Comment Re:Oblicatory (Score 0) 397
This Soylent Green tastes funny... Oh look, the box says "May contain clowns".
aaaand there goes the milk out my nose. thanks. thanks a bunch.
Comment Re:Half baked (Score 0) 235
"Wasn't booting at all."
But at least there's hope for the people who want yet another Windows 7 tablet.
I'm not sure if that should be Funny, Insightful, or Flamebait. Any would work, I guess. Surely it deserves +5 *something*.
Comment Re:Lost? You keep using that word. (Score 0) 466
Yes, and you get modded troll for posting the link to the Wired article saying as much.
Comment Re:Lost? You keep using that word. (Score 0) 466
Marked troll for posting facts with the sources? Nice job moderators.
Comment Re:Lost? You keep using that word. (Score 0, Troll) 466
Well, according to http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/04/iphone-finder/
"The person who found and sold an Apple iPhone prototype says he regrets not doing more to return the device to its owner, according to a statement provided by his attorney Thursday in response to queries from Wired.com."
"A friend of Hogan’s then offered to call Apple Care on Hogan’s behalf, according to Hogan’s lawyer. That apparently was the extent of Hogan’s efforts to return the phone."
And from http://daringfireball.net/2010/04/gizmodo_prototype_iphone
"California’s penal code, section 485: One who finds lost property under circumstances which give him knowledge of or means of inquiry as to the true owner, and who appropriates such property to his own use, or to the use of another person not entitled thereto, without first making reasonable and just efforts to find the owner and to restore the property to him, is guilty of theft."
So the phone was stolen and sold...I'm not clear how the theft of the phone was "Apple's fault"?
"The person who found and sold an Apple iPhone prototype says he regrets not doing more to return the device to its owner, according to a statement provided by his attorney Thursday in response to queries from Wired.com."
"A friend of Hogan’s then offered to call Apple Care on Hogan’s behalf, according to Hogan’s lawyer. That apparently was the extent of Hogan’s efforts to return the phone."
And from http://daringfireball.net/2010/04/gizmodo_prototype_iphone
"California’s penal code, section 485: One who finds lost property under circumstances which give him knowledge of or means of inquiry as to the true owner, and who appropriates such property to his own use, or to the use of another person not entitled thereto, without first making reasonable and just efforts to find the owner and to restore the property to him, is guilty of theft."
So the phone was stolen and sold...I'm not clear how the theft of the phone was "Apple's fault"?
Comment Re:Meh (Score 1) 572
"HTML5, the budding specification for multimedia in Web applications, will not displace proprietary rich Internet technologies, such as Adobe Flash/Flex or Microsoft Silverlight, anytime soon, an analyst report released this week said'.
OK, understood, it's new and therefore it sucks, and the existing "proprietary systems" are better. You support proprietary systems then? Wait, isn't that why we hate Apple? Dammit is this /. or not. I'm confused :(
Comment Re:People don't WANT free... (Score 1) 572
I paid $199 for my iPhone and I can't play Facebook games?
That's not a bug, it's a feature.
Should have been +5 Insightful.
Comment Re:Meh (Score 1) 572
He doesnt care that you should care, or not.
Flash apps circumvent the app store, you can make a website app through flash for free (such as a game) and Jobs doesn't get to enforce his Apple Tax.
HTML5 doesn't? http://www.osnews.com/story/23097/Quake_II_Ported_to_HTML5
RIAA Sued For Fraud, Abuse, & "Sham Litigation" 187
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "It's been a rough week for the RIAA as massive layoffs are about to cost many employees their job. On top of that, the anti-piracy outfit is being sued in North Carolina for abusing the legal system in its war on piracy, particularly for civil conspiracy, deceptive trade practices, trespassing and computer fraud in SONY BMG Music Entertainment v. Moursy. Named along with the record companies as defendants on the counterclaims are Safenet (formerly known as MediaSentry) and the RIAA. This case first started out as 'LaFace Records v. Does 1-38' until the court required the RIAA to break it up into 38 separate cases, at which point it morphed into 'SONY BMG Music Entertainment v. Doe.' Only after the RIAA finally got its 'expedited' discovery did it become SONY v. Moursy. And from the looks of things, it has a long, long way to go. The RIAA hasn't even filed its answer to the counterclaims yet, but is making a motion to dismiss them on the grounds of legal insufficiency. Sound like a good investment of record company resources, anyone?"
Comment Oh come on people! (Score 4, Funny) 578
Doesn't any one see the irony of this being posted by "taxevader"?
I think someone is just getting a little nervous.
I think someone is just getting a little nervous.
Slashdot Top Deals
"When anyone says `theoretically,' they really mean `not really.'" -- David Parnas
