few outlets to get the same products but they are in China.
First, it would be patented material, not copyrighted material. And patent infringement, especially design patents, is really quite easy to pursue.
Second, the Chinese supplier is "Foxconn", not "Foxcomm".
Third, and finally, in cases like these, as a general rule, even though Foxconn is the supplier, Apple is the owner of the parts. If Apple ordered that the parts in question be destroyed, putting them in a box and taking them home doesn't count, and certainly neither does selling them to a friend in the US. If they are the actual parts produced for Apple, then it is quite likely that they are, indeed stolen goods, and both this boy and the employee who got the parts for him are in trouble.
However, if the people involved were a bit smarter, then these parts would be from a production run not ordered by Apple. Under those circumstances, depending on how the contract is worded, there may have been enough wiggle room for them to sell these parts, especially given the fact that the actual Apple parts never went into formal production.
Finally, while it's arguably quite impressive that this kid was able to sell about 450 kits, to the tune of $130K, it's important to remember that this doesn't mean that he's made $130K. I would think it much more likely that he's getting maybe 10%-20% of that. Still, $13,000-$26,000 is not a bad haul for a couple months work...
Do you have proof apple ordered the destruction of the products?
There are a few outlets to get the same products but they are in China.
Phil A.
Feb 25, 04:14 AM
Alright, if this is the case, then the problem is not with Apple, but the game publishers.
...AND the adult owners of the idevices.
Agree 100% - as I said in my original post, I don't think Apple are in any way culpable here: It's not their job to set prices for apps or in-app purchases. I also think Parents need to accept responsibility and watch their kids more carefully.
My only issue with this is the exploitative behavior of the publishers of the Apps - I can't think of any reason for charging the huge prices they do apart from someone thinking "Some parents are dumb and won't know how to stop their kids spending huge wads of cash on in-app purchases. We can make loads of money by using this to our advantage".
That shouldn't be what in-app purchases are used for: even if it doesn't break any rules, it's not at all ethical.
I know businesses exist to make money, but they shouldn't do it in an unethical and immoral way IMO.
...AND the adult owners of the idevices.
Agree 100% - as I said in my original post, I don't think Apple are in any way culpable here: It's not their job to set prices for apps or in-app purchases. I also think Parents need to accept responsibility and watch their kids more carefully.
My only issue with this is the exploitative behavior of the publishers of the Apps - I can't think of any reason for charging the huge prices they do apart from someone thinking "Some parents are dumb and won't know how to stop their kids spending huge wads of cash on in-app purchases. We can make loads of money by using this to our advantage".
That shouldn't be what in-app purchases are used for: even if it doesn't break any rules, it's not at all ethical.
I know businesses exist to make money, but they shouldn't do it in an unethical and immoral way IMO.
SAD*FACED*CLOWN
Jun 10, 12:19 PM
every analyst in the world just bet the farm a few weeks ago that Verizon was definitely getting the iPhone this summer..now that reality has set in speculation about T-Mobile begins....
ExoticFish
Apr 2, 04:18 PM
i think it's been cool for the couple of "design" documents i've done with it. i made a fake newspaper and a form for work. i'm happy with it but i'm not trying to do anything too complex either.
KnightWRX
Apr 26, 07:24 AM
Funny how history repeats itself (or better the comments on current events) ... those are the same arguments that I heard when computer manufactures started to get rid of the Floppy drive: but CDs are so much more expensive, I can't get everything on CD, people don't know how to handle them, ....
Uh ? CDs were cheaper than floppies to mass produce and had been for quite in the 90s (remember, pressed vs burned) and 2, I was booting OS images and bootloaders from them way before the floppy drive even disappeared from Macs.
What are you even ranting about here ? This isn't history repeating itself at all in my case. If you have a blank Mac because of a problem or HD upgrade, a network install image being sold outside the Mac App Store makes a lot more sense than Mac App Store distribution. OSes shouldn't be distributed in a store that requires an OS installation to even work.
Chicken and egg problem right there. And a pure network install without media should be possible, Linux distributions have had that option forever. Welcome to the 90s or something. Again, all we need is a simple bootable image that we can put on a USB drive. Make an app to automate the creation of the USB thumb drive and it becomes completely user proof.
And seriously, the guy arguing normal people who have problems doing it this way ? News flash, people that aren't computer savvy don't tend to upgrade their OS beyond patches.
The difference is that the DVD drive is a relict from the last century. No need to put this big mechanical noisy space wasting thing in any new machine. The USB stick is for those who can't download for whatever reason. I have not used the DVD drive in years - still all my machines have this thing in it. I dare to say that the majority of users don't need a DVD drive - and for those that need one, they should have the option to get an optional one on new machines, but no need to have it by default in every new machine.
That's the point. You say it yourself, your machines still have DVD drives. What's the point of going to the more expensive USB drive option ? Again : CDs were cheaper than floppies to produce and were much quicker to mass produce. Going from optical to Flash memory is the opposite move, it makes the media both more expensive and much more complicated/long to duplicate in mass.
DVD distribution makes a lot more sense than USB right now in 2011. It will probably be like that for a few years. Admit, all the people clamoring for USB distribution just want a Apple branded USB Thumb drive. As an Air user with such a thumb drive let me tell you this : their design is pure crap and it is not quite as convenient as a real thumb drive. It also tends to get all scratched up when inserting it and removing it because it lacks the proper guides for the USB port.
Uh ? CDs were cheaper than floppies to mass produce and had been for quite in the 90s (remember, pressed vs burned) and 2, I was booting OS images and bootloaders from them way before the floppy drive even disappeared from Macs.
What are you even ranting about here ? This isn't history repeating itself at all in my case. If you have a blank Mac because of a problem or HD upgrade, a network install image being sold outside the Mac App Store makes a lot more sense than Mac App Store distribution. OSes shouldn't be distributed in a store that requires an OS installation to even work.
Chicken and egg problem right there. And a pure network install without media should be possible, Linux distributions have had that option forever. Welcome to the 90s or something. Again, all we need is a simple bootable image that we can put on a USB drive. Make an app to automate the creation of the USB thumb drive and it becomes completely user proof.
And seriously, the guy arguing normal people who have problems doing it this way ? News flash, people that aren't computer savvy don't tend to upgrade their OS beyond patches.
The difference is that the DVD drive is a relict from the last century. No need to put this big mechanical noisy space wasting thing in any new machine. The USB stick is for those who can't download for whatever reason. I have not used the DVD drive in years - still all my machines have this thing in it. I dare to say that the majority of users don't need a DVD drive - and for those that need one, they should have the option to get an optional one on new machines, but no need to have it by default in every new machine.
That's the point. You say it yourself, your machines still have DVD drives. What's the point of going to the more expensive USB drive option ? Again : CDs were cheaper than floppies to produce and were much quicker to mass produce. Going from optical to Flash memory is the opposite move, it makes the media both more expensive and much more complicated/long to duplicate in mass.
DVD distribution makes a lot more sense than USB right now in 2011. It will probably be like that for a few years. Admit, all the people clamoring for USB distribution just want a Apple branded USB Thumb drive. As an Air user with such a thumb drive let me tell you this : their design is pure crap and it is not quite as convenient as a real thumb drive. It also tends to get all scratched up when inserting it and removing it because it lacks the proper guides for the USB port.
jbzoom
Nov 2, 04:38 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/iphone/2009/11/05/why-an-rfid-enabled-iphone/)
Multiple reports have come in that Apple is researching (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/11/05/apple-experimenting-with-rfid-enabled-iphone-prototypes/) RFID (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/07/09/new-apple-iphone-patent-applications-surface-object-and-facial-recognition-messaging-voice-modulation/) integration (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/07/02/haptic-feedback-fingerprint-identification-and-rfid-tag-readers-in-future-iphones/) into the iPhone, but some may still be wondering what such functionality would bring to the table for consumers.
Firstly, we should note that RFID is a catch-all term that describes a vast array of technologies and standards. RFID tags can be relatively large and battery-powered, such as ones used in toll collection, to small "passive" tags that can be embedded into credit cards, drivers licenses (called "Enhanced Drivers Licenses" in the U.S.), passports, or stuck onto a piece of merchandise.
Currently, cell-phone usage of RFID technology is centered around Near Field Communication (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Near_Field_Communication) (NFC). NFC has three main usage scenarios: a phone acting as an RFID tag; a phone acting as an RFID reader; and peer to peer communication (P2P).
In RFID tag mode, a phone could be used as a payment device (like a credit card), an identity card, or act as a car key. In RFID reader mode the phone would be able to interact with tags in its vicinity. This article and video (http://www.nearfield.org/2009/04/iphone-rfid-nfc) demonstrates how an iPhone with RFID could use physical objects to control media playback. And in P2P mode, Bluetooth pairing can be streamlined.
These are just a few ways that RFID could be used in an iPhone. When or if it becomes a reality isn't clear, but hopefully now you have a better idea of what the potential is for Apple's research in this area.
Article Link: Why an RFID-enabled iPhone? (http://www.macrumors.com/iphone/2009/11/05/why-an-rfid-enabled-iphone/)
Apple is believed to be working on technologies where your iOS device carries the configuration details of your OSX device, while the OSX device is backed up in the cloud. Then merely placing your iOS device next to another OSX device will enable that OSX device to be temporarily configured as if it were yours. And removing the iOS device will make the OSX device return to its original state. No wonder they are interested in short range radio technologies...
Multiple reports have come in that Apple is researching (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/11/05/apple-experimenting-with-rfid-enabled-iphone-prototypes/) RFID (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/07/09/new-apple-iphone-patent-applications-surface-object-and-facial-recognition-messaging-voice-modulation/) integration (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/07/02/haptic-feedback-fingerprint-identification-and-rfid-tag-readers-in-future-iphones/) into the iPhone, but some may still be wondering what such functionality would bring to the table for consumers.
Firstly, we should note that RFID is a catch-all term that describes a vast array of technologies and standards. RFID tags can be relatively large and battery-powered, such as ones used in toll collection, to small "passive" tags that can be embedded into credit cards, drivers licenses (called "Enhanced Drivers Licenses" in the U.S.), passports, or stuck onto a piece of merchandise.
Currently, cell-phone usage of RFID technology is centered around Near Field Communication (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Near_Field_Communication) (NFC). NFC has three main usage scenarios: a phone acting as an RFID tag; a phone acting as an RFID reader; and peer to peer communication (P2P).
In RFID tag mode, a phone could be used as a payment device (like a credit card), an identity card, or act as a car key. In RFID reader mode the phone would be able to interact with tags in its vicinity. This article and video (http://www.nearfield.org/2009/04/iphone-rfid-nfc) demonstrates how an iPhone with RFID could use physical objects to control media playback. And in P2P mode, Bluetooth pairing can be streamlined.
These are just a few ways that RFID could be used in an iPhone. When or if it becomes a reality isn't clear, but hopefully now you have a better idea of what the potential is for Apple's research in this area.
Article Link: Why an RFID-enabled iPhone? (http://www.macrumors.com/iphone/2009/11/05/why-an-rfid-enabled-iphone/)
Apple is believed to be working on technologies where your iOS device carries the configuration details of your OSX device, while the OSX device is backed up in the cloud. Then merely placing your iOS device next to another OSX device will enable that OSX device to be temporarily configured as if it were yours. And removing the iOS device will make the OSX device return to its original state. No wonder they are interested in short range radio technologies...
IBradMac
Aug 19, 01:00 PM
3.2.1 has been pushed out from the App Store.
Still doesn't work. Pointless update.
Still doesn't work. Pointless update.
convergent
Nov 18, 09:06 AM
There is no way this is legal, and he is now going to have the wrath of Apple's legal department coming at him... and probably also the FBI since this is an international deal. If Foxconn sold him the parts, then they are likely violating all kinds of things with Apple.... so they would never do it legitimately. Had he designed and manufactured his OWN white panels and design, he'd be fine... but this is a young kid that doesn't have the maturity to realize he's into something that he shouldn't be and he's probably going to be paying dearly for it. His best move would be to disappear as quickly as possible.
Just for those who thing this is a hand-slap kind of thing, I worked on a project where someone leaked an industrial design on a product and the FBI arrested them and they were facing 75 years in federal prison for it. This kind of stuff can get you more years than killing someone.
Just for those who thing this is a hand-slap kind of thing, I worked on a project where someone leaked an industrial design on a product and the FBI arrested them and they were facing 75 years in federal prison for it. This kind of stuff can get you more years than killing someone.
No comments:
Post a Comment