Eduardo1971
Apr 11, 12:34 PM
If true, this means that Apple has raised the white flag and accepted the defeat that Android has given to them. Not caring about the power of the hardware relative to others in the marketplace is a hallmark of a niche ecosystem.
Welcome to obscurity Apple - Population You
Yet another example of an opinion being passed off as 'fact'.
Not surprised given your chosen signature.
Welcome to obscurity Apple - Population You
Yet another example of an opinion being passed off as 'fact'.
Not surprised given your chosen signature.
MacBoobsPro
Jul 20, 10:09 AM
you need to do your math better, extra core = 1.5x - 1.8x speed increase. but still the same power usage as a normal core!
Wow Im having to do a lot of explaining of my posts, im beginning to think im a bit retarded. :(
24Ghz is (in my head) an 8 core machine running at 3Ghz i.e. 8x3=24
Its just an example to make things easier for people to answer my OP. :)
DISCLAIMER: All information contained within my posts sounded right in my head at the time of writing. However I may have been A) Quickly typing because I should actually be working B) Trying to be funny but failing miserabley or C) Drunk. It is not my intention to confuse people but I seem to do it quite easily and without knowledge. Please address any complaints to the complaints dept. at Microsoft Corporation.
Wow Im having to do a lot of explaining of my posts, im beginning to think im a bit retarded. :(
24Ghz is (in my head) an 8 core machine running at 3Ghz i.e. 8x3=24
Its just an example to make things easier for people to answer my OP. :)
DISCLAIMER: All information contained within my posts sounded right in my head at the time of writing. However I may have been A) Quickly typing because I should actually be working B) Trying to be funny but failing miserabley or C) Drunk. It is not my intention to confuse people but I seem to do it quite easily and without knowledge. Please address any complaints to the complaints dept. at Microsoft Corporation.
Mad Mac Maniac
Apr 7, 10:24 PM
Please tell him.
me too! I wanna learn!
How does withholding stock from the public aid a company? I can imagine holding them till everything is registered in their system and accounted for. But turning people away when they actually do have stock doesn't sound like a good business practice to me
me too! I wanna learn!
How does withholding stock from the public aid a company? I can imagine holding them till everything is registered in their system and accounted for. But turning people away when they actually do have stock doesn't sound like a good business practice to me
morespce54
Aug 11, 12:18 PM
Using TimeMachine, Steve is going to release it two years ago.
LOL !!!!!!! Stop it !!!!! :D
LOL !!!!!!! Stop it !!!!! :D
skunk
Feb 28, 07:12 PM
2) okay, they can pretend to get marriedNo, you are absolutely wrong., They can get married like any other couple where the laws allow. Marriage is not a special preserve of any religion. You cannot just commandeer it.
No, I'm not kidding. To the Catholic Church sex outside of a valid sacramental marriage is fornicationWho cares what Catholic dogma claims? It's an irrelevance.
Last time I checked when the vast majority of people did such behavior it was with the opposite gender not the same.So what is the problem? Are you against variation?
Do you have proof that Plato was a repressed homosexual?No, not proof
"Homosexuality," Plato wrote, "is regarded as shameful by barbarians and by those who live under despotic governments just as philosophy is regarded as shameful by them, because it is apparently not in the interest of such rulers to have great ideas engendered in their subjects, or powerful friendships or passionate love-all of which homosexuality is particularly apt to produce." This attitude of Plato's was characteristic of the ancient world, and I want to begin my discussion of the attitudes of the Church and of Western Christianity toward homosexuality by commenting on comparable attitudes among the ancients.
To a very large extent, Western attitudes toward law, religion, literature and government are dependent upon Roman attitudes. This makes it particularly striking that our attitudes toward homosexuality in particular and sexual tolerance in general are so remarkably different from those of the Romans. It is very difficult to convey to modern audiences the indifference of the Romans to questions of gender and gender orientation. The difficulty is due both to the fact that the evidence has been largely consciously obliterated by historians prior to very recent decades, and to the diffusion of the relevant material.
Romans did not consider sexuality or sexual preference a matter of much interest, nor did they treat either in an analytical way. An historian has to gather together thousands of little bits and pieces to demonstrate the general acceptance of homosexuality among the Romans.
One of the few imperial writers who does appear to make some sort of comment on the subject in a general way wrote, "Zeus came as an eagle to god like Ganymede and as a swan to the fair haired mother of Helen. One person prefers one gender, another the other, I like both." Plutarch wrote at about the same time, "No sensible person can imagine that the sexes differ in matters of love as they do in matters of clothing. The intelligent lover of beauty will be attracted to beauty in whichever gender he finds it." Roman law and social strictures made absolutely no restrictions on the basis of gender. It has sometimes been claimed that there were laws against homosexual relations in Rome, but it is easy to prove that this was not the case. On the other hand, it is a mistake to imagine that anarchic hedonism ruled at Rome. In fact, Romans did have a complex set of moral strictures designed to protect children from abuse or any citizen from force or duress in sexual relations. Romans were, like other people, sensitive to issues of love and caring, but individual sexual (i.e. gender) choice was completely unlimited. Male prostitution (directed toward other males), for instance, was so common that the taxes on it constituted a major source of revenue for the imperial treasury. It was so profitable that even in later periods when a certain intolerance crept in, the emperors could not bring themselves to end the practice and its attendant revenue.
Gay marriages were also legal and frequent in Rome for both males and females. Even emperors often married other males. There was total acceptance on the part of the populace, as far as it can be determined, of this sort of homosexual attitude and behavior. This total acceptance was not limited to the ruling elite; there is also much popular Roman literature containing gay love stories. The real point I want to make is that there is absolutely no conscious effort on anyone's part in the Roman world, the world in which Christianity was born, to claim that homosexuality was abnormal or undesirable. There is in fact no word for "homosexual" in Latin. "Homosexual" sounds like Latin, but was coined by a German psychologist in the late 1 9th century. No one in the early Roman world seemed to feel that the fact that someone preferred his or her own gender was any more significant than the fact that someone preferred blue eyes or short people. Neither gay nor straight people seemed to associate certain characteristics with sexual preference. Gay men were not thought to be less masculine than straight men and lesbian women were not thought of as less feminine than straight women. Gay people were not thought to be any better or worse than straight people-an attitude which differed both from that of the society that preceded it, since many Greeks thought gay people were inherently better than straight people, and from that of the society which followed it, in which gay people were often thought to be inferior to others.
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/pwh/1979boswell.html
The most celebrated account of homosexual love comes in Plato's Symposium, in which homosexual love is discussed as a more ideal, more perfect kind of relationship than the more prosaic heterosexual variety. This is a highly biased account, because Plato himself was homosexual and wrote very beautiful epigrams to boys expressing his devotion. Platonic homosexuality had very little to do with sex; Plato believed ideally that love and reason should be fused together, while concern over the body and the material world of particulars should be annihilated. Even today, "Platonic love" refers to non-sexual love between two adults.
Behind Plato's contempt for heterosexual desire lay an aesthetic, highly intellectual aversion to the female body. Plato would have agreed with Schopenhauer's opinion that "only a male intellect clouded by the sexual drive could call the stunted, narrow-shouldered, broad-hipped and short-legged sex the fair sex".
http://www.newstatesman.com/199908230009
No, I'm not kidding. To the Catholic Church sex outside of a valid sacramental marriage is fornicationWho cares what Catholic dogma claims? It's an irrelevance.
Last time I checked when the vast majority of people did such behavior it was with the opposite gender not the same.So what is the problem? Are you against variation?
Do you have proof that Plato was a repressed homosexual?No, not proof
"Homosexuality," Plato wrote, "is regarded as shameful by barbarians and by those who live under despotic governments just as philosophy is regarded as shameful by them, because it is apparently not in the interest of such rulers to have great ideas engendered in their subjects, or powerful friendships or passionate love-all of which homosexuality is particularly apt to produce." This attitude of Plato's was characteristic of the ancient world, and I want to begin my discussion of the attitudes of the Church and of Western Christianity toward homosexuality by commenting on comparable attitudes among the ancients.
To a very large extent, Western attitudes toward law, religion, literature and government are dependent upon Roman attitudes. This makes it particularly striking that our attitudes toward homosexuality in particular and sexual tolerance in general are so remarkably different from those of the Romans. It is very difficult to convey to modern audiences the indifference of the Romans to questions of gender and gender orientation. The difficulty is due both to the fact that the evidence has been largely consciously obliterated by historians prior to very recent decades, and to the diffusion of the relevant material.
Romans did not consider sexuality or sexual preference a matter of much interest, nor did they treat either in an analytical way. An historian has to gather together thousands of little bits and pieces to demonstrate the general acceptance of homosexuality among the Romans.
One of the few imperial writers who does appear to make some sort of comment on the subject in a general way wrote, "Zeus came as an eagle to god like Ganymede and as a swan to the fair haired mother of Helen. One person prefers one gender, another the other, I like both." Plutarch wrote at about the same time, "No sensible person can imagine that the sexes differ in matters of love as they do in matters of clothing. The intelligent lover of beauty will be attracted to beauty in whichever gender he finds it." Roman law and social strictures made absolutely no restrictions on the basis of gender. It has sometimes been claimed that there were laws against homosexual relations in Rome, but it is easy to prove that this was not the case. On the other hand, it is a mistake to imagine that anarchic hedonism ruled at Rome. In fact, Romans did have a complex set of moral strictures designed to protect children from abuse or any citizen from force or duress in sexual relations. Romans were, like other people, sensitive to issues of love and caring, but individual sexual (i.e. gender) choice was completely unlimited. Male prostitution (directed toward other males), for instance, was so common that the taxes on it constituted a major source of revenue for the imperial treasury. It was so profitable that even in later periods when a certain intolerance crept in, the emperors could not bring themselves to end the practice and its attendant revenue.
Gay marriages were also legal and frequent in Rome for both males and females. Even emperors often married other males. There was total acceptance on the part of the populace, as far as it can be determined, of this sort of homosexual attitude and behavior. This total acceptance was not limited to the ruling elite; there is also much popular Roman literature containing gay love stories. The real point I want to make is that there is absolutely no conscious effort on anyone's part in the Roman world, the world in which Christianity was born, to claim that homosexuality was abnormal or undesirable. There is in fact no word for "homosexual" in Latin. "Homosexual" sounds like Latin, but was coined by a German psychologist in the late 1 9th century. No one in the early Roman world seemed to feel that the fact that someone preferred his or her own gender was any more significant than the fact that someone preferred blue eyes or short people. Neither gay nor straight people seemed to associate certain characteristics with sexual preference. Gay men were not thought to be less masculine than straight men and lesbian women were not thought of as less feminine than straight women. Gay people were not thought to be any better or worse than straight people-an attitude which differed both from that of the society that preceded it, since many Greeks thought gay people were inherently better than straight people, and from that of the society which followed it, in which gay people were often thought to be inferior to others.
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/pwh/1979boswell.html
The most celebrated account of homosexual love comes in Plato's Symposium, in which homosexual love is discussed as a more ideal, more perfect kind of relationship than the more prosaic heterosexual variety. This is a highly biased account, because Plato himself was homosexual and wrote very beautiful epigrams to boys expressing his devotion. Platonic homosexuality had very little to do with sex; Plato believed ideally that love and reason should be fused together, while concern over the body and the material world of particulars should be annihilated. Even today, "Platonic love" refers to non-sexual love between two adults.
Behind Plato's contempt for heterosexual desire lay an aesthetic, highly intellectual aversion to the female body. Plato would have agreed with Schopenhauer's opinion that "only a male intellect clouded by the sexual drive could call the stunted, narrow-shouldered, broad-hipped and short-legged sex the fair sex".
http://www.newstatesman.com/199908230009
Notaclone
Apr 27, 09:35 AM
Am I the only person disappointed to find my iPhone is NOT tracking me? I download the App David Pogue posted on NYT and it didn't work. My iPhone's too old! I wish the damn thing would just die already, but since every Mac I've bought since 1989* still works, what are the odds? Someone steal my iPhone, PLEASE!
*1985's Mac had a coca-cola spilled in it. That can destroy anything.
*1985's Mac had a coca-cola spilled in it. That can destroy anything.
maelstromr
Apr 19, 04:58 PM
Obsession can be positive or negative. Loving or hating a company is irrational.
You're missing the point. It's more fun to come to an Apple rumors site and irrationally bait the residents into irrationally baiting you into irrationally...well, you get the point. :rolleyes:
You're missing the point. It's more fun to come to an Apple rumors site and irrationally bait the residents into irrationally baiting you into irrationally...well, you get the point. :rolleyes:
pkson
Apr 5, 11:43 PM
I wonder if they're gonna add (slightly useless) stuff from iMovie like face recognition (It's a great idea, but it takes too long to go through all the clips..)
I hope FCP is just awesome beyond comprehension.
I hope FCP is just awesome beyond comprehension.
THX1139
Apr 10, 08:28 PM
So munch elitism there it's dripping off my screen. Your post is funny b/c when FCP 1.0 was announced the many of "pro" editors of the time gasped b/c it, well, "dumbed down" editing, similar to how Pagemaker 1.0 dumbed down publishing.
What Apple does best, what it's always done best, is define new paradigms. It sounds like that is what may happen on Tues. Clearly, for all your snobbery, you are a horse and buggy driver and not a buyer into the Model T thing. Enjoy your Linux, but physical media is still dying, nonetheless. Editing for the web needs a new set of editing tools. YouTube has a lot of professionally edited material. It's not all cell phone clips.
So, in other words... you are excited that Apple might be dumbing down FCS for you? Well, good for you! Maybe you will be understand how to use it now to edit weekend skate videos of you and your buddies. Have fun with that.
What Apple does best, what it's always done best, is define new paradigms. It sounds like that is what may happen on Tues. Clearly, for all your snobbery, you are a horse and buggy driver and not a buyer into the Model T thing. Enjoy your Linux, but physical media is still dying, nonetheless. Editing for the web needs a new set of editing tools. YouTube has a lot of professionally edited material. It's not all cell phone clips.
So, in other words... you are excited that Apple might be dumbing down FCS for you? Well, good for you! Maybe you will be understand how to use it now to edit weekend skate videos of you and your buddies. Have fun with that.
citizenzen
Apr 28, 10:08 AM
Imagine that, three responses which utterly fail to refute let alone dispute my clear and truthful argument.
Here 5P. Let me try to explain this in a (hopefully) clear and truthful manner.
Tribalism works on a variety of levels. You don't care about conservative blacks because your shared conservative ideology overcomes any racial issues. The fact that you feel a kinship, based on the political ties can even fool you into thinking that you've become color blind. "I like Colin Powell, that proves I'm not a racist."
But when the overriding political connection doesn't exist then the subtler identifiers come into play. The tensions over race, religion, class or gender are always there, they're just overcome by political kinship. Take away that basis for agreement and those other aspects are more prone to color our perception of that person.
Here 5P. Let me try to explain this in a (hopefully) clear and truthful manner.
Tribalism works on a variety of levels. You don't care about conservative blacks because your shared conservative ideology overcomes any racial issues. The fact that you feel a kinship, based on the political ties can even fool you into thinking that you've become color blind. "I like Colin Powell, that proves I'm not a racist."
But when the overriding political connection doesn't exist then the subtler identifiers come into play. The tensions over race, religion, class or gender are always there, they're just overcome by political kinship. Take away that basis for agreement and those other aspects are more prone to color our perception of that person.
seenew
Aug 27, 02:26 PM
Maybe there will be a new iMac launched with the new iPod in October.
zacman
Apr 6, 04:05 PM
Yeah, good luck to Android tablets without carrier BOGO deals, Apple carrier exclusivity, and greater retail distribution than Apple. None of these factors apply in the tablet market.
That's why Apple lost around 30% marketshare in less than two months when the Galaxy tab was released? You know: That's the tablet that runs an outdated phone OS and not even a tablet OS...
That's why Apple lost around 30% marketshare in less than two months when the Galaxy tab was released? You know: That's the tablet that runs an outdated phone OS and not even a tablet OS...
Sirmausalot
Apr 10, 11:42 AM
I think the studio concept, as we know, it will be gone. It will all be one truly integrated application. Most importantly, full audio editing will be integrated obviating the need for OMFs and conforms for the person who does all of their own work.
This will include a powerful titling tool, Motion graphics, compression, sound. There shouldn't be a need to launch an external application. Integrated Internet delivery will be comprehensive to social media, iDevices, and anything in the cloud.
DVD Studio Pro will get a full overhaul and fully support The Bag of Hurt Blu-ray -- on an external burner for the new iMacs which will also be announced. Again, physical media gets an external treatment and the application will be the sperate step child of the newly integrated Final Studio.
This will include a powerful titling tool, Motion graphics, compression, sound. There shouldn't be a need to launch an external application. Integrated Internet delivery will be comprehensive to social media, iDevices, and anything in the cloud.
DVD Studio Pro will get a full overhaul and fully support The Bag of Hurt Blu-ray -- on an external burner for the new iMacs which will also be announced. Again, physical media gets an external treatment and the application will be the sperate step child of the newly integrated Final Studio.
carmenodie
Mar 31, 05:53 PM
Let me tell you the real deal behind this.
Google gave away the Android OS for free because they wanted Android on as many cell phones as possible so they could capitalize on that whole click an ad sh** that generates Google so much money in the phone space. And of curse the cell phone makers happily got on the bandwagon b/c they didn't have to spend millions making their own effing OS. As long as they followed the licensing agreement they were fine.
Now Google has pulled the rug from under them. Google knows that hundreds of millions have been spent by the cell makers in their commitment to Android devices. Advertising, new models etc. A whole lot of cash. Now Google wants tighter control as if they OWN these cell phone makers.And who ever doesn't want to play ball can go to hell as far as Google is concerned.
Right now HTC, LG, Sammy and Moto look like bi***!
Ha ha! But not Apple.
Ain't it awesome to row your own damn boat.
Google gave away the Android OS for free because they wanted Android on as many cell phones as possible so they could capitalize on that whole click an ad sh** that generates Google so much money in the phone space. And of curse the cell phone makers happily got on the bandwagon b/c they didn't have to spend millions making their own effing OS. As long as they followed the licensing agreement they were fine.
Now Google has pulled the rug from under them. Google knows that hundreds of millions have been spent by the cell makers in their commitment to Android devices. Advertising, new models etc. A whole lot of cash. Now Google wants tighter control as if they OWN these cell phone makers.And who ever doesn't want to play ball can go to hell as far as Google is concerned.
Right now HTC, LG, Sammy and Moto look like bi***!
Ha ha! But not Apple.
Ain't it awesome to row your own damn boat.
osx11
Mar 22, 12:58 PM
.2 mm thinner?
let the war begin.
let the war begin.
Mr. Savage
Apr 7, 10:46 PM
That's nothin'. I remember shortly after the new MacBook Air was released at BB I was playin' around with the demos and was listening to an older man with his teenage daughter talking to the salesman about getting one. Then I noticed they ONLY had the more expensive versions (bigger SSDs) on the price cards. The old guy was oblivious about the different versions and the daughter was spoiled so he agreed to buy her one. When the sales-twerp went into the back to find one I pulled up the inventory right there on the demo model and showed the guy the cheaper model. When the sales-kid came back out the old guy asked him if they had the cheaper model in stock. The kid played dumb and pretended he didn't even know there was such a thing. I helpfully pointed out the one on the inventory screen and its "In Stock" status.
Long story short: kid acts surprised and confused, goes gets one and old guy buys his daughter a $1350 (instead of $1650) computer to update her facebook status with and thanks me for not minding my own business ;)
Long story short: kid acts surprised and confused, goes gets one and old guy buys his daughter a $1350 (instead of $1650) computer to update her facebook status with and thanks me for not minding my own business ;)
yg17
Apr 27, 09:21 AM
He could have released this years ago.
Why should he? He released the short form BC, which is valid and legal proof of citizenship.
Hawaii law states that no one can request an original long form BC, not even the person who's name is on the BC, so Obama had to call in a few favors to get this. I'm surprised the right wing loons aren't accusing him of overstepping his bounds and destroying states' rights to get it.
Why should he? He released the short form BC, which is valid and legal proof of citizenship.
Hawaii law states that no one can request an original long form BC, not even the person who's name is on the BC, so Obama had to call in a few favors to get this. I'm surprised the right wing loons aren't accusing him of overstepping his bounds and destroying states' rights to get it.
MacRumors
Sep 18, 11:00 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
AppleInsider expects that Apple will update its complete laptop line (http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=2060) (13" MacBook and 15/17" MacBook Pros) to Core 2 Duo "Merom" before the holiday shopping season starts in late November. According to the site, development has been completed and the launch is simply awaiting Apple's marketing team to "pull the trigger."
MacShrine and MacOSXRumors expect the MacBook Pro to be updated (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/09/20060915171825.shtml) at Apple's September 25th event preceding Photokina. AppleInsider is unsure whether the updated MacBook will be unveiled at that event or be held off to ensure adequate supply of Intel's Core 2 Duo Merom chip.
Many users have pointed to extended ship dates and delays for MacBooks as evidence of an impending update. While possible, the shipping delays may simply be due to a demand backlog which was noted (http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1896) in Apple's Q3 2006 conference call in July. At the time Apple stated they expected to reach a supply/demand balance by the end of September (the end of Apple's current fiscal quarter).
AppleInsider expects that Apple will update its complete laptop line (http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=2060) (13" MacBook and 15/17" MacBook Pros) to Core 2 Duo "Merom" before the holiday shopping season starts in late November. According to the site, development has been completed and the launch is simply awaiting Apple's marketing team to "pull the trigger."
MacShrine and MacOSXRumors expect the MacBook Pro to be updated (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/09/20060915171825.shtml) at Apple's September 25th event preceding Photokina. AppleInsider is unsure whether the updated MacBook will be unveiled at that event or be held off to ensure adequate supply of Intel's Core 2 Duo Merom chip.
Many users have pointed to extended ship dates and delays for MacBooks as evidence of an impending update. While possible, the shipping delays may simply be due to a demand backlog which was noted (http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1896) in Apple's Q3 2006 conference call in July. At the time Apple stated they expected to reach a supply/demand balance by the end of September (the end of Apple's current fiscal quarter).
NJRonbo
Jun 14, 06:04 PM
Wait a sec...
Had to read that again...
If I get a PIN tomorrow at 1pm EST I am guaranteed
a phone on launch day? I don't have to stand in line
that morning?
They told me differently when I called the store citing
NO RESERVATIONS.
Had to read that again...
If I get a PIN tomorrow at 1pm EST I am guaranteed
a phone on launch day? I don't have to stand in line
that morning?
They told me differently when I called the store citing
NO RESERVATIONS.
NoSmokingBandit
Dec 3, 09:54 PM
same here .. on tarmac level there always seems to be 1 car in the bunch who will cause me troubles with being really fast
I ended up bumping my focus's hp to 241 with some kind of mod (i cant remember what i did, i tested everything to see what would get me closest to 245, the limit), reduced the body weight, and put on the semi-racing flywheel. The Tarmac Rally was easy enough after that.
**spoiler alert**
You get a voucher for a "base rally car" for winning. Idk if the prize is always the same for everyone, but i got an 05 Mini. I dont need or want an 05 Mini. I sold it and added it to my Lambo fund.
**end spoiler**
I started the Italian Tour thing earlier today. Half of it is fun but half is just annoying. Theres a race with a murcielago at night, which is awesome but the damn car spins out if you dont hold the wheel perfectly straight while you break or accelerate, making it very difficult to keep any reasonable speed. The Alfa Romeo in the first leg of the tour is almost as bad. But the Ferrari race at Monza? Easy as pie, i got gold on my first attempt without much fight from the AI.
If anyone wants to add me, my PSN name is the same as my MR name: NoSmokingBandit
Perhaps we could trade cars or something. I have an '08 Ferrari California (won from the Pro series Ferrari race) i have no use for, but i really need a Lambo (any will do, needed for the Pro series Lambo race).
I ended up bumping my focus's hp to 241 with some kind of mod (i cant remember what i did, i tested everything to see what would get me closest to 245, the limit), reduced the body weight, and put on the semi-racing flywheel. The Tarmac Rally was easy enough after that.
**spoiler alert**
You get a voucher for a "base rally car" for winning. Idk if the prize is always the same for everyone, but i got an 05 Mini. I dont need or want an 05 Mini. I sold it and added it to my Lambo fund.
**end spoiler**
I started the Italian Tour thing earlier today. Half of it is fun but half is just annoying. Theres a race with a murcielago at night, which is awesome but the damn car spins out if you dont hold the wheel perfectly straight while you break or accelerate, making it very difficult to keep any reasonable speed. The Alfa Romeo in the first leg of the tour is almost as bad. But the Ferrari race at Monza? Easy as pie, i got gold on my first attempt without much fight from the AI.
If anyone wants to add me, my PSN name is the same as my MR name: NoSmokingBandit
Perhaps we could trade cars or something. I have an '08 Ferrari California (won from the Pro series Ferrari race) i have no use for, but i really need a Lambo (any will do, needed for the Pro series Lambo race).
4God
Jul 14, 11:07 PM
8 cores?! Wow, maybe one day!
8 cores, yeah you can get that in a jumbled amd setup today.
8 cores, yeah you can get that in a jumbled amd setup today.
Nuck81
Dec 7, 11:42 PM
would those that have played this game reccomend getting it? or are there too many cons (standard cars, multiple versions of one car, bad AI in racing, bad physics in damage esp with standard, etc) that would lead to buyers remorse?
Keep in mind, I have played quite abit of Forza, but now have a PS3 and want agood racing sim but just keep hearing bad things about this game (largely being an incomplete game)
Standard cars- You can't tell the difference on the track, you can't tell the difference on the way they drive, you can't tell the difference on replays, You can only tell a difference in that there is no cockpit mode (most people drive hood or bumper cam) or in photo mode which you use a few times and then never look do it again.
Multiple versions of one car- Yes there are a lot of Skylines, but with 1,000 cars are you going to run out of different rides? Plus there are a lot of rare Gems. The Chaparral 2J, Tommy Karai ZZII, Tank Car, I can keep going.
Bad AI- Yes sir, the AI does suck pretty bad.
Bad Physics in damage- Forza's canned animation damage is better? I'm a level 26 and my cars bend, dent, deform, get tire donuts from rubbing other cars, and lose hoods and doors. The standard cars don't lose parts, but they dent, deform, and get dirty.
The game is a blast and very addicting. No buyers remorse will be had, unless you have a preconceived negative opinion about the game to begin with.
Keep in mind, I have played quite abit of Forza, but now have a PS3 and want agood racing sim but just keep hearing bad things about this game (largely being an incomplete game)
Standard cars- You can't tell the difference on the track, you can't tell the difference on the way they drive, you can't tell the difference on replays, You can only tell a difference in that there is no cockpit mode (most people drive hood or bumper cam) or in photo mode which you use a few times and then never look do it again.
Multiple versions of one car- Yes there are a lot of Skylines, but with 1,000 cars are you going to run out of different rides? Plus there are a lot of rare Gems. The Chaparral 2J, Tommy Karai ZZII, Tank Car, I can keep going.
Bad AI- Yes sir, the AI does suck pretty bad.
Bad Physics in damage- Forza's canned animation damage is better? I'm a level 26 and my cars bend, dent, deform, get tire donuts from rubbing other cars, and lose hoods and doors. The standard cars don't lose parts, but they dent, deform, and get dirty.
The game is a blast and very addicting. No buyers remorse will be had, unless you have a preconceived negative opinion about the game to begin with.
lsvtecjohn3
Apr 6, 02:21 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)
Motorola doesn't "get" tablets yet, but the G1 didn't sell well either. Let's look at the market again in two years, I bet it'll look a lot different.
Cell phones and tablets are completely different. Unless some of these other manufacturer can get their tablets cheaper than the iPad I don't see that happing. The carriers are the ones are subsiding a lot of Android phones free with contract and BOGOF. Even if you can get a tablet subsidized for $299 with a two year contract I still don't know if people would be willing to spend $30 at the end of that contract thats over $1,000.
Another reason also is that the Xoom only has something like 20 Apps made for tablets where the iPad has over 65,000. You also have power user that see no need in a tablet right now.
Motorola doesn't "get" tablets yet, but the G1 didn't sell well either. Let's look at the market again in two years, I bet it'll look a lot different.
Cell phones and tablets are completely different. Unless some of these other manufacturer can get their tablets cheaper than the iPad I don't see that happing. The carriers are the ones are subsiding a lot of Android phones free with contract and BOGOF. Even if you can get a tablet subsidized for $299 with a two year contract I still don't know if people would be willing to spend $30 at the end of that contract thats over $1,000.
Another reason also is that the Xoom only has something like 20 Apps made for tablets where the iPad has over 65,000. You also have power user that see no need in a tablet right now.
Amazing Iceman
Mar 31, 05:05 PM
Well, I guess the Open Source concept backfired at Google and everyone else doing Android. Open Source is a great concept, but when handled the wrong way, it does lead to fragmentation.
The problem is that all the happiness about Android being an open system will now turn into disappointment to many hobbyists and tweakers, and also to developers.
The fact that Apple keeps iOS closed is for a good reason, but at least it created a system to be able to advertise and sell apps. The quality control may not be perfect, but at least so far we haven't heard of an iOS viral app. iOS devices are very tight, protecting their own integrity.
Well, let's see what happens. We need Android to keep poking on Apple's creativity to make better products.
I'm not against Android; I may get an Android phone when I see one worth my money.
The problem is that all the happiness about Android being an open system will now turn into disappointment to many hobbyists and tweakers, and also to developers.
The fact that Apple keeps iOS closed is for a good reason, but at least it created a system to be able to advertise and sell apps. The quality control may not be perfect, but at least so far we haven't heard of an iOS viral app. iOS devices are very tight, protecting their own integrity.
Well, let's see what happens. We need Android to keep poking on Apple's creativity to make better products.
I'm not against Android; I may get an Android phone when I see one worth my money.
No comments:
Post a Comment