ciTiger
Apr 29, 03:59 PM
Let's hope this isn't the last change...
I disliked a few changes in the shortcuts in the track pad gestures...
I disliked a few changes in the shortcuts in the track pad gestures...
Hephaestus
Mar 18, 08:18 PM
I agree with you on this- the comments were definitely rude.
But I still don't think you get my point (and this includes the guy who posted below my previous post). That it doesn't mean that the other person is jealous of you. Its this attitude that irks me. And its this very attitude that so many "fanboys" share. Why in the world would someone be JEALOUS of you because you have a $200-$300 phone or even a $1500 computer?!? And because you think others envy you for it, you end up placing extraordinary value on everyday material things. I mean, seriously, is this what you use to define your status in society, what kind of phone you carry? Are you really that shallow and materialistic? I honestly feel pity for you.
To the other poster. You were jealous of (or "hated") those who had iphones until you got one for yourself. Now you believe that everyone around you is jealous of you.
I understand, you buy something trendy, and it makes you feel good. Thats great, I'm not arguing with that, because you should enjoy everything you have. But its this faux sense of superiority that comes with it, that makes you believe that others are envious of you because you bought this gadget. Its not like you've won the Nobel prize or even drive a Bugatti Veyron, that would make someone want what you have. No, you bought a phone. A phone that lots of people already have. A phone that my housekeeper's 11 year old son has. And any Joe Schmoe can walk into any Apple store/Walmart/Best Buy and pick one up. And when the new model comes out, you'll buy that as well, because you're chronically unsatisfied with what you have, and somehow, you feel that owning this will raise you up above the rest of society. It is people with attitudes like this (the attitude of the fanboy) that Apple capitalizes on.
Take this as a life lesson -- set your goals higher. Don't be envious of the guy with the cooler phone.
Oh my, you really missed the point with this one. Maybe you are right and I'm exaggerating, but if someone flat out starts being rude to someone because they see them with something, then I'm struggling to think of a reason. By no means am I placing extraordinary value on it, what have I been repeating through every page of this thread? Its just a damn phone. Keep your life lessons to yourself and try not to be so condescending.
Also, reality is that there are a lot of people out there that get jealous of material things. Some people get jealous when they see others drive a nicer car, some get jealous when they see someone with nicer shoes then them. I perfectly understand the shallowness of the human condition. I'm simply pointing out an observation based on my own personal experience within the last few days.
But I still don't think you get my point (and this includes the guy who posted below my previous post). That it doesn't mean that the other person is jealous of you. Its this attitude that irks me. And its this very attitude that so many "fanboys" share. Why in the world would someone be JEALOUS of you because you have a $200-$300 phone or even a $1500 computer?!? And because you think others envy you for it, you end up placing extraordinary value on everyday material things. I mean, seriously, is this what you use to define your status in society, what kind of phone you carry? Are you really that shallow and materialistic? I honestly feel pity for you.
To the other poster. You were jealous of (or "hated") those who had iphones until you got one for yourself. Now you believe that everyone around you is jealous of you.
I understand, you buy something trendy, and it makes you feel good. Thats great, I'm not arguing with that, because you should enjoy everything you have. But its this faux sense of superiority that comes with it, that makes you believe that others are envious of you because you bought this gadget. Its not like you've won the Nobel prize or even drive a Bugatti Veyron, that would make someone want what you have. No, you bought a phone. A phone that lots of people already have. A phone that my housekeeper's 11 year old son has. And any Joe Schmoe can walk into any Apple store/Walmart/Best Buy and pick one up. And when the new model comes out, you'll buy that as well, because you're chronically unsatisfied with what you have, and somehow, you feel that owning this will raise you up above the rest of society. It is people with attitudes like this (the attitude of the fanboy) that Apple capitalizes on.
Take this as a life lesson -- set your goals higher. Don't be envious of the guy with the cooler phone.
Oh my, you really missed the point with this one. Maybe you are right and I'm exaggerating, but if someone flat out starts being rude to someone because they see them with something, then I'm struggling to think of a reason. By no means am I placing extraordinary value on it, what have I been repeating through every page of this thread? Its just a damn phone. Keep your life lessons to yourself and try not to be so condescending.
Also, reality is that there are a lot of people out there that get jealous of material things. Some people get jealous when they see others drive a nicer car, some get jealous when they see someone with nicer shoes then them. I perfectly understand the shallowness of the human condition. I'm simply pointing out an observation based on my own personal experience within the last few days.
Full of Win
Apr 29, 01:36 PM
Come on Open GL 3... come to daddy.
Rodimus Prime
Mar 4, 02:11 PM
Minimum wages = unemployment, lower growth
child labor laws = limits free will and opportunities for youngsters
max hours per week = limits free will, opportunity for higher personal revenue
workplace safety = bureaucracy, red tape, lower growth
Umm boy if you really believe that you are pretty out of it. Lets go look at China. They have had the lack of those laws in place and BOY it is has worked out well for its people
Majority of Chiniese are nothing more than slaves. Paid very little and have no chances to better themselves. Their health suffers and they are treated like cattle.
There is more to life than work. Safety is important and guess what OSHA safety oddly enough has made the work place more productive and made things safer. Used safety was the employees job to deal with. If they got hurt it was on them. If you were not willing to risk your safety guess what the company could and would go find someone who would. Now days if you get hurt on the job it is on the company and the company is at fault automatically. This pushes the company to increase safety. They do not want fines or higher insurance cost so they make the place safer for their workers and for the company.
Hour limititation can point back to safety.
Min wage at least gives a floor to the paid slave labor and min wage really should only be for high school kids any ways. After that it should go up.
child labor laws = limits free will and opportunities for youngsters
max hours per week = limits free will, opportunity for higher personal revenue
workplace safety = bureaucracy, red tape, lower growth
Umm boy if you really believe that you are pretty out of it. Lets go look at China. They have had the lack of those laws in place and BOY it is has worked out well for its people
Majority of Chiniese are nothing more than slaves. Paid very little and have no chances to better themselves. Their health suffers and they are treated like cattle.
There is more to life than work. Safety is important and guess what OSHA safety oddly enough has made the work place more productive and made things safer. Used safety was the employees job to deal with. If they got hurt it was on them. If you were not willing to risk your safety guess what the company could and would go find someone who would. Now days if you get hurt on the job it is on the company and the company is at fault automatically. This pushes the company to increase safety. They do not want fines or higher insurance cost so they make the place safer for their workers and for the company.
Hour limititation can point back to safety.
Min wage at least gives a floor to the paid slave labor and min wage really should only be for high school kids any ways. After that it should go up.
more...
Anthony T
Apr 16, 09:49 AM
http://img.skitch.com/20100416-1fcq6stwput2wkx8w2c3wdw3sf.jpg
http://img.skitch.com/20100416-x24u8rjfyc781wmh9ms3us6y4e.jpg
Now that looks better. Where did you get these from? I'm assuming they are fake.
http://img.skitch.com/20100416-x24u8rjfyc781wmh9ms3us6y4e.jpg
Now that looks better. Where did you get these from? I'm assuming they are fake.
jjrtiger
May 2, 09:39 AM
Not that I really care about the tracking services...but I wonder if Apple will skip the 3G again with this update...
more...
MacNut
Apr 23, 01:16 PM
Much like the logo in your avatar. :pThat gets a negative vote.:p
tdhurst
Jan 12, 09:27 PM
So gizmodo is responsible for this how? Questioning what makes an online a journalist a journalist and not just a fan site has been going on for some time (aka: before gizmodo turned off a bunch of TVs). You're just scapegoating an easy target. If you have a problem with the conferences and expos limiting press to only a few big names go after that. Not after guys who like to prank people. You'll change nothing by attacking gizmodo.
I think what he is trying to say here is that we're all pissed at Gizmodo for possibly lending legitimacy to big media claims that online-only or blogger sites aren't real journalists, but rather fan sites. I'm not saying that everyone will think this, but the majority of the less-involved public could be swayed.
Pranks like this by Gizmodo just give them false credibility to their incorrect claims.
I would argue that many people lump all blogger sites into one group, neglecting to admit there are great differences from site to site. Right now, because these new players are not complete accepted yet, anything done by one has repercussions on everyone.
I think what he is trying to say here is that we're all pissed at Gizmodo for possibly lending legitimacy to big media claims that online-only or blogger sites aren't real journalists, but rather fan sites. I'm not saying that everyone will think this, but the majority of the less-involved public could be swayed.
Pranks like this by Gizmodo just give them false credibility to their incorrect claims.
I would argue that many people lump all blogger sites into one group, neglecting to admit there are great differences from site to site. Right now, because these new players are not complete accepted yet, anything done by one has repercussions on everyone.
more...
tveric
Oct 9, 08:32 AM
But if iTunes' DRM was annoying to users, it never would have made it to 70%. Users absolutely care about DRM. But they're not aware of it unless it's too restrictive or inconvenient - if you give them *bad* DRM they will totally notice it and hate it.
Again - 70% of the DRM market, not 70% of all music obtained online. And that number doesn't figure in (obviously) any music obtained from a site like allofmp3. The legality of allofmp3 may be dubious, but there's an example of DRM-free music, that people are paying for (at a rate of .10 on the dollar, I'll grant you) - and it's trouncing any other pay service. I would continue to shop there even if they made the prices comparable to the itms, simply because I can be confident that once I purchase an album, I'll be able to play that album on any computer, any mp3 player, anytime, far into the future. Not so with the itms; you need an ipod and itunes, and while those are my current items of choice, who's to say they will continue to be my software and/or player of choice 5, 10, 15 years from now? I still have CDs I bought 15 years ago - I should be able to buy music now with the same confidence, that I can play it forever if I want to.
And by the way, before I hear the same wrongful accusations about how people are breaking the law by going to allofmp3 - guess what, they're not. Distributing copyrighted material is against the law - every single RIAA lawsuit was brought against someone for THAT offense, being that people were running Kazaa, or other p2p software, and naturally everyone is distributing while downloading. They haven't sued anyone for using allofmp3 simply because technically, it's not illegal to download music from them. Are the operators of the site in violation of the law? Yes - US copyright law, and they're not inside the US. I know it's a shock to some of you, but people not living in the US aren't subject to our laws.
Support your artists, not the record companies. Buy from DRM-free sites online and see the bands when they tour - that's where 90% of the bands make 90% of their money anyway.
Again - 70% of the DRM market, not 70% of all music obtained online. And that number doesn't figure in (obviously) any music obtained from a site like allofmp3. The legality of allofmp3 may be dubious, but there's an example of DRM-free music, that people are paying for (at a rate of .10 on the dollar, I'll grant you) - and it's trouncing any other pay service. I would continue to shop there even if they made the prices comparable to the itms, simply because I can be confident that once I purchase an album, I'll be able to play that album on any computer, any mp3 player, anytime, far into the future. Not so with the itms; you need an ipod and itunes, and while those are my current items of choice, who's to say they will continue to be my software and/or player of choice 5, 10, 15 years from now? I still have CDs I bought 15 years ago - I should be able to buy music now with the same confidence, that I can play it forever if I want to.
And by the way, before I hear the same wrongful accusations about how people are breaking the law by going to allofmp3 - guess what, they're not. Distributing copyrighted material is against the law - every single RIAA lawsuit was brought against someone for THAT offense, being that people were running Kazaa, or other p2p software, and naturally everyone is distributing while downloading. They haven't sued anyone for using allofmp3 simply because technically, it's not illegal to download music from them. Are the operators of the site in violation of the law? Yes - US copyright law, and they're not inside the US. I know it's a shock to some of you, but people not living in the US aren't subject to our laws.
Support your artists, not the record companies. Buy from DRM-free sites online and see the bands when they tour - that's where 90% of the bands make 90% of their money anyway.
JackSYi
Oct 4, 02:14 PM
Thank god. My first MWSF (been saving up for it), with the primary reason being: Steve Jobs.
more...
Tarzanman
Mar 18, 12:52 AM
Blame Apple for the rivalry in the mobile arena.
They spend a lot of money brainwashing their customers into feeling like their choice in consumer products makes them better than people who use other products.
In a normal world, no one should give a rat's @ss what kind of phone you're making a phone call on but us non-iphone users had to put up with 2 years of iphone-users' fawining and bull---- about how awesome their phone was.
Its not surprising to me that there is now blowback as a result of Apple's marketing push.
They still do it today... look at the recent ipad2 press conference. Didn't the last slide say "2011: year of the copycat?" Which is ridiculous. Every product in the world has multiple manufacturers. TVs, bicycles, cars, toothbrushes, etc.... why should tablets be any different?
So, the next time someone gives you lip for using an Apple product remember that the money you give to Steve Jobs is helping fund the ill will.
You don't see Google going around bashing apple for no reason... but maybe because their CEO isn't a complete jerk like Jobs.
They spend a lot of money brainwashing their customers into feeling like their choice in consumer products makes them better than people who use other products.
In a normal world, no one should give a rat's @ss what kind of phone you're making a phone call on but us non-iphone users had to put up with 2 years of iphone-users' fawining and bull---- about how awesome their phone was.
Its not surprising to me that there is now blowback as a result of Apple's marketing push.
They still do it today... look at the recent ipad2 press conference. Didn't the last slide say "2011: year of the copycat?" Which is ridiculous. Every product in the world has multiple manufacturers. TVs, bicycles, cars, toothbrushes, etc.... why should tablets be any different?
So, the next time someone gives you lip for using an Apple product remember that the money you give to Steve Jobs is helping fund the ill will.
You don't see Google going around bashing apple for no reason... but maybe because their CEO isn't a complete jerk like Jobs.
AbyssImpact
May 4, 09:30 PM
I thought the same thing, discriminating on us white iPad folks
Nope, just that they are sold out with the White Ipad 2s because they are so popular and everyone wants them. They gotta settle with the black ones since it is sitting on shelves collecting dust;)
Nope, just that they are sold out with the White Ipad 2s because they are so popular and everyone wants them. They gotta settle with the black ones since it is sitting on shelves collecting dust;)
more...
tigress666
Apr 9, 01:53 AM
wow, you try to shut down a whole shop because they hurt your feelings?
Ever thought of the many people who depend on working there? What unbelievable egoism.
Well, to be fair I have no idea what happened but depending on what they did, it could be very unfair to say they just "hurt his feelings".
That being said, yeah, I think that poster is being a little delusional that they'd shut the whole store down over what he did.
At best Best Buy fires anyone involved that caused them to have to pay out some large fine and maybe any of the managers that were around at the time. But they aren't going to shut the store down over it. And that is how it should be, cause the whole store shouldn't suffer because of some really bad employees (but the bad employees should be gone).
Ever thought of the many people who depend on working there? What unbelievable egoism.
Well, to be fair I have no idea what happened but depending on what they did, it could be very unfair to say they just "hurt his feelings".
That being said, yeah, I think that poster is being a little delusional that they'd shut the whole store down over what he did.
At best Best Buy fires anyone involved that caused them to have to pay out some large fine and maybe any of the managers that were around at the time. But they aren't going to shut the store down over it. And that is how it should be, cause the whole store shouldn't suffer because of some really bad employees (but the bad employees should be gone).
rovex
Mar 19, 05:30 PM
http://gifjes.web-log.nl/photos/uncategorized/hahaha.gif
and the way you express yourself practically shows me why people 'diss' all your gadgets.
you Americans have some ridiculous proverbs/figure of speeches that no other Anglophones around the world can even attempt to understand.
And the English language's inception was here in England so why do Americans spell rumours 'rumors'? And there are an abundance of similar examples.
and the way you express yourself practically shows me why people 'diss' all your gadgets.
you Americans have some ridiculous proverbs/figure of speeches that no other Anglophones around the world can even attempt to understand.
And the English language's inception was here in England so why do Americans spell rumours 'rumors'? And there are an abundance of similar examples.
more...
DoFoT9
Jul 22, 04:54 AM
That is a very poor speed, at least I'm getting close to 10 mb/s but paying for 30 I think... $76 a month. These monopolies we have in the US are a drag, they can do whatever they want and the gov does nothing about it. Mine is adequate for all the folding at least.
i pay $130aus a month ($~110 US) for 50GB of downloads! (adsl2+). at least i hit the speeds.
are you on cable lord?
i pay $130aus a month ($~110 US) for 50GB of downloads! (adsl2+). at least i hit the speeds.
are you on cable lord?
paradox00
May 3, 04:14 PM
They are offering you more bandwidth to use a higher bandwidth service like tethering.
The consideration is very clear. Thanks for quoting the premise for contract law, but claiming there is no consideration there is ridiculous.
People who tether use more bandwidth, so the cost associated with their usage is more expensive. The carriers can either charge those people for tethering or they can raise the price for EVERYONE.
They choose to charge the people who tether. It is a perfectly reasonable choice on their part.
Hey a cable line comes into my house with all the channels on it. I can just jimmy off a filter and get all the channels without paying any more. They are already delivering it to my house, why can't I just get all of them since they are there anyways and I am paying for cable right?
You are not paying for tethering unless you are paying for tethering. The math is simple. People who tether use more bandwidth. Wireless providers set their data prices based on AVERAGE usage. Tethering makes the average usage go up, so the revenue to cover those costs has to come from somewhere.
So they can either charge EVERYONE more or charge the people who tether more.. Again they choose the later.
I'd agree with you that there may be consideration with unlimited data plans as you might be using your phone outside the scope of what they initially envisioned when they offered you unlimited data, but those are largely a thing of the past now.
With regards to tiered pricing, what you're suggesting is that you're not entitled to the data you paid for should you choose to use some of it for tethering. If you paid for 2 GB a month, you can damn well get 2 GB a month. 2 GB a month was the consideration they offered you. It's none of your concern if the carrier sold it to you with the assumption that you'd only use 500 MB a month. They can't charge you more because your tethering makes you more likely to approach the 2 GB cap they offered you. You aren't legally obligated to pay twice for that same 2 GB of consideration if you want to use a tethering app.
Any concerns carriers have with bandwidth use can be addressed through their data plans, which they have full control of. They are not within their rights to start dictating what apps can or can't access data on your phone. Even if tethering apps generate a lot of data use, charging specifically for tethering is just a stopgap for a larger problem with their data plan pricing structure. Tethering apps are just one type of many high bandwidth apps. Are they going to start charging for all of them? Do you think that's reasonable?
Today your wireless ISP charges extra for tethering, tomorrow it will charge extra to access Netflix, and perhaps later on, your local ISP will want in on the action and start charge per device connected to your router. This segmented path of internet service is not a path I want to go down. The moment data becomes more than just data, and becomes data by application or use, is the day that consumers lose.
The consideration is very clear. Thanks for quoting the premise for contract law, but claiming there is no consideration there is ridiculous.
People who tether use more bandwidth, so the cost associated with their usage is more expensive. The carriers can either charge those people for tethering or they can raise the price for EVERYONE.
They choose to charge the people who tether. It is a perfectly reasonable choice on their part.
Hey a cable line comes into my house with all the channels on it. I can just jimmy off a filter and get all the channels without paying any more. They are already delivering it to my house, why can't I just get all of them since they are there anyways and I am paying for cable right?
You are not paying for tethering unless you are paying for tethering. The math is simple. People who tether use more bandwidth. Wireless providers set their data prices based on AVERAGE usage. Tethering makes the average usage go up, so the revenue to cover those costs has to come from somewhere.
So they can either charge EVERYONE more or charge the people who tether more.. Again they choose the later.
I'd agree with you that there may be consideration with unlimited data plans as you might be using your phone outside the scope of what they initially envisioned when they offered you unlimited data, but those are largely a thing of the past now.
With regards to tiered pricing, what you're suggesting is that you're not entitled to the data you paid for should you choose to use some of it for tethering. If you paid for 2 GB a month, you can damn well get 2 GB a month. 2 GB a month was the consideration they offered you. It's none of your concern if the carrier sold it to you with the assumption that you'd only use 500 MB a month. They can't charge you more because your tethering makes you more likely to approach the 2 GB cap they offered you. You aren't legally obligated to pay twice for that same 2 GB of consideration if you want to use a tethering app.
Any concerns carriers have with bandwidth use can be addressed through their data plans, which they have full control of. They are not within their rights to start dictating what apps can or can't access data on your phone. Even if tethering apps generate a lot of data use, charging specifically for tethering is just a stopgap for a larger problem with their data plan pricing structure. Tethering apps are just one type of many high bandwidth apps. Are they going to start charging for all of them? Do you think that's reasonable?
Today your wireless ISP charges extra for tethering, tomorrow it will charge extra to access Netflix, and perhaps later on, your local ISP will want in on the action and start charge per device connected to your router. This segmented path of internet service is not a path I want to go down. The moment data becomes more than just data, and becomes data by application or use, is the day that consumers lose.
more...
tbrinkma
May 3, 07:28 PM
Contract terms require "consideration" from both parties to be legally binding. Consideration is something you provide to the other party (i.e., money from you, data services from your carrier).
What consideration are the carriers offering you for tethering? You're already paying $X for Y GB of data used on your phone.
Ok, here's the thing. The contract, presented to you when you signed up for the service *explicitly* disallows tethering unless you sign up for that extra service. You pay them money for the service you signed up for *as defined in the contract*. There's the consideration from both sides. If you want to *add* something to that, they're going to want *you* to provide more consideration in exchange for giving you more capabilities under the service agreement *contract*.
(Wow, there's a lot of arm-chair lawyers here who think the contract they signed doesn't apply to *them*.)
What consideration are the carriers offering you for tethering? You're already paying $X for Y GB of data used on your phone.
Ok, here's the thing. The contract, presented to you when you signed up for the service *explicitly* disallows tethering unless you sign up for that extra service. You pay them money for the service you signed up for *as defined in the contract*. There's the consideration from both sides. If you want to *add* something to that, they're going to want *you* to provide more consideration in exchange for giving you more capabilities under the service agreement *contract*.
(Wow, there's a lot of arm-chair lawyers here who think the contract they signed doesn't apply to *them*.)
iVoid
Sep 28, 10:53 PM
Too many folks think just because you have wealth that you have to build a oversized Gaudy McMansion as some kind of totem to prove your wealth to the unwashed masses.
I myself like smaller well built with high quality material and nice architecture with a large lot/waterfront.
Actually, this seems like a McMansion to me. Very narrow to fit into a tight lot.
Except the lot is much bigger in this case than a McMansion lot typically is. :)
I wonder if the design was made when they couldn't tear down the old house and they thought they'd have to squeeze it in. :)
I myself like smaller well built with high quality material and nice architecture with a large lot/waterfront.
Actually, this seems like a McMansion to me. Very narrow to fit into a tight lot.
Except the lot is much bigger in this case than a McMansion lot typically is. :)
I wonder if the design was made when they couldn't tear down the old house and they thought they'd have to squeeze it in. :)
iansilv
Oct 6, 12:26 PM
Again, I love competition- thank you Verizon.
SimonTheSoundMa
Sep 25, 04:03 PM
I suppose there could be a bit of news here for non-photographers.
As I understand it, Aperture uses OS X's built-in RAW image processing. If I remember rightly, the last Aperture update accompanied an OS X update. So it's possible 10.4.8 could be just around the corner (i.e. sometime this week?)
It still is pretty poor with compatibility when it comes to RAW. For example, it still can't read white balance from the meta data on RAW files off Canon cameras. Great!
Aperture's development also is going slow. Apple pulling out the software?
Perhaps all the developers are spending too much time on Leopard and Logic 8 at the moment.
As I understand it, Aperture uses OS X's built-in RAW image processing. If I remember rightly, the last Aperture update accompanied an OS X update. So it's possible 10.4.8 could be just around the corner (i.e. sometime this week?)
It still is pretty poor with compatibility when it comes to RAW. For example, it still can't read white balance from the meta data on RAW files off Canon cameras. Great!
Aperture's development also is going slow. Apple pulling out the software?
Perhaps all the developers are spending too much time on Leopard and Logic 8 at the moment.
mkrishnan
Sep 8, 06:29 PM
It was the french.
hate the french.
Sweeeeeeet! Thanks for clarifying! :eek: ;) :D
hate the french.
Sweeeeeeet! Thanks for clarifying! :eek: ;) :D
mackk
Oct 8, 10:07 AM
I live in NYC and work in Manhattan every day, and my coverage is fine.
But I have a 1st gen iPhone...
But I have a 1st gen iPhone...
Hellhammer
Apr 22, 07:31 AM
All seems rather silly to me.
Over the years, there must have been 85 threads on some type of reputation/like/thanks system and it's always been shot down (thankfully). What changed?
Remember that this is just a test. Maybe Arn and others want to try it out and see how it works. In the future they can then say that it was tried but it didn't work out that well.
Over the years, there must have been 85 threads on some type of reputation/like/thanks system and it's always been shot down (thankfully). What changed?
Remember that this is just a test. Maybe Arn and others want to try it out and see how it works. In the future they can then say that it was tried but it didn't work out that well.
codebar
May 2, 09:52 AM
there is a solution here : http://www.digidna.net/products/diskaid/support/how-to-remove-iphone-tracking-data which doesn't require a jailbreak... DigiDNA added a button in DiskAid ;-)
No comments:
Post a Comment