Originally posted by FistOfThe NorthHahaha... came out of nowhere? He's had cancer for years.
oh man.that was outta no where.
r.i.p. from one techie to another.
(the htc evo's still the worlds best phone though, imo.)
As for the death:
I hate everything Apple has become... but I respect everything it's done.
Steve Jobs was an important man. He changed the world we live in... for the better. RIP Jobs.
I respect Steve Jobs as a computer technician because of his genius, but as a human being, I can give less than a shit about his death, tbh. The man was an *******, a huge *******, according to the people who knew him personally. He was an egomaniac of the worst degree, had temper problems, was hyper aggressive, and was in general just a very selfish individual.
So yah. It's kind of hard for me to put him on a pedestal, despite his achievements.
Originally posted by RE: BlaxicanI agree with you tbh. I didn't like the guy on a personal level. I watched this interview with him and Bill Gates. Gates came off as a nice guy.... Jobs did not.
I respect Steve Jobs as a computer technician because of his genius, but as a human being, I can give less than a shit about his death, tbh. The man was an *******, a huge *******, according to the people who knew him personally. He was an egomaniac of the worst degree, had temper problems, was hyper aggressive, and was in general just a very selfish individual.So yah. It's kind of hard for me to put him on a pedestal, despite his achievements.
"When I was 17, I read a quote that went something like: "If you live each day as if it was your last, someday you'll most certainly be right." It made an impression on me, and since then, for the past 33 years, I have looked in the mirror every morning and asked myself: "If today were the last day of my life, would I want to do what I am about to do today?" And whenever the answer has been no for too many days in a row, I know I need to change something."
-Steve Jobs
cry
Originally posted by §P0oONY
Hahaha... came out of nowhere? He's had cancer for years.As for the death:
I hate everything Apple has become... but I respect everything it's done.
Steve Jobs was an important man. He changed the world we live in... for the better. RIP Jobs.
his death came outta nowhere. i expected him to live a bit longer. not a month after his retirement from the nations most valuable company. he was also secretive as hell anyway so you just never knew. his death was a shocker, no doubt.
And how did he change the world? he was the face of a company whom introduced a few good gadgets with marketing the likes of no one else.
Originally posted by FistOfThe NorthRewind past the iPod/Phone/Pad... Without Macintosh the computer you are sitting at would be very different. Apple computers broke the mould.
his death came outta nowhere. i expected him to live a bit longer. not a month after his retirement from the nations most valuable company. he was also secretive as hell anyway so you just never knew. his death was a shocker, no doubt.And how did he change the world? he was the face of a company whom introduced a few good gadgets with marketing the likes of no one else.
Not to mention Pixar....
And I stated in the post that you replied to that I hated what Apple have become.
Re: Steve Jobs Dead to Cancer at 56
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
He'll be back in a year when Apple realizes they still need him.
We can only hope...Still, it seems unreal. He was only 56.
I heard of people submitting their thoughts and pictures to the Steve Jobs living memorial wall via [email protected]. I found a cool website remembering Steve as well. Google search PIXT Remembering Steve
Steve Jobs and drug policyGlenn Greenwald
It’s fascinating to juxtapose America’s reverence for Steve Jobs’ accomplishments and its draconian drug policy with this, from the New York Times‘ obituary of Jobs:
[quote][Jobs] told a reporter that taking LSD was one of the two or three most important things he had done in his life. He said there were things about him that people who had not tried psychedelics — even people who knew him well, including his wife — could never understand.
Unlike many people who have enjoyed success, Jobs is not saying that he was able to succeed despite his illegal drug use; he’s saying his success is in part — in substantial part — because of those illegal drugs (he added that Bill Gates would “be a broader guy if he had dropped acid once”). These quotes (first published by a New York Times reporter) have been around for some time but have been only rarely discussed in the recent hagiographies of Jobs: a notable omission given that he himself praised those experiences as an integral part of his identity and one of the most important things he ever did. A surprisingly good Time Magazine article elaborates on this Jobs-LSD connection further:
The paradoxes of love have perhaps never been clearer than in our relationships with Apple products — the warm, fleshy desire we feel for such cold, hard, glassy objects. But Jobs knew how to inspire material lust. He knew that consumers want something that not only sparkles and awes, but also feels accessible, easy to use, an object with which we want to merge and to feel one and the same. . . .Not coincidentally, that’s how people describe the experience of taking psychedelic drugs. It feels profoundly artificial yet deeply real, both high-tech and earthy-crunchy, human and mystically divine — in a word, transcendent. Jobs had this experience. . . . As attested by the nearly spiritual devotion so many consumers have to Jobs’ creations, the former Apple chief (and indeed many other top technology pioneers) appeared to have found enduring inspiration in LSD. Research shows that the psychedelic experience is, in fact, long lasting: a new study published last week found that people who took magic mushrooms (psilocybin) had long-term personality changes, becoming more open, more curious, more intellectually engaged and more creative. These personality shifts persisted more than a year after taking the drugs.
America’s harsh prohibitionist drug policies are grounded in the premise that the prohibited substances have little or no redeeming value and cannot be used without life-destroying consequences. Yet the evidence of its falsity is undeniable. Here is one of the most admired men in America, its greatest contemporary industrialist, hailing one of the most scorned of these substances as integral to his success and intellectual and personal growth. The current President commendably acknowledged cocaine and marijuana use while there is evidence suggesting the prior President also used those substances. One of America’s most accomplished athletes was caught using marijuana at the peak of his athletic achievements. And millions upon millions of American adults have consumed some or many of those criminally prohibited substances, and themselves will say (like Jobs) that they had important and constructive experiences with those drugs or know someone who did.
In short, the deceit at the heart of America’s barbaric drug policy — that these substances are such unadulterated evils that adults should be put in cages for voluntarily using them — is more glaring than ever. In light of his comments about LSD, it’s rather difficult to reconcile America’s adoration for Steve Jobs with its ongoing obsession with prosecuting and imprisoning millions of citizens (mostly poor and minorities) for doing what Jobs, Obama, George W. Bush, Michael Phelps and millions of others have done. Obviously, most of these banned substances — like alcohol, gambling, sex, junk food consumption, prescription drug use and a litany of other legal activities — can create harm to the individual and to others when abused (though America’s solution for drug users — prison — also creates rather substantial harm to the drug user and to others, including their spouses, parents and children: at least as much harm as, and usually substantially more than, the banned drugs themselves). But no rational person can doubt that these substances can also be used responsibly and constructively; just study Steve Jobs’ life if you doubt that.
Jobs’ praise for his LSD use is what I kept returning to as I read about the Obama DOJ’s heinous new policy to use the full force of criminal prosecutions against medical marijuana dispensaries in California. In October, 2009, I enthusiastically praised Eric Holder and the DOJ for appearing to fulfill Obama’s campaign promise by refraining from prosecuting medical marijuana dispensaries in compliance with state law (a “rare instance of unadulterated good news from Washington,” I gushed). As I wrote:
Criminalizing cancer and AIDS patients for using a substance that is (a) prescribed by their doctors and (b) legal under the laws of their state has always been abominable. The Obama administration deserves major credit not only for ceasing this practice, but for memorializing it formally in writing.
Yet now, U.S. Attorneys in California will expend substantial law enforcement resources to persecute medical marijuana dispensaries that sell to consenting adults even though those transactions have been legalized by the voters of California and 16 other states (to see what a complete reversal this is of everything Obama and Holder previously said on this subject, see here).
Progressives love to point out the hypocrisy of social conservatives who righteously rail against (and demand legal sanction for) the very same sexually sinful behavior in which they enthusiastically engage — and rightly so. But what about a society that continues to imprison millions of human beings for using substances that vast numbers of people in the nation have secretly used and enjoyed, or which empowers people with the Oval Office, or reveres people like Steve Jobs, who have done the same? The DOJ claims dispensaries are now masking non-medical marijuana sales, leading to this question: even leaving aside the rather significant (and shameful) fact that drug laws are enforced with overwhelming disproportionality against racial minorites, what possible justification is there for putting someone in a cage for using a substance they choose to use without any evidence that they’ve harmed anyone else or even risked harm to anyone else?
All of this becomes even more incomprehensible when one considers the never-ending preaching about the need for “austerity,” which means: depriving poor and middle class citizens of services and financial security. In this environment, how can it possibly be justified to expend substantial sums of money investigating, arresting, prosecuting and then imprisoning large numbers of people for doing nothing more than consuming marijuana or selling it in states where it is legal to sell it to other consenting adults? That makes about as much sense as deploying a State Department army of 16,000 for a permanent presence in Iraq at the same time political and financial elites plot cuts to Social Security and Medicare. I genuinely don’t understand why a policy that single-handedly sustains America’s status as World’s Largest Jailer — and that consigns huge numbers of minorities and America’s poor to prison and permanent criminal status for no good reason, in the process breaking up families at astonishing rates (to say nothing of the inexorable erosion of civil liberties) — isn’t a higher priority for progressives.
But just like the senseless and monumentally wasteful Endless military War, America’s Drug War feeds the pockets of a powerful private industry: the growing privatized prison industry, which needs more and more prisoners for profits, gets many from drug convictions, and thus vehemently opposes and lobbies against any reform to the nation’s drug laws as well as reform of harsh criminal sentencing. That, combined with self-righteous, deeply hypocritical anti-drug moralizing and complete obliviousness to evidence, has ensured not only that the Drug War and its prison obsession endures, but that it remains outside the scope of what can even be discussed in mainstream political circles. And as the Obama DOJ’s newly intensified attacks on marijuana demonstrate, the problem is, in many respects, getting worse, even as most of the world moves toward a much more restrained and health-based (rather than crime-based) approach to dealing with drug usage.[/quote]
http://politics.salon.com/2011/10/08/steve_jobs_and_drug_policy/singleton/
He was one of the best (if not, THE best) marketers to had roamed this Earth.
I challenge you to find me a person who can market and sell millions of devices with outdated and below-par specs that other brands are offering better than Mr. Jobs did.
He revolutionized the cellphone, improving the touchscreen for phones (an innovation he deliberately stole from the Nokia 7710)
and renaming "video call" to "FaceTime" calling it their own innovation (another one he stole from Nokia's 6680).
He stole the Microsoft's source code for GUI, and claimed it was his.
He was a prick.
Nevertheless, he was a very clever prick.
To the point that even in death, he is able to market millions of subpar products in the form of the iPhone 4S.
Still, I respect him for all his so-called "contributions" in the tech world.
RIP Steve Jobs. You will be missed (by some)
Originally posted by AsbestosFlaygon
He was one of the best (if not, THE best) marketers to had roamed this Earth.I challenge you to find me a person who can market and sell millions of devices with outdated and below-par specs that other brands are offering better than Mr. Jobs did.
He revolutionized the cellphone, improving the touchscreen for phones (an innovation he deliberately stole from the Nokia 7710)
and renaming "video call" to "FaceTime" calling it their own innovation (another one he stole from Nokia's 6680).He stole the Microsoft's source code for GUI, and claimed it was his.
He was a prick.
Nevertheless, he was a very clever prick.
To the point that even in death, he is able to market millions of subpar products in the form of the iPhone 4S.Still, I respect him for all his so-called "contributions" in the tech world.
RIP Steve Jobs. You will be missed (by some)
The problem with "subpar" is what are you looking at? Specs? Or actual performance? Because iOS devices tend to be smooth, have little to no crashes and do what they let you do well, as well as doing quite good on many benchmarks. So, as far as performance and experience go, they do quite well. Androids and certain other OSs can obviously potentially do a lot more, but often come with certain other set backs. Really, both Android and iOS have a valid place in the market, and for many customers an iPhone is just the better choice considering their circumstances.
Originally posted by Bardock42For the price of a Mac you can build yourelf a fantastic PC. One that is capable of running all modern software without a care in the world, and one that is going to be very fast and crash pretty much never.
The problem with "subpar" is what are you looking at? Specs? Or actual performance? Because iOS devices tend to be smooth, have little to no crashes and do what they let you do well, as well as doing quite good on many benchmarks. So, as far as performance and experience go, they do quite well. Androids and certain other OSs can obviously potentially do a lot more, but often come with certain other set backs. Really, both Android and iOS have a valid place in the market, and for many customers an iPhone is just the better choice considering their circumstances.
Macs are a rip off the same way Alienware computers are a ripoff. You're garunteenteed to get a decent bit of kit, but you're going to be paying way over the odds for it. It's just a fashion accessory.
This said, the Mac's operating system is great, you have to be an idiot in denial to disagree there. If it's what you want in a computer there really is no alternative. I just prefer to get more bang for my buck.
Everything said about the Mac also applies to their mobile phones.
Originally posted by §P0oONY
For the price of a Mac you can build yourelf a fantastic PC. One that is capable of running all modern software without a care in the world, and one that is going to be very fast and crash pretty much never.Macs are a rip off the same way Alienware computers are a ripoff. You're garunteenteed to get a decent bit of kit, but you're going to be paying way over the odds for it. It's just a fashion accessory.
This said, the Mac's operating system is great, you have to be an idiot in denial to disagree there. If it's what you want in a computer there really is no alternative. I just prefer to get more bang for my buck.
Everything said about the Mac also applies to their mobile phones.
I don't disagree with the Mac in general. You are paying a sort of fee for having an Apple logo. The exception seems to be the MacBook Air, as you could not find anything even close in that form factor for a while, and even now the competition is sort of weak in that department.
iOS devices on the other hand are competitive and not particularly overpriced. The iPad and iPod Touch in particular, are the best in their respective category with some of the best prices. So I disagree with your assessment there.
Selected Stats:
Toshiba Satellite R830-143 - £729.99
CPU: Intel® Core™ i5-2410M Processor
clock speed : 2.30 / 2.90 Turbo GHz
RAM: 6,144 (4,096 + 2,048) MB
maximum expandability : 8,192 MB
technology : DDR3 RAM (1,333 MHz)
HDD: 640 GB
Dimensions:
W x D x H : 316.0 x 227.0 x 18.3 (front) / 26.6 (rear) mm
weight : starting at 1.48 kg
13-Inch Macbook Air - £1,349.00
CPU: 1.7GHz dual-core Intel Core i5 with 3MB shared L3 cache
RAM: 4GB of 1333MHz DDR3 onboard memory
HDD: 256GB flash storage (The only thing it has going for it.)
Dimensions:
Height: 0.3-1.7 cm (0.11-0.68 inches)
Width: 32.5 cm (12.8 inches)
Depth: 22.7 cm (8.94 inches)
Weight: 1.35 kg (2.96 pounds)
Originally posted by §P0oONY
I reckon the Toshiba Satalite range is more than competition for the Mac Book Air, as an example that comes off the top of my head.I have to admit I know very little about mobile phones and handheld devices... as it's not somethign I;m very intersted in.
The Sattelite's are not ultrabooks, as far as I know (Intel's marketing terms). Toshiba's ultrabook line is called "Protege". And again, like I said, they are coming up with competitor products now, they just cost as much or more than the MacBook Air for similar or less features.
That's okay, just take my word for it 😛
[edit] You are comparing Apples to Oranges. Sure you can find cheaper laptops, you can find cheaper Netbooks too, but they are not what the MacBook Air offers. They offer a form factor, it's like comparing a tower PC to the iPad. Not the same category.
Originally posted by Bardock42"Form Factor"? Look at the dimensions of the 2 computers... there is not much in it.
The Sattelite's are not ultrabooks, as far as I know (Intel's marketing terms). Toshiba's ultrabook line is called "Protege". And again, like I said, they are coming up with competitor products now, they just cost as much or more than the MacBook Air for similar or less features.That's okay, just take my word for it 😛
[edit] You are comparing Apples to Oranges. Sure you can find cheaper laptops, you can find cheaper Netbooks too, but they are not what the MacBook Air offers. They offer a form factor, it's like comparing a tower PC to the iPad. Not the same category.
Originally posted by §P0oONY
"Form Factor"? Look at the dimensions of the 2 computers... there is not much in it.
As far as I can tell the thinnest part of the Sattelite is thicker than the thickest part of the Mac Book Air. My point is if you want something that is highly portable, and powerful, the MacBook Airs are a great choice, maybe not the best for everyone, but definitely an acceptable contender. And those SSD would cost you a good chunk if you wanted them in your laptop, too.
Have you held a MacBook Air in your hand before? My Asus Eee PC feels like a menhir compared to it.
Though I want to repeat, I am not saying that MacBook Airs are the best for everything, I am just saying that they are very good for certain needs, and within those needs they are reasonably priced. Is it for everyone? Definitely not.