bartenders on minute to win it

The OP was ambiguous ... I read it that the weapons used on 9/11 were still not banned. As opposed to not banned at the time.

Hasn't anyone noticed that not a single US plane has been hijacked in the past 10 years? A quick look at Wikipedia shows 7 US planes hijacked in the 1970s, several in the 80s and 90s. Four planes were hijacked in 2001 (all on the same day....) - and then not a single US, European, Japanese plane has been hijacked.

Something is working.....

1980s - Aer Ligus Dublin - London; Air France Frankfurt - Paris; Rio Airways Killen, Texas - Dallas, Texas; TWA Athens - Beirut; Egypt Air Athens - Cairo; Malev Hungarian Airlines Prague - ?? ;

1990s - Lufthansa Frankfort - Cairo; FedEx flight Memphis - ??; Air Malta Malta - Turkey; All Nippon (domestic flight);

I've only listed those flights that departed from a European (and one Japanese) airport.... not European airlines that departed from non-European airports. After 9/11 there were still a number of hijackings, but the closest they come to European departure points are Nicosia, and Tirana. Though there was one from a Mexican Airport and one from a Caribbean airport. The Mexican hijacking was by a man threatening a bomb, but I don't think they actually found one.

I'll grant you the eighties. Now we get in to the ninties and there's...one in the United States, and it's an employee hijacking a company plane (FedEx).

So what's the correlation you're going for here? I'm not seeing it.

I see a decline from the 70's to the 80's, but the 90's seems in line with 2K.

We go ten years without a single commercial U.S. flight getting hijacked. Then 9/11. Then ten more years without. I'm not seeing some amazing statistical shift as a result of TSA. Further, I'm not seeing anything that justifies the new full body scanners. These were added without any supporting reasons.

If your argument is that security changes post 9/11 have made things better than the previous decade, I think showing it via statistics will be shaky at best. Zero passenger-carrying hijacks in the U.S. in the decade before 9/11 followed by zero passenger-carrying hijacks in the U.S. in the decade after 9/11 is not a statistic you can make a very solid conclusion off of.

And if your argument is that last year's full body scanners are justified, I would request much more evidence.



And how may people have the TSA found?

You tell me.


And how many people have not even bothered to try, because they were afraid of getting caught?

Same number as in the 90's.

Just noticed something at work (large retailer). The iPod case is unusually empty of iPod videos. We may have 15 total when the case usual has 50-100. The iPod Nanos on the other hand are completely stocked full. Usually this only happens when Apple is going to release a new version and stops sending the store product. I know it sounds weird because they just upgraded the 5G but it was a very insignificant update. Just thought I'd add that to the rumor mill.

Mmmm, they're not replacing the current iPod-With-Video models. If anything, they will add another model "on top" of the ipod family. Not sure if your shortage of iPods really means anything.

If Apple really is going to release something, it is already in full production as we speak. They will need to announce it and get it into stores by November to make the holiday season and that would still be last minute. After October, I'm not holding my breath.

Who wants to go out of their way to see ads? What's this world coming to?

Absolutely. Don't we have enough adverts in our lives already?

(well I imagine most do. I either watch TV shows recorded on my HDD or live on BBC. I don't read printed magazines or newspapers. Adblocker in Firefox. Play DS or PSP whilst waiting for films to start. Live in the countryside (no billboards!). It's lovely!)

iTV, Leopard Details, iWork/iLife updates, Laptop updates? iPod true video? (iPhone yeah right)

That seems like a lot of stuff for just one keynote. He better release that iPod video before the holidays, Market analysts are switching from Buy to Hold because of Apples poor holiday line-up. The stock has gone down about 4% in the past 2 days! that may not concern most of you, but it concerns me damnit!

Also, i want to buy new goodies!

iTV is a definite. Whether or not it's available then, at the very least the final feature set will be specified. As part of that, Apple will probably announce all Macs are updated with 802.11n (already rumored to be the case for iMacs).

I would also rate the iPhone a very high probability. Apple is not stupid and they have to strike now while the iron is hot and the iPod is still at the top of its game. Music phones by SonyEricsson, LG, Samsung, Motorola, etc. may not have made a dent in iPod sales yet, but they are bound to once they improve the crappy media player software and increase capacity (and affordable 2 GB micro/mini SD flash cards are already available).

If Apple is able to deliver an iPhone by early I predict it will sweep aside all competitors (LG Chocolate, SonyEricsson Walkman phone, etc.), and also start taking large chunks of market share of "cool" fashionista-oriented phones like RAZR and Sidekick. Not because Apple is competing on features with the RAZR or Sidekick, but rather because it will become the new "cool" phone, and most people only own one phone, after all.


If the iPhone did as well as the RAZR, it would be amazing! I really hope that happens, but personally, i hate the RAZR, not just because Everybody and their 12 year old daughter have one, but because i just don't like the design and small outside screen, although i love the huge inside screen.
Anyway, I agree that they should release the iPhone asap to tap into the MP3 playing phone market which is HUGE right now! (RAZR with media just released, LG Chololate, seems like every phone has mp3 capabilities which everyone wants, but then they get the phone and realize the capabilities SUCK on their phone.

I'd switch to cingular just for the iPhone.

I'll give it does have advantages. I don't think I would agree that it is "a hell of a lot easier", as most apps have an automatic updater or some mechanism to make you aware that an update is available.

The Mac App store updating mechanism is flawed, at least in my experience. For example, a few days ago the Mac App Store did not detect that I had the app Awaken 4 on my mac, even thought they host Awaken 5 on the store. I had to go to the developers website and download Awaken 5 and then update it the old fashioned way.

I, like many people, had a hard time getting XCode 4.00 to be upgraded to XCode 4.01. AppStore simply wouldn't recognize that I had previously purchased XCode 4 (yes, I had the XCode installer in /applications ). Downloading outside of the appstore would have been vastly easier...


I never said it was perfect. If you have many apps as I do that DON'T have automatic updates then it is a royal pain in the ass to go to their site(assuming you even know where it is), download it again, unpackage the dmg, and place it in my applications folder. Sure, if you only have a few apps then it isn't THAT bad but I have upwards to 20 apps that I have to do this with. It's a chore. With the Mac App Store I can take a quick glance, click update all if there are any updates and be done with it.

A long time ago I remember reading that Jobs said that people didn't really want to download movies or even own movies. The only movies worth owning (according to Jobs) were children's movies because they typically watch them hundreds of times. The average adult, on the other hand, might watch his favorite movie a dozen times. I think this idea, whether or not it can be tracked back to Jobs, is spot on. I've bought a few DVDs and most people I know have bought a few, but nobody I know buys as many movies as they do music (even if you compare total duration, rather then #).

I wouldn't be surprised if Apple's movie store is simply the only way to get Disney/Pixar content and they're happy to stash the revenue from those sales in their pocket. They'll sell enough to make it worth the investment and if it goes really well and the demand grows (or Amazon appears to do well), then they just open the doors and make other studio's movies available. I bet this is more of an Apple control issue than a movie studio control issue. Apple is proven when it comes to DRM (like it or not).

I guess we'll see...

Denmark, Norway and Sweden are just about the happiest countries in the world. Taking the iTMS away from them ought to knock them down a few pegs!


Problem is Demark, Norway and Sweden are just the first countries to really crack down on DRM like this but they will not be the last. Pulling iTMS away from them might work right now but think long term. The 3 counties will not be the last to do it. Other will follow suit with the DRM. France will at some point get the laws passed since they are pretty close to DRM set up like that with ones that went though so it would not be much of a surpise to see France force DRM to open up there as well. I could see most of the EU at some point forcing the issue.

Should apple pull iTMS away from every country that does that. No it will catch up to them and they will just open up to all. Problem is any country the pulled out of they burned those bridges and will have a very hard time getting back in and will more than likely lose a lot of market share long term by pulling that stunt.

Long term the wises action is for apple to give in and just open it up because those countries are just the first and they most certanily will not be the last.

Lucky girl.

Yeah, on Friday nights her boyfriend spends all his time on the internet obsessing over gay people. That has to do a lot for her self esteem. ;)

Apple Gets French Support in Music Compatibility Case

By THOMAS CRAMPTON
Published: July 29, 2006

PARIS, July 28 � The French constitutional council, the country�s highest judicial body, has declared major aspects of the so-called iPod law unconstitutional, undermining some controversial aspects of the legislation.

� Apple�s lawyers might want to drink a glass of French Champagne today, but not a whole bottle,� said Dominique Menard, partner at the Lovells law firm and a specialist in intellectual property. �The constitutional council has highlighted fundamental protections for intellectual property in such a way as to put iTunes a little further from risk of the French law.�

Released late Thursday, the council�s 12-page legal finding made frequent reference to the 1789 Declaration on Human Rights and concluded that the law violated the constitutional protections of property.

The decision affects Apple�s market-dominant iTunes Music Store by undermining the government�s original intention, which was to force Apple and others to sell music online that would be playable on any device. Apple�s iPod is the only portable music device that can play music purchased on iTunes, which lead rivals to complain about anti-competitive practices.

Although the ruling could still require companies like Apple to make music sold online to be compatible with other hand-held devices, it said that the companies could not be forced to do so without receiving compensation. The council also eliminated reduced fines for file sharing.

�The constitutional council effectively highlighted the importance of intellectual property rights,� Mr. Menard said, emphasizing that Apple and other companies must be paid for sharing their copy-protection technology.

The law, which had been approved by the French Senate and National Assembly last month, was brought for review at the demand of more than 100 members of the National Assembly. The council�s review of whether the law fits within the French Constitution�s framework is one of the final steps before a law is promulgated. It now could take effect as altered by the council or the government could bring it once more before the Parliament.

The French minister of culture, Renaud Donnedieu de Vabres, advocated enforced interoperability as a way to ensure diverse cultural offerings on the Internet by limiting technical constraints on digital works.

While the constitutional council highlighted the need for compensation, it was not such good news for Apple and other companies that the principle of forced interoperability remained in place, said Jean-Baptiste Soufron, legal director of the Association of Audionautes, a group opposed to copy restrictions.

�It is good news for Apple because they receive monetary compensation, but much bigger bad news if it forces them to license iTunes,� he said. Link (requires login) (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/29/technology/29music.html?_r=4&ref=business&oref=slogin&oref=slogin&oref=login&oref=slogin)

If anyone sitting in the front row of macworld, or works backstage there, please, bring your apple remotes and reak havok during a demo presentation. But seriously, DONT

-Steve

Those are not smug, those are facts!

In case you can't tell, I'm serious.

"aint that just cool? cute white text tricks?"

Use the apple dictionary and look up the word fact.:confused:

Really its not brain surgery.

Windows 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, 4.0, XP (5.0), Vista (6.0), Windows 7 (7.0).

Actually, if I'm not mistaken, I believe that Windows 7 is actually version 6.1.

v1: Windows 1.0
v2: Windows 2.0
v3: Windows 3.x, Windows NT 3.1
v4: Windows 95 (4.0.x), Windows NT 4 (also 4.0.x), Windows 98 (4.1.x), Windows ME (4.9)
v5: Windows 2000 (5.0.x), Windows XP (5.1.x), Windows XP 64-bit (5.2.x)
v6: Windows Vista (6.0.x), Windows 7 (6.1.x)

Don't ask me why--seems a bit illogical to me. Especially since, at some point, they'll likely have a v7.x and it will likely create additional confusion.

Wikipedia has a little more detail on this:
There has been some confusion over naming the product Windows 7, while versioning it as 6.1 to indicate its similar build to Vista and increase compatibility with applications that only check major version numbers, similar to Windows 2000 and Windows XP both having 5.x version numbers. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_7

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)

Lol. Let's just wait and see. 

This is funny. Welp, glad I don't buy stuff at Best Buy.

It's my 'try before I buy store', as we don't have an Apple Store in our city.

They will take "because it'll kill Apple's hardware business, which is where Apple makes most of their money" as an answer, however.

Apple's interests lie in selling high-margin solutions, not bottom-of-the-market extremely low margin PCs.

Think of Dell as Ford, and Apple as BMW.

The computer - car analogy has to stop, it makes no sense at all. The most reliable car is the Toyota Corolla because it is the longest in production and has the errors worked out a long time ago, worst reliable cars are short production but expensive models like the Ferrari. Ford has less luxury options but may well be more reliable than BMW, price and luxury isn't the key factor here.

As for the "high-margin solutions" Apple has a good position at the moment, price is competitive and high standard. It looks like Apple wants to keep a firm grip on the top end models but losing it on the low end, there is no sub $500 Mac! (except maybe the "iTV") Licensing an OS has a typical $80 price point and that is more than they make on a Mac Mini (hard- and software together) so it makes sense to me.

A few years back Steve said that Apple would focus more on software than on hardware (and brought the iPod on the market :) ), the release of 10.5 may well be the turning point for the OS. If Mac sales go the way of the iPod then i agree there is no need to license but if not i see no other option. Its not if but when.

I can't see how people can vote this negative...

The App Stores are Apple's thing. Why can't they award the best apps on those stores?

Seems like a good idea to me. :)

I really like the tone of these commercials.

Also, I enjoy that they keep saying magic or magical; only because I know how angry people (trolls, mostly) here get about it.

its almost at the taunt stage now.

i love it.

reminds me of the think different campaign - feeling-wise.