fastlane1588
Jul 27, 11:52 PM
so everyone keeps saying wwdc for all of the hardware releases....well seeing as how apple enjoys releasing stuff on tuesdays there happens to be a tuesday before wwdc. what if they just either quitely released everything or anounced everything that tuesday. that way they arent slow about releasing, and everyone will be set for when they talk about leopard and all the cool apps that they can run on their new machines,
this way they can also keep the focus of wwdc on the software instead of trying to squeeze new releases and software demos and all into one event......just a thought
this way they can also keep the focus of wwdc on the software instead of trying to squeeze new releases and software demos and all into one event......just a thought
ssk2
Apr 14, 04:20 PM
But the iPhone 4 is still the best smartphone on the market and will continue to be so well past June.
If you want to choose to get an inferior phone because you want to chase after a spec sheet that is on you. That does not change reality.
LOL. Right.
Opinion is not fact. This works on both sides of the argument, I concede.
Still, you cannot say the iPhone is the best smartphone on the market, just as someone else can't say the Atrix is the best. Different strokes for different folks!
If you want to choose to get an inferior phone because you want to chase after a spec sheet that is on you. That does not change reality.
LOL. Right.
Opinion is not fact. This works on both sides of the argument, I concede.
Still, you cannot say the iPhone is the best smartphone on the market, just as someone else can't say the Atrix is the best. Different strokes for different folks!
MacRumors
Jul 27, 09:34 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
Intel announced (http://www.macworld.com/news/2006/07/27/core2duo/index.php) the long anticipated Core 2 Duo processors today. Intel announced 10 new chips including 5 designed for latops (Merom) and 5 for desktops (Conroe).
Core 2 Duo runs at slower clock speeds than Pentium-era chips, but is still more productive because it handles more calculations per clock cycle, said Sean Tucker, a product manager at HP. Thanks to that slower speed, Core 2 Duo chips need less electricity, drawing just 65 watts compared to the Pentium 4�s 95 watts and Pentium D�s 130 watts.
Intel has already started shipping Core 2 Duo chips to manufacturers, so the first Core 2 Duo Desktop machines should reach consumers in early August. Meanwhile Core 2 Duo laptops will reach consumers by the end of August.
Conroe and Merom are successors to the Core Duo processor which was introduced by Intel early this year. The Core Duo (Yonah) was the first Intel chip used in Apple's switch to intel earlier this year.
At present Apple's lineup is as follows:
Intel: MacBook, MacBook Pro, iMac, Mac mini: Core Duo or Core Solo (Yonah)
PowerPC: PowerMac, Xserve: PowerPC 970 (G5)
Newer processors from Intel sharing a new architecture now include:
Core 2 Duo mobile (Merom)
Core 2 Duo desktop (Conroe)
Xeon 5100 (Woodcrest)
Woodcrest is rumored (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/07/20060711225142.shtml) to be used in the Mac Pro, which is expected be released at WWDC 2006. Apple's use of the Core 2 Duo is not yet clear, but the Core 2 Duo mobile (Merom) is pin compatible (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/06/20060613185240.shtml) with the current Core Duo (Yonah). This means that Apple could easily upgrade the existing Intel-based Macs to the newer processor with no design changes.
Intel announced (http://www.macworld.com/news/2006/07/27/core2duo/index.php) the long anticipated Core 2 Duo processors today. Intel announced 10 new chips including 5 designed for latops (Merom) and 5 for desktops (Conroe).
Core 2 Duo runs at slower clock speeds than Pentium-era chips, but is still more productive because it handles more calculations per clock cycle, said Sean Tucker, a product manager at HP. Thanks to that slower speed, Core 2 Duo chips need less electricity, drawing just 65 watts compared to the Pentium 4�s 95 watts and Pentium D�s 130 watts.
Intel has already started shipping Core 2 Duo chips to manufacturers, so the first Core 2 Duo Desktop machines should reach consumers in early August. Meanwhile Core 2 Duo laptops will reach consumers by the end of August.
Conroe and Merom are successors to the Core Duo processor which was introduced by Intel early this year. The Core Duo (Yonah) was the first Intel chip used in Apple's switch to intel earlier this year.
At present Apple's lineup is as follows:
Intel: MacBook, MacBook Pro, iMac, Mac mini: Core Duo or Core Solo (Yonah)
PowerPC: PowerMac, Xserve: PowerPC 970 (G5)
Newer processors from Intel sharing a new architecture now include:
Core 2 Duo mobile (Merom)
Core 2 Duo desktop (Conroe)
Xeon 5100 (Woodcrest)
Woodcrest is rumored (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/07/20060711225142.shtml) to be used in the Mac Pro, which is expected be released at WWDC 2006. Apple's use of the Core 2 Duo is not yet clear, but the Core 2 Duo mobile (Merom) is pin compatible (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/06/20060613185240.shtml) with the current Core Duo (Yonah). This means that Apple could easily upgrade the existing Intel-based Macs to the newer processor with no design changes.
tortoise
Aug 23, 03:04 PM
Do you have a reference showing that this translates to better performance in real-world application tests in a head to head competition?
Not handy, since a lot of this happened on mailing lists.
The short version is that the memory performance scales in a very sub-linear fashion as a function of the number of cores being used, whereas Opteron scalability is almost linear up to a large number of cores. The good news is that for single dual-core processors the memory performance is on par with dual-core Opterons and their in-cache performance can be better. The bad news is that this performance does not hold as you scale cores in a system. So for some applications (e.g. those that live mostly in cache) the Woodcrest processors will be mildly faster than Opterons, but for most the performance is about even in real app benchmarks.
I've seen fairly comprehensive benchmarks for both databases and scientific computing applications, both of which thoroughly exercise the memory subsystem. Even though a single Intel core theoretically has more bandwidth, the high latency means that the real bandwidth is about the same as the slower Opterons (which have real bandwidth that approaches theoretical) and the cross-sectional bandwidth of Opterons when you get up to 4 cores and higher is much higher since the scaling is almost linear with the number of cores. For Intel, I think it was the case that a bigger cache was a cheaper design choice than a truly scalable memory subsystem. As a result, they will have different competencies. Some types of floating point codes should run very well on Intel.
Not handy, since a lot of this happened on mailing lists.
The short version is that the memory performance scales in a very sub-linear fashion as a function of the number of cores being used, whereas Opteron scalability is almost linear up to a large number of cores. The good news is that for single dual-core processors the memory performance is on par with dual-core Opterons and their in-cache performance can be better. The bad news is that this performance does not hold as you scale cores in a system. So for some applications (e.g. those that live mostly in cache) the Woodcrest processors will be mildly faster than Opterons, but for most the performance is about even in real app benchmarks.
I've seen fairly comprehensive benchmarks for both databases and scientific computing applications, both of which thoroughly exercise the memory subsystem. Even though a single Intel core theoretically has more bandwidth, the high latency means that the real bandwidth is about the same as the slower Opterons (which have real bandwidth that approaches theoretical) and the cross-sectional bandwidth of Opterons when you get up to 4 cores and higher is much higher since the scaling is almost linear with the number of cores. For Intel, I think it was the case that a bigger cache was a cheaper design choice than a truly scalable memory subsystem. As a result, they will have different competencies. Some types of floating point codes should run very well on Intel.
ezekielrage_99
Aug 17, 02:01 AM
A lot of folks are waiting for game benchmarks...bring 'em on!
Yeah put up some World of Warcraft or Doom 3 results, that's what this is all about a Mac being the fastest gaming machine :cool:
Yeah put up some World of Warcraft or Doom 3 results, that's what this is all about a Mac being the fastest gaming machine :cool:
Chip NoVaMac
Apr 7, 11:48 PM
You might want to look at Best Buy's pricing again.
All iPads, iPods and Macs are sold $.99 (at minimum) above Apple.
Time Capsule 1TB $334.99 at Best Buy, $299.00 at Apple
2TB $499.99, $499.00 at Apple
Airport Extreme - $189.99 at Best Buy $179.00 at Apple
Express, $109.99 at Best Buy, $99.00 at Apple
The small accessories are just as bad. And Apple isn't the only brand they mark over MSRP too. I wouldn't be surprised is Bose products were too.
Noticed this as well on some items I have looked at BB.... they seem to be counting on the uneducated consumer of late. Working retail, I hate it when folks whip out their cellphones to do a barcode search (at least at the shop I work at we are competitive most of the time) - but at BB I do it all the time now... no reason to pay more than the retail price for something to make shareholders happy....
All iPads, iPods and Macs are sold $.99 (at minimum) above Apple.
Time Capsule 1TB $334.99 at Best Buy, $299.00 at Apple
2TB $499.99, $499.00 at Apple
Airport Extreme - $189.99 at Best Buy $179.00 at Apple
Express, $109.99 at Best Buy, $99.00 at Apple
The small accessories are just as bad. And Apple isn't the only brand they mark over MSRP too. I wouldn't be surprised is Bose products were too.
Noticed this as well on some items I have looked at BB.... they seem to be counting on the uneducated consumer of late. Working retail, I hate it when folks whip out their cellphones to do a barcode search (at least at the shop I work at we are competitive most of the time) - but at BB I do it all the time now... no reason to pay more than the retail price for something to make shareholders happy....
Multimedia
Aug 18, 08:53 AM
http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/mac%20pro_081406100848/12798.png
I think this speaks for itself.
When I'm working on one project, that's all my attention to it. When I'd like to encode it, I'd like my however many cores to be at full blast. Sadly, that's not happening at the moment and will remain so until they rewrite h264 encoding.
Like I said, unless people are doing what you do (sending multiple files to be encoded at the same time all the time) they won't benefit from 4, 8, 100 cores.
Now if anyone can show benchmarks that show FCP being 40-50% faster on a quad than on a dual when working on a project, I'll shut up :)That chart speaks for NOTHING. Comparing a Mac Pro to old 2004 single core Dual G5 PowerMacs is a completely irrelevant and spurious "test". This entire review is flawed by the missing Quad G5. BTW I don't use H.264 at all ever.
I think this speaks for itself.
When I'm working on one project, that's all my attention to it. When I'd like to encode it, I'd like my however many cores to be at full blast. Sadly, that's not happening at the moment and will remain so until they rewrite h264 encoding.
Like I said, unless people are doing what you do (sending multiple files to be encoded at the same time all the time) they won't benefit from 4, 8, 100 cores.
Now if anyone can show benchmarks that show FCP being 40-50% faster on a quad than on a dual when working on a project, I'll shut up :)That chart speaks for NOTHING. Comparing a Mac Pro to old 2004 single core Dual G5 PowerMacs is a completely irrelevant and spurious "test". This entire review is flawed by the missing Quad G5. BTW I don't use H.264 at all ever.
leekohler
Mar 7, 07:59 AM
Here's a tidbit from the pdf:
This book is dedicated to the
Holy Family, the sublime model for all
families, and our sure guide in the
reaction to the sexual revolution and
homosexual offensive.
May the Blessed Mother intercede
with Her Divine Son for all Americans
committed to defend the sacred
institutions of marriage and the family.
Interesting... wasn't Mary knocked up by an angel and was she really married to Joseph? :confused:
Whoever wrote this nonsense has no idea how the world really works and what the social and cultural consensus was in the 1700s, the Renaissance and all the way before. Any idealized tradition in family, culture and society the Christians of today are pining for would completely eradicate everything we've worked for to be free and live without fear to be who we are.
I just have one thing to say to all the righteous religious folk; it's over, end of the line, the jig is up. You've had your chance and you blew it. Join us in the 21st century where liberty, freedom and equality prevail - it's not perfect but it's the best we can do. So, rather than fighting it, join it and help it make better.
They really think we're the enemy. It's unbelievable.
This book is dedicated to the
Holy Family, the sublime model for all
families, and our sure guide in the
reaction to the sexual revolution and
homosexual offensive.
May the Blessed Mother intercede
with Her Divine Son for all Americans
committed to defend the sacred
institutions of marriage and the family.
Interesting... wasn't Mary knocked up by an angel and was she really married to Joseph? :confused:
Whoever wrote this nonsense has no idea how the world really works and what the social and cultural consensus was in the 1700s, the Renaissance and all the way before. Any idealized tradition in family, culture and society the Christians of today are pining for would completely eradicate everything we've worked for to be free and live without fear to be who we are.
I just have one thing to say to all the righteous religious folk; it's over, end of the line, the jig is up. You've had your chance and you blew it. Join us in the 21st century where liberty, freedom and equality prevail - it's not perfect but it's the best we can do. So, rather than fighting it, join it and help it make better.
They really think we're the enemy. It's unbelievable.
Macsterguy
Apr 27, 08:19 AM
So track me... I'm not ashamed of where I go...
We are giving up our rights just by typing in this forum on the "World Wide Web" because it is World Wide...
This was all started by 2 paranoid people that need to throw away their technology and crawl into a cave with that guy with the long grey beard that is hiding from the world (until he gets caught)...
We are giving up our rights just by typing in this forum on the "World Wide Web" because it is World Wide...
This was all started by 2 paranoid people that need to throw away their technology and crawl into a cave with that guy with the long grey beard that is hiding from the world (until he gets caught)...
powers74
Apr 10, 09:57 PM
If I think the new FCP sucks I'll be b*tching and moaning too. ;)
Lethal
Ha! fair enough.
Lethal
Ha! fair enough.
SevenInchScrew
Dec 9, 01:09 AM
DoFoT:
It depends on what you want from a game. If you care more about driving and tuning than painting and whatnot go buy GT5. Its all about driving and not much else.
I love it because i'm a bit of a car nerd. If you like cars you will like GT5. If you love cars you will love GT5, its just that simple.
I guess I'll throw in my counterpoint to that then, just to give him another opinion to mull over, because I love cars and don't love GT5....
The game is not real good. Every time I've played it, I can't help but think of how it could have been SOOO much better, if they just trimmed back on the crazy feature list a bit. The game tries to be everything to everyone who likes cars. But the problem with that is, trying to do many things means you'll never excel at any of them. Often the implementation of things in this game is a little weak or unfulfilling because of that. For example...
NASCAR is in, but is pretty plain and boring, and doesn't feel like a real cup race. If you like NASCAR, you'd be better served with a full game based on that.
Same with WRC stuff. Yes, the rally is pretty decent. But, I've played a bunch of REALLY awesome rally games before, and this is nowhere near as good.
Day and Night cycles, and Weather effects look amazing.... on the very few tracks that you can actually have them function on.
The sounds of the cars, just as with every GT game that has come before it, is terrible. Very few cars actually sound like their real-world version, and when you tune them up, they get even less distinctive.
The car list, while huge, is FILLED with cars that I have absolutely no desire to drive in a racing game. I get Kaz's intention, bringing in cars from many eras and different parts of the automotive spectrum to see them, and maybe appreciate them more. But this is a racing game at its core, and I don't ever want to race a VW Kombi.
And lastly, the menus are just pitiful. It really feels like they designed them first, all those years ago, and then never touched them again. So many games have come and gone with great menu systems, and this game took nothing away from them, because they are just awful in this game.
This game really had the potential to be amazing. If they got rid of NASCAR, WRC, Karts, etc, and took out about 4-500 of the boring, crappy cars, we'd be getting somewhere. Use the time and effort that those removed things would have occupied to make some manageable menus, more Premium cars, and get the Day-Night cycle and Weather on all tracks. That would have been great. But that isn't what we got.
Don't get me wrong, it is a good game. But GT games aren't supposed to just be good, they are supposed to be GREAT. But even after a 6 year wait, we only got pretty good.
But hey, as I've said on many occasions, it does make some DAMN GOOD screenshots. Almost unreal at times...
Click to HUGE-size
http://imgur.com/hLJ12.jpg
http://imgur.com/V06hb.jpg
http://imgur.com/Vciun.jpg
http://imgur.com/ZGPiF.jpg
http://imgur.com/IMrhk.jpg
It depends on what you want from a game. If you care more about driving and tuning than painting and whatnot go buy GT5. Its all about driving and not much else.
I love it because i'm a bit of a car nerd. If you like cars you will like GT5. If you love cars you will love GT5, its just that simple.
I guess I'll throw in my counterpoint to that then, just to give him another opinion to mull over, because I love cars and don't love GT5....
The game is not real good. Every time I've played it, I can't help but think of how it could have been SOOO much better, if they just trimmed back on the crazy feature list a bit. The game tries to be everything to everyone who likes cars. But the problem with that is, trying to do many things means you'll never excel at any of them. Often the implementation of things in this game is a little weak or unfulfilling because of that. For example...
NASCAR is in, but is pretty plain and boring, and doesn't feel like a real cup race. If you like NASCAR, you'd be better served with a full game based on that.
Same with WRC stuff. Yes, the rally is pretty decent. But, I've played a bunch of REALLY awesome rally games before, and this is nowhere near as good.
Day and Night cycles, and Weather effects look amazing.... on the very few tracks that you can actually have them function on.
The sounds of the cars, just as with every GT game that has come before it, is terrible. Very few cars actually sound like their real-world version, and when you tune them up, they get even less distinctive.
The car list, while huge, is FILLED with cars that I have absolutely no desire to drive in a racing game. I get Kaz's intention, bringing in cars from many eras and different parts of the automotive spectrum to see them, and maybe appreciate them more. But this is a racing game at its core, and I don't ever want to race a VW Kombi.
And lastly, the menus are just pitiful. It really feels like they designed them first, all those years ago, and then never touched them again. So many games have come and gone with great menu systems, and this game took nothing away from them, because they are just awful in this game.
This game really had the potential to be amazing. If they got rid of NASCAR, WRC, Karts, etc, and took out about 4-500 of the boring, crappy cars, we'd be getting somewhere. Use the time and effort that those removed things would have occupied to make some manageable menus, more Premium cars, and get the Day-Night cycle and Weather on all tracks. That would have been great. But that isn't what we got.
Don't get me wrong, it is a good game. But GT games aren't supposed to just be good, they are supposed to be GREAT. But even after a 6 year wait, we only got pretty good.
But hey, as I've said on many occasions, it does make some DAMN GOOD screenshots. Almost unreal at times...
Click to HUGE-size
http://imgur.com/hLJ12.jpg
http://imgur.com/V06hb.jpg
http://imgur.com/Vciun.jpg
http://imgur.com/ZGPiF.jpg
http://imgur.com/IMrhk.jpg
wizard
Apr 10, 03:53 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
A bit of selective hearing on the part of MacRumors with the quotes they chose to use. At first the video sounds great, dude is hyping what he saw from Apple. But later he gets called out from another speculating Apple is making a very significant change and distancing Final Cut from the real 'pro' users, dumbing it down, etc, and the guy who has seen it gets real quiet.. He is asked if he will update his editing studio's workflow to the new Final Cut, and he basically danced around the question, pleaded the 5th, and made it pretty clear that he is holding back some reservations about how the industry will adapt to the changes.
Personally I'm very interested to see what they do, I'm sure it will have huge improvements on real time rendering and performance, sounds like the whole thing is being rewritten. But it does worry me that the program could become more for mass audience and no longer the pro application it has been for the past decade.
A hammer is a hammer, the only significant difference between pro use and amature is how you swing it. Sometimes the pros get a little full of themselves and don't realize that tools are just there to express your imagination.
A bit of selective hearing on the part of MacRumors with the quotes they chose to use. At first the video sounds great, dude is hyping what he saw from Apple. But later he gets called out from another speculating Apple is making a very significant change and distancing Final Cut from the real 'pro' users, dumbing it down, etc, and the guy who has seen it gets real quiet.. He is asked if he will update his editing studio's workflow to the new Final Cut, and he basically danced around the question, pleaded the 5th, and made it pretty clear that he is holding back some reservations about how the industry will adapt to the changes.
Personally I'm very interested to see what they do, I'm sure it will have huge improvements on real time rendering and performance, sounds like the whole thing is being rewritten. But it does worry me that the program could become more for mass audience and no longer the pro application it has been for the past decade.
A hammer is a hammer, the only significant difference between pro use and amature is how you swing it. Sometimes the pros get a little full of themselves and don't realize that tools are just there to express your imagination.
jaxstate
Aug 11, 10:50 AM
I wonder if it's going to be a toy or a real phone. I'm hoping it's more of a smartphone than a ngage phone. (i know they couldn't make a phone that bad if they tried, just tryint to get a point out there.)
Willis
Jul 27, 02:19 PM
They didn't. Where is this Mhz myth you are talking about? They are downplaying the use of Mhz was the point I was making.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PKF9GOE2q38
Anyone wanting to know about the Mhz myth shall find it there.
These new chips are to prove that the Mhz myth doesnt exist. Just by changing their arch. they can provide more performance with the same mhz, instead of increasing it (such as the Pentiums)
Imagine. If the Intel's were'nt annouced in January... we'd only have them for a month or two now instead of 7. Crazy.
Just goes to show the MBP's truely are designed for Merom
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PKF9GOE2q38
Anyone wanting to know about the Mhz myth shall find it there.
These new chips are to prove that the Mhz myth doesnt exist. Just by changing their arch. they can provide more performance with the same mhz, instead of increasing it (such as the Pentiums)
Imagine. If the Intel's were'nt annouced in January... we'd only have them for a month or two now instead of 7. Crazy.
Just goes to show the MBP's truely are designed for Merom
cult hero
Mar 26, 03:59 PM
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.
Ick. None of that is good news. Although their current implementation of Samba is old anyway. Things aren't going to get worse... they're just not going to get any better. That's a bummer.
Looks like I'll continue using Linux for my domain controllers then. (Not that I take issue with this.)
Personally, I think it's GPL3. Apple isn't the only company reacting negatively to it. Who knows though? I certainly don't.
On the upside that means Apple won't advertise that their server will work as a domain controller anymore which they do now despite the fact that nowhere do they say, "Hey, only old NT4 style domains that don't work for modern Windows clients."
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.
Ick. None of that is good news. Although their current implementation of Samba is old anyway. Things aren't going to get worse... they're just not going to get any better. That's a bummer.
Looks like I'll continue using Linux for my domain controllers then. (Not that I take issue with this.)
Personally, I think it's GPL3. Apple isn't the only company reacting negatively to it. Who knows though? I certainly don't.
On the upside that means Apple won't advertise that their server will work as a domain controller anymore which they do now despite the fact that nowhere do they say, "Hey, only old NT4 style domains that don't work for modern Windows clients."
fullmanfullninj
Apr 8, 02:14 AM
Did it ever occur to you that perhaps BB take a cut of Apple's share of the profit when they sell an iPad?
Based on what I've seen, BB doesn't take a cut of the profit.
Look at it this way - Apple has to approve a certain retailer to sell their products. Why would they then pay that retailer that they have approved? I admit this isn't a very compelling example.
My point(s) remain that managers are not hoarding iPads to meet their daily budgets and I do not believe BB gets any sort of money from Apple for every sale. Even then, that would not explain the stop-sale. In fact, that would encourage BB to go through their stock...
Based on what I've seen, BB doesn't take a cut of the profit.
Look at it this way - Apple has to approve a certain retailer to sell their products. Why would they then pay that retailer that they have approved? I admit this isn't a very compelling example.
My point(s) remain that managers are not hoarding iPads to meet their daily budgets and I do not believe BB gets any sort of money from Apple for every sale. Even then, that would not explain the stop-sale. In fact, that would encourage BB to go through their stock...
portishead
Apr 12, 02:50 AM
People actually use Motion, for actual work?
Motion is a lot like After Effects, if After Effects' mom got drunk, did some crank and tossed herself down a flight of stairs every Friday night during her pregnancy, and then delivered a breech baby with the cord wrapped around its neck.
and then dropped it.
twice.
I was gonna say... you need a hug... then I read your sig. :p
Motion is a lot like After Effects, if After Effects' mom got drunk, did some crank and tossed herself down a flight of stairs every Friday night during her pregnancy, and then delivered a breech baby with the cord wrapped around its neck.
and then dropped it.
twice.
I was gonna say... you need a hug... then I read your sig. :p
takao
Dec 3, 05:28 PM
I've started rally a bit today while i save up for a car with a bit more balls. Rally is completely sublime. I am loving every second of it. I had no problem with the dirt and snow tracks, but the tarmac rally is giving me some trouble. I use an 06 Focus ST that is around 215hp, so i can bump up the HP and still compete in the series. I might just have to do that.
same here .. on tarmac level there always seems to be 1 car in the bunch who will cause me troubles with being really fast
same here .. on tarmac level there always seems to be 1 car in the bunch who will cause me troubles with being really fast
AidenShaw
Sep 16, 12:09 AM
Dude I'm going to sell my dell.
And buy a new Dell with these same chips and features ;)
And buy a new Dell with these same chips and features ;)
jaxstate
Jul 27, 11:27 AM
MacPro
Leopard
iTunes Movie store
Asteroid
Al Nano up to 8G
MacPro
MBP, iMac processor update
Leopard Preview
I think those are the most likely marbles.
Leopard
iTunes Movie store
Asteroid
Al Nano up to 8G
MacPro
MBP, iMac processor update
Leopard Preview
I think those are the most likely marbles.
eawmp1
Apr 27, 08:43 AM
Now our long national nightmare is over! It's morning again in America. ;)
All is good with the world.
Left and right can unite behind the newly-legitimized president and join together to accomplish the work of the people.
:rolleyes:
All is good with the world.
Left and right can unite behind the newly-legitimized president and join together to accomplish the work of the people.
:rolleyes:
Rt&Dzine
Feb 28, 08:05 PM
They still can not have valid sacramental marriage
Fornication doesn't matter if the person doesn't care about the religious connotations of marriage
Sure they can. There are other beliefs than Catholicism and Christianity.
Fornication doesn't matter if the person doesn't care about the religious connotations of marriage
Sure they can. There are other beliefs than Catholicism and Christianity.
manu chao
Apr 27, 08:47 AM
But if that happens, they already know everything there is to know about you anyway and have no need to check your Wi-Fi database. They've got your Address Book info, your bank site links and cookies, your email, your personal letters, etc.
The point is that I save on my computer what I consider the computer to be safe enough for, which includes, eg, my e-mails. I simply would like to be given the choice to decide whether I want to save certain things on my computer or not. With that database, Apple did not give me the choice because it did not inform me about this database (if it had told me, I might have run a cron job to delete it, excluded it from my TM backups, encrypted my iPhone backups, etc.).
The point is that I save on my computer what I consider the computer to be safe enough for, which includes, eg, my e-mails. I simply would like to be given the choice to decide whether I want to save certain things on my computer or not. With that database, Apple did not give me the choice because it did not inform me about this database (if it had told me, I might have run a cron job to delete it, excluded it from my TM backups, encrypted my iPhone backups, etc.).
parapup
Apr 11, 12:13 PM
Apple really needs to make some significant changes to iOS5 to bring me back this time.
For me those changes would be -
a) Check box that says "Allow app installs from unknown sources"
b) Mind blowing notification system - never before seen preferably, but something that even remotely competes with webOS would do
c) Widgets
d) Bigger screen - although this is not iOS specific, a iOS5 that does some magic with bigger screen is what I am looking for.
Tough gig Apple - doesn't hurt to try :)
For me those changes would be -
a) Check box that says "Allow app installs from unknown sources"
b) Mind blowing notification system - never before seen preferably, but something that even remotely competes with webOS would do
c) Widgets
d) Bigger screen - although this is not iOS specific, a iOS5 that does some magic with bigger screen is what I am looking for.
Tough gig Apple - doesn't hurt to try :)