Piggie
Apr 25, 02:33 PM
Perhaps this is like CCTV systems in the workplace.
You are allowed by law to fit them, however staff must be told they are there.
Perhaps it's just that the public need to be made away this is being done, and not done secretly. If people knew, then this would be a non story in the 1st place.
You are allowed by law to fit them, however staff must be told they are there.
Perhaps it's just that the public need to be made away this is being done, and not done secretly. If people knew, then this would be a non story in the 1st place.
psionic001
Nov 28, 07:50 PM
Actually, they do. They also got paid on every blank tape sold when cassettes were big. I think it is crazy for everyone to think that the music industry is greedy when it getting squeezed out of all of their revenue streams. So, Apple makes hundreds of millions off of their back on the itunes site, and a billion off of iPod sales, and they cannot share in the wealth?
It doesn't cost the consumer any more, why wouldn't you want the people who actually make the music you are listening to get compensated?
This debate is stale. People want something for nothing.
Haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa.
That's it!.... I'm not buying any more tapes...
Actually I think two things should happen:
1) Universal should pay an anual feel to be on ITS.
2) Universal should pay a further industry fee to Apple (or DAP manufacturers) to go towards DRM R&D.
It doesn't cost the consumer any more, why wouldn't you want the people who actually make the music you are listening to get compensated?
This debate is stale. People want something for nothing.
Haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa.
That's it!.... I'm not buying any more tapes...
Actually I think two things should happen:
1) Universal should pay an anual feel to be on ITS.
2) Universal should pay a further industry fee to Apple (or DAP manufacturers) to go towards DRM R&D.
Cougarcat
Mar 26, 07:09 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8F190 Safari/6533.18.5)
How does Rosetta hold back forward progress exactly? It's just small extension for the OS. It's not like it's Classic.
How does Rosetta hold back forward progress exactly? It's just small extension for the OS. It's not like it's Classic.
Jopling
Jul 20, 12:51 PM
New Apple Mac Pro Dual Quad
Dual Intel Xeon 8400 Quardro processors at 3.4Ghz (2 x 4 core)
2Gb Buffered DDR2 RAM
750 Gb Sata2 Hard drive
Blue Ray Super drive 2x
Regular DVD rom in second bay
ATI X1900 video card 512mb PCI express x16
$3950
If that came out in August I'd wet my pants. It's exactly what I want. I need to get a promachine before I move in August.
Dual Intel Xeon 8400 Quardro processors at 3.4Ghz (2 x 4 core)
2Gb Buffered DDR2 RAM
750 Gb Sata2 Hard drive
Blue Ray Super drive 2x
Regular DVD rom in second bay
ATI X1900 video card 512mb PCI express x16
$3950
If that came out in August I'd wet my pants. It's exactly what I want. I need to get a promachine before I move in August.
parapup
Apr 12, 10:11 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
That's what I was think but decided, if that's his taste live and let live.
LOL - Rolex reminds me of the spam emails, counterfeits and quirky distribution model - how many buy those real ones anyways? iPhone reminds me not of Rolex but PowerPC macs back in the day - cute in their day but long since kicked by Intel.
That's what I was think but decided, if that's his taste live and let live.
LOL - Rolex reminds me of the spam emails, counterfeits and quirky distribution model - how many buy those real ones anyways? iPhone reminds me not of Rolex but PowerPC macs back in the day - cute in their day but long since kicked by Intel.
Lord Blackadder
Mar 22, 03:16 PM
How can any government meet armed internal rebellion without qualifying as "slaughtering their own people"?
The UN resolution has determined that the Libyan government's response to the opposition uprising has been "aggressive", and furthermore that Libyans need to be protected from their own government's military and security forces. The implicit judgement is that Gaddafi no longer has a mandate to rule, and that by fighting to maintain power he his fighting an aggressive war against a legitimate political movement.
How would you characterize the situation? I don't want to jump to intervention when other options are available, but so far the NFZ has reduced Gaddafi's capacity to bombard population centers - though he is still doing just that.
The UN resolution has determined that the Libyan government's response to the opposition uprising has been "aggressive", and furthermore that Libyans need to be protected from their own government's military and security forces. The implicit judgement is that Gaddafi no longer has a mandate to rule, and that by fighting to maintain power he his fighting an aggressive war against a legitimate political movement.
How would you characterize the situation? I don't want to jump to intervention when other options are available, but so far the NFZ has reduced Gaddafi's capacity to bombard population centers - though he is still doing just that.
igator210
Apr 27, 09:04 AM
The principle of any and every cell phone is that if can connect to a cellular network signal, it knows where you are. Based upon every unique cellular ID, the networks know how to route incoming calls and texts to you, If it didn't how that. how the h#!! do you think you'd get any calls? Right now, sitting at my desk, Verizon knows exactly where I am (based upon triangulation of the nearest cell towers. They have my unique cell ID and my account information. My dumb phone even has a gps 911 locator on it. I dial 911, they know where I am.
Side story: the credit card companies know exactly where I am better then the cell companies. Every time I swipe my credit or debit card, they know where I am. When I travel for vacation, I am very likely to get a call from my credit card company (on my cell) asking where, when and how long I will be traveling. They know every store and every purchase I've ever made on a credit card.
Side story: the credit card companies know exactly where I am better then the cell companies. Every time I swipe my credit or debit card, they know where I am. When I travel for vacation, I am very likely to get a call from my credit card company (on my cell) asking where, when and how long I will be traveling. They know every store and every purchase I've ever made on a credit card.
hulugu
Mar 23, 12:19 AM
Although I backed the implementation of a no-fly zone a few weeks ago, I wouldn't describe my position as one of wholehearted support. More a queasy half-hearted recognition that something had to be done and that all alternatives lead to rabbit holes of some degree or another. When all is said and done, my usual fallback position is an intense weariness at the evil that men do.
For the record, I actually supported (if silence is considered consent) both Gulf wars at the start; I believed in the fictional WMD, I believed it when Colin Powell held his little vial up at the UN... but I, like many was tied down with work and other concerns and was only paying cursory attention to the news at the time. Like Obama, I also initially supported the war in Afghanistan, or at least the idea of it, initiated by a Republican president, but since then it seems to have become a fiasco of Catch-22 proportions.
Slowly discovering the real agenda and true ineptness of the Bush administration was a pivotal point in my reawakening political understanding of US current affairs after reading Hunter Thompson for so many years. Disgusted and appalled at the casual way in which we all were lied to, I'm quite happy to hold my hands up and say 'I was wrong'.
Thing is about Obama, I never had any starry-eyed notion about him being a peace-maker. He's an American president, the incentives are cemented into the role as one of using power and protecting wealth. Not that many conservatives were paying attention at the time, but he stood up in front of the Nobel academy when accepting his Nobel Peace Prize and laid out a justification for war.
Since the second Gulf War, the entire circus has been one of my occasional interests, because I've never seen a political process elsewhere riddled with so many bald-faced liars, grotesque characters and half-baked casual hate speech. What power or the sniff of it does to people, twisting them out of shape, is infinitely more interesting and has more impact on us than any other endeavour, except for possibly the parallel development of technology.
I used you as an example more out of rhetoric than anything else. However, I think your essay is spot on.
I didn't believe the Bush administration's call for war in Iraq because I was reading Hans Blix's reports and I was suspicious of the whole endeavor: the Bushies struck me as a group wholly unprepared for the difficulty of governing a foreign country after a military invasion. I did hope, like Tom Friedman, that an Iraq without Saddam might be a powerful symbol in the Middle East, but I was deeply concerned about the war.
Reading Anthony Shadid's reporting on Iraq told me that the situation was, days in, already spinning out of control. Once it became apparent that looters were able to steal artifacts from the museums, office chairs pilled with computers from the bureaus and weapons from Iraq's hundreds of ammunition dumps I knew we were in trouble.
Libya is more like Bosnia than Iraq. A moment of force has the potential to change the scope of the conflict, hopefully for the positive, in a way that a full-blown invasion would merely complicate. That's the central part that fivepoint, who is merely interested in making another partisan screed, is ignoring.
We have complicated thoughts about the use of force in the world, which leads us to appear hypocritical when all things are made to appear equal to make straw.
George W. Bush is responsible for another calamity: me posting in PRSI, one of my many occasional weaknesses.
Me too. I wandered in here by accident as a new member and haven't left.
For the record, I actually supported (if silence is considered consent) both Gulf wars at the start; I believed in the fictional WMD, I believed it when Colin Powell held his little vial up at the UN... but I, like many was tied down with work and other concerns and was only paying cursory attention to the news at the time. Like Obama, I also initially supported the war in Afghanistan, or at least the idea of it, initiated by a Republican president, but since then it seems to have become a fiasco of Catch-22 proportions.
Slowly discovering the real agenda and true ineptness of the Bush administration was a pivotal point in my reawakening political understanding of US current affairs after reading Hunter Thompson for so many years. Disgusted and appalled at the casual way in which we all were lied to, I'm quite happy to hold my hands up and say 'I was wrong'.
Thing is about Obama, I never had any starry-eyed notion about him being a peace-maker. He's an American president, the incentives are cemented into the role as one of using power and protecting wealth. Not that many conservatives were paying attention at the time, but he stood up in front of the Nobel academy when accepting his Nobel Peace Prize and laid out a justification for war.
Since the second Gulf War, the entire circus has been one of my occasional interests, because I've never seen a political process elsewhere riddled with so many bald-faced liars, grotesque characters and half-baked casual hate speech. What power or the sniff of it does to people, twisting them out of shape, is infinitely more interesting and has more impact on us than any other endeavour, except for possibly the parallel development of technology.
I used you as an example more out of rhetoric than anything else. However, I think your essay is spot on.
I didn't believe the Bush administration's call for war in Iraq because I was reading Hans Blix's reports and I was suspicious of the whole endeavor: the Bushies struck me as a group wholly unprepared for the difficulty of governing a foreign country after a military invasion. I did hope, like Tom Friedman, that an Iraq without Saddam might be a powerful symbol in the Middle East, but I was deeply concerned about the war.
Reading Anthony Shadid's reporting on Iraq told me that the situation was, days in, already spinning out of control. Once it became apparent that looters were able to steal artifacts from the museums, office chairs pilled with computers from the bureaus and weapons from Iraq's hundreds of ammunition dumps I knew we were in trouble.
Libya is more like Bosnia than Iraq. A moment of force has the potential to change the scope of the conflict, hopefully for the positive, in a way that a full-blown invasion would merely complicate. That's the central part that fivepoint, who is merely interested in making another partisan screed, is ignoring.
We have complicated thoughts about the use of force in the world, which leads us to appear hypocritical when all things are made to appear equal to make straw.
George W. Bush is responsible for another calamity: me posting in PRSI, one of my many occasional weaknesses.
Me too. I wandered in here by accident as a new member and haven't left.
skunk
Feb 28, 07:12 PM
2) okay, they can pretend to get marriedNo, you are absolutely wrong., They can get married like any other couple where the laws allow. Marriage is not a special preserve of any religion. You cannot just commandeer it.
No, I'm not kidding. To the Catholic Church sex outside of a valid sacramental marriage is fornicationWho cares what Catholic dogma claims? It's an irrelevance.
Last time I checked when the vast majority of people did such behavior it was with the opposite gender not the same.So what is the problem? Are you against variation?
Do you have proof that Plato was a repressed homosexual?No, not proof
"Homosexuality," Plato wrote, "is regarded as shameful by barbarians and by those who live under despotic governments just as philosophy is regarded as shameful by them, because it is apparently not in the interest of such rulers to have great ideas engendered in their subjects, or powerful friendships or passionate love-all of which homosexuality is particularly apt to produce." This attitude of Plato's was characteristic of the ancient world, and I want to begin my discussion of the attitudes of the Church and of Western Christianity toward homosexuality by commenting on comparable attitudes among the ancients.
To a very large extent, Western attitudes toward law, religion, literature and government are dependent upon Roman attitudes. This makes it particularly striking that our attitudes toward homosexuality in particular and sexual tolerance in general are so remarkably different from those of the Romans. It is very difficult to convey to modern audiences the indifference of the Romans to questions of gender and gender orientation. The difficulty is due both to the fact that the evidence has been largely consciously obliterated by historians prior to very recent decades, and to the diffusion of the relevant material.
Romans did not consider sexuality or sexual preference a matter of much interest, nor did they treat either in an analytical way. An historian has to gather together thousands of little bits and pieces to demonstrate the general acceptance of homosexuality among the Romans.
One of the few imperial writers who does appear to make some sort of comment on the subject in a general way wrote, "Zeus came as an eagle to god like Ganymede and as a swan to the fair haired mother of Helen. One person prefers one gender, another the other, I like both." Plutarch wrote at about the same time, "No sensible person can imagine that the sexes differ in matters of love as they do in matters of clothing. The intelligent lover of beauty will be attracted to beauty in whichever gender he finds it." Roman law and social strictures made absolutely no restrictions on the basis of gender. It has sometimes been claimed that there were laws against homosexual relations in Rome, but it is easy to prove that this was not the case. On the other hand, it is a mistake to imagine that anarchic hedonism ruled at Rome. In fact, Romans did have a complex set of moral strictures designed to protect children from abuse or any citizen from force or duress in sexual relations. Romans were, like other people, sensitive to issues of love and caring, but individual sexual (i.e. gender) choice was completely unlimited. Male prostitution (directed toward other males), for instance, was so common that the taxes on it constituted a major source of revenue for the imperial treasury. It was so profitable that even in later periods when a certain intolerance crept in, the emperors could not bring themselves to end the practice and its attendant revenue.
Gay marriages were also legal and frequent in Rome for both males and females. Even emperors often married other males. There was total acceptance on the part of the populace, as far as it can be determined, of this sort of homosexual attitude and behavior. This total acceptance was not limited to the ruling elite; there is also much popular Roman literature containing gay love stories. The real point I want to make is that there is absolutely no conscious effort on anyone's part in the Roman world, the world in which Christianity was born, to claim that homosexuality was abnormal or undesirable. There is in fact no word for "homosexual" in Latin. "Homosexual" sounds like Latin, but was coined by a German psychologist in the late 1 9th century. No one in the early Roman world seemed to feel that the fact that someone preferred his or her own gender was any more significant than the fact that someone preferred blue eyes or short people. Neither gay nor straight people seemed to associate certain characteristics with sexual preference. Gay men were not thought to be less masculine than straight men and lesbian women were not thought of as less feminine than straight women. Gay people were not thought to be any better or worse than straight people-an attitude which differed both from that of the society that preceded it, since many Greeks thought gay people were inherently better than straight people, and from that of the society which followed it, in which gay people were often thought to be inferior to others.
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/pwh/1979boswell.html
The most celebrated account of homosexual love comes in Plato's Symposium, in which homosexual love is discussed as a more ideal, more perfect kind of relationship than the more prosaic heterosexual variety. This is a highly biased account, because Plato himself was homosexual and wrote very beautiful epigrams to boys expressing his devotion. Platonic homosexuality had very little to do with sex; Plato believed ideally that love and reason should be fused together, while concern over the body and the material world of particulars should be annihilated. Even today, "Platonic love" refers to non-sexual love between two adults.
Behind Plato's contempt for heterosexual desire lay an aesthetic, highly intellectual aversion to the female body. Plato would have agreed with Schopenhauer's opinion that "only a male intellect clouded by the sexual drive could call the stunted, narrow-shouldered, broad-hipped and short-legged sex the fair sex".
http://www.newstatesman.com/199908230009
No, I'm not kidding. To the Catholic Church sex outside of a valid sacramental marriage is fornicationWho cares what Catholic dogma claims? It's an irrelevance.
Last time I checked when the vast majority of people did such behavior it was with the opposite gender not the same.So what is the problem? Are you against variation?
Do you have proof that Plato was a repressed homosexual?No, not proof
"Homosexuality," Plato wrote, "is regarded as shameful by barbarians and by those who live under despotic governments just as philosophy is regarded as shameful by them, because it is apparently not in the interest of such rulers to have great ideas engendered in their subjects, or powerful friendships or passionate love-all of which homosexuality is particularly apt to produce." This attitude of Plato's was characteristic of the ancient world, and I want to begin my discussion of the attitudes of the Church and of Western Christianity toward homosexuality by commenting on comparable attitudes among the ancients.
To a very large extent, Western attitudes toward law, religion, literature and government are dependent upon Roman attitudes. This makes it particularly striking that our attitudes toward homosexuality in particular and sexual tolerance in general are so remarkably different from those of the Romans. It is very difficult to convey to modern audiences the indifference of the Romans to questions of gender and gender orientation. The difficulty is due both to the fact that the evidence has been largely consciously obliterated by historians prior to very recent decades, and to the diffusion of the relevant material.
Romans did not consider sexuality or sexual preference a matter of much interest, nor did they treat either in an analytical way. An historian has to gather together thousands of little bits and pieces to demonstrate the general acceptance of homosexuality among the Romans.
One of the few imperial writers who does appear to make some sort of comment on the subject in a general way wrote, "Zeus came as an eagle to god like Ganymede and as a swan to the fair haired mother of Helen. One person prefers one gender, another the other, I like both." Plutarch wrote at about the same time, "No sensible person can imagine that the sexes differ in matters of love as they do in matters of clothing. The intelligent lover of beauty will be attracted to beauty in whichever gender he finds it." Roman law and social strictures made absolutely no restrictions on the basis of gender. It has sometimes been claimed that there were laws against homosexual relations in Rome, but it is easy to prove that this was not the case. On the other hand, it is a mistake to imagine that anarchic hedonism ruled at Rome. In fact, Romans did have a complex set of moral strictures designed to protect children from abuse or any citizen from force or duress in sexual relations. Romans were, like other people, sensitive to issues of love and caring, but individual sexual (i.e. gender) choice was completely unlimited. Male prostitution (directed toward other males), for instance, was so common that the taxes on it constituted a major source of revenue for the imperial treasury. It was so profitable that even in later periods when a certain intolerance crept in, the emperors could not bring themselves to end the practice and its attendant revenue.
Gay marriages were also legal and frequent in Rome for both males and females. Even emperors often married other males. There was total acceptance on the part of the populace, as far as it can be determined, of this sort of homosexual attitude and behavior. This total acceptance was not limited to the ruling elite; there is also much popular Roman literature containing gay love stories. The real point I want to make is that there is absolutely no conscious effort on anyone's part in the Roman world, the world in which Christianity was born, to claim that homosexuality was abnormal or undesirable. There is in fact no word for "homosexual" in Latin. "Homosexual" sounds like Latin, but was coined by a German psychologist in the late 1 9th century. No one in the early Roman world seemed to feel that the fact that someone preferred his or her own gender was any more significant than the fact that someone preferred blue eyes or short people. Neither gay nor straight people seemed to associate certain characteristics with sexual preference. Gay men were not thought to be less masculine than straight men and lesbian women were not thought of as less feminine than straight women. Gay people were not thought to be any better or worse than straight people-an attitude which differed both from that of the society that preceded it, since many Greeks thought gay people were inherently better than straight people, and from that of the society which followed it, in which gay people were often thought to be inferior to others.
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/pwh/1979boswell.html
The most celebrated account of homosexual love comes in Plato's Symposium, in which homosexual love is discussed as a more ideal, more perfect kind of relationship than the more prosaic heterosexual variety. This is a highly biased account, because Plato himself was homosexual and wrote very beautiful epigrams to boys expressing his devotion. Platonic homosexuality had very little to do with sex; Plato believed ideally that love and reason should be fused together, while concern over the body and the material world of particulars should be annihilated. Even today, "Platonic love" refers to non-sexual love between two adults.
Behind Plato's contempt for heterosexual desire lay an aesthetic, highly intellectual aversion to the female body. Plato would have agreed with Schopenhauer's opinion that "only a male intellect clouded by the sexual drive could call the stunted, narrow-shouldered, broad-hipped and short-legged sex the fair sex".
http://www.newstatesman.com/199908230009
portishead
Apr 12, 12:54 PM
Then that just begs the question, "why haven't these people left already?" FCP has been fairly stagnant for years. There are plenty of other alternatives, so doesn't that kinda make them fanboyish too for sticking it out when up to this point Apple has given zero hints about when or how it will take FCP to the next level?
I'm not in the video editing biz, but if the pro s/w I use in my profession hobbled my efficiency and workflow the way you are carping about FCP, and there were viable alternatives, I would abandon it quicker than pigeon can snatch a bread crumb. Just sayin'.
People just love to complain. Yes Apple has been a little behind in the NLE business lately. They can't be on top all the time. Avid has made fantastic strides lately, and so has Adobe, although I would never advise using Premiere. You have to remember though Avid made a lot of bad moves, from nearly dropping Mac support to their closed hardware system. Just recently have they finally started to look like they got it together. FCP is being updated today, so all this nonsense about apple neglecting the pro market can stop. You may not like the update, but from what I've heard (not much) it's going to be pretty amazing.
I'm not in the video editing biz, but if the pro s/w I use in my profession hobbled my efficiency and workflow the way you are carping about FCP, and there were viable alternatives, I would abandon it quicker than pigeon can snatch a bread crumb. Just sayin'.
People just love to complain. Yes Apple has been a little behind in the NLE business lately. They can't be on top all the time. Avid has made fantastic strides lately, and so has Adobe, although I would never advise using Premiere. You have to remember though Avid made a lot of bad moves, from nearly dropping Mac support to their closed hardware system. Just recently have they finally started to look like they got it together. FCP is being updated today, so all this nonsense about apple neglecting the pro market can stop. You may not like the update, but from what I've heard (not much) it's going to be pretty amazing.
phairphan
Aug 26, 04:19 PM
Only problem with that is that a 2.33 GHz Merom chip will be fifty percent more expensive than a 2.16 GHz Yonah is today. So do you think Apple will increase prices of the MacBook Pro by $150 to $200 or reduce their profit?
I believe the 2.33 GHz Merom chip debuted at the same price as the 2.16 GHz Yonah when it was released. The prices of MBPs certainly haven't fallen. Apple has just been enjoying the extra profits from Intel's price drops of the past few months.
I believe the 2.33 GHz Merom chip debuted at the same price as the 2.16 GHz Yonah when it was released. The prices of MBPs certainly haven't fallen. Apple has just been enjoying the extra profits from Intel's price drops of the past few months.
KingYaba
Mar 1, 04:47 AM
I have no right to condemn anyone to hell.
If heaven were very crowded, it wouldn't be very heavenly, would it?
Couldn't God just forgive everyone and make heaven bigger?
If heaven were very crowded, it wouldn't be very heavenly, would it?
Couldn't God just forgive everyone and make heaven bigger?
glassbathroom
Jul 28, 03:18 AM
It absolutely will!!! Leopard is just going to be mostly beneficial for dual-core machines. Read this article:
http://macosrumors.com/20060710A1.php
Leopard sounds FAST!
MOSR is always good for a laugh, but don't be fooled into believing any of it.
http://macosrumors.com/20060710A1.php
Leopard sounds FAST!
MOSR is always good for a laugh, but don't be fooled into believing any of it.
takao
Dec 4, 09:01 PM
I started the Italian Tour thing earlier today. Half of it is fun but half is just annoying. Theres a race with a murcielago at night, which is awesome but the damn car spins out if you dont hold the wheel perfectly straight while you break or accelerate, making it very difficult to keep any reasonable speed. The Alfa Romeo in the first leg of the tour is almost as bad. But the Ferrari race at Monza? Easy as pie, i got gold on my first attempt without much fight from the AI.
hahe same here.. though i was close on the first alfa and rally challenge but the ferrari one: 1st corner you are first place and then you can just finish the race 'safe' but the lambo one... what a PITA .. it even spined out on me in a fast corner just because i went off the throttle slightly
i already took a mental note to avoid _that_ lambo for the challenge
hahe same here.. though i was close on the first alfa and rally challenge but the ferrari one: 1st corner you are first place and then you can just finish the race 'safe' but the lambo one... what a PITA .. it even spined out on me in a fast corner just because i went off the throttle slightly
i already took a mental note to avoid _that_ lambo for the challenge
Chundles
Jul 20, 09:44 AM
Just stating 'I knew that' I just used it as an example. Chundles gets confused easily so I have to make things simple. Hi Chundles :D
You'll keep...:p
You'll keep...:p
Foxglove9
Jul 14, 09:22 PM
I think the current case is getting a little old looking and needs a change. It still holds up to pc cases and is beautiful inside. My compaints are how heavy it is and how the handles cut through my hands when I try to lift it. I'd really like to see them change that a little.
I personally would like to see something like the macbooks, in white or black.
I really don't see the need for any case changes for the towers (other than adding at least one more 5 inch bay, which I am all for) instead of redeigning the case for the sake of it, why not pocket the saving in design, and tooling, and pass some along to the consumer. I don't recall any big case changes to the mini, or imac in the G5 - intel change over.
I personally would like to see something like the macbooks, in white or black.
I really don't see the need for any case changes for the towers (other than adding at least one more 5 inch bay, which I am all for) instead of redeigning the case for the sake of it, why not pocket the saving in design, and tooling, and pass some along to the consumer. I don't recall any big case changes to the mini, or imac in the G5 - intel change over.
roadbloc
Mar 26, 06:43 PM
I'm glad rosetta is going away. Maybe the dev will finally update the app.
By saying that you clearly misunderstand the idea of a legacy app. Say I have an old PPC game that I still enjoy to play. Why on earth would the dev want to update the old game to work in intel, especially if the dev is busy with new and more profitable endeavours?
Windows manages to run legacy apps still. Even if you do have to resort to using the virtual machine they've called 'XP Mode.'
Fortunately, my one and only PPC program does indeed have an intel version that I wasn't aware of, so I'm fine.
By saying that you clearly misunderstand the idea of a legacy app. Say I have an old PPC game that I still enjoy to play. Why on earth would the dev want to update the old game to work in intel, especially if the dev is busy with new and more profitable endeavours?
Windows manages to run legacy apps still. Even if you do have to resort to using the virtual machine they've called 'XP Mode.'
Fortunately, my one and only PPC program does indeed have an intel version that I wasn't aware of, so I'm fine.
camomac
Jul 20, 02:39 PM
eight cores + Tiger = Octopussy?!?
haha, then Doctor Q's signature could be-
"Oh do pay attention 007. In the wrong hands, this Octopussy could be very dangerous."
LOL.:D
haha, then Doctor Q's signature could be-
"Oh do pay attention 007. In the wrong hands, this Octopussy could be very dangerous."
LOL.:D
MikeD23nu
Apr 6, 06:26 PM
I just got my low end 13" MacBook Air with 4GB of RAM today too. Should I keep it?
Me too! It's killing me...don't know what to do.
Me too! It's killing me...don't know what to do.
Tones2
Apr 19, 02:39 PM
Boy. Why do we go back and forth like this arguing between fanboys and non. It's pointless. Nobody cares about your or my opinion, and you're not convincing anyone who disagrees with you as people NEVER change their opinions about anything ever.
I'm not why I do it either, but never again.
I'm not why I do it either, but never again.
ducttape
Nov 28, 08:55 PM
So stupid. Not even the Zune players should have to deal with royalties. iTunes is where a lot of people get legal music. Like Universal's. So why should Universal make Apple pay them for a product Apple sells that helps Universal's business anyway? We could go into the debate about illegal Universal music on iPods, but Apple (nor any other company) should be held responsible for how customers 'abuse' their products. That's the customers' problem.
paul4339
Apr 20, 10:48 AM
You mean it's not an Apple? :eek: But it's ok for Apple to sue and Australian grocery store because they think the letter W looks like their logo? LMAO. Please.
I think this was because Woolworth (Australian supermarket giant) applied for a blanket trademark that allows it to apply it's logo on anything - especially competing electronic goods, computers, music players, and branded phones. (I'm not saying it's right, just surfacing some more details)
P.
I think this was because Woolworth (Australian supermarket giant) applied for a blanket trademark that allows it to apply it's logo on anything - especially competing electronic goods, computers, music players, and branded phones. (I'm not saying it's right, just surfacing some more details)
P.
Mammoth
Jul 15, 10:14 AM
Looking at PC product offerings by ATI (http://www.ati.com/products/workstation/fireglmatrix.html), you can see that they also offer video cards with two dual-link DVI ports on a single card. You can even get this on a Radeon X1900 series card (http://www.ati.com/products/radeonx1900/radeonx1900xtx/specs.html).
I believe you are wrong (http://www.ati.com/designpartners/media/images/RX1900_Board_lg.jpg).
(Believe)
I believe you are wrong (http://www.ati.com/designpartners/media/images/RX1900_Board_lg.jpg).
(Believe)
Gugulino
Apr 6, 04:17 AM
Looking for some controversy are we?!!! :rolleyes:
No, I really think that iMovie is a good example of video-editing software. Did Apple changed FCP's look and feel in the last few years? No! It is outdated, that you have to admit for sure. iMovie has a far more modern UI, which should be adopted by FCP somehow. I didn't mean FCP should lose all its Pro-features. FCP could also adopt the easy way of handling your footage: In iMovie I see what I shot and can quickly add clips to the project without setting in and out points manually. And what about the precision-editor? For one project I abandoned FCP just because it has no precision editor.
I think FCP could learn a lot from iMovie. And if the same man, who created iMovie, is also the chief of the Final Cut Studio Developer Team, it will happen!
No, I really think that iMovie is a good example of video-editing software. Did Apple changed FCP's look and feel in the last few years? No! It is outdated, that you have to admit for sure. iMovie has a far more modern UI, which should be adopted by FCP somehow. I didn't mean FCP should lose all its Pro-features. FCP could also adopt the easy way of handling your footage: In iMovie I see what I shot and can quickly add clips to the project without setting in and out points manually. And what about the precision-editor? For one project I abandoned FCP just because it has no precision editor.
I think FCP could learn a lot from iMovie. And if the same man, who created iMovie, is also the chief of the Final Cut Studio Developer Team, it will happen!