Jump to content

The Librarian

Apple partners with Cookie Monster

Topic Summary

Created

Last Reply

Replies

Views

The Librarian -
The Librarian -
1
463

Top Posters


Recommended Posts


Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Similar Content

    • By admin
      I replied her Mark zuckerburg might be listening us.

      She laughed.

      We laughed

      Alexa laughed

      Siri laughed.
    • Guest Anonymous
    • By admin
      The quick version: Apple is expected to launch its original content and streaming video services today.
      The long(er) version
      Sorry to break it to you, but this isn’t exactly the Apple vs. Netflix pay-per-view you ordered. This is Apple vs. every other third party selling video subscription services.
      Netflix has carved a name for itself creating bingeworthy original content (that’ll cost $15 billion this year). But for all the star power Reese Witherspoon and Jennifer Aniston bring to Cupertino, Apple’s original content is more like the cherry on top of the sundae.
      The sundae—at least for now: using Reese & Co. to get users on the platform, then selling those users subscriptions to premium services like HBO, Showtime, and more, all while taking a cut.
      It could work. Apple’s already got more than 1 billion devices across the globe (compared to Netflix’s 139 million subscribers worldwide). In the biz they call that owning the pipes. You’re looking at the Amazon model
      Since its 2015 launch, Amazon Prime Channels has capitalized on existing customer relationships. It’s a lot easier to click “purchase now” on a 12-month HBO deal when Amazon already has your billing info on file.
      One crazy stat: The Diffusion Group estimated Amazon was responsible a year ago for 55% of all standalone video subscriptions. So what makes Apple’s different?
      According to Recode, Apple is expected to create a new storefront on the upcoming service that will streamline buying TV subscription apps. Instead of scrolling through streaming apps in a crowded App Store, all your shows will be in one convenient spot.
      Plus, Apple is widely expected to offer its own bundles of premium services like Showtime, HBO, and Starz to its 1.4 billion users at lower price points than you’d pay for each individually.
      Who’s notably sitting out the bundle? You might’ve figured it out by now...Netflix.
      -------------------------------------------
      iTransform... Apple marathoned through its biggest non-iPhone product event ever. Technically, there was no hardware — Just human being celebrities there to promote its new TV shows (enter, Oprah, Spielberg, J-Aniston). Apple made itself over into an everything company. 
      Here's the new roster... Apple offered a bunch of services for your living room, but was hazy on some details and the price (no clue yet on how much TV or gaming will cost):
      Apple Card: A Goldman Sachs and Mastercard powered menage àpartnership credit card (without the physical card). Pay and manage spending from an app, which updates your budget. Apple TV+: Its new streaming service starts with a dozen original new shows. But it also integrates your other streaming options (except Netflix), so you can search once to see if The Notebook is available anywhere. Apple News+: It's bundled the WSJ, LA Times, and over 300 magazines for $9.99 monthly (the NY Times and Washington Post are doing their own thing). Apple Arcade: A subscription for smartphone, tablet, and computer games (and it's the least exciting of all 4).  THE TAKEAWAY  Bundling for you, while it unbundles itself... Apple's got a TV bundle, a news bundle, a music bundle, and a gaming bundle. It's like Apple's updated its own operating system to become a real "services" company. Its future is bundled in bundles because that means you're paying monthly for each.
    • Guest Nicole
      By Guest Nicole
      OS 11 is available, officially, today. It's coming to every iPhone and iPad made in the past few years, and chances are, you're going to upgrade. When you install it on your iPhone, you'll find that some things are very different than what you're used to, but the core of how you get around and experience the OS will be the same. For example: the Control Center is wildly different and notifications have changed slightly, but you still have that comfortable (and comforting) grid of apps on the home screen. A lot is new, but not so much that you can't recognize it.
      The iPad is a different story. That's where Apple has made the most radical changes to the way you open and manage your apps. Apple has introduced an app dock that's available no matter what you're doing with a quick swipe up, so you can get to your most-important apps quicker. It's also changed the way that multitasking works, giving you more flexibility with split-screen apps. And you can now drag and drop content between apps, a feature that takes some finger Jiu Jitsu, but is remarkably powerful once you get used to it.
      Read more: https://www.theverge.com/2017/9/19/16328404/apple-ios-11-review-iphone-update-control-center-how-to
    • Guest
    • By Jack Ryan
      Experiment talking to apple about JW app
      I was curious what would happen if I did a web chat and talked to Apple about the JW IOS app. So it went like this:
      • Hello. I would like to report an offensive app I found today in the IOS store
      • 1:17 PM It links to literature by the organizations web site that is anti gay. . So the organizations app is a portal to their many books.
      • I understand and will be happy to assist with this issue.
      • I am here to help.
      • You said you want to report an offensive App. What App is it please?
      • https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/jw-library/id672417831?ls=1&mt=8
      • I am sorry, here at work I cannot click on links.
      • JW Library Jehovah's Witnesses
      • I thank you.
      • If you install it and search for the word gay you will see what I mean.
      • It will open a browser to their publications
      • 1:22 PM I gotcha. I understand. I am glad you took some time to let us know. I appreciate that and so does Apple. I will get this up to the folks above me. I thank you a great deal.
      • No problem
      • You are all set on my side. Again, many thanks. Thank you for being the best part of Apple!
      That is all. I have no idea if the info will really be seen by higher ups . But that was how it went.
      - Via Otnar1
       
      Will you help us spread the word?
    • By TheWorldNewsOrg
      The U.S. Supreme Court seemed open to the idea of allowing iPhone users to proceed with an antitrust suit against Apple. At question here is whether the company's App Store holds an illegal monopoly.
    • Guest Nicole
      By Guest Nicole
      A handful of apps are no longer supported on the Apple Watch, according to a report by Apple Insider. Major apps like Google Maps, Amazon, and eBay appear to have quietly abandoned the Apple Watch App Store, without giving a heads-up or providing any explanation to users.
      AI reports that Google pulled support for its Maps app on watchOS a few weeks ago, while recent updates to the Amazon and eBay apps no longer reference support for the Apple Watch. Other affected apps include Target (the main one, not its coupon app Cartwheel) and TripAdvisor. A TripAdvisor thread dating back to February questioned the changes, but users said they emailed technical support and received no response.
      Continue reading
    • Guest Nicole
      By Guest Nicole
      SAN FRANCISCO — Travis Kalanick, the chief executive of Uber, visited Apple’s headquarters in early 2015 to meet with Timothy D. Cook, who runs the iPhone maker. It was a session that Mr. Kalanick was dreading.
      For months, Mr. Kalanick had pulled a fast one on Apple by directing his employees to help camouflage the ride-hailing app from Apple’s engineers. The reason? So Apple would not find out that Uber had been secretly identifying and tagging iPhones even after its app had been deleted and the devices erased — a fraud detection maneuver that violated Apple’s privacy guidelines.
      But Apple was onto the deception, and when Mr. Kalanick arrived at the midafternoon meeting sporting his favorite pair of bright red sneakers and hot-pink socks, Mr. Cook was prepared. “So, I’ve heard you’ve been breaking some of our rules,” Mr. Cook said in his calm, Southern tone. Stop the trickery, Mr. Cook then demanded, or Uber’s app would be kicked out of Apple’s App Store.
      For Mr. Kalanick, the moment was fraught with tension. If Uber’s app was yanked from the App Store, it would lose access to millions of iPhone customers — essentially destroying the ride-hailing company’s business. So Mr. Kalanick acceded.
      In a quest to build Uber into the world’s dominant ride-hailing entity, Mr. Kalanick has openly disregarded many rules and norms, backing down only when caught or cornered. He has flouted transportation and safety regulations, bucked against entrenched competitors and capitalized on legal loopholes and gray areas to gain a business advantage. In the process, Mr. Kalanick has helped create a new transportation industry, with Uber spreading to more than 70 countries and gaining a valuation of nearly $70 billion, and its business continues to grow.
      Continue reading
    • Guest Nicole
    • By The Librarian
      Patterson Bethel Apple Orchard
      Do you have photos / video from Patterson Apple Orchard? Post them below:
    • Guest Sonita
      By Guest Sonita
      How do I uninstall an app at my Mac?
      Thank you  
    • By Money & Finance
      Apple is deepening its ties in China with a $1 billion investment in ride-hailing company Didi. Bloomberg's Tim Higgins examines the deal and what it could mean for Apple in China.
    • By TheWorldNewsOrg
      With it's recent move to handle customer service via Twitter... this brings up the above question.
      I have wondered for a long time why Apple has never entered the social media game. Maybe they wanted to let it play out first? Maybe they wanted to watch the continued demise of Google +?

      I have been saying for over a year that I expect Apple will buy Twitter and will even more tightly integrate it into it's OS's.
      What do you think? Why have they stayed out for so long?
       
  • Forum Statistics

    61,556
    Total Topics
    113,283
    Total Posts
  • Member Statistics

    16,484
    Total Members
    1,592
    Most Online
    César Chávez
    Newest Member
    César Chávez
    Joined




  • Topics

  • Posts

    • It sure does my heart good. Yes, and I am taking diligent notes. I may be a washed-out has-been, but I will rise again!
    • Only to a selected few. The key word is "sniff". You just made my day. From plus to minus, if it is JW Elders, then what would be the opposite of that?
    • Does it really matter who a person on here is ?  Does it matter if a person uses 10 different 'usernames' ? If a person can bring some info' to the table that is surely good ?  Then others can confirm or criticise that info.  But to waffle on about who a person is or is not, what good is that doing any of us ?  I have a theory that this Forum is run by JW Elders. The purpose of the forum being to study the feelings and actions of JW's, Ex-JW's, Apostates, et al.  Then those Elders report their finding to a superior body, and it may even get to the GB.   But this theory does me no good, nor anyone else, so I will keep it to myself  .  Coffee time. 
    • @Arauna  Quote " I think that things LOST are a better topic "  But it isn't the topic. You would want it to be because as I've noticed you don't seem to have any things GAINED'  The GB have lumped great weights onto the shoulders of the congregants and the GB nor Elders lift a finger to help.  Just as the Pharisees did, adding negativity but nothing positive.  What I'm showing is that the GB is not motivated by Holy Spirit, and is not moving the CCJW forward. It is stagnant, but wallowing in immorality. 
    • Look, I like you, and all. I really do. Besides, I owe you for constructive criticism of my books. I share your prioritization of the overall picture and your frustration at some ragged human edges. So should I play this way? Hmm. Ah, well, I have a touch of OCD. Everyone knows it. I’ll ask for forgiveness later: “Now the day came when the sons of the true God entered to take their station before Jehovah, and Satan also entered among them. Then Jehovah said to Satan: I mean, come on! There! Now, a couple of caveats. Of course, he is not the devil. Nor is it the whistleblower talk that prompts the characterization. It is the atheism in combination with his relentless opposition—he has spurned and opposes EVERYTHING, not just characters of the past that appear squirrelly. And his plain self-worship, as manifest by his need to correct every little detail....who does THAT remind you of? Nor, obviously, are you Jehovah—any more than I am.  https://www.tomsheepandgoats.com/2019/11/oh-no-i-would-never-presume-to-compare-myself-with-the-most-high-god.html
    • Every word emanating from my keyboard is laden with value. They positively reek with the stuff. All words from any other source should be disposed of. There is one or two Dilberts from JTR that are pretty good, but other than that.....out to the curb with everything except my posts! My favorite memory with Alan is when he was carrying on about his atheism and evolution, and I came onboard as Dr. Adhominem or someone to discuss learnedly with him the problem of persuading the rank and file about evolutionary psychology, since there really is no evidence and its little more than wishful evolutionist thinking—to see how long I could pull the scam before he knew he was being had. It went for two or three comments. Of course, it was completely unfair on my part, but he has such a blustering manner and a manifest need to prove himself RIGHT on EVERY SINGLE DETAIL, even those having nothing to do with the thread, that I couldn’t resist. Call THAT not contributing anything of value? Now watch him respond that he knew instantly that Dr Adhominem was a fraud, for it is very important to him to NEVER be in the wrong over ANYTHING. I mean, the guy has a personality that smacks  of waving a red flag before a bull. And he has NO sense of humor. A “juggernaut,” Witness called him. It will be very hard for me to refrain from saying much. I will try my best, but it will be hard. It is a huge consumer of time, so I’m not eager to commit that sin again, and besides, I don’t want to get The Librarian (that old hen) mad at me once more.  
    • Per Wikipedia, The Constitution says: "The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors." When the Constitution was written, the terms "high crime" and "misdemeanor" were both used in senses that are quite different from the way we've come to think of them today. The original sense came from the laws that the framers had themselves been under, the British laws, which had used the term since as far back as 1386. It was originally a phrase to highlight the fact that almost any kind of "maladministration" --even things we might think of as NON-crimes-- could have a magnified effect due to the "high office" of the official, judge, president, etc. Most of the items that were considered "maladministration" would not be considered much of a problem at all if you or I practiced them. But they could become a perverting of justice or subject the populace to the ill effects in a way that only a person in high office had the ability to do. When James Madison discussed the formulation of the "constitution" with Mason, they started out with only Bribery and Treason, but Mason argued that the definition of Treason is too narrowly tied to enemies when at war, and that this would hardly cover situations when a president "attempts to subvert the Constitution." So the British term "maladministration" was suggested and then, after discussion, changed it to the more formal British term "high crimes and misdemeanors." According to the Wikipedia article on "Maladministration"  it means the following in UK law: The definition of maladministration is wide and can include: Delay Incorrect action or failure to take any action Failure to follow procedures or the law Failure to provide information Inadequate record-keeping Failure to investigate Failure to reply Misleading or inaccurate statements Inadequate liaison Inadequate consultation Broken promises That's such a vague definition that Madison said it would be the equivalent of just having a President who served at the pleasure of the Senate. It would "normalize" impeachment, and therefore the phrase "high crimes and misdemeanors" was deemed closer to the idea of "subverting the constitution." The phrase was definitely intended to narrow the reasons that the Senate might try to impeach a President, but was also a way to include things that would not nearly reach up to the definitions of bribery and treason. In Britain the phrase meant abuse of a high office even if the abuse did NOT violate any criminal laws. So this is how legal scholars have also applied it to the US presidency, usually with a focus on any subversion of the Constitution. The Wiki article on "High Crimes and Misdemeanors" includes the following that gives an idea of how the original framers understood it: Benjamin Franklin asserted that the power of impeachment and removal was necessary for those times when the Executive "rendered himself obnoxious," and the Constitution should provide for the "regular punishment of the Executive when his conduct should deserve it, and for his honorable acquittal when he should be unjustly accused." James Madison said that "impeachment... was indispensable" to defend the community against "the incapacity, negligence or perfidy of the chief Magistrate." With a single executive, Madison argued, unlike a legislature whose collective nature provided security, "loss of capacity or corruption was more within the compass of probable events, and either of them might be fatal to the Republic."[10] The process of impeaching someone in the House of Representatives and the Senate is difficult, made so to be the balance against efforts to easily remove people from office for minor reasons that could easily be determined by the standard of "high crimes and misdemeanors". It was George Mason who offered up the term "high crimes and misdemeanors" as one of the criteria to remove public officials who abuse their office. Their original intentions can be gleaned by the phrases and words that were proposed before, such as "high misdemeanor," "maladministration," or "other crime." Edmund Randolph said impeachment should be reserved for those who "misbehave." Charles Cotesworth Pinckney said, It should be reserved "for those who behave amiss, or betray their public trust." As can be seen from all these references to "high crimes and misdemeanors," the definition or its rationale does not relate to specific offences. This gives a lot of freedom of interpretation to the House of Representatives and the Senate. The constitutional law by nature is not concerned with being specific. The courts through precedence and the legislature through lawmaking make constitutional provisions specific. In this case the legislature (the House of Representatives and the Senate) acts as a court and can create a precedent. In Federalist No. 65, Alexander Hamilton said, "those offences which proceed from the misconduct of public men, or, in other words, from the abuse or violation of some public trust. They are of a nature which may with peculiar propriety be denominated political, as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to the society itself."[11] The first impeachment conviction by the United States Senate was in 1804 of John Pickering, a judge of the United States District Court for the District of New Hampshire, for chronic intoxication. Federal judges have been impeached and removed from office for tax evasion, conspiracy to solicit a bribe, and making false statements to a grand jury.[12]
  • Popular Now

  • Recently Browsing

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Who's Online (See full list)

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.