SciFrog
Oct 18, 06:43 PM
It is usable, but when you use it on your lap, it gets warmer and the CPU throttles down, resulting in slower times. I don't use it much so it works, and is under warranty... I rests on a laptop stand. It is the original 1.6Ghz, but seeing how some reputable magazine saw the slowdowns on the 2.13Ghz even more, not tempted to upgrade.
LagunaSol
May 4, 12:00 AM
I love the design of the iPhone 4 and love the screen. Why not just go with a Mac-like update routine, where you throw in a newer, faster processor as soon as one is available? The yearly iPhone reveal may be great for media coverage, but it's unrealistic when the Android gang releases a new device every 7 hours.
briansolomon
Apr 13, 10:31 PM
Can we get a $99 8GB model, too?
kfury77
Apr 15, 02:55 AM
You can 'like' a purchased track from within the music player app now, and post a comment about it. Surprised no one else mentioned this yet... Anyone else spotted any additional changes?
http://instagr.am/p/DKjvV/
http://instagr.am/p/DKjvV/
more...
Steelers7510
Apr 14, 07:33 AM
Sorry, this is a dumb question.
Whats a 16 GB AT&T iPhone cost without a 2 year plan?
$599.99
Google my friend... :cool:
Whats a 16 GB AT&T iPhone cost without a 2 year plan?
$599.99
Google my friend... :cool:
spillproof
Sep 30, 01:10 AM
I never knew people were experiencing this many dropped calls. I guess I don't make calls enough to experience all the fail. AT&T is the only phone company I've had, so I don't know any different. If Verizon did get the iPhone, I'm sure their network would struggle a bit too.
more...
twilson
Apr 15, 07:24 AM
Are people firing up their lawyers because Apple does not update their iPhone 3G that came with iOS 3 when they bought it in june 2010 ? Doesn't the licence flyer in the box say Apple will supply the current iOS version +1 ?
I'm not sure what it says exactly, but it will most likely be worded along the lines of "the next major iOS release after the initial launch date of the device."
I'm not sure what it says exactly, but it will most likely be worded along the lines of "the next major iOS release after the initial launch date of the device."
maclaptop
Apr 12, 06:08 PM
Breaking news, iPhone 5 to come out within the next 10 years :rolleyes:
Oh boy, and here I was expecting it in only 9 years. I guess that rumor was wrong. :)
Oh boy, and here I was expecting it in only 9 years. I guess that rumor was wrong. :)
more...
Platform
Oct 24, 09:00 AM
For the "why only MBP's and not MB's too"
As said, less press coverage, but also maybe more important is that now there is a gap between the [rosumer line and the consumer line ;)
750GB drives in iMac's , Mac Pro's , Xserves....!
As said, less press coverage, but also maybe more important is that now there is a gap between the [rosumer line and the consumer line ;)
750GB drives in iMac's , Mac Pro's , Xserves....!
DS Flyer
Apr 28, 04:02 PM
Does Apple's website specs show this?
EDIT. Nope. Still 9.3 mm thin
Just says -
Depth: 0.37 inch (9.3 mm)...lies, available in white and black....
...oh well
EDIT. Nope. Still 9.3 mm thin
Just says -
Depth: 0.37 inch (9.3 mm)...lies, available in white and black....
...oh well
more...
jweinraub
Jun 8, 04:09 PM
15 minutes?
45 Seconds is all it took to get the facts...
Google search: "android market return policy"
First result: http://www.google.com/mobile/android/market-policies.html
For those too lazy to click...
"Returns: You have 24 hours from the time of purchase (not download) to return any applications purchased from Android Market for a full refund of any applicable fees."
Summary: 24 Hours, not 15 minutes.
the fifteen minutes he was referring to was the second part of the guys question on the time period/grace period until it requires a password again, not it took him 15 minutes to figure out how to do this on an android. his sentence structure while poor, was understandable. your critical thinking skills seem to be lacking, however.
45 Seconds is all it took to get the facts...
Google search: "android market return policy"
First result: http://www.google.com/mobile/android/market-policies.html
For those too lazy to click...
"Returns: You have 24 hours from the time of purchase (not download) to return any applications purchased from Android Market for a full refund of any applicable fees."
Summary: 24 Hours, not 15 minutes.
the fifteen minutes he was referring to was the second part of the guys question on the time period/grace period until it requires a password again, not it took him 15 minutes to figure out how to do this on an android. his sentence structure while poor, was understandable. your critical thinking skills seem to be lacking, however.
MagnusVonMagnum
Nov 26, 03:09 PM
What I said: Users of the 120M+ iOS devices are doing just fine without Flash plugins is completely true. There are no Flash plugins for this device. Nobody can run a shred of Flash content in their browser on this device.
No amount of nonsensical shouting will change the facts.
The only thing nonsensical around here is your insistence that everything you say is correct and that no one else is allowed to have an opinion but you on a given subject.
You like to speak for other people and act like they agree with you with no basis what-so-ever to come to that conclusion. Like I said three times now (and which you ignore, along with pretty much everything in my posts), this very thread and the sales thereof indicate a HUGE interest in being able to view Flash on iOS devices and no amount of BS nonsense on your part will change that fact. People get along without Flash until now because they had no choice (thanks to Steve). Your implication that people would return an iOS device based on just a single feature alone is ludicrous just like the logic in your posts in general. I've pointed out there is no equivalent of the iPod Touch from Android and therefore no reasonable alternative regardless of one's feelings about the inability to view Flash web sites. Instead of just acknowledging that not everyone likes Steve Jobs decision to not allow Flash (hardly an unreasonable opinion to have and clearly shared by everyone who bought this app to be able to view those sites), you just continue RANTING like a high school debate team student does just for ranting's sake. Sorry dude, but in the real world not everyone is going to agree with you or share your point-of-view about opinions. Opinion is a word you should look up, BTW since you clearly either cannot tell them from facts or simply won't allow anyone else to express their opinion without jumping down their throat. Take your pick.
No amount of nonsensical shouting will change the facts.
The only thing nonsensical around here is your insistence that everything you say is correct and that no one else is allowed to have an opinion but you on a given subject.
You like to speak for other people and act like they agree with you with no basis what-so-ever to come to that conclusion. Like I said three times now (and which you ignore, along with pretty much everything in my posts), this very thread and the sales thereof indicate a HUGE interest in being able to view Flash on iOS devices and no amount of BS nonsense on your part will change that fact. People get along without Flash until now because they had no choice (thanks to Steve). Your implication that people would return an iOS device based on just a single feature alone is ludicrous just like the logic in your posts in general. I've pointed out there is no equivalent of the iPod Touch from Android and therefore no reasonable alternative regardless of one's feelings about the inability to view Flash web sites. Instead of just acknowledging that not everyone likes Steve Jobs decision to not allow Flash (hardly an unreasonable opinion to have and clearly shared by everyone who bought this app to be able to view those sites), you just continue RANTING like a high school debate team student does just for ranting's sake. Sorry dude, but in the real world not everyone is going to agree with you or share your point-of-view about opinions. Opinion is a word you should look up, BTW since you clearly either cannot tell them from facts or simply won't allow anyone else to express their opinion without jumping down their throat. Take your pick.
more...
MacRumorUser
Jun 6, 06:07 PM
So the story is, child downloads an app by mistake and apple refund them? How is that even a story? Worse story ever.....
shawnce
Nov 4, 01:21 PM
Parallels just sucks. Weird on my MacBook Pro and Mac Pro Parallels works great running WinXP Pro. I use it to do heavy development work and testing... it actually runs noticeably faster then my Dell desktop (P4 3GHz).
more...
iJohnHenry
Apr 25, 07:27 AM
I should hope that nobody performs CPR should someone collapse, since Macdonalds staff aren't medically trained.
No fear of that ever happening either, in the Litigious States of America. :rolleyes:
No fear of that ever happening either, in the Litigious States of America. :rolleyes:
Eidorian
Nov 3, 11:43 AM
Parallels just posted an update on their blog about USB 2 and 3D graphics:
w00t for competition :DSounds like another copy of Parallels to buy. :(
But yay! Competition.
w00t for competition :DSounds like another copy of Parallels to buy. :(
But yay! Competition.
more...
BrianMojo
Jul 24, 10:33 PM
The new Ipod has no buttons, no scroll wheel, no headphone jack, no dock connector. In other words freedom from everything. The most aesthetic piece of technology ever conceived.
...
*ipod Nano will still have dock connector for now.
A non-physical hold switch would be highly impractical. I just want to be able to slip the thing into my pocket without worrying about changing the volume -- I don't want to have to use a fingerprint identification to do that.
Also, this was all posted on AppleInsider last week, why is this front-page news?
...
*ipod Nano will still have dock connector for now.
A non-physical hold switch would be highly impractical. I just want to be able to slip the thing into my pocket without worrying about changing the volume -- I don't want to have to use a fingerprint identification to do that.
Also, this was all posted on AppleInsider last week, why is this front-page news?
MultiMediaWill
May 1, 11:08 PM
My thoughts on Osama: He must have registered his real address on PSN.
dexthageek
Apr 13, 02:43 PM
Only slightly off topic�
Without using iTunes & ATV, does anyone know of a product where you can wirelessly stream the media contents of any shared volume to the TV? I would imagine such a product would need a PC/Mac side client as well as a TV attached gizmo�like iTunes & ATV. I have both anyway, but I was wondering of different options.
Boxee or any HTPC can be configured to stream movies from a network share.
I am currently using a hacked AppleTV running XBMC to stream movies from a SMB network share on my iMac.
Without using iTunes & ATV, does anyone know of a product where you can wirelessly stream the media contents of any shared volume to the TV? I would imagine such a product would need a PC/Mac side client as well as a TV attached gizmo�like iTunes & ATV. I have both anyway, but I was wondering of different options.
Boxee or any HTPC can be configured to stream movies from a network share.
I am currently using a hacked AppleTV running XBMC to stream movies from a SMB network share on my iMac.
dsensi
May 2, 10:16 AM
OK, guys, I think you are right, touch screens are not the most desirable thing to see in an iMac, although I am sure they will implement it sooner or later, because it has an appeal nowadays to many customers - and it�s up to you if you use it or not. Time will answer this question.
But... what do you think about higher resolution screens? Specially for the 21,5 iMac. I currently own a notebook with 15.4 screen that has exactly the same amount of pixels of a 21.5 iMac (1920x1080). When I use the 21.5 iMac, the large pixel size bother me, while at the notebook pixels are almost invisible, and it�s a great pleasure to use it.
But... what do you think about higher resolution screens? Specially for the 21,5 iMac. I currently own a notebook with 15.4 screen that has exactly the same amount of pixels of a 21.5 iMac (1920x1080). When I use the 21.5 iMac, the large pixel size bother me, while at the notebook pixels are almost invisible, and it�s a great pleasure to use it.
Eldiablojoe
Apr 16, 10:50 PM
In :D
tristangage
Apr 3, 05:56 AM
Winter on one side, spring on the other... Which side do I choose? I choose spring!!! :)
This is a nice effect. Can you share how you did this?
Good choice, and thank you for your comment! :)
I'm sure you can do it in Photoshop but I personally did it in Lightroom. I used the Graduated Filter tool which can be found up near the top right corner of the Lightroom interface and just dragged the saturation slider down to -100. I then applied the graduated filter vertically around the centre of the image at a slight angle (depending how your photo is and what parts you want in colour or b+w) and it desaturated half of the image whilst gradually allowing colour back in at the middle for the other half. I hope that makes sense, I'm glad you liked the photo :)
As for my photo of the day...
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5300/5584911644_727b9015cb.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/tristangage/5584911644/)
sprung flowers (http://www.flickr.com/photos/tristangage/5584911644/) by tristangage (http://www.flickr.com/people/tristangage/), on Flickr
Camera Canon EOS 500D
Exposure 0.005 sec (1/200)
Aperture f/10.0
Focal Length 44 mm
ISO Speed 100
I'm running out of half decent photos to post, am gonna have to get back out and take some more!
This is a nice effect. Can you share how you did this?
Good choice, and thank you for your comment! :)
I'm sure you can do it in Photoshop but I personally did it in Lightroom. I used the Graduated Filter tool which can be found up near the top right corner of the Lightroom interface and just dragged the saturation slider down to -100. I then applied the graduated filter vertically around the centre of the image at a slight angle (depending how your photo is and what parts you want in colour or b+w) and it desaturated half of the image whilst gradually allowing colour back in at the middle for the other half. I hope that makes sense, I'm glad you liked the photo :)
As for my photo of the day...
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5300/5584911644_727b9015cb.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/tristangage/5584911644/)
sprung flowers (http://www.flickr.com/photos/tristangage/5584911644/) by tristangage (http://www.flickr.com/people/tristangage/), on Flickr
Camera Canon EOS 500D
Exposure 0.005 sec (1/200)
Aperture f/10.0
Focal Length 44 mm
ISO Speed 100
I'm running out of half decent photos to post, am gonna have to get back out and take some more!
FloatingBones
Nov 25, 12:34 AM
For the last time, STOP SPEAKING FOR OTHER PEOPLE!!! You have NO right what-so-ever to speak for anyone but yourself and yet you continue to state that EVER SINGLE iOS USER hates Flash and is glad to be rid of it and yet this Skyfire app proves just the opposite.
What I said: Users of the 120M+ iOS devices are doing just fine without Flash plugins is completely true. There are no Flash plugins for this device. Nobody can run a shred of Flash content in their browser on this device.
No amount of nonsensical shouting will change the facts.
You have every right to give your opinion on the matter, but it is your opinion, not the opinion of every single iOS user in existence.
But owners of those 120M+ iOS devices are doing just fine without Flash. Nobody forced them to buy those devices. If they were somehow "disappointed" because there are no Flash plugins available, nobody prevented them from returning them or reselling them.
That is NOT a shortcoming of Flash dude.
Also incorrect. There are huge shortcomings of Flash, and you've never addressed them.
You've never addressed the identity-leaking of Flash cookies: Flash doesn't honor the cookie privacy settings of the browser. More than half of the top 100 websites are now using Flash cookies to track users and store information about them. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-209.txt) Do you actually like the fact that those sites do an end-run around the cookie privacy settings by using Flash? I can't find a single rational person that likes the identity-leaking.
You've never addressed the quirkiness that Flash brings to the browser UI. On my Mac, scrolling works differently when my mouse is over a Flash region. Certain keyboard shortcuts cease to work. Text that appears in a Flash window is not searchable with the browser's text-finding feature. My Mac doesn't behave like a Mac inside of a Flash window.
The engineering choice made for iOS is simplicity. Layering Flash on top of the browser would compromise that simplicity. Click-to-flash semantics would add yet another layer of clutter and obfuscation to the UI.
You've never addressed Adobe's inability to deal competently to secure their software. Security experts believe that Adobe is going to surpass Microsoft as the #1 target for security attacks. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-231.htm) Besides Flash, Adobe Reader is a vector for zero day bugs (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt). I really don't know how you do that: it's a PDF reader! The bugs have been around in Adobe Reader for years and Adobe still hasn't fixed them.
If Apple enabled Flash in iOS Safari, they would be farming out the correct operation of their iOS browser to a company that has proven to be one of the least competent companies in dealing with malware attacks. Noted security expert Steve Gibson mocks their cluelessness:
"[Adobe:] how is that quarterly update cycle going for you?" (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt)
I have yet to find a single Flash enthusiast who can address those issues. I'm hardly surprised that you can't address them, either.
That is a shortcoming of Steve Jobs' choosing.
Nonsense. They are engineering and design choices. If Apple made bad engineering and design choices, they would never have sold 120M+ of these devices.
If you think they are a "shortcoming": there are simple solutions. Don't buy an iOS device. If you did buy one, sell it. Or maybe you can see if it will blend (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAl28d6tbko).
One thing is certain: Apple will not compromise their iOS browser with Flash, and complaining about that is rather silly.
Even if Flash is on the road to becoming obsolete, that doesn't mean people don't want to be able to access the entire Web in the here and now.
Adobe Flash is on the road to becoming obsolete. Even Adobe acknowledges the fact (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999).
Between the 120M+ iOS devices, the click-to-flash plugins disable Flash downloads on Windows, Mac OS X and Linux machines, and Adobe's new Flash-to-HTML5 conversion tools (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999), the abandonment of Flash will continue to accelerate.
You just don't seem to comprehend that.
You are correct. Flash is a legacy technology, and its day has passed.
You seem to have this deep seated hatred of Flash
There are fundamental failings in both the design and deployment of Flash. I listed three of those earlier in my reply.
The thing that got my attention was when I realized that Flash was maintaining its own set of cookies and that those cookies did not honor the privacy settings of my browser. I then learned about click-to-flash plugins to minimize my exposure to Flash. The shocking thing to me was how much disabling Flash improved the browsing experience: faster page loads, less flashing advertisements, and far less CPU usage.
and I can tell that if Steve had said "I LOVE Flash" instead you would almost undoubtedly be here fighting against HTML5 and for Flash.
You imply that I blindly agree with Apple's (and Jobs's) decisions. That is not the case.
I strongly disagree with Apple's decision to prevent Hypermac from selling external batteries for Mac computers (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1032695). Hypermac makes a quality product, and they are filling a niche that Apple ignores. Magsafe is a wonderful technology, but they should be licensing this tech to third-party vendors. I fondly hope that Apple addresses this deficiency in their strategy and product accessories soon.
If you search, you can find where I commented on this in the public record weeks ago.
Yes, I honestly believe that. You have no vested interest in either one. You're just being Steve's doormat.
Now you know better.
I see no reason why ANYONE should have to convert to HTML5.
Too many laptop users are tired of the CPU loading and battery suck of Flash apps.
Too many users don't like that Flash alters the UI inside of the browsers: altered scrolling behavior, keyboard shortcuts that don't work in Flash, text searches that don't work with text in a Flash app.
Too many privacy advocates are bothered that Flash maintains a separate set of cookies and those cookies do not honor the privacy settings of the browser. Commercial websites are using those Flash cookies to track users. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-209.txt)
Too many security advocates are wary of using Adobe products because of Adobe's poor track record against security attacks.
Even if all those four large concerns were addressed, websites have to deal with the growing number of users that use Flash-blocking plugins. Advertisers that deliver their ads with Flash have no guarantee that users will allow those Flash apps to be downloaded and run on their machines.
Those are the reasons why Flash's viability for delivering web content is in decline. Even if you don't see the reasons, Adobe does (http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2010/10/adobe-demos-flash-to-html5-conversion-tool.html).
What I said: Users of the 120M+ iOS devices are doing just fine without Flash plugins is completely true. There are no Flash plugins for this device. Nobody can run a shred of Flash content in their browser on this device.
No amount of nonsensical shouting will change the facts.
You have every right to give your opinion on the matter, but it is your opinion, not the opinion of every single iOS user in existence.
But owners of those 120M+ iOS devices are doing just fine without Flash. Nobody forced them to buy those devices. If they were somehow "disappointed" because there are no Flash plugins available, nobody prevented them from returning them or reselling them.
That is NOT a shortcoming of Flash dude.
Also incorrect. There are huge shortcomings of Flash, and you've never addressed them.
You've never addressed the identity-leaking of Flash cookies: Flash doesn't honor the cookie privacy settings of the browser. More than half of the top 100 websites are now using Flash cookies to track users and store information about them. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-209.txt) Do you actually like the fact that those sites do an end-run around the cookie privacy settings by using Flash? I can't find a single rational person that likes the identity-leaking.
You've never addressed the quirkiness that Flash brings to the browser UI. On my Mac, scrolling works differently when my mouse is over a Flash region. Certain keyboard shortcuts cease to work. Text that appears in a Flash window is not searchable with the browser's text-finding feature. My Mac doesn't behave like a Mac inside of a Flash window.
The engineering choice made for iOS is simplicity. Layering Flash on top of the browser would compromise that simplicity. Click-to-flash semantics would add yet another layer of clutter and obfuscation to the UI.
You've never addressed Adobe's inability to deal competently to secure their software. Security experts believe that Adobe is going to surpass Microsoft as the #1 target for security attacks. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-231.htm) Besides Flash, Adobe Reader is a vector for zero day bugs (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt). I really don't know how you do that: it's a PDF reader! The bugs have been around in Adobe Reader for years and Adobe still hasn't fixed them.
If Apple enabled Flash in iOS Safari, they would be farming out the correct operation of their iOS browser to a company that has proven to be one of the least competent companies in dealing with malware attacks. Noted security expert Steve Gibson mocks their cluelessness:
"[Adobe:] how is that quarterly update cycle going for you?" (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt)
I have yet to find a single Flash enthusiast who can address those issues. I'm hardly surprised that you can't address them, either.
That is a shortcoming of Steve Jobs' choosing.
Nonsense. They are engineering and design choices. If Apple made bad engineering and design choices, they would never have sold 120M+ of these devices.
If you think they are a "shortcoming": there are simple solutions. Don't buy an iOS device. If you did buy one, sell it. Or maybe you can see if it will blend (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAl28d6tbko).
One thing is certain: Apple will not compromise their iOS browser with Flash, and complaining about that is rather silly.
Even if Flash is on the road to becoming obsolete, that doesn't mean people don't want to be able to access the entire Web in the here and now.
Adobe Flash is on the road to becoming obsolete. Even Adobe acknowledges the fact (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999).
Between the 120M+ iOS devices, the click-to-flash plugins disable Flash downloads on Windows, Mac OS X and Linux machines, and Adobe's new Flash-to-HTML5 conversion tools (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999), the abandonment of Flash will continue to accelerate.
You just don't seem to comprehend that.
You are correct. Flash is a legacy technology, and its day has passed.
You seem to have this deep seated hatred of Flash
There are fundamental failings in both the design and deployment of Flash. I listed three of those earlier in my reply.
The thing that got my attention was when I realized that Flash was maintaining its own set of cookies and that those cookies did not honor the privacy settings of my browser. I then learned about click-to-flash plugins to minimize my exposure to Flash. The shocking thing to me was how much disabling Flash improved the browsing experience: faster page loads, less flashing advertisements, and far less CPU usage.
and I can tell that if Steve had said "I LOVE Flash" instead you would almost undoubtedly be here fighting against HTML5 and for Flash.
You imply that I blindly agree with Apple's (and Jobs's) decisions. That is not the case.
I strongly disagree with Apple's decision to prevent Hypermac from selling external batteries for Mac computers (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1032695). Hypermac makes a quality product, and they are filling a niche that Apple ignores. Magsafe is a wonderful technology, but they should be licensing this tech to third-party vendors. I fondly hope that Apple addresses this deficiency in their strategy and product accessories soon.
If you search, you can find where I commented on this in the public record weeks ago.
Yes, I honestly believe that. You have no vested interest in either one. You're just being Steve's doormat.
Now you know better.
I see no reason why ANYONE should have to convert to HTML5.
Too many laptop users are tired of the CPU loading and battery suck of Flash apps.
Too many users don't like that Flash alters the UI inside of the browsers: altered scrolling behavior, keyboard shortcuts that don't work in Flash, text searches that don't work with text in a Flash app.
Too many privacy advocates are bothered that Flash maintains a separate set of cookies and those cookies do not honor the privacy settings of the browser. Commercial websites are using those Flash cookies to track users. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-209.txt)
Too many security advocates are wary of using Adobe products because of Adobe's poor track record against security attacks.
Even if all those four large concerns were addressed, websites have to deal with the growing number of users that use Flash-blocking plugins. Advertisers that deliver their ads with Flash have no guarantee that users will allow those Flash apps to be downloaded and run on their machines.
Those are the reasons why Flash's viability for delivering web content is in decline. Even if you don't see the reasons, Adobe does (http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2010/10/adobe-demos-flash-to-html5-conversion-tool.html).
ChrisA
Dec 4, 11:45 AM
iAdware apparently works by silently installing a system library. That sounds like a vulnerability that Apple could easily fix, by requiring Admin privileges, issuing a warning, and/or prompting for an Admin password.
Seems easy for an end user to fix it himself. Simply change permision on the library so a non-admin can't write there. About four clicks and you're done with it.
Seems easy for an end user to fix it himself. Simply change permision on the library so a non-admin can't write there. About four clicks and you're done with it.