Rowbear
Mar 1, 06:55 AM
Ottawa under a beautifull blanket of snow.
http://www.robertgravel.ca/Art/Varia/MG6789-upload/1201986264_wEsHs-XL.jpg
http://www.robertgravel.ca/Art/Varia/MG6789-upload/1201986264_wEsHs-XL.jpg
boss.king
May 4, 11:35 PM
Not interested in this. It's not really any more convenient to do this OTA. Just plug your phone in for 10 mins and install it in the evening. I could maybe see this working over Wi-Fi but for a lot of places this would destroy peoples data caps.
Reefbone
Mar 25, 12:22 PM
This update contains improvements and other bug fixes including:
- Fixes an occasional graphics glitch on iPod touch (4th generation)
- Resolves bugs related to activating and connecting to some cellular networks
- Fixes image flicker when using Apple Digital AV Adapter with some TVs
- Resolves an issue authenticating with some enterprise web services
- Fixes an occasional graphics glitch on iPod touch (4th generation)
- Resolves bugs related to activating and connecting to some cellular networks
- Fixes image flicker when using Apple Digital AV Adapter with some TVs
- Resolves an issue authenticating with some enterprise web services
mikeschmeee
Mar 6, 08:01 PM
I feel like I must visit Vancouver and Canada in general, as I see so many great photos in this thread from here.
Canada is sweet! I'm slowing planning a road trip across Canada from end to end. I'd love to visit places further north but I'll have to stick around close HWY 1 and major cities.
Vancouver is neat but it's UBER EXPENSIVE!!!!! In my opinion that is. I feel everything is overpriced and the city doesn't help out much.
Thanks! That's a small stream that flows into the Seymour River near my house.
This is similarly awesome... I like the layers and clouds as well as the lights from downtown. I'm guessing this was shot from Queen E Park?
Duuuude! Seymour River is so long! I guess I'll start at one end and work my way down until I find your little hidden jem :p
Thanks for the compliments! It really means a lot to me. Yes, Queen Elizabeth Park right beside the restaurant where the statues are. I wish I was like 30 feet tall cause those trees kind of bug me. I heard Kensington Park has a great view as well? I'm gonna check it out tonight perhaps.
Canada is sweet! I'm slowing planning a road trip across Canada from end to end. I'd love to visit places further north but I'll have to stick around close HWY 1 and major cities.
Vancouver is neat but it's UBER EXPENSIVE!!!!! In my opinion that is. I feel everything is overpriced and the city doesn't help out much.
Thanks! That's a small stream that flows into the Seymour River near my house.
This is similarly awesome... I like the layers and clouds as well as the lights from downtown. I'm guessing this was shot from Queen E Park?
Duuuude! Seymour River is so long! I guess I'll start at one end and work my way down until I find your little hidden jem :p
Thanks for the compliments! It really means a lot to me. Yes, Queen Elizabeth Park right beside the restaurant where the statues are. I wish I was like 30 feet tall cause those trees kind of bug me. I heard Kensington Park has a great view as well? I'm gonna check it out tonight perhaps.
fivepoint
Mar 29, 08:26 AM
I don't know about that. Check out #2 ...
If the United States were under immediate threat, do you really think the president would have to write a report to congress "setting forth the circumstances necessitating the introduction of United States Armed Forces"?
As for Rand Paul's objections, it's so geopolitically and historically ignorant, it's beyond contempt. It's been hilarious watching the right run around to find a consistent line of attack on this. Congress hasn't declared war since the 1940s.
This is a multilateral action with the backing of a Security Council resolution. The Daily Telegraph's rantings about Al Qaeda are little more than Gaddafi propaganda.
As for US interests, many of you including the racist fringe christianist Pauls, are not connecting the dots:
The entire point of this is in the long-term. Apart from denying a victorious Gaddafi an opportunity to create trouble to his neighbours and destabilise the region, it is to provide support for popular uprisings in order to deny radicalism the oxygen it needs.
It's fascinating how quickly the Democrat party has turned into the party of war... trying to justify it legally and morally at every corner. It's almost as if their anti-war stance for the past 10 years was a complete farce, and was more anti-Bush than anti-war, anti-intervention. Now that Obama is at the helm, core philosophy no longer matters, consistent morality no longer matters, only justifying war and protecting the political future of the first black president.
The constitution was written in regards to war specifically to stifle the power of the president which the founders knew would be more predisposed to war, and to put the power in the hands of the people via congress. In fact, as Tom Woods recently put it...
...here is my challenge to you. I want you to find me one Federalist, during the entire period in which the Constitution was pending, who argued that the president could launch non-defensive wars without consulting Congress. To make it easy on you, you may cite any Federalist speaking in any of the ratification conventions in any of the states, or in a public lecture, or in a newspaper article � whatever. One Federalist who took your position. I want his name and the exact quotation.
If I�m so wrong, this challenge should be a breeze. If you evade this challenge, or call me names, or make peripheral arguments instead, I will take that as an admission of defeat.
We can argue all day long about whether or not war with Libya was justified, you'll talk about the threat of mass killings, I'll talk about the tens of other nations which are in similar circumstances which receive NO American aid and the logical fallacy of suggesting it's our role to play in picking sides on every civil war around the world... but the point here is that it's straight up unconstitutional, and CANDIDATE Obama (you know, the one you voted for) completely agrees. But for some reason, now that he's president you think it's ok for him to switch his views 180 degrees and still are unwilling to admit you agree with Rand Paul even though his position is far more consistent with candidate Obama's. Sounds awfully hypocritical.
This was my impression as well. If correct, Obama has no business doing what he's done--right, wrong, paid for or not. Personally, I'm glad somebody's stopping Gaddafi from acting unchecked--but that doesn't excuse circumventing the constitution to do so.
Yes.
I'm not surprised. Every administration grabs more and more power. I get depressed just seeing how everyone takes it as the status quo and defends it. The Constitution was set up almost as if to stop one person from being able to take up to war on a whim. Well, if Obama has that right, then George Bush III, or whoever will push the limits of his powers even further. I guess that's the power of precedence. If you look at the Constitution, it vests in the Congress the exclusive power to declare war. Things just have a way of changing. I thought Bush was bad enough with Iraq. Now Obama's actions are even worse than Bush's. Obama didn't even put up the charade of making a case.
Yes.
Uh yeah. Saw that on Meet the Press. Paul is only telling a half-truth. Gates went on to say that other NATO countries felt they have a vital interest in Libya, and I think we all understand how the NATO treaty works. Whether or not you believe or agree with that, the fact is that Paul misrepresented Gates' statement.
I don't want to be the one to tell you, but Americans hold no allegiance to NATO or to the United Nations. In addition, no treaties or otherwise passed by these two organizations have any legal effect on our sovereign nation. The UN or NATO passing a resolution to engage in military action does not serve as an ALTERNATIVE to a declaration of war by the U.S. congress.
Also, I do not believe his position was misrepresented. If you watched Gates' testimony before the war, you'll see that he was dragged kicking and screaming in to this war. He is of the strong opinion that this was a bad idea and that Libya is not vital to U.S. interests. His comment that the 'mid-east' is part of our national interest was an extremely long reach in a pathetic attempt to find some sort of overlap between his position and the administration he works for. I'd say Paul's analysis of Gates' position is much better than any analysis which suggests he thinks the war is justified.
If the United States were under immediate threat, do you really think the president would have to write a report to congress "setting forth the circumstances necessitating the introduction of United States Armed Forces"?
As for Rand Paul's objections, it's so geopolitically and historically ignorant, it's beyond contempt. It's been hilarious watching the right run around to find a consistent line of attack on this. Congress hasn't declared war since the 1940s.
This is a multilateral action with the backing of a Security Council resolution. The Daily Telegraph's rantings about Al Qaeda are little more than Gaddafi propaganda.
As for US interests, many of you including the racist fringe christianist Pauls, are not connecting the dots:
The entire point of this is in the long-term. Apart from denying a victorious Gaddafi an opportunity to create trouble to his neighbours and destabilise the region, it is to provide support for popular uprisings in order to deny radicalism the oxygen it needs.
It's fascinating how quickly the Democrat party has turned into the party of war... trying to justify it legally and morally at every corner. It's almost as if their anti-war stance for the past 10 years was a complete farce, and was more anti-Bush than anti-war, anti-intervention. Now that Obama is at the helm, core philosophy no longer matters, consistent morality no longer matters, only justifying war and protecting the political future of the first black president.
The constitution was written in regards to war specifically to stifle the power of the president which the founders knew would be more predisposed to war, and to put the power in the hands of the people via congress. In fact, as Tom Woods recently put it...
...here is my challenge to you. I want you to find me one Federalist, during the entire period in which the Constitution was pending, who argued that the president could launch non-defensive wars without consulting Congress. To make it easy on you, you may cite any Federalist speaking in any of the ratification conventions in any of the states, or in a public lecture, or in a newspaper article � whatever. One Federalist who took your position. I want his name and the exact quotation.
If I�m so wrong, this challenge should be a breeze. If you evade this challenge, or call me names, or make peripheral arguments instead, I will take that as an admission of defeat.
We can argue all day long about whether or not war with Libya was justified, you'll talk about the threat of mass killings, I'll talk about the tens of other nations which are in similar circumstances which receive NO American aid and the logical fallacy of suggesting it's our role to play in picking sides on every civil war around the world... but the point here is that it's straight up unconstitutional, and CANDIDATE Obama (you know, the one you voted for) completely agrees. But for some reason, now that he's president you think it's ok for him to switch his views 180 degrees and still are unwilling to admit you agree with Rand Paul even though his position is far more consistent with candidate Obama's. Sounds awfully hypocritical.
This was my impression as well. If correct, Obama has no business doing what he's done--right, wrong, paid for or not. Personally, I'm glad somebody's stopping Gaddafi from acting unchecked--but that doesn't excuse circumventing the constitution to do so.
Yes.
I'm not surprised. Every administration grabs more and more power. I get depressed just seeing how everyone takes it as the status quo and defends it. The Constitution was set up almost as if to stop one person from being able to take up to war on a whim. Well, if Obama has that right, then George Bush III, or whoever will push the limits of his powers even further. I guess that's the power of precedence. If you look at the Constitution, it vests in the Congress the exclusive power to declare war. Things just have a way of changing. I thought Bush was bad enough with Iraq. Now Obama's actions are even worse than Bush's. Obama didn't even put up the charade of making a case.
Yes.
Uh yeah. Saw that on Meet the Press. Paul is only telling a half-truth. Gates went on to say that other NATO countries felt they have a vital interest in Libya, and I think we all understand how the NATO treaty works. Whether or not you believe or agree with that, the fact is that Paul misrepresented Gates' statement.
I don't want to be the one to tell you, but Americans hold no allegiance to NATO or to the United Nations. In addition, no treaties or otherwise passed by these two organizations have any legal effect on our sovereign nation. The UN or NATO passing a resolution to engage in military action does not serve as an ALTERNATIVE to a declaration of war by the U.S. congress.
Also, I do not believe his position was misrepresented. If you watched Gates' testimony before the war, you'll see that he was dragged kicking and screaming in to this war. He is of the strong opinion that this was a bad idea and that Libya is not vital to U.S. interests. His comment that the 'mid-east' is part of our national interest was an extremely long reach in a pathetic attempt to find some sort of overlap between his position and the administration he works for. I'd say Paul's analysis of Gates' position is much better than any analysis which suggests he thinks the war is justified.
iGary
Aug 24, 05:13 PM
While the actual recall site, https://support.apple.com/ibook_powerbook/batteryexchange/ (which is linked from the FAQ site) quotes:
http://homepage.mac.com/calvindavidson/.Pictures/misc/Recall.png
I expect the dust will settle, eventually.
This is the one that worked for me.
http://homepage.mac.com/calvindavidson/.Pictures/misc/Recall.png
I expect the dust will settle, eventually.
This is the one that worked for me.
stainlessliquid
Oct 15, 04:36 PM
So how many people here have actually gone up to a girl youve never met and asked if she wants to share your sweaty earbuds? My guess is nobody, because its creepy as hell, its like holding hands with someone you just met that is neither your friend nor your date. It was just a PR response to a competitors product, I doubt jobs was being serious thinking people with ipods actually do stuff like that on a regular basis.
The Zune isnt really a way to pick up chicks either, I think it was more designed for friends to share music. Even having the debate is pretty pointless, its all marketting mumbo jumbo. Plus last time I checked you can share headphones with a Zune too.
The Zune isnt really a way to pick up chicks either, I think it was more designed for friends to share music. Even having the debate is pretty pointless, its all marketting mumbo jumbo. Plus last time I checked you can share headphones with a Zune too.
imutter
Mar 25, 07:17 PM
You guys need to find a different forum to talk about Asbergers and autism I can suggest some if you need them .......I hope not that you have a child or family member with a PDD.
toddybody
Apr 14, 12:47 PM
Right after dell drops off the face of the world. Dam crappy computers.
I cant help but 2nd that opinion. Dell computers are horrible...the PWS they use in their desktops are a joke.
I cant help but 2nd that opinion. Dell computers are horrible...the PWS they use in their desktops are a joke.
Jcoz
Mar 29, 03:36 PM
I'm happy it's working for you, but that doesnt mean they were problem free.
The rest is your opinion, not fact.... But since you like the iPhone 4 your opinion must count more then mine right? :rolleyes:
Yes your right... Me saying it's a POS negates any opinion I have. Why didn't I see that?
Oh right. Cause a lot of people agree. And it's important. And I want the iPhone 5 soon, so I can rid myself of the 3GS, and hear from all you fanbois that IT is the best phone eva omgwtf everyone has to agree or they don't know what they are talking abot!!!!!!
It's really not nearly as big a deal as you are making it, maybe calm down a bit?
funny you are the one basically calling people out for hurt feelings yet you are showing much, much more emotion in your opinion.
Yes using wild hyperbole does in fact degrade the chances of people taking what you say seriously. It doesn't mean your opinion doesn't "count", it just means it isn't much worth listening to.
Whatever your real opinion is, you are posting with the emotion of a teenager. I've got no bones to pick with your decision not to get a new iphone. You seem angry at someone, dont know who that is.
No matter, I could care less. Grab a beer or get laid or something.
The rest is your opinion, not fact.... But since you like the iPhone 4 your opinion must count more then mine right? :rolleyes:
Yes your right... Me saying it's a POS negates any opinion I have. Why didn't I see that?
Oh right. Cause a lot of people agree. And it's important. And I want the iPhone 5 soon, so I can rid myself of the 3GS, and hear from all you fanbois that IT is the best phone eva omgwtf everyone has to agree or they don't know what they are talking abot!!!!!!
It's really not nearly as big a deal as you are making it, maybe calm down a bit?
funny you are the one basically calling people out for hurt feelings yet you are showing much, much more emotion in your opinion.
Yes using wild hyperbole does in fact degrade the chances of people taking what you say seriously. It doesn't mean your opinion doesn't "count", it just means it isn't much worth listening to.
Whatever your real opinion is, you are posting with the emotion of a teenager. I've got no bones to pick with your decision not to get a new iphone. You seem angry at someone, dont know who that is.
No matter, I could care less. Grab a beer or get laid or something.
schenz
Aug 2, 05:20 PM
Do you know what a computer without drivers is? A paperweight. The OS is not a single monolithic thing; it's made up of many components. The notion of what is "written into the OS" is more complicated than you seem to think, and it's childish to dismiss a vulnerability because it's in a driver.
Well... but at least it's not Apple's fault, because they didn't produce the driver. Therefore it's actually not a concern of Apple's but of the driver's producer's.
On the other hand Apple did include it into it's OS seemingly without testing it thorougly, and that is, of course, a concern of Apple's. So they will have to work together to get rid of that - and I'm sure they will - and I may be smug again. :p
Well... but at least it's not Apple's fault, because they didn't produce the driver. Therefore it's actually not a concern of Apple's but of the driver's producer's.
On the other hand Apple did include it into it's OS seemingly without testing it thorougly, and that is, of course, a concern of Apple's. So they will have to work together to get rid of that - and I'm sure they will - and I may be smug again. :p
Pilgrim1099
Apr 11, 07:28 PM
;) I agree that it's crazy to pay full price. Everyone has to know someone in college or who can at least get an educational discount. I mean of several hundred bucks, make a friend. Otherwise, yes, simply 5-10 minutes on the net can yield you the full CS Suite and all the major plug ins. I think the total available in that time is about $3,500.
$3,500?
No.
Make that close to $1,500. Don't exaggerate. Premium packages cost a bit more but Standards are a bit cheaper. You always have the option of buying just ONE Adobe application if you don't need the rest of the stuff. Or buy them one at a time. Or buy Standard for Photoshop, Illustrator and InDesign (for the print/publishing industry), for instance.
$3,500?
No.
Make that close to $1,500. Don't exaggerate. Premium packages cost a bit more but Standards are a bit cheaper. You always have the option of buying just ONE Adobe application if you don't need the rest of the stuff. Or buy them one at a time. Or buy Standard for Photoshop, Illustrator and InDesign (for the print/publishing industry), for instance.
morespce54
Aug 4, 02:40 PM
I think this is pretty conclusive.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYF3BpbFI9c#watch_response
It is clearly a fake. Its amazing what you can do with glossy printer paper!
Actually, I'm looking at it (again!), there was definitively something weirdo about the screen... curvy but flat... no reflection, no shining... :rolleyes:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYF3BpbFI9c#watch_response
It is clearly a fake. Its amazing what you can do with glossy printer paper!
Actually, I'm looking at it (again!), there was definitively something weirdo about the screen... curvy but flat... no reflection, no shining... :rolleyes:
vikingdave
Mar 28, 02:51 PM
Your point would be valid IF SHE HAD A FAMILY TO HAUL AROUND ANYMORE.
Both her children have their own vehicles and they no longer take long family vacations in the car anymore.
The wasting of a finite resource and pollution put out by a vehicle that large to drive 3 miles to and from the grocery store has no justification.
And yes, I do feel good about myself. I drive a vehicle that gets 95+ mpg.
This is America, and that person DOES NOT NEED TO JUSTIFY HERSELF TO YOU! If that V10 Excursion ever gets in an accident with your "95+ MPG" car, it will illustrate one very good reason to drive an Excursion, and you will not survive. Even with a five star crash rating, these newer lighter cars are death traps when fitted against large SUVs, these crash ratings do not take into account the advantage created by additional weight. Also, if your considering CO2 as "pollution", are you aware of the fact that only 0.28% of all greenhouse gasses are from human activity ? Not 28%, but 0.28%, the rest is mainly water vapor. With all of the resources that the world is throwing at reducing CO2 emissions we could actually do something useful instead like end world hunger. What we are doing to reduce CO2 is kind of like pissing into the ocean to warm it up, maybe it makes you better but it will not work. Enjoy that "95MPG" golf cart you drive.
Both her children have their own vehicles and they no longer take long family vacations in the car anymore.
The wasting of a finite resource and pollution put out by a vehicle that large to drive 3 miles to and from the grocery store has no justification.
And yes, I do feel good about myself. I drive a vehicle that gets 95+ mpg.
This is America, and that person DOES NOT NEED TO JUSTIFY HERSELF TO YOU! If that V10 Excursion ever gets in an accident with your "95+ MPG" car, it will illustrate one very good reason to drive an Excursion, and you will not survive. Even with a five star crash rating, these newer lighter cars are death traps when fitted against large SUVs, these crash ratings do not take into account the advantage created by additional weight. Also, if your considering CO2 as "pollution", are you aware of the fact that only 0.28% of all greenhouse gasses are from human activity ? Not 28%, but 0.28%, the rest is mainly water vapor. With all of the resources that the world is throwing at reducing CO2 emissions we could actually do something useful instead like end world hunger. What we are doing to reduce CO2 is kind of like pissing into the ocean to warm it up, maybe it makes you better but it will not work. Enjoy that "95MPG" golf cart you drive.
dadoftwogirls
Mar 25, 04:20 PM
Looks like Apple Screwed us Iphone 4 CDMA users once again...
Nope. You we're screwed when you picked Verizon. How's that map treating you? :p
Nope. You we're screwed when you picked Verizon. How's that map treating you? :p
Foggy
Sep 6, 09:22 AM
I realize it's unlikely Apple will release a Conroe minitower, but I definitely still see a place for it, and hey, one can always dream. :D :cool:
I asked a while back if Apple were likely to release a mini tower type machine and was quite surprised with the agreessivley negative replies some people gave all but calling me an idiot for asking for one. Some people just dont seem to get the fact there could quite easily be a machine that sits inbetween the mac mini and the mac pro even though the imac exists.
I asked a while back if Apple were likely to release a mini tower type machine and was quite surprised with the agreessivley negative replies some people gave all but calling me an idiot for asking for one. Some people just dont seem to get the fact there could quite easily be a machine that sits inbetween the mac mini and the mac pro even though the imac exists.
MarcBook
May 5, 02:09 PM
I hate stereoscopic 3D. OK, it's quite fun at the cinema with your friends on a night out, but it's far from perfect. I really can't see Apple implementing the technology in any of their products. It's not polished enough for them, not good enough for the 'Apple experience'. Like AMOLED (as it currently stands), Apple will probably leave it to the other guys to play around with, waiting for either something better or the technology to mature. In this case, however, I think stereoscopic 3D is a dead end.
john123
Mar 14, 06:23 PM
I think you're staing a very good point, comrade :) The only people who are going to buy a MBP is the ones that cares and who know they're going to buy it despite of the iPad.
I dont think either that the iPad will loose customers because of a "minor" MBP update. Just look at the pre-order numbers. Haven't they passed over 50,000 now? And that in just days? I mean, it shows the interest for the iPad and people will not ask themself wether go get an iPad or the new Macbook Pro, they know they want that ****INGS iPad.
So in all, mr. Jobs have no reason to delay the launch of the new MBP. Because he know that the iPad will be a sucsess and it won't matter when the hell the MBP is released... Hmmm...that makes me wonder why he haven't released it before allready :S
It has nothing to do with who buys what. It's all about marketing. And I assure you Mr. Jobs is considerably better at marketing than you (or anyone else on these boards).
I dont think either that the iPad will loose customers because of a "minor" MBP update. Just look at the pre-order numbers. Haven't they passed over 50,000 now? And that in just days? I mean, it shows the interest for the iPad and people will not ask themself wether go get an iPad or the new Macbook Pro, they know they want that ****INGS iPad.
So in all, mr. Jobs have no reason to delay the launch of the new MBP. Because he know that the iPad will be a sucsess and it won't matter when the hell the MBP is released... Hmmm...that makes me wonder why he haven't released it before allready :S
It has nothing to do with who buys what. It's all about marketing. And I assure you Mr. Jobs is considerably better at marketing than you (or anyone else on these boards).
SimonMW
Apr 14, 04:25 PM
Great, That's the guy who "redesigned" iMovie and screwed it up.
He's also the guy who designed FCP in the first place!
I edit professionally and I am stoked by what I have seen so far. Anything that makes my life easier is a good thing. I'm glad it is cheaper, although nothing has been said about the other apps such as STP and Motion, or even Color. As others have said, just because amateurs can afford the software, it doesn't mean that they can use it well.
He's also the guy who designed FCP in the first place!
I edit professionally and I am stoked by what I have seen so far. Anything that makes my life easier is a good thing. I'm glad it is cheaper, although nothing has been said about the other apps such as STP and Motion, or even Color. As others have said, just because amateurs can afford the software, it doesn't mean that they can use it well.
MacsRgr8
Sep 6, 08:43 AM
I believe the GeForce 7600 GT is on par with the X1800 GT, faster in some cases, slower in others. It's a pretty good graphics card. I would just like to see the GeForce 7600 GT bump out the 7300 GT on Mac Pro.
Cheers.
So, the 7600 GT card should be a good gaming card.
I mean, I am still looking for a replacement of my dead gaming PC, and thought the Mac Pro too expensive (don't need all 4 Cores) for my Mac needs + PC gaming needs together.
But this 24" iMac, is en excellent computer for my combined needs! (I am sure, I am not the only one who wants the Mac for every day stuff, and a PC just for gaming....)
Cheers.
So, the 7600 GT card should be a good gaming card.
I mean, I am still looking for a replacement of my dead gaming PC, and thought the Mac Pro too expensive (don't need all 4 Cores) for my Mac needs + PC gaming needs together.
But this 24" iMac, is en excellent computer for my combined needs! (I am sure, I am not the only one who wants the Mac for every day stuff, and a PC just for gaming....)
bwilfong
Aug 24, 01:01 PM
Ridiculous that Apple would let this story post and NOT have it's site already configured to handle the inquries.
mkrishnan
Aug 3, 08:26 AM
So why did they use an external wireless card? The only reasonable explanation is that whatever they did doesn't work with the built-in airport.
Yes, this had certainly occurred to me, and I think it's a fair guess. But I don't think I'd gallop off to "this is a total non-issue" from here. That's all I'm saying. Again, not panicked, but I think this should be pursued in the long term. There is a valid point in that the "seeking a network" activity of wifi cards in general offers a potential vector for exploits.
Yes, this had certainly occurred to me, and I think it's a fair guess. But I don't think I'd gallop off to "this is a total non-issue" from here. That's all I'm saying. Again, not panicked, but I think this should be pursued in the long term. There is a valid point in that the "seeking a network" activity of wifi cards in general offers a potential vector for exploits.
eleftherios72
Aug 24, 05:36 PM
But who is more specific in serial numbers of ibook 12" ?
Apple ?
https://support.apple.com/ibook_powerbook/batteryexchange/
or U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission ?
Check out this
http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml06/06245.html
Apple ?
https://support.apple.com/ibook_powerbook/batteryexchange/
or U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission ?
Check out this
http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml06/06245.html
nydoofus
Aug 24, 01:20 PM
What are the serials that are affected? The Apple link is down....
Computer model name Battery model number Battery serial numbers
12-inch iBook G4 A1061 3K429 through 3K611
Computer model name Battery model number Battery serial numbers
12-inch iBook G4 A1061 3K429 through 3K611
ليست هناك تعليقات:
إرسال تعليق