wiestlingjr
Jun 11, 06:03 PM
Bibbz
I just talked to my local radioshack and they are also taking preorders. He told me he can't guarantee me the 24th. He said he's not sure when they will come in. How accurate is this? I really don't want to preorder if its not going to be there on the 24th.
I just talked to my local radioshack and they are also taking preorders. He told me he can't guarantee me the 24th. He said he's not sure when they will come in. How accurate is this? I really don't want to preorder if its not going to be there on the 24th.
Lord Blackadder
Mar 22, 07:56 PM
As far as necessary to make it appear that he was the "last piece of the jigsaw" rather than its inventor.
Well, he'd have to be a complete novice to allow himself to be seen as the latter. But do you think that the entire international response truly originated with the US? Maybe I just don't want to believe that. :o
Well, he'd have to be a complete novice to allow himself to be seen as the latter. But do you think that the entire international response truly originated with the US? Maybe I just don't want to believe that. :o
lsvtecjohn3
Apr 19, 02:40 PM
wow @ post 2.
apple will have a hard time fighting this in court.
watch this video then
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJZBpumb0B8&feature=related
apple will have a hard time fighting this in court.
watch this video then
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJZBpumb0B8&feature=related
samcraig
Apr 27, 08:36 AM
I wonder how long this "bug" has existed? You know...the bug that's recording all sorts of other information into the database.
2 years? 4 years?
If it's been longer than a few months, no one will ever believe a)it is a bug b)a bug this severe for privacy concerns, c)that it was never mentioned before as a bug, and d)until the lawsuit has never been on the roadmap to be fixed.
The issue has been known for over a year.
The bad press Apple has been getting led to this "discovery"
Much like the bad press led Apple to "discover" that their Antenna had an issue while pointing the finger at all phones to say that all phones have an issue.
So again - whether or not the lawsuit is justified - at the very least, when matters like this are brought to attention, results can be achieved. So for those criticizing people speaking up when they see something wrong, try and remember that it's the questioning that is important to achieve clarity and transparency. You don't have to agree with lawsuits, etc. But it's always important to engage in discussion.
2 years? 4 years?
If it's been longer than a few months, no one will ever believe a)it is a bug b)a bug this severe for privacy concerns, c)that it was never mentioned before as a bug, and d)until the lawsuit has never been on the roadmap to be fixed.
The issue has been known for over a year.
The bad press Apple has been getting led to this "discovery"
Much like the bad press led Apple to "discover" that their Antenna had an issue while pointing the finger at all phones to say that all phones have an issue.
So again - whether or not the lawsuit is justified - at the very least, when matters like this are brought to attention, results can be achieved. So for those criticizing people speaking up when they see something wrong, try and remember that it's the questioning that is important to achieve clarity and transparency. You don't have to agree with lawsuits, etc. But it's always important to engage in discussion.
emiljan
Apr 27, 12:10 PM
These people never stop do they? I don't remember anyone asking bush or any other president about their educational records, plus the one time they shed light on bush's military record it just seemed to disappear into thin air.
At least new the president's chances of getting re-elected in 2012 just skyrocketed.
At least new the president's chances of getting re-elected in 2012 just skyrocketed.
DoFoT9
Aug 8, 07:12 PM
i don't know, i still think the Gran Turismo series is the best as far as real driving simulation. by far. and the number of copies sold backs that up
given that its been out for 10 years, i think it would have sold a fair few no matter what :rolleyes: i preferred GT3 A-Spec over anything else.
yeah i still might pre-order the special edition one. i'm not sure yet
do we have an official date yet? or will that be pushed back too :D
given that its been out for 10 years, i think it would have sold a fair few no matter what :rolleyes: i preferred GT3 A-Spec over anything else.
yeah i still might pre-order the special edition one. i'm not sure yet
do we have an official date yet? or will that be pushed back too :D
gallinger
Sep 13, 10:27 AM
does anyone know how much the clovertown chips are going to be?
andrewfee
Aug 26, 05:38 AM
Apple support in the UK is terrible. :( When I had an iMac G5 (Rev.A) I had no end of problems and was without the machine for at least 2-3 months. (which actually cost me some work, as I had just started to do some web design for a local business)
After 5 faults (the last two being it coming back from repair with a damaged screen and a dead hard drive) I eventually convinced them to replace it, but rather than getting another iMac, I figured I'd go for a "safe" option and go for a Rev.D Powerbook as I figured they would have sorted out all the faults. Now, to be fair, I did get a maxed out 17" one as compensation (although they screwed that up and I had to get the RAM sent out separately and fit it myself) but I'd rather have had a perfectly working iMac.
Not much with the Powerbook either though - I had a dead sound board within a couple of weeks of owning it (which meant I was without it for a week or so) and I've now been without the proper use of it for two months again. When it came back from service the first time after being "fixed" it had this:
http://static.flickr.com/61/200198290_8368452c2c.jpg
I've had an iSkin cover on it from day one, so it couldn't have been caused by me (see the next pic) and other than a hairline scratch next to the trackpad (you can't even see it in the photo) it was perfect - it hasn't even been out of my house. Not the first scratched machine I've had either. (if I remember correctly, the first Powerbook was scratched out of the box)
The screen brightness wasn't fixed either, they just disabled my calibrated profile, which gets back maybe 5cd/m2:
http://static.flickr.com/64/200198281_9d631b8680.jpg
As you can see, it used to be quite good:
http://static.flickr.com/56/130208615_cb043ed264.jpg
They replaced the main logic board, but the buzzing that started (and it makes "chirping" noises when running iMovie) is still there.
Funnily enough, as soon as I called to complain, they got the part in the next day (or so they claim) and have said I should have it back next week. I've been told to call up again next Thursday - if I have it back (and working!) by then, I'll be entitled to some kind of compensation, if not, then they'll sort out a replacement machine.
For �280 I'm appalled at the level of service.
I've had far more downtime since switching to a Mac than any other computer - back when I had a store-bought PC years ago from somewhere local, I was without it maybe for a week over a period of several years. When I started building my own machines (at least 5/6 years ago now) that was down to a matter of days. (I could either pick up the parts locally the same day, or order online with next-day shipping)
Since buying the first iMac G5 (got one the day they were available, if I remember correctly) it must have been at least 4-6 months I've been without my computer now. (right now I'm now back to using an old PC I've built from spare parts - but there are at least two parts on their way out - keeps crashing and sometimes refuses to boot, but I'm not going to be buying more hardware for it, unless Apple want to pay the bill)
It probably wouldn't be so bad if it wasn't for the fact that I'm disabled, and my only real contact with the "outside world" and friends is via the internet.
I absolutely love the OS, and Apple's software, and the hardware is fantastic when it works, but I'm having doubts as to whether my next machine will be from them or not. (realistically, I don't think I could drop OSX for Windows, but I can't believe how unreliable these things are)
At least they're not as bad as Samsung though - they had my two-month-old LCD HDTV in repair for over four months (the store said I had to wait for the repair to be done and get them the TV back to get a refund) which left me with a 14" Portable CRT during that time, and when I eventually did get it back, it went up in smoke as soon as I plugged it in and turned it on - literally! :eek:
After 5 faults (the last two being it coming back from repair with a damaged screen and a dead hard drive) I eventually convinced them to replace it, but rather than getting another iMac, I figured I'd go for a "safe" option and go for a Rev.D Powerbook as I figured they would have sorted out all the faults. Now, to be fair, I did get a maxed out 17" one as compensation (although they screwed that up and I had to get the RAM sent out separately and fit it myself) but I'd rather have had a perfectly working iMac.
Not much with the Powerbook either though - I had a dead sound board within a couple of weeks of owning it (which meant I was without it for a week or so) and I've now been without the proper use of it for two months again. When it came back from service the first time after being "fixed" it had this:
http://static.flickr.com/61/200198290_8368452c2c.jpg
I've had an iSkin cover on it from day one, so it couldn't have been caused by me (see the next pic) and other than a hairline scratch next to the trackpad (you can't even see it in the photo) it was perfect - it hasn't even been out of my house. Not the first scratched machine I've had either. (if I remember correctly, the first Powerbook was scratched out of the box)
The screen brightness wasn't fixed either, they just disabled my calibrated profile, which gets back maybe 5cd/m2:
http://static.flickr.com/64/200198281_9d631b8680.jpg
As you can see, it used to be quite good:
http://static.flickr.com/56/130208615_cb043ed264.jpg
They replaced the main logic board, but the buzzing that started (and it makes "chirping" noises when running iMovie) is still there.
Funnily enough, as soon as I called to complain, they got the part in the next day (or so they claim) and have said I should have it back next week. I've been told to call up again next Thursday - if I have it back (and working!) by then, I'll be entitled to some kind of compensation, if not, then they'll sort out a replacement machine.
For �280 I'm appalled at the level of service.
I've had far more downtime since switching to a Mac than any other computer - back when I had a store-bought PC years ago from somewhere local, I was without it maybe for a week over a period of several years. When I started building my own machines (at least 5/6 years ago now) that was down to a matter of days. (I could either pick up the parts locally the same day, or order online with next-day shipping)
Since buying the first iMac G5 (got one the day they were available, if I remember correctly) it must have been at least 4-6 months I've been without my computer now. (right now I'm now back to using an old PC I've built from spare parts - but there are at least two parts on their way out - keeps crashing and sometimes refuses to boot, but I'm not going to be buying more hardware for it, unless Apple want to pay the bill)
It probably wouldn't be so bad if it wasn't for the fact that I'm disabled, and my only real contact with the "outside world" and friends is via the internet.
I absolutely love the OS, and Apple's software, and the hardware is fantastic when it works, but I'm having doubts as to whether my next machine will be from them or not. (realistically, I don't think I could drop OSX for Windows, but I can't believe how unreliable these things are)
At least they're not as bad as Samsung though - they had my two-month-old LCD HDTV in repair for over four months (the store said I had to wait for the repair to be done and get them the TV back to get a refund) which left me with a 14" Portable CRT during that time, and when I eventually did get it back, it went up in smoke as soon as I plugged it in and turned it on - literally! :eek:
KnightWRX
Mar 26, 12:19 PM
Do we know this? I know Samba is being replaced but does anyone have any details?
I presume it's going to have better support for Vista and 7 clients purely because if Apple didn't care about that there would be no reason to ditch the older version of Samba that's GPL2. However, does anyone have any actual details on what Apple's Samba replacement is?
Details found here :
http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/Apple-removes-Samba-from-Mac-OS-X-10-7-Server-1215179.html
Gist of it :
- less features than Samba
- no more Active Directory Services
- Just file sharing now.
Samba developers have also noted that the true motive behind this move might not be the GPLv3 per say, but a more global move away from the GPL. Is Apple moving to close the source on more and more of OS X ?
Anyway, Samba v4 could have given them all the "features" they implemented and much more. Their own in-house version won't necessarily be better just because it's written by Apple. The Samba team does a great job with what Microsoft puts out as documentation (if you can even call it that).
Note that from the article, this change only impacts OS X Server. The client was already an in-house solution.
I presume it's going to have better support for Vista and 7 clients purely because if Apple didn't care about that there would be no reason to ditch the older version of Samba that's GPL2. However, does anyone have any actual details on what Apple's Samba replacement is?
Details found here :
http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/Apple-removes-Samba-from-Mac-OS-X-10-7-Server-1215179.html
Gist of it :
- less features than Samba
- no more Active Directory Services
- Just file sharing now.
Samba developers have also noted that the true motive behind this move might not be the GPLv3 per say, but a more global move away from the GPL. Is Apple moving to close the source on more and more of OS X ?
Anyway, Samba v4 could have given them all the "features" they implemented and much more. Their own in-house version won't necessarily be better just because it's written by Apple. The Samba team does a great job with what Microsoft puts out as documentation (if you can even call it that).
Note that from the article, this change only impacts OS X Server. The client was already an in-house solution.
valiar
Jul 27, 01:02 PM
Ouch.
And I have just bought a 2.16 GHz MacBook Pro.
I know what everybody would say - "buy the machine that is available now". That is what I am saying to myself.
Still - ouch :(
And I have just bought a 2.16 GHz MacBook Pro.
I know what everybody would say - "buy the machine that is available now". That is what I am saying to myself.
Still - ouch :(
clevin
Aug 7, 07:13 PM
I keep reading stuff like this. I don't think Time Machine works with the reagular harddrive. You have to use it with an external drive.
thats a kinda harsh requirement, i would think it will allow you to choose local/external hard drive/network server.
Buts till, it will cost lot of space, no matter where the space is from.
thats a kinda harsh requirement, i would think it will allow you to choose local/external hard drive/network server.
Buts till, it will cost lot of space, no matter where the space is from.
Mikey7c8
Mar 31, 08:47 PM
John Gruber's take:
So here�s the Android bait-and-switch laid bare. Android was �open� only until it became popular and handset makers dependent upon it. Now that Google has the handset makers by the balls, Android is no longer open and Google starts asserting control.
Andy Rubin, Vic Gundotra, Eric Schmidt: shameless, lying hypocrites, all of them.Can't say I disagree.
I completely disagree.
Going open sounded like a great idea in the beginning. Fast forward to today, and manufacturers have used the openness against the platform by creating custom versions of android that aren't readily upgradable.
This has hurt the platform more than 'being open' helped it and google is right to start regulating what can and cannot be done.
I think we're all pretty lucky to have experienced both sides of the spectrum to be honest :)
So here�s the Android bait-and-switch laid bare. Android was �open� only until it became popular and handset makers dependent upon it. Now that Google has the handset makers by the balls, Android is no longer open and Google starts asserting control.
Andy Rubin, Vic Gundotra, Eric Schmidt: shameless, lying hypocrites, all of them.Can't say I disagree.
I completely disagree.
Going open sounded like a great idea in the beginning. Fast forward to today, and manufacturers have used the openness against the platform by creating custom versions of android that aren't readily upgradable.
This has hurt the platform more than 'being open' helped it and google is right to start regulating what can and cannot be done.
I think we're all pretty lucky to have experienced both sides of the spectrum to be honest :)
law guy
Aug 6, 04:28 PM
As Apple applied for the trademark, it will not be approved.
It is up to Apple how they want to proceed. A fight that can't win, no matter how much money they have.
Mac Pro has been the premier Mac dealer in the same county as Apple since 1988. Out of all the names for this new line of computers, why choose one that they know they cannot have.
We are already getting countless support calls for the macbook pro. It seems they assume we made them When we can't help them, they seem to get very upset.
Mac Pro is in a position to file for a court order not to release any computer that bears our name.
So get ready WWDC, we will be watching.
Mike Ajlouny
President
MAC-PRO.com
Mike - I'm sure Apple had their IP counsel do an IP search prior to deciding on any names and filing for registration. That is the first and most basic step and is not going going to escape the experienced folks at whatever large firm Apple is using for IP these days. A TM approval from the USPTO doesn't take long at all, 10 to 18 months. Are you operating under the impression that Apple's registration hasn't already been approved? Did you protest the trademark during the time provided for the filing of protests during the trademark registration process? If you've registered mac-pro in the past, did you follow all the guidelines (e.g. providing notice that you were using the term within 6 months of your approval to the USPTO or request a six month extension with USPTO, etc.) have you renewed the registration? If you did file, had it approved, provided the notices of use to the the USPTO, and protested and lost on Apple's application, a bid for a TRO will be interesting as - assuming that last list of events - there are no rights being infringed. Of course, I'm not an IP att'y and there's a long list of assumptions here, and I'm sure if you did have an issue, a post on the MR forum wouldn't be your means of pursuing it.
It is up to Apple how they want to proceed. A fight that can't win, no matter how much money they have.
Mac Pro has been the premier Mac dealer in the same county as Apple since 1988. Out of all the names for this new line of computers, why choose one that they know they cannot have.
We are already getting countless support calls for the macbook pro. It seems they assume we made them When we can't help them, they seem to get very upset.
Mac Pro is in a position to file for a court order not to release any computer that bears our name.
So get ready WWDC, we will be watching.
Mike Ajlouny
President
MAC-PRO.com
Mike - I'm sure Apple had their IP counsel do an IP search prior to deciding on any names and filing for registration. That is the first and most basic step and is not going going to escape the experienced folks at whatever large firm Apple is using for IP these days. A TM approval from the USPTO doesn't take long at all, 10 to 18 months. Are you operating under the impression that Apple's registration hasn't already been approved? Did you protest the trademark during the time provided for the filing of protests during the trademark registration process? If you've registered mac-pro in the past, did you follow all the guidelines (e.g. providing notice that you were using the term within 6 months of your approval to the USPTO or request a six month extension with USPTO, etc.) have you renewed the registration? If you did file, had it approved, provided the notices of use to the the USPTO, and protested and lost on Apple's application, a bid for a TRO will be interesting as - assuming that last list of events - there are no rights being infringed. Of course, I'm not an IP att'y and there's a long list of assumptions here, and I'm sure if you did have an issue, a post on the MR forum wouldn't be your means of pursuing it.
littleman23408
Dec 1, 02:25 PM
after trying out the nascar challenges: :confused:... honestly they should have rather spent their money on getting more recent street cars ... thanks for having 10+ premium nascar cars :rolleyes:
I wish they would have done without the nascar, but it's not to bad playing around with those kinds of races. Those cars are heavy and you sure can feel it when you race them!
I wish they would have done without the nascar, but it's not to bad playing around with those kinds of races. Those cars are heavy and you sure can feel it when you race them!
Multimedia
Jul 23, 05:14 PM
January - March 2007
..$999 - Dual 2.13 GHz One Conroe
$1399 - Dual 2.4 GHz One Conroe
$1699 - Dual 2.67 GHz One Conroe
$1999 - Quad 2.67 GHz One Kentsfield
$2499 - Quad 3.2 GHz One Kentsfield
$3499 or more for Mac OctoPod Fastest On EARTH - 8 x 3.2 GHz
Two Clovertown later One Yorkfield for less money.
This is all just a wild guestimate for discussion purposes. Please don't flame me.At those prices, sign me up for a Quad 2.3!!!! I'll buy that along with a newly designed 23" ACD for $699. :DYeah I can see that this is a January 2007 price list not this year. Sorry for the time warped confusion. :eek:
You can already buy a 24" Dell 1920 x 1200 display for only $799 from a dealer who buys and sells them in bulk on eBay.A Quad 2.3 for $1999 ... not going to happen.
Even a cheapest configuration of Dell Precision 490 Workstartion (http://catalog.us.dell.com/CS1/cs1page2.aspx?br=6&c=us&cs=04&fm=11456&kc=6W463&l=en&s=bsd) with dual 2.3 Woodcrests comes out to $2348. This includes 1GB RAM, 80GB SATA drive, and 128MB nVidia Quadro NVS 285 2D graphics.
Apple prices are typically a few hundred $ higher. I am guessing it will be more like $2699 with a larger hard drive and better graphics.Yes I realize that. I forgot to put the time frame on the original list. I agree with your assessment of the imminent offerings this summer.
..$999 - Dual 2.13 GHz One Conroe
$1399 - Dual 2.4 GHz One Conroe
$1699 - Dual 2.67 GHz One Conroe
$1999 - Quad 2.67 GHz One Kentsfield
$2499 - Quad 3.2 GHz One Kentsfield
$3499 or more for Mac OctoPod Fastest On EARTH - 8 x 3.2 GHz
Two Clovertown later One Yorkfield for less money.
This is all just a wild guestimate for discussion purposes. Please don't flame me.At those prices, sign me up for a Quad 2.3!!!! I'll buy that along with a newly designed 23" ACD for $699. :DYeah I can see that this is a January 2007 price list not this year. Sorry for the time warped confusion. :eek:
You can already buy a 24" Dell 1920 x 1200 display for only $799 from a dealer who buys and sells them in bulk on eBay.A Quad 2.3 for $1999 ... not going to happen.
Even a cheapest configuration of Dell Precision 490 Workstartion (http://catalog.us.dell.com/CS1/cs1page2.aspx?br=6&c=us&cs=04&fm=11456&kc=6W463&l=en&s=bsd) with dual 2.3 Woodcrests comes out to $2348. This includes 1GB RAM, 80GB SATA drive, and 128MB nVidia Quadro NVS 285 2D graphics.
Apple prices are typically a few hundred $ higher. I am guessing it will be more like $2699 with a larger hard drive and better graphics.Yes I realize that. I forgot to put the time frame on the original list. I agree with your assessment of the imminent offerings this summer.
NoNameBrand
Jul 20, 01:04 PM
I hate to burst everyone's bubble, but Kentsfield will not be appearing in any of the Pro machines for some time.
Apple will be using them exclusively in the Xserves, at for the most part of 2007. This will finally give Apple another way to distinguish their server line from their pro line.
What? Apple*differentiates the XServes by having them 1U thick and rackmountable. One buys a rackmount server not because it's faster but because it's smaller and fits in a rack.
Apple will be using them exclusively in the Xserves, at for the most part of 2007. This will finally give Apple another way to distinguish their server line from their pro line.
What? Apple*differentiates the XServes by having them 1U thick and rackmountable. One buys a rackmount server not because it's faster but because it's smaller and fits in a rack.
63dot
Aug 17, 10:44 AM
Check it out!
http://barefeats.com/quad06.html
The 3 ghz Mac Pro is neck and neck with the G5 Quad in the Adobe benchmarks, sick considering the fact it's running under rosetta!!
when cs 3 comes out, which will be sometime in the spring of 2007 according to macworld magazine, the mac pro will be "hands down" the best machine across the board on "all" benchmarks concerning adobe software
let's hope we get cs 3 sooner rather than later in 2007 because i would hate to wait until late march
pc world, september issue, mentioned amd's plan for a quad core processor in 2007 and if that happens, some pc box will be faster than our best xeon powered machines...that is, he he, unless we get that quad core K8L amd with their 4x4 motherboard architecture which would enable a desktop to run two quads for a total of 8 amd cores (but the price of such a machine will debut at a very high price and probably won't directly compete with the mac pro)
but for now, apple has the best pro desktop machine dollar for dollar that i have seen and with cs 3 next year, it will be a designer's dream machine better than anything out there in its price range...at least for a few months ;)
http://barefeats.com/quad06.html
The 3 ghz Mac Pro is neck and neck with the G5 Quad in the Adobe benchmarks, sick considering the fact it's running under rosetta!!
when cs 3 comes out, which will be sometime in the spring of 2007 according to macworld magazine, the mac pro will be "hands down" the best machine across the board on "all" benchmarks concerning adobe software
let's hope we get cs 3 sooner rather than later in 2007 because i would hate to wait until late march
pc world, september issue, mentioned amd's plan for a quad core processor in 2007 and if that happens, some pc box will be faster than our best xeon powered machines...that is, he he, unless we get that quad core K8L amd with their 4x4 motherboard architecture which would enable a desktop to run two quads for a total of 8 amd cores (but the price of such a machine will debut at a very high price and probably won't directly compete with the mac pro)
but for now, apple has the best pro desktop machine dollar for dollar that i have seen and with cs 3 next year, it will be a designer's dream machine better than anything out there in its price range...at least for a few months ;)
mmmcheese
Nov 28, 11:41 PM
Universal has already stated that half of the money will be going to the artists.
Do you work for Universal, or the RIAA?
Do you work for Universal, or the RIAA?
Blue Velvet
Mar 23, 06:11 AM
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.
Well exactly. Far easier to tag together some buzzwords, maybe pull something from FoxNews than it is to think critically about the issue. This inane comparison between coalition numbers was also picked up by Steve M.:
Fox Nation huffily declares that "Bush Had 2 Times More Coalition Partners in Iraq Than Obama Has in Libya." Bush's thirty-nation list, of course, included such global powers as Azerbaijan, Estonia, Latvia, and Uzbekistan, and didn't include the likes of, y'know, Germany and France.
But if we're going to play games like this, in the run-up to the war, how many coalition partners did Bush attract per week? The Libyan uprising started just about a month ago and Obama's coalition is fifteen nations. When do you date the start of the "Iraq crisis" the Bushies manufactured? The Axis of Evil speech, fourteen months before the war began? The Battle of Tora Bora, a month before that? The first administration meetings on Iraq regime change, mere days after Bush's inauguration, and more than two years before the Iraq War started? By that standard, Bush barely acquired one coalition partner a month! Obama obtained more than three partners a week!
I'm reminded of the 2000 electoral maps that measured Bush's vote by geography, as if winning a county with more jackrabbits than people was the equivalent of winning a county full of apartment buildings.
http://nomoremister.blogspot.com/2011/03/well-if-were-going-to-be-ridiculous.html
Meanwhile, Juan Cole lays out ten reasons why this is not like Iraq:
Here are the differences between George W. Bush�s invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the current United Nations action in Libya:
1. The action in Libya was authorized by the United Nations Security Council. That in Iraq was not. By the UN Charter, military action after 1945 should either come as self-defense or with UNSC authorization. Most countries in the world are signatories to the charter and bound by its provisions.
2. The Libyan people had risen up and thrown off the Qaddafi regime, with some 80-90 percent of the country having gone out of his hands before he started having tank commanders fire shells into peaceful crowds. It was this vast majority of the Libyan people that demanded the UN no-fly zone. In 2002-3 there was no similar popular movement against Saddam Hussein.
3. There was an ongoing massacre of civilians, and the threat of more such massacres in Benghazi, by the Qaddafi regime, which precipitated the UNSC resolution. Although the Saddam Hussein regime had massacred people in the 1980s and early 1990s, nothing was going on in 2002-2003 that would have required international intervention.
4. The Arab League urged the UNSC to take action against the Qaddafi regime, and in many ways precipitated Resolution 1973. The Arab League met in 2002 and expressed opposition to a war on Iraq. (Reports of Arab League backtracking on Sunday were incorrect, based on a remark of outgoing Secretary-General Amr Moussa that criticized the taking out of anti-aircraft batteries. The Arab League reaffirmed Sunday and Moussa agreed Monday that the No-Fly Zone is what it wants).
5. None of the United Nations allies envisages landing troops on the ground, nor does the UNSC authorize it. Iraq was invaded by land forces.
6. No false allegations were made against the Qaddafi regime, of being in league with al-Qaeda or of having a nuclear weapons program. The charge is massacre of peaceful civilian demonstrators and an actual promise to commit more such massacres.
7. The United States did not take the lead role in urging a no-fly zone, and was dragged into this action by its Arab and European allies. President Obama pledges that the US role, mainly disabling anti-aircraft batteries and bombing runways, will last �days, not months� before being turned over to other United Nations allies.
8. There is no sectarian or ethnic dimension to the Libyan conflict, whereas the US Pentagon conspired with Shiite and Kurdish parties to overthrow the Sunni-dominated Baathist regime in Iraq, setting the stage for a prolonged and bitter civil war.
9. The US has not rewarded countries such as Norway for entering the conflict as UN allies, but rather a genuine sense of outrage at the brutal crimes against humanity being committed by Qaddafi and his forces impelled the formation of this coalition. The Bush administration�s �coalition of the willing� in contrast was often brought on board by what were essentially bribes.
10. Iraq in 2002-3 no longer posed a credible threat to its neighbors. A resurgent Qaddafi in Libya with petroleum billions at his disposal would likely attempt to undermine the democratic experiments in Tunisia and Egypt, blighting the lives of millions.
http://www.juancole.com/2011/03/top-ten-ways-that-libya-2011-is-not-iraq-2003.html
Well exactly. Far easier to tag together some buzzwords, maybe pull something from FoxNews than it is to think critically about the issue. This inane comparison between coalition numbers was also picked up by Steve M.:
Fox Nation huffily declares that "Bush Had 2 Times More Coalition Partners in Iraq Than Obama Has in Libya." Bush's thirty-nation list, of course, included such global powers as Azerbaijan, Estonia, Latvia, and Uzbekistan, and didn't include the likes of, y'know, Germany and France.
But if we're going to play games like this, in the run-up to the war, how many coalition partners did Bush attract per week? The Libyan uprising started just about a month ago and Obama's coalition is fifteen nations. When do you date the start of the "Iraq crisis" the Bushies manufactured? The Axis of Evil speech, fourteen months before the war began? The Battle of Tora Bora, a month before that? The first administration meetings on Iraq regime change, mere days after Bush's inauguration, and more than two years before the Iraq War started? By that standard, Bush barely acquired one coalition partner a month! Obama obtained more than three partners a week!
I'm reminded of the 2000 electoral maps that measured Bush's vote by geography, as if winning a county with more jackrabbits than people was the equivalent of winning a county full of apartment buildings.
http://nomoremister.blogspot.com/2011/03/well-if-were-going-to-be-ridiculous.html
Meanwhile, Juan Cole lays out ten reasons why this is not like Iraq:
Here are the differences between George W. Bush�s invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the current United Nations action in Libya:
1. The action in Libya was authorized by the United Nations Security Council. That in Iraq was not. By the UN Charter, military action after 1945 should either come as self-defense or with UNSC authorization. Most countries in the world are signatories to the charter and bound by its provisions.
2. The Libyan people had risen up and thrown off the Qaddafi regime, with some 80-90 percent of the country having gone out of his hands before he started having tank commanders fire shells into peaceful crowds. It was this vast majority of the Libyan people that demanded the UN no-fly zone. In 2002-3 there was no similar popular movement against Saddam Hussein.
3. There was an ongoing massacre of civilians, and the threat of more such massacres in Benghazi, by the Qaddafi regime, which precipitated the UNSC resolution. Although the Saddam Hussein regime had massacred people in the 1980s and early 1990s, nothing was going on in 2002-2003 that would have required international intervention.
4. The Arab League urged the UNSC to take action against the Qaddafi regime, and in many ways precipitated Resolution 1973. The Arab League met in 2002 and expressed opposition to a war on Iraq. (Reports of Arab League backtracking on Sunday were incorrect, based on a remark of outgoing Secretary-General Amr Moussa that criticized the taking out of anti-aircraft batteries. The Arab League reaffirmed Sunday and Moussa agreed Monday that the No-Fly Zone is what it wants).
5. None of the United Nations allies envisages landing troops on the ground, nor does the UNSC authorize it. Iraq was invaded by land forces.
6. No false allegations were made against the Qaddafi regime, of being in league with al-Qaeda or of having a nuclear weapons program. The charge is massacre of peaceful civilian demonstrators and an actual promise to commit more such massacres.
7. The United States did not take the lead role in urging a no-fly zone, and was dragged into this action by its Arab and European allies. President Obama pledges that the US role, mainly disabling anti-aircraft batteries and bombing runways, will last �days, not months� before being turned over to other United Nations allies.
8. There is no sectarian or ethnic dimension to the Libyan conflict, whereas the US Pentagon conspired with Shiite and Kurdish parties to overthrow the Sunni-dominated Baathist regime in Iraq, setting the stage for a prolonged and bitter civil war.
9. The US has not rewarded countries such as Norway for entering the conflict as UN allies, but rather a genuine sense of outrage at the brutal crimes against humanity being committed by Qaddafi and his forces impelled the formation of this coalition. The Bush administration�s �coalition of the willing� in contrast was often brought on board by what were essentially bribes.
10. Iraq in 2002-3 no longer posed a credible threat to its neighbors. A resurgent Qaddafi in Libya with petroleum billions at his disposal would likely attempt to undermine the democratic experiments in Tunisia and Egypt, blighting the lives of millions.
http://www.juancole.com/2011/03/top-ten-ways-that-libya-2011-is-not-iraq-2003.html
ergle2
Sep 14, 08:42 PM
I think you're a bit arse-about-face there. Someone else has already pointed out the differences between XP and Windows 2003 aren't trivial, so I won't go into that. However, if you're sufficient vintage, you should remember the "outrage" when someone demonstrated that you could turn NT 4 Workstation into NT 4 Server (including the boot and login screens) just by changing a few Registry settings (although the part that usually doesn't get said is that those Registry settings then triggered a whole range of different tuning settings for the scheduler, memory management, etc). NT 3.5 & 3.51 were the same, and IIRC, NT 3.1 didn't even have a "Server" version.
The comments about separate platforms in the NT era I took to refer to NT3.x/4 vs Win9x.
Quite a few bits of XP Pro functionality can be enabled in XP home with some minor hex editing, too.
And of course, NT started as a reimplementation of VMS for a failed Intel RISC CPU...
The comments about separate platforms in the NT era I took to refer to NT3.x/4 vs Win9x.
Quite a few bits of XP Pro functionality can be enabled in XP home with some minor hex editing, too.
And of course, NT started as a reimplementation of VMS for a failed Intel RISC CPU...
arkitect
Apr 27, 12:29 PM
Maybe the certificate is legitimate, but I think the original short form would have been more convincing than a pristine copy of the long one. I like Obama, but I loathe his extreme liberalism.
Maybe?
Maybe?
I am not sure you wanted to phrase it that way, since you are not a birther…
I like Obama, but I loathe his extreme liberalism.
Extreme liberalism? I guess by US standards. But from across the Atlantic he sure as hell is not an extreme liberal.
I suspected it was a copy, I've never trusted the president, and I probably never will.
So what would be good enough to convince you?
A press conference inside the Hawaii Records Office?
Maybe?
Maybe?
I am not sure you wanted to phrase it that way, since you are not a birther…
I like Obama, but I loathe his extreme liberalism.
Extreme liberalism? I guess by US standards. But from across the Atlantic he sure as hell is not an extreme liberal.
I suspected it was a copy, I've never trusted the president, and I probably never will.
So what would be good enough to convince you?
A press conference inside the Hawaii Records Office?
thisisahughes
Apr 8, 02:00 AM
I'm not sure how I feel about this.
princealfie
Nov 29, 01:21 AM
******* Universal. May the b****** lose foreva.
ZildjianKX
Sep 19, 01:53 AM
If all MBPs came with a gig of RAM standard, DL DVD drives, and a better graphics card (and Merom CPU), I would be thrilled.