John Jacob
Sep 26, 07:44 AM
What about India? I want me an iPhone!! :mad:
And why the exclusive deal? Wouldn't that mean that Apple would sell LESS iPhone's? I can't see how an exclusive deal with Cingular/O2 benefits anyone other than Cingular/O2...
And why the exclusive deal? Wouldn't that mean that Apple would sell LESS iPhone's? I can't see how an exclusive deal with Cingular/O2 benefits anyone other than Cingular/O2...
Speedracer04
Sep 12, 02:22 PM
and what exactly is the gapless playback...I guess I missed that. Im a little disappointed by the conference...i mean the new iTV isnt even available until next year...blah
peharri
Sep 18, 07:52 AM
I'm sure I late getting into the argument, and that fanboyism depending on what network youre own will not change, but I really think GSM does have better voice quality than any other network.
(Before I begin, quick terminology comment: I'm going to avoid "CDMA" and use the term "IS-95" instead - I try to avoid using terms like "CDMA" and "TDMA" because it generally confuses people. Many think the next version of GSM, UMTS, is actually IS95, because it incorporates a CDMA air interface called W-CDMA, for instance. Others think GSM is the same thing as the D-AMPS/IS-136 system used by (the various phone companies that became) Cingular until they started moving to GSM because both have a "TDMA" air interface and IS-136 is usually called "TDMA".) In practice, UMTS and IS95 have almost nothing in common, UMTS is a revision of GSM, and GSM has almost nothing in common with IS-136. )
There's no way to compare the two. Both IS-95 and GSM implement a variety of different codecs that are provided differently by different operators. In the area I live, Cingular (GSM) tries to force many phones to use something called AMR-HR, which has "acceptable" voice quality when you have good reception, and drops to barely incomprehensable with any deterioration in signal strength. T-Mobile (GSM) clearly doesn't, and I can talk and listen to someone with both of us sounding like we're on a landline with one bar of signal. On the same phone.
Likewise, Verizon (IS-95) uses some awful bitrate codec for its network where I live (I believe they're heavily oversubscribed here) where pretty much everyone sounds like they're dying from some serious lung problem, and Sprint PCS (IS-95 too) doesn't and generally the call quality, at medium to good reception, seems pretty much ok. Sub-landline, but not seriously so.
With the variety of voice codecs the operators use, you can't really make a fair judgement merely on the basis of network technology. Either the operator's cheap, or it isn't. IS-95 was chosen by many networks on the basis that it's spectrum efficient (ie it's cheap), but on the other hand Sprint PCS was always content with call drops when I used it to handle network overloading rather than seriously compromising on call quality. Cingular's move to GSM has caused problems in that it's using a significantly less spectrum efficient technology than the technology it replaced, so Cingular's had to, in many places, hopefully temporarily, use the crappy half-rate codecs to boost capacity until it can get more towers online.
I wouldn't use voice quality as a way to judge the technologies.
(Before I begin, quick terminology comment: I'm going to avoid "CDMA" and use the term "IS-95" instead - I try to avoid using terms like "CDMA" and "TDMA" because it generally confuses people. Many think the next version of GSM, UMTS, is actually IS95, because it incorporates a CDMA air interface called W-CDMA, for instance. Others think GSM is the same thing as the D-AMPS/IS-136 system used by (the various phone companies that became) Cingular until they started moving to GSM because both have a "TDMA" air interface and IS-136 is usually called "TDMA".) In practice, UMTS and IS95 have almost nothing in common, UMTS is a revision of GSM, and GSM has almost nothing in common with IS-136. )
There's no way to compare the two. Both IS-95 and GSM implement a variety of different codecs that are provided differently by different operators. In the area I live, Cingular (GSM) tries to force many phones to use something called AMR-HR, which has "acceptable" voice quality when you have good reception, and drops to barely incomprehensable with any deterioration in signal strength. T-Mobile (GSM) clearly doesn't, and I can talk and listen to someone with both of us sounding like we're on a landline with one bar of signal. On the same phone.
Likewise, Verizon (IS-95) uses some awful bitrate codec for its network where I live (I believe they're heavily oversubscribed here) where pretty much everyone sounds like they're dying from some serious lung problem, and Sprint PCS (IS-95 too) doesn't and generally the call quality, at medium to good reception, seems pretty much ok. Sub-landline, but not seriously so.
With the variety of voice codecs the operators use, you can't really make a fair judgement merely on the basis of network technology. Either the operator's cheap, or it isn't. IS-95 was chosen by many networks on the basis that it's spectrum efficient (ie it's cheap), but on the other hand Sprint PCS was always content with call drops when I used it to handle network overloading rather than seriously compromising on call quality. Cingular's move to GSM has caused problems in that it's using a significantly less spectrum efficient technology than the technology it replaced, so Cingular's had to, in many places, hopefully temporarily, use the crappy half-rate codecs to boost capacity until it can get more towers online.
I wouldn't use voice quality as a way to judge the technologies.
sth
Apr 30, 04:23 PM
Curious that everyone is clamoring for a thunderbolt-enabled machine, but there isn't a single thunderbolt drive available on the market.
I guess some people just need to feel like they have new stuff even if it's totally pointless.
Most people keep their machines for at least a couple of years, so it makes sense to have TB built in. Many companies have announced that they are looking into TB, and not just for external storage. The possibilities of TB are much broader than that. Think of it as having PCIe on a cable. You could, for example, give your iMac USB3 support if a company decides to build an USB3 host with a Thunderbolt port. Same for eSATA etc...
Of course not much can be done right now, but you have to start somewhere to overcome the chicken/egg-problem.
We'll probably see broader support for TB when PCs based on Ivy Bridge are hitting the market next year (Intel has said to include TB support directly in the chipset). At that time, most of the people waiting here will still be using their mid-2011 iMacs for quite a few years to come.
Besides abolishing the ability of your graphics card, there are other interesting features of the processor. The hardware giant has confirmed that Sandy Bridge was designed with an integrated content protection to prevent piracy of high-end digital quality.
Just because the hardware supports it, it doesn't mean the software has to use it, especially in Apple's case. They even had seperate TPM chips built into the first Intel Macs and never actually used them for anything.
1- Matte screen option (Isn't there an aftermarket for this?)
No, there isn't. Putting an anti-glare film on a glass panel is NOT the same as a matte screen.
That's why I keep saying look for a redesign this Fall, just before or just after Lion is released.
What sense would it make for Apple to update the iMac twice in such a rapid succession? If anything, Apple's hardware cycles are getting even longer, mostly around 10-12 months in recent years. And at least from Intel, there will be nothing new to put into these machines by that date.
Lion is going to be released about a month after the new iMac, so if the redesign somehow really coincides with the release, it will probably happen right now.
Please keep USB 2.0 and Firewire for a couple more years.....
I don't think you have to worry about that for a long time.
In addition, we'll probably even get native USB3 in next year's models.
What's the deal with people wanting the matte version? Anyone care to explain the reasoning behind it to a noob like myself? Thanks in advance
If you have a window behind you or bad ceiling lights, the glass screen is almost unusable because of the reflections.
Matte screens do not have this problem because they diffuse the light.
I guess some people just need to feel like they have new stuff even if it's totally pointless.
Most people keep their machines for at least a couple of years, so it makes sense to have TB built in. Many companies have announced that they are looking into TB, and not just for external storage. The possibilities of TB are much broader than that. Think of it as having PCIe on a cable. You could, for example, give your iMac USB3 support if a company decides to build an USB3 host with a Thunderbolt port. Same for eSATA etc...
Of course not much can be done right now, but you have to start somewhere to overcome the chicken/egg-problem.
We'll probably see broader support for TB when PCs based on Ivy Bridge are hitting the market next year (Intel has said to include TB support directly in the chipset). At that time, most of the people waiting here will still be using their mid-2011 iMacs for quite a few years to come.
Besides abolishing the ability of your graphics card, there are other interesting features of the processor. The hardware giant has confirmed that Sandy Bridge was designed with an integrated content protection to prevent piracy of high-end digital quality.
Just because the hardware supports it, it doesn't mean the software has to use it, especially in Apple's case. They even had seperate TPM chips built into the first Intel Macs and never actually used them for anything.
1- Matte screen option (Isn't there an aftermarket for this?)
No, there isn't. Putting an anti-glare film on a glass panel is NOT the same as a matte screen.
That's why I keep saying look for a redesign this Fall, just before or just after Lion is released.
What sense would it make for Apple to update the iMac twice in such a rapid succession? If anything, Apple's hardware cycles are getting even longer, mostly around 10-12 months in recent years. And at least from Intel, there will be nothing new to put into these machines by that date.
Lion is going to be released about a month after the new iMac, so if the redesign somehow really coincides with the release, it will probably happen right now.
Please keep USB 2.0 and Firewire for a couple more years.....
I don't think you have to worry about that for a long time.
In addition, we'll probably even get native USB3 in next year's models.
What's the deal with people wanting the matte version? Anyone care to explain the reasoning behind it to a noob like myself? Thanks in advance
If you have a window behind you or bad ceiling lights, the glass screen is almost unusable because of the reflections.
Matte screens do not have this problem because they diffuse the light.
!� V �!
Apr 25, 03:54 PM
Good. The unibody design was never great, it was just so-so. The AlBook powerbook that preceded it had a MUCH better design.
The TiBooks where probably my fav of all PowerBook/MacBook Pro finish and design. :D
The TiBooks where probably my fav of all PowerBook/MacBook Pro finish and design. :D
mi5moav
Aug 31, 10:45 PM
I'm thinking of an Apple/Canon merger? I was hoping for a buyout of leica or kodak, but I think a Canon merger might work. We haven't seen any large mergers buyouts since HP/Compaq and something is going to happen soon. Though I don't know if this is true or not Steve Jobs and Canon have had close ties for nearly 15 years and I've noticed this recently with the Canon products being given first priority in there digital/video store. At one time Canon even invested something like $10 million into NEXT. Snapping(excuse the pun) Canon would help with a huge amount of patents and might be easier then starting from scratch with a camera or camcorder.
~Shard~
Sep 13, 09:12 PM
Go away- just go away.
Can we all just agree not to talk abiout this thing until it is actually out? There is so much BS about this thing, maybe it does not deserve anything until two weeks after it is out... if ever.
Sorry man, this is MacRumors. If you don't like talking about rumored products and such, sign up for an account on MacFacts. :p :cool:
The mock-up looks cool - definitely something that I could see Apple designing. It bares quite a similarity though to LG's Chocolate phone...
http://img80.imageshack.us/img80/3426/chocmicrosdfw5.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
http://img80.imageshack.us/img80/255/lgchocolatera7.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
http://img80.imageshack.us/img80/9552/lgchocolate720703sn3.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
Can we all just agree not to talk abiout this thing until it is actually out? There is so much BS about this thing, maybe it does not deserve anything until two weeks after it is out... if ever.
Sorry man, this is MacRumors. If you don't like talking about rumored products and such, sign up for an account on MacFacts. :p :cool:
The mock-up looks cool - definitely something that I could see Apple designing. It bares quite a similarity though to LG's Chocolate phone...
http://img80.imageshack.us/img80/3426/chocmicrosdfw5.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
http://img80.imageshack.us/img80/255/lgchocolatera7.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
http://img80.imageshack.us/img80/9552/lgchocolate720703sn3.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
enklined
Mar 23, 05:34 PM
Isn't it possible that the heads up provided up this app (and friends, newspapers, etc) may make people who know they will be drinking later in the evening re-think their mode of transportation? Could be saving a life or two.
Eh not really. If you've been drinking. Don't drive. Not a difficult dilemma to solve. No technology required to solve it.
And if you are planning to go out and get hammered, take a taxi.
I agree, no one could argue against that. However, for the guy who thinks he may be sober enough to drive: he checks his phone and gets discouraged by the local check points and decides to hail a cab.
Seems like a very decent possibility of this happening. Could save a life, or many. For that alone, the app shouldn't be pulled.
Eh not really. If you've been drinking. Don't drive. Not a difficult dilemma to solve. No technology required to solve it.
And if you are planning to go out and get hammered, take a taxi.
I agree, no one could argue against that. However, for the guy who thinks he may be sober enough to drive: he checks his phone and gets discouraged by the local check points and decides to hail a cab.
Seems like a very decent possibility of this happening. Could save a life, or many. For that alone, the app shouldn't be pulled.
rstansby
Apr 19, 11:21 PM
The logo on the center of the record, not the album artwork. The Beatle's logo looks like an apple to me, Apple's logo looks like an apple to me. We both know if the sides were reversed, Apple would have filed a suit.
Apple Corps (owned by the The Beatles) did sue Apple.
So there you have it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps_v_Apple_Computer
Apple Corps (owned by the The Beatles) did sue Apple.
So there you have it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps_v_Apple_Computer
cwt1nospam
Jan 3, 08:09 AM
Ummm.... Didn't most of the early iOS jail breaking methods target holes in OS. Sure more grey hat than black hat but risk is there to be aware of regardless of platform.
That "risk" requires the active participation of the user. That's a huge difference from simply tricking them into clicking/tapping on something.
In theory, your bank account is vulnerable to a hacker getting you to deliberately withdraw cash and give it to them, even though you know what they're trying to do. Is that a realistic possibility? It's not any less real than the same hacker getting you to deliberately jail break your iPhone so they can send you a virus.
That "risk" requires the active participation of the user. That's a huge difference from simply tricking them into clicking/tapping on something.
In theory, your bank account is vulnerable to a hacker getting you to deliberately withdraw cash and give it to them, even though you know what they're trying to do. Is that a realistic possibility? It's not any less real than the same hacker getting you to deliberately jail break your iPhone so they can send you a virus.
farmermac
Mar 30, 11:22 AM
i love when big companies publicly fight like this. Dont really care about the actual issue, but the details are so interesting. The lawyers basically make it look like children are fighting.
JAT
Apr 11, 12:05 PM
Try proofing before posting articles.
"especially when there it is possible to be an officially licensed AirPlay partner."
They do appreciate notice of such things, but you could try using a friendly tone.
True, but if you've just spent �450 on the receiver and another �100 or so on speakers you'd maybe resent having to shell out more for AirPlay.
I've never quite understood the mindset that '$600 is ok for a PS3, $300 is ok for an iPod Touch, $2000 is ok for a pieced gaming rig, $200+$30/month forever is ok for a smartphone....but spend another $30 to get a necessary accessory??? You bastards are ripping me off!!' :rolleyes:
Also, people should really plan ahead and not expect others (say, Apple) to accomplish setting up their home for them. Expecting and whining about getting any speaker and any song on any device to communicate without YOU having a bit of forethought is silly. If you have 10 rooms with speakers, then set them up right with potential 'friends' iPods' hookup somewhere. Put your iTunes server on the most intelligent computer for whole house audio and set it up appropriately. You should be happy it no longer costs $10000+ to do such a thing. Whether it's a few AEXs or other means, you can get what you want, go do it.
"especially when there it is possible to be an officially licensed AirPlay partner."
They do appreciate notice of such things, but you could try using a friendly tone.
True, but if you've just spent �450 on the receiver and another �100 or so on speakers you'd maybe resent having to shell out more for AirPlay.
I've never quite understood the mindset that '$600 is ok for a PS3, $300 is ok for an iPod Touch, $2000 is ok for a pieced gaming rig, $200+$30/month forever is ok for a smartphone....but spend another $30 to get a necessary accessory??? You bastards are ripping me off!!' :rolleyes:
Also, people should really plan ahead and not expect others (say, Apple) to accomplish setting up their home for them. Expecting and whining about getting any speaker and any song on any device to communicate without YOU having a bit of forethought is silly. If you have 10 rooms with speakers, then set them up right with potential 'friends' iPods' hookup somewhere. Put your iTunes server on the most intelligent computer for whole house audio and set it up appropriately. You should be happy it no longer costs $10000+ to do such a thing. Whether it's a few AEXs or other means, you can get what you want, go do it.
ngenerator
Mar 23, 05:03 PM
Boo! What's the point of drinking and driving if I can't also be distracted by my bright and pretty iPhone? Goddamn senators
stagi
Nov 16, 08:38 AM
Yes, but only for Apple, because they own the infrastructure. We still haven't heard of a company that can really make a living with software for the iPhone/iPod Touch platform. So far, it's all just hype and even though there are hundreds of thousands of apps distributed through the AppStore, the only winner at this point in time is Apple.
I have actually heard of lots of companies making very good money since the app store has been released, plenty of small devs that the app store has changed their lives as well as big companies making millions already.
I actually think RA should have worked a little harder with apple to address their frustrations instead of just leaving the app store to make a statement and in the end are only hurting themselves.
I have actually heard of lots of companies making very good money since the app store has been released, plenty of small devs that the app store has changed their lives as well as big companies making millions already.
I actually think RA should have worked a little harder with apple to address their frustrations instead of just leaving the app store to make a statement and in the end are only hurting themselves.
.jpg "flash world map available for")
JimMacFan
Mar 23, 09:18 AM
What are the odds on a 30" display? I'm thinking it's not likely but would buy one if they built it. Probably unlikely since they did away with the 30" monitors already.
bedifferent
May 3, 11:33 AM
Great update� waiting for the usual suspects to come around to list any [unreasonable] cons :p�
SmalTek
Nov 14, 12:21 PM
I think that Apple doesn't have resources for decent quality review process.
App store works in a such way, that all underdog app developers want to update their apps as often as possible. A new update brings an app to the first page in its category, sorted by date (for a day or 2)
Apple does not have guts or desire to charge for reviews, and all this mess goes on. They "review" apps very formally, and I suspect that this is outsourced to India.
If Apple wants to make this right, they should include 10 or 20 reviews into the annual $100 developer fee, and charge $20-$50 for each additional review. That would greatly reduce the number of updates, and increase the quality of reviews.
I myself have several apps in the appstore, and my apps and updates were also rejected many times for formal reasons, which were totally stupid in the context of my apps.
And what's also funny, Apple suddenly rejected my critical update with a bug fix because of a piece of graphic that already was in my app for 6 months :-)
App store works in a such way, that all underdog app developers want to update their apps as often as possible. A new update brings an app to the first page in its category, sorted by date (for a day or 2)
Apple does not have guts or desire to charge for reviews, and all this mess goes on. They "review" apps very formally, and I suspect that this is outsourced to India.
If Apple wants to make this right, they should include 10 or 20 reviews into the annual $100 developer fee, and charge $20-$50 for each additional review. That would greatly reduce the number of updates, and increase the quality of reviews.
I myself have several apps in the appstore, and my apps and updates were also rejected many times for formal reasons, which were totally stupid in the context of my apps.
And what's also funny, Apple suddenly rejected my critical update with a bug fix because of a piece of graphic that already was in my app for 6 months :-)
ChristianJapan
Apr 22, 08:05 AM
If I can stream and download to a iDevice I would be a happy camper. Should be users choice based on need. Streaming in many cases will not make it.
And SJ knows soon WHAT you listen WHERE and WHEN and HOW OFTEN. I'm sure there is marketing to be done. At least when iPhone or iPad are used.
And SJ knows soon WHAT you listen WHERE and WHEN and HOW OFTEN. I'm sure there is marketing to be done. At least when iPhone or iPad are used.
cirus
Apr 29, 09:53 PM
Apple's market share is growing but the fact that they supposedly (according to other posts) sell 90% of the computers that cost more than $1000 indicates that they are never going to really own the market. If they want to achieve true market dominance they need to lower their prices to attract the "I ain't paying over $800 for a fricking computer" crowd (the vast majority of people). Until they make their products affordable to the majority, they will never have a majority of the market share. Windows will always be around unless they make their products so that everyone can buy one.
They can still make record profits though.
However, if you exclude revenue that did not come from computers (ipods, itunes, etc.) and only look at products that are directly comparable (both companies sell a similar product) Microsoft has decidedly more revenue. For example there are two stores: Store 1 (pharmacy and other things including non perishable food) and Store 2 (food only). Only a small portion of store 1 's revenue comes from food. Store 1 is bigger than store 2 but it would be wrong to assume that store 1 is a bigger player in the food market as only a small portion of its revenue comes from food. It actually has less market penetration than store 2.
They can still make record profits though.
However, if you exclude revenue that did not come from computers (ipods, itunes, etc.) and only look at products that are directly comparable (both companies sell a similar product) Microsoft has decidedly more revenue. For example there are two stores: Store 1 (pharmacy and other things including non perishable food) and Store 2 (food only). Only a small portion of store 1 's revenue comes from food. Store 1 is bigger than store 2 but it would be wrong to assume that store 1 is a bigger player in the food market as only a small portion of its revenue comes from food. It actually has less market penetration than store 2.
Some_Big_Spoon
Oct 27, 09:10 AM
I'm a Green Peace supporter, but with Bush in the Whitehouse, don't they have bigger fish to fry?
cwt1nospam
Mar 16, 11:31 AM
OS X Server ships with clamav for filtering viruses through the email server. Lion merges client and server. Therefore, there will be an antivirus program shipping with 10.7.
That does not in any way imply that it is necessary for the OS. Since the server can have Windows clients many businesses will like this "feature" so I can't blame Apple for including it.
Personally, I figure that if I pass an infected file on to a PC user it's their responsibility to detect and remove the virus, not mine. I didn't force them to buy a Windows box.
That does not in any way imply that it is necessary for the OS. Since the server can have Windows clients many businesses will like this "feature" so I can't blame Apple for including it.
Personally, I figure that if I pass an infected file on to a PC user it's their responsibility to detect and remove the virus, not mine. I didn't force them to buy a Windows box.
Popeye206
Apr 22, 08:51 AM
You never OWNED any of this stuff. You owned the physical media, and you had an unlimited license to you. The technology is just clarifying this.
If you had actually owned it, you could have copied it as much as you wanted-- legally-- and resold the copies to others. You have been capable of doing this, but it was illegal; it also was difficult to enforce the law. Now the technology is actually starting to match your legal rights. It's actually wonderful. You are not losing anything you had legally, but the true owners (the content creators and the people who support them financially) can stop getting ripped off by criminals.
+1 LOL!
Have to laugh... so many people here are upset about nothing. All it says in this rumor is that you would have the option of storing your libraries on-line and access them from multiple points. And if you upload something you already "own" they will take that too. Not just what you've purchased from iTunes.
It's a value added service that I'm sure Apple is looking to do something different with and I'm sure there's more to the story... like that this will be used for Video, books and other media too. The advantages:
If you had actually owned it, you could have copied it as much as you wanted-- legally-- and resold the copies to others. You have been capable of doing this, but it was illegal; it also was difficult to enforce the law. Now the technology is actually starting to match your legal rights. It's actually wonderful. You are not losing anything you had legally, but the true owners (the content creators and the people who support them financially) can stop getting ripped off by criminals.
+1 LOL!
Have to laugh... so many people here are upset about nothing. All it says in this rumor is that you would have the option of storing your libraries on-line and access them from multiple points. And if you upload something you already "own" they will take that too. Not just what you've purchased from iTunes.
It's a value added service that I'm sure Apple is looking to do something different with and I'm sure there's more to the story... like that this will be used for Video, books and other media too. The advantages:
robeddie
Apr 25, 02:05 PM
please get rid of the bezel. make it as small as possible.
please do not make it thinner. rather reduce footprint and keep battery life up.
Agreed. I've never understood why macs have such large bezel's. The 11" MBA is a notable offender in particular, since because the laptop is so small, the wide bezel looks even more immense compared to the rest of the laptop.
please do not make it thinner. rather reduce footprint and keep battery life up.
Agreed. I've never understood why macs have such large bezel's. The 11" MBA is a notable offender in particular, since because the laptop is so small, the wide bezel looks even more immense compared to the rest of the laptop.
Ugg
Apr 17, 08:55 PM
I don't know if i can. Give me some time. But doesn't it make sense that if u stop using something that killed disease spreading insects that the insects will continue to spread the disease?
What if the DDT destroys frogs and kills birds? They are two of the mosquitoes biggest enemies. That will obviously only make the problem worse, won't it?
Malaria is a big killer but mosquito nets can make an enormous difference as well as education about what causes malaria.
Reaching for a can of toxic chemicals isn't always the best solution. If we don't approach a problem holistically, all we do is create more problems down the road.
Do you know what PCBs are? Did you know that small Aleutian Islands qualify for EPA cleanup (http://juneauempire.com/stories/081197/toxins.html)even though no PCBs have ever been on the island?
Higher levels of PCBs were found in otters taken from Adak than from otters taken off the coast of California, the scientists said. Their findings were reported in a study published last month in the journal Marine Pollution Bulletin.
Enough DDT was found in egg samples from eagles on Kiska Island to indicate the pesticide may be harming the bird's ability to reproduce in one of the nation's most remote areas, scientists said.
What if the DDT destroys frogs and kills birds? They are two of the mosquitoes biggest enemies. That will obviously only make the problem worse, won't it?
Malaria is a big killer but mosquito nets can make an enormous difference as well as education about what causes malaria.
Reaching for a can of toxic chemicals isn't always the best solution. If we don't approach a problem holistically, all we do is create more problems down the road.
Do you know what PCBs are? Did you know that small Aleutian Islands qualify for EPA cleanup (http://juneauempire.com/stories/081197/toxins.html)even though no PCBs have ever been on the island?
Higher levels of PCBs were found in otters taken from Adak than from otters taken off the coast of California, the scientists said. Their findings were reported in a study published last month in the journal Marine Pollution Bulletin.
Enough DDT was found in egg samples from eagles on Kiska Island to indicate the pesticide may be harming the bird's ability to reproduce in one of the nation's most remote areas, scientists said.
