QCassidy352
Apr 6, 02:33 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
I'm not joking when I say this - I held off buying a Macbook for years purely because I didn't want to be associated with these hardcore Apple fanboys who live under Steve Job's bed. It's quite sickening.
I love Apple products, but doesn't mean you have to be blind to the alternatives. It's absolutely amazing how easily people can be brainwashed.
It's a two way street, really. I mean, what would one expect to see/read on a Mac rumor board?
I've been on the other boards, like Android and non-Apple computers and they're just as bad. Some people bash Apple because it's the cool/in thing to do. The Android fanatics are worse in some cases. Their biggest argument is "Open" and "Choice". Sounds familiar...kind of like the Linux crowd back in the day. Where are they now?
In the end, buy what you want and need. It's your money, your choice. If you don't like what someone else bought, get over it. Does it affect you? Does it somehow change how you live? I could give a flying f*&k what my neighbor buys. Whether it's a car, golf clubs, PC, phone, whatever...
Spouting off sounds like jealousy...
Agreed. Basing your buying decisions on who else does or doesn't buy the same product is... How can I put this nicely... Utterly ridiculous.
I'm not joking when I say this - I held off buying a Macbook for years purely because I didn't want to be associated with these hardcore Apple fanboys who live under Steve Job's bed. It's quite sickening.
I love Apple products, but doesn't mean you have to be blind to the alternatives. It's absolutely amazing how easily people can be brainwashed.
It's a two way street, really. I mean, what would one expect to see/read on a Mac rumor board?
I've been on the other boards, like Android and non-Apple computers and they're just as bad. Some people bash Apple because it's the cool/in thing to do. The Android fanatics are worse in some cases. Their biggest argument is "Open" and "Choice". Sounds familiar...kind of like the Linux crowd back in the day. Where are they now?
In the end, buy what you want and need. It's your money, your choice. If you don't like what someone else bought, get over it. Does it affect you? Does it somehow change how you live? I could give a flying f*&k what my neighbor buys. Whether it's a car, golf clubs, PC, phone, whatever...
Spouting off sounds like jealousy...
Agreed. Basing your buying decisions on who else does or doesn't buy the same product is... How can I put this nicely... Utterly ridiculous.
diamond.g
Mar 22, 02:53 PM
Rand didn't trip on the Civil Rights Act? Ok, only if you agree with him that entire towns in the South should have the right to discriminate like they used to. The free market will sort it out... just like it did before the civil rights act.
At some point all the discriminated folks would have started their own businesses and everything would have been a-ok right? Isn't that how the free market is supposed to work? :D
At some point all the discriminated folks would have started their own businesses and everything would have been a-ok right? Isn't that how the free market is supposed to work? :D
notjustjay
Sep 19, 10:57 AM
why does anyone need to justify to you why they want 64-bit computing?
My demanding you to give me a reason has about the same weight as all the people in this thread (and many others) demanding Apple provide them with the machine they think they needed yesterday.
My demanding you to give me a reason has about the same weight as all the people in this thread (and many others) demanding Apple provide them with the machine they think they needed yesterday.
VanNess
Aug 5, 05:59 PM
Im glad we will be getting a bit of closure on monday, while I love the rumors its been getting a bit to much, im actively avoiding all mac related sites... I dont want to be the boy that spoilt his own Xmas! :D
Here, let me show you the art and science of rumoring (http://www.misterbg.org/AppleProductCycle/), Apple-style.
Here, let me show you the art and science of rumoring (http://www.misterbg.org/AppleProductCycle/), Apple-style.
Leoff
Sep 19, 06:12 AM
What's funny is that even if new MacBooks and MacBook Pros were released tomorrow with the newer Merom chip, 90% of you folks in here wouldn't notice a difference in your daily computing. You would not say "OMG, this 64 bit processing and extra .16Ghz speed is AWESOME!!! I can't BELIEVE I lived without this for so long!!!" You wouldn't even notice unless someone told you.
rxse7en
Nov 29, 06:31 AM
Time for Apple to change the paradigm again. I think it's time for Apple to start putting together a music production house. Offer musicians the ability to go direct to iTunes with all the marketing necessary to promote their catalogs. I'm not very familiar with the music industry, but I "think" Apple is quite prepared to create their own studios, handle their own promotion/marketing and already have a HIGHLY efficient distribution system in place. Granted, they are not supposed to be creating music according to their Apple Music agreement, but if they just bought Apple Music outright it would make a great fit, eh?
B
B
Gelfin
Mar 3, 02:59 PM
Bill, it's OK to react emotionally. We're people, not robots. :)
Speak for yourself, squishy meat-beast.
Speak for yourself, squishy meat-beast.
arkitect
Apr 28, 06:13 AM
I am not going to read 7 pages to see if someone already said this because I am sure they did.
It's clearly a forgery.
And you base that on what evidence exactly? :confused:
Not liking Obama does not mean you are racist.
Well judging by your signature I'd take that comment with a large pinch of salt.
It's clearly a forgery.
And you base that on what evidence exactly? :confused:
Not liking Obama does not mean you are racist.
Well judging by your signature I'd take that comment with a large pinch of salt.
shawnce
Jul 27, 01:12 PM
The next gen of chips has 4 core versions of conroe and woodcrest, each with the same sockets as the ones they're replacing.
Those aren't next generation version of the Core 2 just MCM (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-Chip_Module) of the existing Core 2.
Those aren't next generation version of the Core 2 just MCM (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-Chip_Module) of the existing Core 2.
Lord Blackadder
Mar 23, 05:50 PM
Here we have an article laying out the case for non intervention (http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/03/2011322135442593945.html) by a Princeton law professor (emeritus) published by Al Jazeera. A worthy read, and here are two exerpts I've commented on.
In effect, overall historical trends vindicate trust in the dynamics of self-determination, even if short-term disasters may and do occur, and similarly underscores the problematic character of intervention, even given the purest of motivations, which rarely, if ever, exists in world politics.
I find it hard to disagree with this, but watching Gaddafi strongarm his way back into authority is a very bitter pill to swallow - plus, historical trends also suggest that other nations rarely resist the temptation to intervene when they feel they have something to gain by intervention (be it increased political influence, territorial gains, economic interests etc). The current structure of the UN is unable to prevent this. Also, even without direct intervention, the process of self-determination does not exist in a total vaccum. I wonder how the author regards more passive measures such as official censure, economic sanctions, asset-freezing etc etc? Do he consider those to be intereferences to self-determination?
The Charter in Article 2(7) accepts the limitation on UN authority to intervene in matters "essentially within the domestic jurisdiction" of member states unless there is a genuine issue of international peace and security present, which there was not, even in the claim, which was supposedly motivated solely to protect the civilian population of Libya.
But such a claim was patently misleading and disingenuous as the obvious goals, as manifest from the scale and character of military actions taken, were minimally to protect the armed rebels from being defeated, and possibly destroyed, and maximally, to achieve a regime change resulting in a new governing leadership that was friendly to the West, including buying fully into its liberal economic geopolitical policy compass.
Using a slightly altered language, the UN Charter embedded a social contract with its membership that privileged the politics of self-determination and was heavily weighted against the politics of intervention.
Neither position is absolute, but what seems to have happened with respect to Libya is that intervention was privileged and self-determination cast aside.
It is an instance of normatively dubious practise trumping the legal/moral ethos of containing geopolitical discretion with binding rules governing the use of force and the duty of non-intervention.
We do not know yet what will happen in Libya, but we do know enough to oppose such a precedent that exhibits so many unfortunate characteristics.
It is time to restore the global social contract between territorial sovereign states and the organised international community, which not only corresponds with the outlawry of aggressive war but also reflect the movement of history in support of the soft power struggles of the non-Western peoples of the world.
I do agree with him that it would be foolish not to recognize that the ultimate goal here is - yet again - regime change regardless of what the official statements and resolutions state.
But while the author adheres to a legal argument, reality is more expansive in my mind. Isn't the UN, by it's very nature, interventionalist on some level? Also, at what point does outside influence affect "self-determination" to the point that it is no longer that? Surely there will always be outside influence - but when does it interfere with self-determination?
Of course, all of these considerations are irrelevant if you are against the concept of the UN or even foreign alliances, as a vocal minority of conservatives are in the US. I imagine they'd prefer to let the "free market" somehow decide what happens.
In effect, overall historical trends vindicate trust in the dynamics of self-determination, even if short-term disasters may and do occur, and similarly underscores the problematic character of intervention, even given the purest of motivations, which rarely, if ever, exists in world politics.
I find it hard to disagree with this, but watching Gaddafi strongarm his way back into authority is a very bitter pill to swallow - plus, historical trends also suggest that other nations rarely resist the temptation to intervene when they feel they have something to gain by intervention (be it increased political influence, territorial gains, economic interests etc). The current structure of the UN is unable to prevent this. Also, even without direct intervention, the process of self-determination does not exist in a total vaccum. I wonder how the author regards more passive measures such as official censure, economic sanctions, asset-freezing etc etc? Do he consider those to be intereferences to self-determination?
The Charter in Article 2(7) accepts the limitation on UN authority to intervene in matters "essentially within the domestic jurisdiction" of member states unless there is a genuine issue of international peace and security present, which there was not, even in the claim, which was supposedly motivated solely to protect the civilian population of Libya.
But such a claim was patently misleading and disingenuous as the obvious goals, as manifest from the scale and character of military actions taken, were minimally to protect the armed rebels from being defeated, and possibly destroyed, and maximally, to achieve a regime change resulting in a new governing leadership that was friendly to the West, including buying fully into its liberal economic geopolitical policy compass.
Using a slightly altered language, the UN Charter embedded a social contract with its membership that privileged the politics of self-determination and was heavily weighted against the politics of intervention.
Neither position is absolute, but what seems to have happened with respect to Libya is that intervention was privileged and self-determination cast aside.
It is an instance of normatively dubious practise trumping the legal/moral ethos of containing geopolitical discretion with binding rules governing the use of force and the duty of non-intervention.
We do not know yet what will happen in Libya, but we do know enough to oppose such a precedent that exhibits so many unfortunate characteristics.
It is time to restore the global social contract between territorial sovereign states and the organised international community, which not only corresponds with the outlawry of aggressive war but also reflect the movement of history in support of the soft power struggles of the non-Western peoples of the world.
I do agree with him that it would be foolish not to recognize that the ultimate goal here is - yet again - regime change regardless of what the official statements and resolutions state.
But while the author adheres to a legal argument, reality is more expansive in my mind. Isn't the UN, by it's very nature, interventionalist on some level? Also, at what point does outside influence affect "self-determination" to the point that it is no longer that? Surely there will always be outside influence - but when does it interfere with self-determination?
Of course, all of these considerations are irrelevant if you are against the concept of the UN or even foreign alliances, as a vocal minority of conservatives are in the US. I imagine they'd prefer to let the "free market" somehow decide what happens.
bretm
Apr 11, 07:56 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
Go get yourself an Atrix or HTC and see if you like it better. You won't. We have an Atrix in our house. And it's dual processor still is slower than the iPhone 4. Heck, just interface snappiness and smoothness is still a lesser experience to the original iPhone.
Go get yourself an Atrix or HTC and see if you like it better. You won't. We have an Atrix in our house. And it's dual processor still is slower than the iPhone 4. Heck, just interface snappiness and smoothness is still a lesser experience to the original iPhone.
SkyStudios
Apr 25, 04:36 PM
First things first, let Apple pay the fines becuase this is indeed a violation of our privacy, Google and facebook paid ober 300,000 dollars to Europe for it why should Apple not pay the fine?
Lets get to the real deal, Apple was already sued for violating privacy laws last year, they where not only storing location data but collecting users political views which required fallowing personal emails, chats, web history recorded regardless of you cleaning it afterwards with some paid apps.
Its a federal offense to not only tap someones line, stalk them with location recording but sell them a device, if people knew this they would never of purchased the device., let those poeple in Top companies who have FBI protecting them from Espionage SUE APPLE and Android companies too if they violate privacy laws becuase thats info you can topple a company with fast, especially competitors.
As for the naive kids who claim police can use this location data to find a rapists or perpetrator at large your dead wrong kids, here is a list of proceedings which have to be met to do this,
The cops can not at all even look into your phone, etc, unless your dumb enough to give them info, how ever a PI or detective can., cops and everyone else need warrants if they want to use this info legally, anything other then that is a personal decision and violation of someones rights, if cops had access to your phone who knows what issues we would have, they are not trained on legal matters, detectives, PIs, federal agents, Pis and detectives working under a lawyer who does, all going through the district attorneys office can, even journalists who are retired Feds, detectives, Pis or CIA agents can, they know the laws or their work is worthless in court.
Cops can however use police jammers, eves drop on your line through the district attorneys office via the phone company, they can even turn your phone into a video camera if it has one with out software or you knowing this, so can the feds, this all is also useless unless a warrant is issued, if cuaght they lose their license or get fined,
Maybe Apple will just pay the fine and walk away with money they made toppling other companies by spying on their employees. , but one thing is for sure, they HAVE TO CHANGE THIS GAME and also REMOVE KIDS APPS that prey on children to pay for more games with out them even knowing it.
Lets get to the real deal, Apple was already sued for violating privacy laws last year, they where not only storing location data but collecting users political views which required fallowing personal emails, chats, web history recorded regardless of you cleaning it afterwards with some paid apps.
Its a federal offense to not only tap someones line, stalk them with location recording but sell them a device, if people knew this they would never of purchased the device., let those poeple in Top companies who have FBI protecting them from Espionage SUE APPLE and Android companies too if they violate privacy laws becuase thats info you can topple a company with fast, especially competitors.
As for the naive kids who claim police can use this location data to find a rapists or perpetrator at large your dead wrong kids, here is a list of proceedings which have to be met to do this,
The cops can not at all even look into your phone, etc, unless your dumb enough to give them info, how ever a PI or detective can., cops and everyone else need warrants if they want to use this info legally, anything other then that is a personal decision and violation of someones rights, if cops had access to your phone who knows what issues we would have, they are not trained on legal matters, detectives, PIs, federal agents, Pis and detectives working under a lawyer who does, all going through the district attorneys office can, even journalists who are retired Feds, detectives, Pis or CIA agents can, they know the laws or their work is worthless in court.
Cops can however use police jammers, eves drop on your line through the district attorneys office via the phone company, they can even turn your phone into a video camera if it has one with out software or you knowing this, so can the feds, this all is also useless unless a warrant is issued, if cuaght they lose their license or get fined,
Maybe Apple will just pay the fine and walk away with money they made toppling other companies by spying on their employees. , but one thing is for sure, they HAVE TO CHANGE THIS GAME and also REMOVE KIDS APPS that prey on children to pay for more games with out them even knowing it.
Pro31
Apr 6, 02:08 PM
It is because Motorola likes to tote their hardware, where as Apple's software is what kills it.
01civicman
Apr 8, 08:28 AM
Scenario 1: Store expects 1000 customers. Customer 15 walks in and buys all the store's stock. The remaining 985 customer walk in through the day and are told we have nothing to sell you. These 98.5% of the daily customers never return to the store in the future.
Scenario 2: Store expects 1000 customers and rations stock to serve the needs of the greatest percentage of their daily customers as possible. The great majority of customers are happy and continue to patronize the store in the future.
Scenario 2 above does not seem so bizarre to me.
We are talking business here, business that needs to function over time and not just over one day. All I know is there are a lot of people here who are taking great pleasure trashing a store for their own personal reasons. But the store must serve their overall client base as best as possible and sometimes that may mean being unable to satisfy every specific request every day.
If somebody came into my store and asked for all of the iPads, my managers would buy him dinner for a week. lol
Scenario 2: Store expects 1000 customers and rations stock to serve the needs of the greatest percentage of their daily customers as possible. The great majority of customers are happy and continue to patronize the store in the future.
Scenario 2 above does not seem so bizarre to me.
We are talking business here, business that needs to function over time and not just over one day. All I know is there are a lot of people here who are taking great pleasure trashing a store for their own personal reasons. But the store must serve their overall client base as best as possible and sometimes that may mean being unable to satisfy every specific request every day.
If somebody came into my store and asked for all of the iPads, my managers would buy him dinner for a week. lol
Billy Boo Bob
Aug 6, 08:38 PM
It won't be a live video stream. In the afternoon Apple will begin streaming a compressed HD recording of it.
I wish they would provide a full QT file download, like the movie trailers. Even if it isn't HD, but just the standard QT. Sure the file would be large, but they could BitTorrent it. Make a standalone app that uses BT, but will only download that one single file. You wouldn't even have to know that BT was under the hood... Just that you were downloading at near peak speeds (depending on when you actually grab the file).
I wish they would provide a full QT file download, like the movie trailers. Even if it isn't HD, but just the standard QT. Sure the file would be large, but they could BitTorrent it. Make a standalone app that uses BT, but will only download that one single file. You wouldn't even have to know that BT was under the hood... Just that you were downloading at near peak speeds (depending on when you actually grab the file).
littleman23408
Dec 1, 02:25 PM
after trying out the nascar challenges: :confused:... honestly they should have rather spent their money on getting more recent street cars ... thanks for having 10+ premium nascar cars :rolleyes:
I wish they would have done without the nascar, but it's not to bad playing around with those kinds of races. Those cars are heavy and you sure can feel it when you race them!
I wish they would have done without the nascar, but it's not to bad playing around with those kinds of races. Those cars are heavy and you sure can feel it when you race them!
jhedges3
Aug 11, 02:40 PM
OK. let us just cut to the chase. The keyword here is hand-over. CDMA2000 doesnt support it from GSM. GSM has 81%. Hence cdma is and will always be a small local network that can be used in small pockets on this planet. Furthermore, I seriously doubt ITU/FOMA will change anything in the standard to allow any compability for CDMA2000 since it is not in their interest.
The faster cdam/CDMA2000 moves to oblivion the better.
We would all benefit from one standard, cheaper phones, worldwide access, lower minute rates (from higher competition) Just look at how Vz bills you.
Having multiple standard on cellphones is just as clever as having two incompatible internet.
I couldn't care less about whether my phone works well in the EU. What is your data on the percentage of consumers that travel the world to such an extent that they purchase their phones with inter-country usability as their primary consideration?
What maters to me more, not most, is that the phone works well were I make the majority of calls, New York. The majority of people I know do the same. Some people are willing to sacrifice network for phone and a few extra dollars a month, they pref TM and similar carriers. Others want to have better network and get VW and pay for that accordingly.
It seems to me that there is some level of implicit, or not so implicit, EU v US on both sides here. To the person in the EU they should have it first cause, LEST WE NOT FORGET, most of them are using a standard with 81% of the world.
But does anyone really believe that App would bring a phone to market without making it widely available to US consumers, regardless of whether we�re in the 19% minority? Is there any history of this? Have they ever, for example, released new gen iPods late here? Have they ever, for example, released new gen iPods in Sweden first and had the rest of us in the US buying them on eBay from the lucky ones in Stockholm? It simply wouldn�t make sense.
But it�s not even worth fighting over. The availability of any App phone will be sufficient to include nearly all of us; which is to say that if they release such a product all dedicated App consumers will be able to get one on some carrier at some cost.
The faster cdam/CDMA2000 moves to oblivion the better.
We would all benefit from one standard, cheaper phones, worldwide access, lower minute rates (from higher competition) Just look at how Vz bills you.
Having multiple standard on cellphones is just as clever as having two incompatible internet.
I couldn't care less about whether my phone works well in the EU. What is your data on the percentage of consumers that travel the world to such an extent that they purchase their phones with inter-country usability as their primary consideration?
What maters to me more, not most, is that the phone works well were I make the majority of calls, New York. The majority of people I know do the same. Some people are willing to sacrifice network for phone and a few extra dollars a month, they pref TM and similar carriers. Others want to have better network and get VW and pay for that accordingly.
It seems to me that there is some level of implicit, or not so implicit, EU v US on both sides here. To the person in the EU they should have it first cause, LEST WE NOT FORGET, most of them are using a standard with 81% of the world.
But does anyone really believe that App would bring a phone to market without making it widely available to US consumers, regardless of whether we�re in the 19% minority? Is there any history of this? Have they ever, for example, released new gen iPods late here? Have they ever, for example, released new gen iPods in Sweden first and had the rest of us in the US buying them on eBay from the lucky ones in Stockholm? It simply wouldn�t make sense.
But it�s not even worth fighting over. The availability of any App phone will be sufficient to include nearly all of us; which is to say that if they release such a product all dedicated App consumers will be able to get one on some carrier at some cost.
Chundles
Jul 20, 08:36 AM
The Mactopus??
Notice time. I bags it, I said it first, it's MINE!!!
My only...
My Mactopus...
Notice time. I bags it, I said it first, it's MINE!!!
My only...
My Mactopus...
paulvee
Aug 18, 07:38 PM
My 3.0's shipping date just changed - for no obvious reason - from 8/20 to 9/19. One month. Clearly, something just got snagged in the supply chain.
Anyone else have this?
okay, it seems to be a RAM bottleneck. I had ordered a couple of 2 gig chips from apple cause I didn't mind paying the penalty now in order not to have to sell 1 gig'ers later on.
anyway, I'm on the phone now, getting standard RAM configuration, then I'm just going to to with OtherWorld's RAM.
I wish Apple had gotten their RAM supplies in order before they started shipping. Well, what can you do.
Anyone else have this?
okay, it seems to be a RAM bottleneck. I had ordered a couple of 2 gig chips from apple cause I didn't mind paying the penalty now in order not to have to sell 1 gig'ers later on.
anyway, I'm on the phone now, getting standard RAM configuration, then I'm just going to to with OtherWorld's RAM.
I wish Apple had gotten their RAM supplies in order before they started shipping. Well, what can you do.
OS2toMAC
Mar 22, 03:55 PM
With the shortages of iPad2's out there, and international sales about to start up, probably making it worse, if the Xoom, G Tabs and Playbooks are "close enough" (particularly for folks that are not avid Apple followers), they could get quite a few sales. At least that is my opinion. (And like everyone I have an @$$-hole too.):)
Roessnakhan
Mar 22, 12:53 PM
So what is next year the year of? Phones again let me guess
Yeah, probably.
Yeah, probably.
NoSmokingBandit
Sep 1, 11:15 AM
Idk, that just doesnt sound right...
They have higher-res models from the GT4/GTPSP artists (everything 3d is made with super high poly counts then downgraded as the game's engine requires) so i dont understand why they would use the low poly models from GT4 when it would take just as much time to export a higher res model from Maya.
Time will tell i suppose, but it just doesnt make sense for them to gimp standard cars for no reason.
They have higher-res models from the GT4/GTPSP artists (everything 3d is made with super high poly counts then downgraded as the game's engine requires) so i dont understand why they would use the low poly models from GT4 when it would take just as much time to export a higher res model from Maya.
Time will tell i suppose, but it just doesnt make sense for them to gimp standard cars for no reason.
SevenInchScrew
Sep 1, 09:50 AM
So i'm wondering, if the standard cars are indeed copy/pasted from GT4, then what about the new standard cars they will be adding (like updated models from the past 5 years)? Obviously the ps3 can handle higher poly models, so surely they wouldn't build new models then scale them down to match gt4... That would be idiotic.
As I understand it, all of the Standard� cars are using the models from GT4 and GT PSP. The models used in those 2 games are basically the same. GT PSP had well over 800 cars itself, and came out just last year, so it has quite a few newer models. So, subtract a few from the lists of those 2 games for the cars that have been updated to Premium� status, and you could still have well over 800 Standard� cars, as they say it will have. To me, that seems like the most likely solution that they've done.
As I understand it, all of the Standard� cars are using the models from GT4 and GT PSP. The models used in those 2 games are basically the same. GT PSP had well over 800 cars itself, and came out just last year, so it has quite a few newer models. So, subtract a few from the lists of those 2 games for the cars that have been updated to Premium� status, and you could still have well over 800 Standard� cars, as they say it will have. To me, that seems like the most likely solution that they've done.
tdmac
Apr 25, 04:15 PM
I think most people are missing this key bit of info - Location Services was turned off and the database was purged, and it still made a new database with new data...
No one is missing anything here. You as well as the Wall Street Journal are confusing "Location Services" with this database.
Location Services are those that provide data from 3rd party providers based on your location. Your date "IS" passed to them of where you are currently located so that they can provide you results on things in your area. i.e. Movie Schedules, Four Square, etc.
This database "locally" stores your proximity to cell towers and wifi antenna's.
No one is missing anything here. You as well as the Wall Street Journal are confusing "Location Services" with this database.
Location Services are those that provide data from 3rd party providers based on your location. Your date "IS" passed to them of where you are currently located so that they can provide you results on things in your area. i.e. Movie Schedules, Four Square, etc.
This database "locally" stores your proximity to cell towers and wifi antenna's.
