oldwatery
Apr 19, 02:03 PM
Apple as Big Brother.
How ironic!
How ironic!
devman
Aug 6, 02:00 PM
With the iSight and IR sensor rumored to be integrated into the new line of Cinema Displays, i guess apple's gonna adopt HDMI as the IO interface, making Apple one of the first corps to do so. Plus with a HDMI enabled Mac Pro and Leopard fully support it. Why? HDMI is just like ADC, plus its an industry standard port. U need only one cable to have all the communications (FW+USB+Sound+...) going, without having to clutter yr desktop with multiple cables. I see it coming!
I think they'll go UDI instead of HDMI (and save fees). The really interesting question here though is HDCP and what means for all existing hardware including cinema displays...
I think they'll go UDI instead of HDMI (and save fees). The really interesting question here though is HDCP and what means for all existing hardware including cinema displays...
Multimedia
Sep 13, 09:18 PM
Hey everybody the Big News is
NBC Today Show went High Definition today!The Today show is an embarrassment. The US major tv networks do not have any real morning news programs. How to trim your dog's ears and an inside look into American Idol contestants is NOT NEWS. It is an entertainment talk show.My post of this news has nothing to do with content. It is a historic moment in the evolution of television. If you don't think so, then you are paying way too much attention to the content and not enough to the process by which they are conveying that content.
NBC Today Show went High Definition today!The Today show is an embarrassment. The US major tv networks do not have any real morning news programs. How to trim your dog's ears and an inside look into American Idol contestants is NOT NEWS. It is an entertainment talk show.My post of this news has nothing to do with content. It is a historic moment in the evolution of television. If you don't think so, then you are paying way too much attention to the content and not enough to the process by which they are conveying that content.
fivepoint
Apr 27, 03:00 PM
Really guys? We're going to argue it may be a forgery now. :rolleyes:
Can you name ONE person here who suggested its a forgery? Please provide the quote assuming of course you're not simply making crap up for the sake of argument... attempting to label people instead of discussing the actual issues. NAWWW!!!
BTW- just opened the same file- no layers. So you tell me what I'm missing here.
Am I a liar? I have no idea if you're doing it right, or if you are even using Illustrator, or if the PDF was replaced with a single-layer/object one. Just do a Google search for 'obama birth certificate layers' and you'll see that I'm not the only one who downloaded a file with multiple layers or objects or whatever.
Can you name ONE person here who suggested its a forgery? Please provide the quote assuming of course you're not simply making crap up for the sake of argument... attempting to label people instead of discussing the actual issues. NAWWW!!!
BTW- just opened the same file- no layers. So you tell me what I'm missing here.
Am I a liar? I have no idea if you're doing it right, or if you are even using Illustrator, or if the PDF was replaced with a single-layer/object one. Just do a Google search for 'obama birth certificate layers' and you'll see that I'm not the only one who downloaded a file with multiple layers or objects or whatever.
Dr.Gargoyle
Aug 11, 12:26 PM
CDMA is the only practical option for those of us who travel.
Travel within US perhaps. Still, you might be correct, even though I have seen posts that claims the opposite. Vz reluctance to give GSM a chance is big roadblock for you guys to get decent roaming. I use my european triband (900,1800,1900) when I fly over. I spend about 2 months per year in US. So far I havent had any problems getting connection. OK, you have some dropped calls when you drive in less populated areas. But that is reallly nothing to get upset about. Better to just redial the number than popping a vein in vain. :p
Still, life would be so much simpler for you if you at least tried to agree on one standard within your own country. Free enterprise has few, but really really annoying drawbacks.
Travel within US perhaps. Still, you might be correct, even though I have seen posts that claims the opposite. Vz reluctance to give GSM a chance is big roadblock for you guys to get decent roaming. I use my european triband (900,1800,1900) when I fly over. I spend about 2 months per year in US. So far I havent had any problems getting connection. OK, you have some dropped calls when you drive in less populated areas. But that is reallly nothing to get upset about. Better to just redial the number than popping a vein in vain. :p
Still, life would be so much simpler for you if you at least tried to agree on one standard within your own country. Free enterprise has few, but really really annoying drawbacks.
louden
Aug 27, 02:39 AM
But I refuse to buy any "So-Called" MacBook Pro until they have implemented the easy access HD professional feature they put in the MacBook. I would rather buy a C2D MacBook with that feature than ever buy a MBP without it.
To me, the most important thing is dedicated video graphics. I'd buy a 2.0 Ghz Core Duo today if it ran with a dedicated graphics card. That would give a user the freedom to run Vista under Parallels and still have pretty good performance.
There's a 15" MBP in my future...
To me, the most important thing is dedicated video graphics. I'd buy a 2.0 Ghz Core Duo today if it ran with a dedicated graphics card. That would give a user the freedom to run Vista under Parallels and still have pretty good performance.
There's a 15" MBP in my future...
mikeapple
Apr 7, 10:58 PM
Best Buy as ALWAYS been really ****** to the customer...
Always had run-ins with workers there and the management always takes the side of the rude sales person... SCREW YOU BEST BUY.. I hope Apple pulls out
Always had run-ins with workers there and the management always takes the side of the rude sales person... SCREW YOU BEST BUY.. I hope Apple pulls out
voyagerd
Jul 27, 03:52 PM
Woot! I'm going to buy and ATI Radeon X850XT!
Lord Blackadder
Mar 22, 10:19 PM
The U.N. Security Council perhaps, but not the entire assembly. It would have been interesting to open that issue up to debate and seen how all the members would have voted.
The security council, not the general assembly, is the organ tasked with authorizing UN military action. The point of the security council is to enable the UN to make rapid strategic decisions without a general debate. It's an imperfect system to be sure, but I don't think requiring a full debate in the general assembly would be an efficient way to respond to this sort of situation.
What I always wonder is what diplomatic efforts were used to pressure Qaddafi? There were no (as far as I know) threats of economic embargoes, freezing of assets, or other less violent methods to coerce Qaddafi. We didn't need to convince him to step dow. We simply needed to convince him that he needed to tone down, defend himself against the armed insurrection, but not cast a wider and violent campaign against innocent civilians.
We could have responded simply with economic sanctions.
Based on Gaddafi's treatment of the initial protests (not to mention his tendencies over 40 years of autocratic rule), I strongly question whether economic sanctions are going to apply sufficient pressure to Gaddafi to relinquish power. Like Mubarak, he is a political strongman who is not easily cowed by threats.
I need a clearer demonstration that serious steps were taken before resorting to war. War should be used as the last resort and only when it's clear that all other options have failed.
I agree that war should be considered a last resort. I also think that the US government is generally too quick to undertake armed intervention. But in this case we took sides in a war that was already in progress. The UN's choices were either non-intervention, non-military intervention, or direct military intervention in some form.
I suppose the point at which "all other options have failed" is a debatable one, since everyone has different opinions on what constitutes a valid option. There are many questions without simple answers. How do we judge failure? Is the purpose of the intervention (military or otherwise) to aid the rebels? Or is it merely to prevent Gaddafi killing civilians? If the latter is the case, does allowing him to remain in power serve that cause? If not, what should we do about it?
At the bottom of all this though, the goal of current foreign intervention (military or otherwise) is clear to me - to remove Gaddafi from power and recognize the rebel transitional government as the legitimate government of Libya.
The security council, not the general assembly, is the organ tasked with authorizing UN military action. The point of the security council is to enable the UN to make rapid strategic decisions without a general debate. It's an imperfect system to be sure, but I don't think requiring a full debate in the general assembly would be an efficient way to respond to this sort of situation.
What I always wonder is what diplomatic efforts were used to pressure Qaddafi? There were no (as far as I know) threats of economic embargoes, freezing of assets, or other less violent methods to coerce Qaddafi. We didn't need to convince him to step dow. We simply needed to convince him that he needed to tone down, defend himself against the armed insurrection, but not cast a wider and violent campaign against innocent civilians.
We could have responded simply with economic sanctions.
Based on Gaddafi's treatment of the initial protests (not to mention his tendencies over 40 years of autocratic rule), I strongly question whether economic sanctions are going to apply sufficient pressure to Gaddafi to relinquish power. Like Mubarak, he is a political strongman who is not easily cowed by threats.
I need a clearer demonstration that serious steps were taken before resorting to war. War should be used as the last resort and only when it's clear that all other options have failed.
I agree that war should be considered a last resort. I also think that the US government is generally too quick to undertake armed intervention. But in this case we took sides in a war that was already in progress. The UN's choices were either non-intervention, non-military intervention, or direct military intervention in some form.
I suppose the point at which "all other options have failed" is a debatable one, since everyone has different opinions on what constitutes a valid option. There are many questions without simple answers. How do we judge failure? Is the purpose of the intervention (military or otherwise) to aid the rebels? Or is it merely to prevent Gaddafi killing civilians? If the latter is the case, does allowing him to remain in power serve that cause? If not, what should we do about it?
At the bottom of all this though, the goal of current foreign intervention (military or otherwise) is clear to me - to remove Gaddafi from power and recognize the rebel transitional government as the legitimate government of Libya.
JeffreyGreen
Apr 25, 03:09 PM
"Federal Marshals need a warrant. . . . . "
Duh, the police always have to jump over a higher bar . . . I, personally, can come into your home, take your bag of cocaine, and go give it to the police and it will be admissible, even though the cops need a warrant. (I can be sued for breaking and entering, etc., but the drugs are still admissible
Also, there is a case in California, upheld by the 9th Circuit, that says the police do NOT need a warrant to come onto your property and place a GPS tracking device on your car and track you and your car. It might get overturned at the USSC, but today, it is legal. Their legal theory is that you don�t have a right to privacy on PUBLIC roads, and it also isn't unreasonable to think that no one would ever come on your property, uninvited. . salesmen, delivery people, the neighbor, etc. So, unless your yard is fenced, and/or clearly posted NO TRESPASSING, the police can put that GPS on your car.
Duh, the police always have to jump over a higher bar . . . I, personally, can come into your home, take your bag of cocaine, and go give it to the police and it will be admissible, even though the cops need a warrant. (I can be sued for breaking and entering, etc., but the drugs are still admissible
Also, there is a case in California, upheld by the 9th Circuit, that says the police do NOT need a warrant to come onto your property and place a GPS tracking device on your car and track you and your car. It might get overturned at the USSC, but today, it is legal. Their legal theory is that you don�t have a right to privacy on PUBLIC roads, and it also isn't unreasonable to think that no one would ever come on your property, uninvited. . salesmen, delivery people, the neighbor, etc. So, unless your yard is fenced, and/or clearly posted NO TRESPASSING, the police can put that GPS on your car.
neko girl
Mar 3, 10:48 PM
That's strange. I've never seen my ignorance stagger. I've always thought it couldn't walk. ;)
Seriously, please educate me, neko girl.
Surely. Why do you believe you have any right or authority to dictate what two consulting adults should do or not?
And, if you do believe you (or a religious book) have that authority, then may I make the following statement to be equally as valid as yours:
Bill McEnaney should only engage in homosexual, sexually active relationships, and should never be engaged in heterosexual relationships, much less any that are anything but platonic.
Do you believe in the validity of my statement. Why or why not?
I look forward to your response.
Seriously, please educate me, neko girl.
Surely. Why do you believe you have any right or authority to dictate what two consulting adults should do or not?
And, if you do believe you (or a religious book) have that authority, then may I make the following statement to be equally as valid as yours:
Bill McEnaney should only engage in homosexual, sexually active relationships, and should never be engaged in heterosexual relationships, much less any that are anything but platonic.
Do you believe in the validity of my statement. Why or why not?
I look forward to your response.
scottlinux
Sep 13, 01:54 PM
Hey everybody the Big News is
NBC Today Show went High Definition today!
The Today show is an embarrassment. The US major tv networks do not have any real morning news programs. How to trim your dog's ears and an inside look into American Idol contestants is NOT NEWS. It is an entertainment talk show.
NBC Today Show went High Definition today!
The Today show is an embarrassment. The US major tv networks do not have any real morning news programs. How to trim your dog's ears and an inside look into American Idol contestants is NOT NEWS. It is an entertainment talk show.
JeffreyGreen
Apr 25, 03:09 PM
"Federal Marshals need a warrant. . . . . "
Duh, the police always have to jump over a higher bar . . . I, personally, can come into your home, take your bag of cocaine, and go give it to the police and it will be admissible, even though the cops need a warrant. (I can be sued for breaking and entering, etc., but the drugs are still admissible
Also, there is a case in California, upheld by the 9th Circuit, that says the police do NOT need a warrant to come onto your property and place a GPS tracking device on your car and track you and your car. It might get overturned at the USSC, but today, it is legal. Their legal theory is that you don�t have a right to privacy on PUBLIC roads, and it also isn't unreasonable to think that no one would ever come on your property, uninvited. . salesmen, delivery people, the neighbor, etc. So, unless your yard is fenced, and/or clearly posted NO TRESPASSING, the police can put that GPS on your car.
Duh, the police always have to jump over a higher bar . . . I, personally, can come into your home, take your bag of cocaine, and go give it to the police and it will be admissible, even though the cops need a warrant. (I can be sued for breaking and entering, etc., but the drugs are still admissible
Also, there is a case in California, upheld by the 9th Circuit, that says the police do NOT need a warrant to come onto your property and place a GPS tracking device on your car and track you and your car. It might get overturned at the USSC, but today, it is legal. Their legal theory is that you don�t have a right to privacy on PUBLIC roads, and it also isn't unreasonable to think that no one would ever come on your property, uninvited. . salesmen, delivery people, the neighbor, etc. So, unless your yard is fenced, and/or clearly posted NO TRESPASSING, the police can put that GPS on your car.
amols
Aug 6, 08:52 AM
Not lame. Childish. I mean seriously. Is your (Generic your.) MBP any slower the day after they announce Core 2 MBPs? I swear to god it's almost as if people's lives are so incomplete that they need to feel special by having the top of the dog pile hardware. I received my MBP on Feb 21st at 10:30AM. Apple can do whatever they want. I'll still be enjoying my Mac at the same level I did on the 21st.
Well...I've used and ENJOYED iMac G4 for five years which is still going strong by the way. I just can't help but wonder how stupid and childish it is to expect that Apple will upgrade it already awesome MBP. The Merom CPU has very minor perforformance benefit over Yonah until Santa Rosa is out next year. It has double the L2 catch, 140M more transistors and 3 Watt/hour more cons (34W/H) than Yonah (31W/H). Conroe with faster FSB is a totally different story. So I personally have nothing against those poor souls expecting new notebooks but sympothy.
Well...I've used and ENJOYED iMac G4 for five years which is still going strong by the way. I just can't help but wonder how stupid and childish it is to expect that Apple will upgrade it already awesome MBP. The Merom CPU has very minor perforformance benefit over Yonah until Santa Rosa is out next year. It has double the L2 catch, 140M more transistors and 3 Watt/hour more cons (34W/H) than Yonah (31W/H). Conroe with faster FSB is a totally different story. So I personally have nothing against those poor souls expecting new notebooks but sympothy.
Padraig
Aug 12, 04:13 AM
If there is a phone on the way i'm guessing that we can be sure of few things.
1) Can't see it being a clamshell. Perhaps a slider, but in all likelyhood it will be a candybar - fits in with apple designs aesthetic, simple, elegant design.
2) It will have to be GSM, UMTS being included as well. There is no way Apple is releasing a CDMA only phone, the market is tiny.
3) I'm sure Apple will release this by themselves, rather than partnering up with a specific carrier. This would allow people who are already tied into contracts to purchase the phone, without having to switch networks. Also couldn't invisage Apple agreeing to something like Vodafone's software.
1) Can't see it being a clamshell. Perhaps a slider, but in all likelyhood it will be a candybar - fits in with apple designs aesthetic, simple, elegant design.
2) It will have to be GSM, UMTS being included as well. There is no way Apple is releasing a CDMA only phone, the market is tiny.
3) I'm sure Apple will release this by themselves, rather than partnering up with a specific carrier. This would allow people who are already tied into contracts to purchase the phone, without having to switch networks. Also couldn't invisage Apple agreeing to something like Vodafone's software.
Rooskibar03
Apr 11, 01:06 PM
Guess this isn't as bad as I would like it to be. ATT moved my upgrade date to 12/3 after I lowered my pricing plan.
Bummer.
Bummer.
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.
jackc
Aug 7, 04:15 PM
Time Machine looks pretty sweet. How do you think it will work in terms of space requirements?
danielpicasso
Mar 26, 01:33 PM
Some of the comments on this board are inane.
1) Launchpad is the selling point...Really? You think Versions, Resume, Mission Control, OS wide Full Screen App support are not selling points?
2) $129 is too much. This one cracks me up. Apple is bundling a $500 product into the OS (and other OS based servers are far more expensive) and people think $129 is too much?
3) When has Apple released an OS, and not shown new features on the final release keynote?
thanks for keeping the inmates sane...... why would Apple let their OS be anything but perfect
1) Launchpad is the selling point...Really? You think Versions, Resume, Mission Control, OS wide Full Screen App support are not selling points?
2) $129 is too much. This one cracks me up. Apple is bundling a $500 product into the OS (and other OS based servers are far more expensive) and people think $129 is too much?
3) When has Apple released an OS, and not shown new features on the final release keynote?
thanks for keeping the inmates sane...... why would Apple let their OS be anything but perfect
Multimedia
Aug 21, 01:25 AM
Mac Pros will need 64bit Leopard to achieve their full multi-core potential. Expect all Core 2 based Macs to hold value well through the next release cycle of OSX Leopard.
Apple is still selling G5's on the website for $3299! Until
Adobe gets out - and optimizes - universal binaries, Quad G5 will sell for more than Quad Xeon Mac Pros! :rolleyes:Quad G5 is only $2799 on the SAVE refurb page. Refurbs are the same as new with a new warranty. But I think that would be a poor choice compared to a Mac Pro. The Mac Pro is not cheaper because you have to add more expensive RAM. But it is faster overall and Rosetta Photoshop performance isn't bad. Quad G5 will also benefit from Leopard don't forget. It's not like Leopard is going to not be written to take advantage of the 64-bit G5 as well.
But I would not recomend a G5 Quad to anyone at this point. I'm pondering a Mac Pro purchase myself. But I'm going to try and hold out for a refurb or even see if I can wait for Clovertown. But I'm likely to be one of the first to snag a Mac Pro refurb when they hit the SAVE page in November-December. By then I may even be thinking about waiting for the January 9th SteveNote. Quad G5 is no slouch. But Mac Pro is faster overall.And I thought you were married to your quad last week ......While I may be married to my Quad G5, we're not exclusive and she likes a threesome with the younger faster models as much as I do too. :p
Apple is still selling G5's on the website for $3299! Until
Adobe gets out - and optimizes - universal binaries, Quad G5 will sell for more than Quad Xeon Mac Pros! :rolleyes:Quad G5 is only $2799 on the SAVE refurb page. Refurbs are the same as new with a new warranty. But I think that would be a poor choice compared to a Mac Pro. The Mac Pro is not cheaper because you have to add more expensive RAM. But it is faster overall and Rosetta Photoshop performance isn't bad. Quad G5 will also benefit from Leopard don't forget. It's not like Leopard is going to not be written to take advantage of the 64-bit G5 as well.
But I would not recomend a G5 Quad to anyone at this point. I'm pondering a Mac Pro purchase myself. But I'm going to try and hold out for a refurb or even see if I can wait for Clovertown. But I'm likely to be one of the first to snag a Mac Pro refurb when they hit the SAVE page in November-December. By then I may even be thinking about waiting for the January 9th SteveNote. Quad G5 is no slouch. But Mac Pro is faster overall.And I thought you were married to your quad last week ......While I may be married to my Quad G5, we're not exclusive and she likes a threesome with the younger faster models as much as I do too. :p
Earendil
Jun 8, 07:40 PM
Why would there be any difference? Do Cheese Doodles purchased form the Piggly Wiggly taste any better than those purchased from Publix?
No, I suspect that Apple's quality control is good enough that an iPhone bought at AT&T and one bought from Radio Shack will taste identical.
No advantages. I mean what does it matter? If it's the white Apple bag you want I can send you one. Eventually they become useless.
I was thinking more along the lines of Warranties. The Apple one will hold no matter what, I would imagine. But I didn't know if Radio Shack, for example, generally has extended services above and beyond the manufacturers.
Or perhaps when an iPhone is bought from Apple a certain amount of data is stored at the time of purchase (like the date) that would make future warranty claims go smoother.
I could not care less about white baggies or taste differences.
No, I suspect that Apple's quality control is good enough that an iPhone bought at AT&T and one bought from Radio Shack will taste identical.
No advantages. I mean what does it matter? If it's the white Apple bag you want I can send you one. Eventually they become useless.
I was thinking more along the lines of Warranties. The Apple one will hold no matter what, I would imagine. But I didn't know if Radio Shack, for example, generally has extended services above and beyond the manufacturers.
Or perhaps when an iPhone is bought from Apple a certain amount of data is stored at the time of purchase (like the date) that would make future warranty claims go smoother.
I could not care less about white baggies or taste differences.
Vegasman
Apr 25, 04:45 PM
Why should Location Services stop your phone from logging cell tower information, the same information your cell company logs?
Now if it's in Airplane Mode, then I'd wonder...
I don't think the "smart people" are all that smart if that's their issue!
People don't tend to lose their "cell tower information" stored on their carrier's servers too often.
They do however lose their phone in bars (ask Apple), in airports and other places.
And then there is the issue of the iTunes backup....
Imagine for a second you were going through a nasty divorce, and the crazy spouse got the Mac Book Pro as part of some early asset devying up. And just now you are finding out she has the backup of YOUR locations. Those same locations her sneaky lawyer can use to create this wild ass scenario that makes you look bad for reasons A, B and C.
Personal stuff needs to stay private and secure. It's incredible what malicious people can do with it it.
Now if it's in Airplane Mode, then I'd wonder...
I don't think the "smart people" are all that smart if that's their issue!
People don't tend to lose their "cell tower information" stored on their carrier's servers too often.
They do however lose their phone in bars (ask Apple), in airports and other places.
And then there is the issue of the iTunes backup....
Imagine for a second you were going through a nasty divorce, and the crazy spouse got the Mac Book Pro as part of some early asset devying up. And just now you are finding out she has the backup of YOUR locations. Those same locations her sneaky lawyer can use to create this wild ass scenario that makes you look bad for reasons A, B and C.
Personal stuff needs to stay private and secure. It's incredible what malicious people can do with it it.
Hallivand
Mar 25, 10:57 PM
Um, there's only been one release since leopard. Too soon to know if Lion will wow or not.
From the developer builds and such, there doesn't appear to be anything compelling or major to warrant anything more than a minor upgrade.
Yeah, disappearing scroll bars. A full size screen. Woo.
The UI and basic functionalities have stayed the same since Leopard, sprinkled with a bit of iOS features. Snow Leopard was a tune up, to establish the Intel line completely and such.
Yet retained most, if not all of the Leopard UI elements.
Personally, it just looks like a rough merge of iOS into the OS X environment without any refinement.
If we have to fork out $120 or something, forget it.
I guess my Leopard PowerPC Macs still look up to date then :)
From the developer builds and such, there doesn't appear to be anything compelling or major to warrant anything more than a minor upgrade.
Yeah, disappearing scroll bars. A full size screen. Woo.
The UI and basic functionalities have stayed the same since Leopard, sprinkled with a bit of iOS features. Snow Leopard was a tune up, to establish the Intel line completely and such.
Yet retained most, if not all of the Leopard UI elements.
Personally, it just looks like a rough merge of iOS into the OS X environment without any refinement.
If we have to fork out $120 or something, forget it.
I guess my Leopard PowerPC Macs still look up to date then :)
Moyank24
Feb 28, 08:46 PM
No because heterosexuality is the default way the brain works
And your proof of this is......??
Heterosexuality is the default way your brain may work. But just because it's like that for you, doesn't mean it's like that for us all.
And your proof of this is......??
Heterosexuality is the default way your brain may work. But just because it's like that for you, doesn't mean it's like that for us all.