absynth
Apr 11, 01:34 PM
who cares about iphone 5, where's my white iphone4 dammit! :mad:
rezenclowd3
Dec 1, 11:31 PM
I hate to link to IGN, but here goes:
GT5 damage explained (http://ps3.ign.com/articles/113/1137446p1.html)
Confusion seems to have stemmed from its differing implementation across the game's extensive garage, a point that Sony further clarified. "Standard models have minor deformation and scratches," said Sony, "Premium cars have greater visible level of damage, and Premium racing models have the highest level of damage."
----------
Also from this (http://ps3.ign.com/articles/113/1136979p1.html) article:
"The first update, Yamauchi said, is coming this Saturday and will include restrictions for weight and power in online races.
Yamauchi went on to say that his team would be "upgrading every week, every month." "
GT5 damage explained (http://ps3.ign.com/articles/113/1137446p1.html)
Confusion seems to have stemmed from its differing implementation across the game's extensive garage, a point that Sony further clarified. "Standard models have minor deformation and scratches," said Sony, "Premium cars have greater visible level of damage, and Premium racing models have the highest level of damage."
----------
Also from this (http://ps3.ign.com/articles/113/1136979p1.html) article:
"The first update, Yamauchi said, is coming this Saturday and will include restrictions for weight and power in online races.
Yamauchi went on to say that his team would be "upgrading every week, every month." "
X2468
Mar 31, 08:09 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8G4)
Finally Google admits Jobs was right about fragmentation and recognises that to fight Apple it must become Apple. But it won't admit it. Prepare for lots of "closed is open and open is closed" stuff. Plus: the state of emergency justifying this closure is temporary: sort of like in Syria 50 years ago.
You know, I am truly sorry for the idealists in the open source community. They deserve better.
Were you attempting to make a point here?
Finally Google admits Jobs was right about fragmentation and recognises that to fight Apple it must become Apple. But it won't admit it. Prepare for lots of "closed is open and open is closed" stuff. Plus: the state of emergency justifying this closure is temporary: sort of like in Syria 50 years ago.
You know, I am truly sorry for the idealists in the open source community. They deserve better.
Were you attempting to make a point here?
macfan881
Aug 11, 12:29 AM
Just saw on the video preview for amazon.com that this will have the Top Gears track i thought that was pretty awesome cant wait for this to finally come out. Wasn't this game a original Launch game?
mwswami
Jul 21, 02:04 PM
There may be unknown variables supporting 8 cores from 4 such that I would not want to take that path. I would rather have 8 cores on a new motherboard with faster ram etc supported to get the most out of all of them at newer faster speeds.
Intel's Bensley platform was designed for Dempsey, Woodcrest, and Clovertown families of Xeon processors. So the system components like mobo and memory will remain the same. Any changes will be incremental.
Of course things like Blue Ray and 802.11n may not be offered in the next release but only in Rev 2. Or, they will be cheaper.
I know you already have a quad-core PowerMac so it makes sense for you to wait .... unless SJ is able to tempt you come WWDC with promise of 2x performance etc. ... :D :D
Intel's Bensley platform was designed for Dempsey, Woodcrest, and Clovertown families of Xeon processors. So the system components like mobo and memory will remain the same. Any changes will be incremental.
Of course things like Blue Ray and 802.11n may not be offered in the next release but only in Rev 2. Or, they will be cheaper.
I know you already have a quad-core PowerMac so it makes sense for you to wait .... unless SJ is able to tempt you come WWDC with promise of 2x performance etc. ... :D :D
bankshot
Aug 7, 07:12 PM
As others have said, Time Machine is likely either a direct port of Sun's ZFS, or an equivalent implementation in HFS+. Actually, that's an interesting point -- if it's ZFS, it'll require a reformat in order to use it. If they did it themselves in HFS+, that's a lot more useful for anything besides brand new machines. Though ZFS is a much more modern design, despite all the things Apple's done to extend HFS+ in recent years (journaling, case-sensitive option, etc). Might be good to make a clean break and move forward.
Anyway, no real surprise there, unless you count the fancy glitz that Apple put on top of it. And of course, who's surprised when they do that? ;)
What I'd like to know more about is Spotlight. It was one of the most disappointing features in Tiger for me. It was supposed to revolutionize how you use the computer, but it turned out to be extremely slow and almost useless to me. I suggested from day one -- in fact from the day Steve demoed Tiger at WWDC in 2004 -- that Spotlight should not only index your online drives, but also network drives and offline media (backup CDs and DVDs). The latter two are far more useful to me personally, as I have data scattered across several different computers and on dozens of backups.
According to today's keynote, Apple has finally added support for network drives. But I wonder -- does this mean only other Leopard Macs, or any shared drive that the Mac can connect to? Can I index a Windows shared drive from my Mac, or even a Unix NFS mount? Or is it only other Macs? Once again, if it's limited to other Leopard Macs, then this would be useless for a lot of people (mostly ME! :D).
Also, will they add indexing of offline media? There's no mention of it on the Leopard Spotlight page. Do I still have time to suggest it (again)? Hmmm....
Finally, gotta wonder what those "top secret" features are, and why so secret? Maybe they might not get done in time for release, and therefore Apple doesn't want to look bad like MS pulling Vista features left and right? Surely there's not enough time for a competitor to steal the idea and get it out before Apple does? Even if "next spring" means early June... That's no time at all in large scale software projects.
Anyway, no real surprise there, unless you count the fancy glitz that Apple put on top of it. And of course, who's surprised when they do that? ;)
What I'd like to know more about is Spotlight. It was one of the most disappointing features in Tiger for me. It was supposed to revolutionize how you use the computer, but it turned out to be extremely slow and almost useless to me. I suggested from day one -- in fact from the day Steve demoed Tiger at WWDC in 2004 -- that Spotlight should not only index your online drives, but also network drives and offline media (backup CDs and DVDs). The latter two are far more useful to me personally, as I have data scattered across several different computers and on dozens of backups.
According to today's keynote, Apple has finally added support for network drives. But I wonder -- does this mean only other Leopard Macs, or any shared drive that the Mac can connect to? Can I index a Windows shared drive from my Mac, or even a Unix NFS mount? Or is it only other Macs? Once again, if it's limited to other Leopard Macs, then this would be useless for a lot of people (mostly ME! :D).
Also, will they add indexing of offline media? There's no mention of it on the Leopard Spotlight page. Do I still have time to suggest it (again)? Hmmm....
Finally, gotta wonder what those "top secret" features are, and why so secret? Maybe they might not get done in time for release, and therefore Apple doesn't want to look bad like MS pulling Vista features left and right? Surely there's not enough time for a competitor to steal the idea and get it out before Apple does? Even if "next spring" means early June... That's no time at all in large scale software projects.
rovex
Apr 12, 06:28 PM
Please explain this. You'd buy an iPhone 5 with HSPA+, but not one with LTE ? Why ? Makes no sense at all.
The coverage and cost obviously.
The coverage and cost obviously.
kntgsp
Mar 22, 07:29 PM
If Samsung had left it as vanilla Android they would've had a day one sale from me. Touchwiz is an abortion of programming. It's horrendous.
I'll wait to see how easily vanilla ROMs can be ported over or if it winds up being the epic clusterf**k that the Galaxy S was. Couldn't get rid of Touchwiz even if you tried. Using a different launcher and it still ran in the background eating resources. Remove it entirely? The thing kernel panicked and rebooted in an endless loop.
Samsung still doesn't get it. VANILLA Android. You want to offer your own launcher and apps as an alternative? Great. Offer them in the marketplace or from your website. Otherwise take your Touchwiz, and your ridiculous RFS file format and cram it up your mother's box. That whole software department at Samsung just needs to be exterminated.
Christ I am so sick of them taking fantastic hardware and absolutely ruining it by using proprietary file formats and frankenstein versions of Android. I do get a kick out of their 10.1" model being both thinner and lighter than the 9.7" Ipad2 though. That will undoubtedly have the apple apologists out en masse.
I'll wait to see how easily vanilla ROMs can be ported over or if it winds up being the epic clusterf**k that the Galaxy S was. Couldn't get rid of Touchwiz even if you tried. Using a different launcher and it still ran in the background eating resources. Remove it entirely? The thing kernel panicked and rebooted in an endless loop.
Samsung still doesn't get it. VANILLA Android. You want to offer your own launcher and apps as an alternative? Great. Offer them in the marketplace or from your website. Otherwise take your Touchwiz, and your ridiculous RFS file format and cram it up your mother's box. That whole software department at Samsung just needs to be exterminated.
Christ I am so sick of them taking fantastic hardware and absolutely ruining it by using proprietary file formats and frankenstein versions of Android. I do get a kick out of their 10.1" model being both thinner and lighter than the 9.7" Ipad2 though. That will undoubtedly have the apple apologists out en masse.
Lord Blackadder
Mar 23, 02:26 PM
That is totally reasonable and understandable, although I do disagree. I can't with good heart support sending my neighbors son/daughter overseas to fight for another people.
Well, we have allies, don't we? I simply consider the UN an attempt to permanently ally the world's nations to the extent that these sort of situations can be dealt with based on broader consensus. We are far from the ideal, but we must keep working towards it and an imperfect UN is better than no UN at all.
I just find it pretty disgusting when we have the VP going on the record talking out his arse about "Unless we are attacked or unless there is proof we are about to be attacked", then a couple years later nary a peep when we start bombing a foreign country that is not even close to a threat to us. Did Biden qualify it with a " we should be able to intervene in a nation's affairs if it is thought necessary to either 1) protect other nations from harm or 2) protect a nation's own people from its government, or in the case of a civil war, one or more factions." NOPE!
I'm not going to defend Biden, he puts his foot in his mouth quite a bit - though he is FAR from the only politician in Washingotn with that problem. Besides, unlike Cheney, he is very much playing second fiddle in the administration (actually he's so far down the pecking order only fiddles when someone lends him one, if I can stretch that saying to the breaking point).
It is worth remembering that the Bush Administration sent that clown Bolton as our representative to the UN - a man who opposes that organization's very existence. Incredibly counterproductive. No, I expect hypocrisy from both Democrats and Republicans.
I think it all boils down to whether you buy into the notion that the UN is a global representative body. If you do, then sending troops to enforce UN resolutions is not just fighting for "other people" but fighting for ouselves. If member nations took the concept of the UN more seriously, UN resolutions alone might be enough to stabilize situations like this without the need for major military intervention.
Well, we have allies, don't we? I simply consider the UN an attempt to permanently ally the world's nations to the extent that these sort of situations can be dealt with based on broader consensus. We are far from the ideal, but we must keep working towards it and an imperfect UN is better than no UN at all.
I just find it pretty disgusting when we have the VP going on the record talking out his arse about "Unless we are attacked or unless there is proof we are about to be attacked", then a couple years later nary a peep when we start bombing a foreign country that is not even close to a threat to us. Did Biden qualify it with a " we should be able to intervene in a nation's affairs if it is thought necessary to either 1) protect other nations from harm or 2) protect a nation's own people from its government, or in the case of a civil war, one or more factions." NOPE!
I'm not going to defend Biden, he puts his foot in his mouth quite a bit - though he is FAR from the only politician in Washingotn with that problem. Besides, unlike Cheney, he is very much playing second fiddle in the administration (actually he's so far down the pecking order only fiddles when someone lends him one, if I can stretch that saying to the breaking point).
It is worth remembering that the Bush Administration sent that clown Bolton as our representative to the UN - a man who opposes that organization's very existence. Incredibly counterproductive. No, I expect hypocrisy from both Democrats and Republicans.
I think it all boils down to whether you buy into the notion that the UN is a global representative body. If you do, then sending troops to enforce UN resolutions is not just fighting for "other people" but fighting for ouselves. If member nations took the concept of the UN more seriously, UN resolutions alone might be enough to stabilize situations like this without the need for major military intervention.
lars steenhoff
Apr 6, 05:01 PM
For the time being, the new ati macbook pro's won't work as fast with premiere pro, as they could have when premiere would use openCL, instead of Cuda.
Probably in the next version I guess, as openCL was not quite there yet when premiere CS5 was developed
Probably in the next version I guess, as openCL was not quite there yet when premiere CS5 was developed
gnasher729
Aug 17, 09:17 AM
Edit: Please ignore this post, I can't count!!!
If you buy a Xeon 5160 (3.0GHz) at the moment they are �570. Apple are charging �530 to upgrade from Xeon 5150 (2.66GHz) to the Xeon 5160. Bearing in mind that you can probably sell the original 2.66Gz chip for around �300, it would be cheaper to buy the lower spec Mac Pro and upgrade yourself.
It's not something I would do myself, but some enterprising dealer could easily do that. In US prices, difference between two 3.00 GHz and two 2.66 GHz chips is roughly $300, and you could sell the 2.66 GHz ones at a premium because they had "extra burn-in testing" :-)
Seriously, the problem is getting money for the 2.66 chips.
If you buy a Xeon 5160 (3.0GHz) at the moment they are �570. Apple are charging �530 to upgrade from Xeon 5150 (2.66GHz) to the Xeon 5160. Bearing in mind that you can probably sell the original 2.66Gz chip for around �300, it would be cheaper to buy the lower spec Mac Pro and upgrade yourself.
It's not something I would do myself, but some enterprising dealer could easily do that. In US prices, difference between two 3.00 GHz and two 2.66 GHz chips is roughly $300, and you could sell the 2.66 GHz ones at a premium because they had "extra burn-in testing" :-)
Seriously, the problem is getting money for the 2.66 chips.
maclaptop
Apr 20, 07:42 AM
Poor Paranoid Apple :)
11thIndian
Apr 6, 07:38 AM
The functions inside FCP do not need the OS support. Apple can install private frameworks, and they do it already, for their own applications. So i think they will support SL.
AV Foundation brings back QT7-features to QTX. Apple uses AV Foundation in the new QTX-player of Lion.
And AV Foundation is what allows iOS devices like the iPhone and iPad, with their significantly slower processors and reduced RAM, to view and edit h264 media.
AV Foundation sidesteps ALL the problems of QTKit. It's a fresh start.
Here's a great article from Philip Hodgett's site:
http://www.philiphodgetts.com/2011/02/a-new-64-bit-final-cut-pro/
AV Foundation brings back QT7-features to QTX. Apple uses AV Foundation in the new QTX-player of Lion.
And AV Foundation is what allows iOS devices like the iPhone and iPad, with their significantly slower processors and reduced RAM, to view and edit h264 media.
AV Foundation sidesteps ALL the problems of QTKit. It's a fresh start.
Here's a great article from Philip Hodgett's site:
http://www.philiphodgetts.com/2011/02/a-new-64-bit-final-cut-pro/
SevenInchScrew
Aug 19, 12:05 AM
I hate how some people think the ~800 standard cars are going to look like GT4 cars.
They won't just look like it, they ARE GT4 cars. Take note that NONE of the cars that are playable at these events or seen in almost all screen shots are Standard� cars. I'm not "hating" on the game. I just question their decisions. As I said in my previous posts, I'm a very LONG time fan of the GT series. But, I'm getting tired of the repeated cycle I continuously go through with them lately. Super hype for the games before they come out, and then, regardless of exponentially greater feature list, I'm let down by the actual driving.
Again, I'm glad this game looks spectacular, because it really does. Even though the screen shots that we're seeing are from Photo Mode, the ones that have come out at GC10 are amazing. It is also practically bewildering how the game now has a feature list that is so huge and loaded with features, if you didn't hear it from Polyphony themselves, you might not believe it. But, like I said, the more stuff that keeps getting added to the game, and more minutiae they detail in the Premium� cars, the more my expectations of the actual driving in the game rises.
They won't just look like it, they ARE GT4 cars. Take note that NONE of the cars that are playable at these events or seen in almost all screen shots are Standard� cars. I'm not "hating" on the game. I just question their decisions. As I said in my previous posts, I'm a very LONG time fan of the GT series. But, I'm getting tired of the repeated cycle I continuously go through with them lately. Super hype for the games before they come out, and then, regardless of exponentially greater feature list, I'm let down by the actual driving.
Again, I'm glad this game looks spectacular, because it really does. Even though the screen shots that we're seeing are from Photo Mode, the ones that have come out at GC10 are amazing. It is also practically bewildering how the game now has a feature list that is so huge and loaded with features, if you didn't hear it from Polyphony themselves, you might not believe it. But, like I said, the more stuff that keeps getting added to the game, and more minutiae they detail in the Premium� cars, the more my expectations of the actual driving in the game rises.
ten-oak-druid
Apr 19, 09:01 PM
I remember when the ipad 2 was announced. A samsung CEO said "we're going to have to rethink our copy of the ipad." Very innovative.
Mr. Wonderful
Apr 12, 07:17 PM
The Final Cut page has already been updated.
bedifferent
Apr 27, 11:13 AM
Maybe you'd prefer discourse where everyone agreed and had the same opinion as you. Maybe some white fluffy bunnies too? ;) I kid.
At the end of the day - an issue was indentified. Apple is responding. Arguing whether or not there is an issue is silly. Arguing whether or not Apple is responding is silly.
That's not addressed to you - but everyone at this point
Civil discourse is great, arguing over silly semantics on an issue when all the facts have not been fully presented seems to be "putting the cart before the horse."
As they say, opinions are like a**holes, everyone has em and they all stink ;)
At the end of the day - an issue was indentified. Apple is responding. Arguing whether or not there is an issue is silly. Arguing whether or not Apple is responding is silly.
That's not addressed to you - but everyone at this point
Civil discourse is great, arguing over silly semantics on an issue when all the facts have not been fully presented seems to be "putting the cart before the horse."
As they say, opinions are like a**holes, everyone has em and they all stink ;)
yg17
Apr 27, 09:21 AM
He could have released this years ago.
Why should he? He released the short form BC, which is valid and legal proof of citizenship.
Hawaii law states that no one can request an original long form BC, not even the person who's name is on the BC, so Obama had to call in a few favors to get this. I'm surprised the right wing loons aren't accusing him of overstepping his bounds and destroying states' rights to get it.
Why should he? He released the short form BC, which is valid and legal proof of citizenship.
Hawaii law states that no one can request an original long form BC, not even the person who's name is on the BC, so Obama had to call in a few favors to get this. I'm surprised the right wing loons aren't accusing him of overstepping his bounds and destroying states' rights to get it.
ghall
Aug 25, 02:59 PM
Hey, I'm not about to complain, they sent me a brand new MacBook Pro (even though I was on hold for an hour). Yeah, I have certainly noticed longer hold times on the support lines. Crazy, huh?
twoodcc
Apr 9, 06:48 PM
good to hear. hopefully apple adopts the new processors soon. the macbook airs really need a processor update
EvilEvil
Apr 8, 02:56 AM
Why anyone would buy anything from Best Buy (no matter what they purchase there) is beyond me.
Digital Skunk
Apr 7, 07:27 AM
Everything depends on your work and needs right? For me...I'm short format and tweak every frame.
In terms of full disclosure I own FCP 4 suite and CS 5 master suite and own all the major Apple products (hardware and software). I also run Windows 7 in bootcamp.
Short format work is all about After Effects. Motion is 5 years behind and offers an incomplete feature set in comparison. After Effects marries up well with the tools from big 3d players, like Maxon and C4D. Its a great pipeline.
I'll watch with interest the announcements next week, but the release of an "iMovie Pro" won't interest me...and it seems like that's where Apple is headed. They now are fixated on Consumers Lite and Consumers Plus.
Apple is also doing everything to push me away from it's platform, with it's anti-Flash crusade, and it's complete inability to support Any (I mean ANY of the top 5-7) professional GPUs.
For the serious Pro Apple is living on borrowed time and the Steve Jobs reality-distortion field is weakening. Redmond is calling. Increasingly serious content professionals are listening. I never imagined these words coming from my mouth. But it's the truth.
Coming from a full-time, multimedia/journalism/photography/etc professional I have to totally and completely
AGREE!
I've seen a huge decline in Apple's interest in the professional market, and I don't even mean high end pro, we're talking SMB and SOHO type stuff here. The last revision of FCP was just not worth it unless you were buying new or buying to ensure you didn't have any left over bugs.
Avid Media Composer and Premier have gained massive leads on FCP in terms of workflow and speed. Once the younger college students start seeing how fast they can delivery a product with Adobe or Avid, they'll start wondering why the small houses switched to FCP in the first place, and start wanting to learn what the industry is working with . . . Avid, After Effects, ProTools, etc. And the iMovie Pro will be left to indie filmmakers and consumers with deep pockets
** disclaimer ** I have nothing against the indie segment . . . I am in it and love it. But Apple makes it harder with every update to justify staying with a company that has too much on it's plate, and not enough staff to keep up with the rest of the market.
Apple will always claim that "no one's buying it" rather than, "we didn't make it marketable and desirable" when they go to axe some hardware or software title.
In terms of full disclosure I own FCP 4 suite and CS 5 master suite and own all the major Apple products (hardware and software). I also run Windows 7 in bootcamp.
Short format work is all about After Effects. Motion is 5 years behind and offers an incomplete feature set in comparison. After Effects marries up well with the tools from big 3d players, like Maxon and C4D. Its a great pipeline.
I'll watch with interest the announcements next week, but the release of an "iMovie Pro" won't interest me...and it seems like that's where Apple is headed. They now are fixated on Consumers Lite and Consumers Plus.
Apple is also doing everything to push me away from it's platform, with it's anti-Flash crusade, and it's complete inability to support Any (I mean ANY of the top 5-7) professional GPUs.
For the serious Pro Apple is living on borrowed time and the Steve Jobs reality-distortion field is weakening. Redmond is calling. Increasingly serious content professionals are listening. I never imagined these words coming from my mouth. But it's the truth.
Coming from a full-time, multimedia/journalism/photography/etc professional I have to totally and completely
AGREE!
I've seen a huge decline in Apple's interest in the professional market, and I don't even mean high end pro, we're talking SMB and SOHO type stuff here. The last revision of FCP was just not worth it unless you were buying new or buying to ensure you didn't have any left over bugs.
Avid Media Composer and Premier have gained massive leads on FCP in terms of workflow and speed. Once the younger college students start seeing how fast they can delivery a product with Adobe or Avid, they'll start wondering why the small houses switched to FCP in the first place, and start wanting to learn what the industry is working with . . . Avid, After Effects, ProTools, etc. And the iMovie Pro will be left to indie filmmakers and consumers with deep pockets
** disclaimer ** I have nothing against the indie segment . . . I am in it and love it. But Apple makes it harder with every update to justify staying with a company that has too much on it's plate, and not enough staff to keep up with the rest of the market.
Apple will always claim that "no one's buying it" rather than, "we didn't make it marketable and desirable" when they go to axe some hardware or software title.
logandzwon
Apr 19, 02:51 PM
The First Commercial GUI
http://img62.imageshack.us/img62/5659/star1vg.gif
Xerox's Star workstation was the first commercial implementation of the graphical user interface. The Star was introduced in 1981 and was the inspiration for the Mac and all the other GUIs that followed.
http://img217.imageshack.us/img217/7892/leopardpreviewdesktop4.jpghttp://img714.imageshack.us/img714/5733/xerox8010star.gif
-The Star was not a commercial product. Xerox didn't sell them. (Well eventually they did, but not as PCs. they were to be similar to what we'd call a terminal today.)
-the middle image is actually of an Apple Lisa. I think you were just showing as a comparison, but some people might think your saying it's a Star. It's not. It's a Lisa.
-Apple compensated Xerox for the ideas borrowed from the Star. SJ and the mac team were already working on the GUI before any of them ever saw the Star though. Also, Macintosh 1 wasn't a copy of the Star. In fact a lot of the stables of a modern GUI today were innovated by Apple for the Macintosh.
http://img62.imageshack.us/img62/5659/star1vg.gif
Xerox's Star workstation was the first commercial implementation of the graphical user interface. The Star was introduced in 1981 and was the inspiration for the Mac and all the other GUIs that followed.
http://img217.imageshack.us/img217/7892/leopardpreviewdesktop4.jpghttp://img714.imageshack.us/img714/5733/xerox8010star.gif
-The Star was not a commercial product. Xerox didn't sell them. (Well eventually they did, but not as PCs. they were to be similar to what we'd call a terminal today.)
-the middle image is actually of an Apple Lisa. I think you were just showing as a comparison, but some people might think your saying it's a Star. It's not. It's a Lisa.
-Apple compensated Xerox for the ideas borrowed from the Star. SJ and the mac team were already working on the GUI before any of them ever saw the Star though. Also, Macintosh 1 wasn't a copy of the Star. In fact a lot of the stables of a modern GUI today were innovated by Apple for the Macintosh.
Vegasman
Apr 27, 11:29 AM
Apple provides the option of encrypting your backups. I suggest that anyone concerned about the safety of their personal information use this feature.
Can you trust anyone to completely cover their bases correctly on this issue? Their "meh" data might be your "personal" data. The only way to be certain that the backups are encrypted is to encrypt the whole backup. Doesn't lengthen the time it takes much either, and you get to set the password to use/access the backup.
Yes, Apple made a bone-head move here. But there's a lot more personal information floating in the backups. SMS message history, 3rd party app data, etc. Not all of it is encrypted, and some of it you probably want encrypted.
In computer security class they will teach you to secure personal information by default. And if necessary to provide an option to unsecure it. I am sure Apple knows this. For some reason they chose not to follow this advice.
They are now fixing the problem. There is no need to defend them.
Can you trust anyone to completely cover their bases correctly on this issue? Their "meh" data might be your "personal" data. The only way to be certain that the backups are encrypted is to encrypt the whole backup. Doesn't lengthen the time it takes much either, and you get to set the password to use/access the backup.
Yes, Apple made a bone-head move here. But there's a lot more personal information floating in the backups. SMS message history, 3rd party app data, etc. Not all of it is encrypted, and some of it you probably want encrypted.
In computer security class they will teach you to secure personal information by default. And if necessary to provide an option to unsecure it. I am sure Apple knows this. For some reason they chose not to follow this advice.
They are now fixing the problem. There is no need to defend them.
