crees!
Oct 10, 04:28 PM
Just bring it! That's all. Bring it!
goober1223
Apr 6, 11:21 AM
With respect, you clearly don't work in advertising. You pay to put ads in front of the right people, not just anyone. Especially not competing advertisers and agencies. Why do you think Google (a) makes so much advertising revenue and (b) collects so much data about its users? Coincidence?
Secondly individuals are just as greedy as corporations, and generally get to operate outside of the spotlight. Apple has a lot to lose if its iAd platform is seen to be poorly targeting users, but an App developer has a lot to gain from indiscriminate iAd spamming. So in this case, yes, for the sake of self interest I'd expect Apple to reimburse advertisers for clicks inside their iAd app, and I'd expect an independent developer of a similar app to laugh all the way to the bank.
I never said btw I'd expect Apple to reimburse developers for their time on rejected apps. Or if I did I didn't mean it.
I know you didn't say that. I was just explaining my original statement that said that they should.
And no, I don't work in advertising (electrical engineer), so you certainly bring a different view, which I appreciate.
As far as a comparison between corporations and individuals, and in this case Apple, I still see no proof that they aren't charging advertisers for displaying these ads. Certainly, they are more capable than a 3rd party in reimbursing such money, but I also see no proof that there is an exorbitant amount of money to be made here. It's a cool gimmick that will not spend much time in actual use, especially if the ads don't change very often, and if there is no additional content to the application.
Besides, pertaining to your best point, how well are iAds targeted at this point? Considering how few big advertising partners there are, I have a hard time understanding how well they are able to advertise when these ads also aren't included in general browsing, but specifically-purposed apps.
Certainly, Apple wants to get there with iAds, but the first step seems to be to take the premium off of the price. The infrastructure may cost a lot, but they have tons of cash to drain on this project if they want to make it a true competition with google and operate similarly. For instance, if I'm playing "Doodle Bowling", the odds that I will get an iAd for anything relevant to bowling is zero. I also associate bowling with greasy bowling alley food, too, but the odds of having any food advertised (on purpose) appears to be zero, as well. The odds of getting an advertisement for a local bowling alley? Again, zero. If I go online and search "doodle bowling" they have tons of options to select from in targeting my search: past search history (and whatever else they know about me), they know that my search is related to bowling, mobile applications, cartoonish games, etc.
The point is, the differences are innumerous. iAds is absolutely primitive in its targeting capability simply by virtue of how many advertising partners it has, and it should not be any different (at this point) how those ad impressions are received.
Secondly individuals are just as greedy as corporations, and generally get to operate outside of the spotlight. Apple has a lot to lose if its iAd platform is seen to be poorly targeting users, but an App developer has a lot to gain from indiscriminate iAd spamming. So in this case, yes, for the sake of self interest I'd expect Apple to reimburse advertisers for clicks inside their iAd app, and I'd expect an independent developer of a similar app to laugh all the way to the bank.
I never said btw I'd expect Apple to reimburse developers for their time on rejected apps. Or if I did I didn't mean it.
I know you didn't say that. I was just explaining my original statement that said that they should.
And no, I don't work in advertising (electrical engineer), so you certainly bring a different view, which I appreciate.
As far as a comparison between corporations and individuals, and in this case Apple, I still see no proof that they aren't charging advertisers for displaying these ads. Certainly, they are more capable than a 3rd party in reimbursing such money, but I also see no proof that there is an exorbitant amount of money to be made here. It's a cool gimmick that will not spend much time in actual use, especially if the ads don't change very often, and if there is no additional content to the application.
Besides, pertaining to your best point, how well are iAds targeted at this point? Considering how few big advertising partners there are, I have a hard time understanding how well they are able to advertise when these ads also aren't included in general browsing, but specifically-purposed apps.
Certainly, Apple wants to get there with iAds, but the first step seems to be to take the premium off of the price. The infrastructure may cost a lot, but they have tons of cash to drain on this project if they want to make it a true competition with google and operate similarly. For instance, if I'm playing "Doodle Bowling", the odds that I will get an iAd for anything relevant to bowling is zero. I also associate bowling with greasy bowling alley food, too, but the odds of having any food advertised (on purpose) appears to be zero, as well. The odds of getting an advertisement for a local bowling alley? Again, zero. If I go online and search "doodle bowling" they have tons of options to select from in targeting my search: past search history (and whatever else they know about me), they know that my search is related to bowling, mobile applications, cartoonish games, etc.
The point is, the differences are innumerous. iAds is absolutely primitive in its targeting capability simply by virtue of how many advertising partners it has, and it should not be any different (at this point) how those ad impressions are received.
Huntn
Mar 4, 08:54 AM
The bill establishes fines and jail time for those who participate in strikes. Unionized workers could negotiate wages, hours and certain work conditions - but not health care, sick time or pension benefits.
Strikes would be illegal? This is why the Republican Party can never be allowed to lead this country. Land Of The Free my arse. Unions are made up of people who want some control over their professions (whatever it is) and their lives. Conservatives/Republican's will never be happy if lowly workers have some control. They can take what we give them and they'd better be happy with it or else.
Strikes would be illegal? This is why the Republican Party can never be allowed to lead this country. Land Of The Free my arse. Unions are made up of people who want some control over their professions (whatever it is) and their lives. Conservatives/Republican's will never be happy if lowly workers have some control. They can take what we give them and they'd better be happy with it or else.
hyperpasta
Sep 25, 03:54 PM
Prob a dumb question but is my mac fast enough to run aperture?
20 inch imac
2 gb ram
intel 2.0
Answer: Yes
20 inch imac
2 gb ram
intel 2.0
Answer: Yes
acslater017
Mar 28, 05:28 PM
Before it was sooo.... hard. My wrist still hurts from dragging one single file to the Applications folder. Oh, and I just love having to pay sales tax on the apps. :rolleyes:
I don't hate the Mac App store, I just don't think it should be a factor in the award. With that said, its Apples award and they can do as they please with it, including making acceptance of onerous terms a prerequisite to compete.
Respectfully, I think you're missing the point. In its totality, installing an app is more like:
1) Google or otherwise search for an app. Make sure its the Mac version, compatible with your OS version, processor, etc. There probably won't be any reviews, more like select quotes from people who liked it.
2) IF you trust that website, fill out your credit card information, PayPal account, etc.
3) Download it and do the process you described for installing.
4) If you need to re-install the app, buy a new computer, etc. hope that the company allows you to re-download it.
5) If you have a good/bad experience, good luck reviewing it or rating it.
I'm a pretty tech-savvy guy and I still appreciate the ease of the Mac App Store.
I don't hate the Mac App store, I just don't think it should be a factor in the award. With that said, its Apples award and they can do as they please with it, including making acceptance of onerous terms a prerequisite to compete.
Respectfully, I think you're missing the point. In its totality, installing an app is more like:
1) Google or otherwise search for an app. Make sure its the Mac version, compatible with your OS version, processor, etc. There probably won't be any reviews, more like select quotes from people who liked it.
2) IF you trust that website, fill out your credit card information, PayPal account, etc.
3) Download it and do the process you described for installing.
4) If you need to re-install the app, buy a new computer, etc. hope that the company allows you to re-download it.
5) If you have a good/bad experience, good luck reviewing it or rating it.
I'm a pretty tech-savvy guy and I still appreciate the ease of the Mac App Store.
drlunanerd
Nov 27, 04:54 AM
They are doing a similar event in the UK on Friday 1st December - a 'one day only special sales event'
It says it's a "shopping event" (http://www.apple.com/uk/retail/shopping/?CDM-EU-0994) though, not a sale.
It says it's a "shopping event" (http://www.apple.com/uk/retail/shopping/?CDM-EU-0994) though, not a sale.
Chundles
Sep 12, 08:49 AM
Those are easier for me because I grew up with them. I can't even say the name of my street right in this country. :P Terowi, like what's that?
Anyways I degrees, this update better be for all stores since they are all down otherwise it'll be the first of a few disappointments of the evening.
Yes there will be disappointments we always shoot to high and feel cheated.
TE- ROW(as in fight)-EE
Can't wait for all the disappointment to settle in. The Merom-waiters are going to go beserk.
Anyways I degrees, this update better be for all stores since they are all down otherwise it'll be the first of a few disappointments of the evening.
Yes there will be disappointments we always shoot to high and feel cheated.
TE- ROW(as in fight)-EE
Can't wait for all the disappointment to settle in. The Merom-waiters are going to go beserk.
Thomas2006
Oct 3, 01:32 PM
The Intel powered Macs and iLife got the lion's share of the MWSF2006 keynote and iWork only got a few slides showing improvements to Keynote and Pages got so I am hoping iWork (new spreadsheet app and a very improved Pages) gets some good airtime at MWSF2007.
iJohnHenry
Apr 26, 08:20 AM
Seizure.
<cynical> Acting for the video? </cynical>
Seriously, at indicated above with the drive-through mugging, look no further than your nearest lawyer, for this American phenomena of people sitting on their hands when there is trouble.
<cynical> Acting for the video? </cynical>
Seriously, at indicated above with the drive-through mugging, look no further than your nearest lawyer, for this American phenomena of people sitting on their hands when there is trouble.
secondhandloser
Mar 11, 01:42 PM
Milestone 1:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0FtgZNOD44
Milestone 2:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ftf4riVJyqw
Milestone 3 (the most recent):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBhYxj2SvRI
Any questions?
[Citation needed]
Fun fact: Showing SJ talk does not mean Apple has "redefined" computing. They have helped evolve it, as a player in the industry, of course. Hardly anything that could be called redefining.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0FtgZNOD44
Milestone 2:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ftf4riVJyqw
Milestone 3 (the most recent):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBhYxj2SvRI
Any questions?
[Citation needed]
Fun fact: Showing SJ talk does not mean Apple has "redefined" computing. They have helped evolve it, as a player in the industry, of course. Hardly anything that could be called redefining.
MacNut
Apr 23, 01:16 PM
Much like the logo in your avatar. :pThat gets a negative vote.:p
NebulaClash
May 4, 08:46 AM
That one thing that I don't see is Google sponsored Android commercials... they are not promoting their own product like MS did with Windows and are leaving each hardware manufacturer to make up their own image. All of this gives the average consumer a confusing, scattered message of the Android OS.
That's a good point. We really don't see many ads from Google in general.
This is speculation, but I remember those stories last summer about how Android is a temporary thing for Google but Chrome is their future. This gets shot down hard any time it gets mentioned around here, but I can certainly see this as a possibility. One thing Google is famous for is starting something only to abandon it once they decide to focus in other areas. And Chrome is at the heart of their corporate mission -- getting people to stay online in the cloud where they can be monetized. Android also gets the ad revenue, so it might indeed stick around for practical reasons, but the app model is the very model Google hates for it gets people offline and perhaps using some service other than what Google provides. With Chrome, Google would have full control. With Android it's a free-for-all.
So perhaps this is why Google doesn't bother advertising Android that much. It's nice to have, but it's not considered the future at Google.
That's a good point. We really don't see many ads from Google in general.
This is speculation, but I remember those stories last summer about how Android is a temporary thing for Google but Chrome is their future. This gets shot down hard any time it gets mentioned around here, but I can certainly see this as a possibility. One thing Google is famous for is starting something only to abandon it once they decide to focus in other areas. And Chrome is at the heart of their corporate mission -- getting people to stay online in the cloud where they can be monetized. Android also gets the ad revenue, so it might indeed stick around for practical reasons, but the app model is the very model Google hates for it gets people offline and perhaps using some service other than what Google provides. With Chrome, Google would have full control. With Android it's a free-for-all.
So perhaps this is why Google doesn't bother advertising Android that much. It's nice to have, but it's not considered the future at Google.
miles01110
Apr 13, 06:37 AM
Don't know what is more ridiculous, the pat down of the little girl or the mother asking for a re-scan. I op out every single time I travel. It is not evident (and the TSA flunkies don't really know) whether a given device is a backscatter scanner or a an active or passive terahertz wave scanner. There is currently no long term evidence that backscatter or active terahertz wave scanners do not have side effects, especially for frequent travelers. Unless they switch all scanners to passive terahertz wave scanners, I will continue to opt out and if they ever make these scans mandatory without the opt out option, I will refuse to fly.
The radiation dosage from any properly maintained active scanner is still orders of magnitude less than what you get from a 4-hour flight at 10 km. Go ahead and opt out of your full-body scans... if you're doing it for the "health" reason you're tilting at a very small windmill.
The radiation dosage from any properly maintained active scanner is still orders of magnitude less than what you get from a 4-hour flight at 10 km. Go ahead and opt out of your full-body scans... if you're doing it for the "health" reason you're tilting at a very small windmill.
Hugh
Apr 27, 07:54 PM
I am going to ask a dumb question here. Why do we have 2 threads talking about the same subject? I think these threads should be combined. :/
This time around, Selena Gomez
Selena Gomez dating Justin
Selena Gomez dating Justin
Is Selena Gomez Dating Justin
Justin Bieber amp; Selena Gomez
skunk
Oct 11, 01:04 PM
that's not the criteria.Nor is it the criterion.
zeroh3ro
Apr 9, 03:28 AM
http://img.game.co.uk/ml/3/5/3/6/353636ps_500h.jpg
Pokemon DSI, with pokemon black for �99 \M/
Pokemon DSI, with pokemon black for �99 \M/
Eraserhead
Apr 25, 04:23 PM
I'd have thought some of the people at a branch of McDonalds would have to have some sort of security training...
MonkeyET
Dec 18, 04:08 PM
My question is if AT&T's exclusivity indeed DOESN'T expire until 2012, then what's the deal with the lack of AT&T iPhone commercials on TV these days? There was a time, not so long ago, when it seemd like every other TV commercial was AT&T whoring the iPhone. Now, it seems like I never see iPhone ads on TV and AT&T is touting every other phone EXCEPT the iPhone.
Didn't Apple just release a new commercial in the last few weeks about the longer life of the iPhone 4 battery compared to other smartphones? If not for this commercial, I would have gone alone with your argument.
Didn't Apple just release a new commercial in the last few weeks about the longer life of the iPhone 4 battery compared to other smartphones? If not for this commercial, I would have gone alone with your argument.
b166er
Mar 17, 06:00 PM
it's a shame the whole "antennagate" fiasco gave the iPhone 4 such a bad rep. I've had mine since launch, and I have had roughly 5 dropped calls. 3 of which happened while I was in a moving vehicle. So it could just as easily be blamed on the network or the place I was driving through at the time.
It seems like whenever someone wants to knock the iPhone they go straight for the antenna non-issue.
It seems like whenever someone wants to knock the iPhone they go straight for the antenna non-issue.
PlayRadioPlay
Apr 5, 03:36 PM
A few hundred advertising majors will download this app, and that's it.
GutBomb
Oct 6, 04:16 PM
but ATT and their admitted 30% call drop rate is truly sad.
AT&T never admitted to 30% call drop rate. An employee at an apple store told a customer that in the NYC area at&t drops 30% of it's calls. And the internet ran wild with it. It was anecdotal evidence, not hard facts and detailed research, not from at&t, and about the NYC phone network, not about the nationwide network. It was an offhand comment by an apple store employee.
But we wouldn't want to get our facts straight now would we?
AT&T never admitted to 30% call drop rate. An employee at an apple store told a customer that in the NYC area at&t drops 30% of it's calls. And the internet ran wild with it. It was anecdotal evidence, not hard facts and detailed research, not from at&t, and about the NYC phone network, not about the nationwide network. It was an offhand comment by an apple store employee.
But we wouldn't want to get our facts straight now would we?
KnightWRX
Apr 26, 07:17 AM
How come people still keep picking up on this point, it surprises me, especially from a developer. A larger screen doesn't necessarily mean problems for apps, a change in resolution does. That, coupled with the previous rumors of a bigger screen with the same resolution mean that if this is true, it doesn't make any difference to developers because there will be the same number of pixels in the screen. All it means is that everything will be very slightly bigger.
I think anyone claiming to be a developer and thinking screen size has anything to do with fragmentation is quite hilarious and shows the quality of some iOS developers.
It's exactly like you say, if you assumed a certain resolution when coding your app, only a change in resolution affects you. Screen size means nothing, it's all about the pixels. 960x640 is the same whether it is on a 3.5" screen or a 4" screen for a developer.
If the iOS frameworks were more resolution independent, this wouldn't even matter. PC/Mac/Web developers have had to cope with multitudes of different resolutions for years and you don't hear them whining about it.
I think anyone claiming to be a developer and thinking screen size has anything to do with fragmentation is quite hilarious and shows the quality of some iOS developers.
It's exactly like you say, if you assumed a certain resolution when coding your app, only a change in resolution affects you. Screen size means nothing, it's all about the pixels. 960x640 is the same whether it is on a 3.5" screen or a 4" screen for a developer.
If the iOS frameworks were more resolution independent, this wouldn't even matter. PC/Mac/Web developers have had to cope with multitudes of different resolutions for years and you don't hear them whining about it.
rtdgoldfish
Apr 3, 09:40 PM
The pawn records and the name on the lease should have pointed them onward, since he is likely to keep pawning crap at his new place.
But your stuff is probably his toy until he gets tired of it, or has already been sold.
Or the son of the lady who is there did it, and had already sold the box to a friend.
Especially odd if she admits to have lived there since January 1st.
Two scumbags in a row at the same house isn't too far out of the question if the homeowner rents to the same pool of people.
It kinda sucks because I thought I knew most of the people in the neighborhood. The few houses that I don't know are the "sumbags".
And I am guessing that someone new has my 360, it has been online way more frequently than before however they still haven't played a game.
But your stuff is probably his toy until he gets tired of it, or has already been sold.
Or the son of the lady who is there did it, and had already sold the box to a friend.
Especially odd if she admits to have lived there since January 1st.
Two scumbags in a row at the same house isn't too far out of the question if the homeowner rents to the same pool of people.
It kinda sucks because I thought I knew most of the people in the neighborhood. The few houses that I don't know are the "sumbags".
And I am guessing that someone new has my 360, it has been online way more frequently than before however they still haven't played a game.
goosnarrggh
Nov 17, 10:02 AM
Maybe if your idea of "traditionally" ignores most of the last quarter-century or so...
AMD's 386 and 486 clones were always cheaper than Intel's, and they always at least matched the clock-for-clock performance of Intel's direct counterparts.
AMD's 386 and 486 clones were always cheaper than Intel's, and they always at least matched the clock-for-clock performance of Intel's direct counterparts.