kupua
Nov 29, 12:19 AM
No way Jose...hahahahahahahaha
How much did they invest in the development in the iPod. Yah right just as I though, zip. If MS is that stupid, it just shows what leverage they have on the market for their Zune
How much did they invest in the development in the iPod. Yah right just as I though, zip. If MS is that stupid, it just shows what leverage they have on the market for their Zune
DeVizardofOZ
Aug 28, 07:09 AM
Well, it seems like you are the one having hard feelings...so chill out, since we all try to be polite in this forum...otherwise, just go visit some other place where you can vent your anger on people.
As I said above, I am talking about facts and statistics...I am sure there a few cases where guys are just unlucky and receive one lemon after another...but this does NOT represent a trend nor a relevant percentage. You must have this impression because you go to an Apple Support forum and see 100 posts complaining the hell out of it...you just fail, and fail badly, to realize that there are some 1,000,000 users out there with no problems at all.
Anyway, before you start babbling again, check the link below...these are FACTS, not whines.
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,2006502,00.asp
So please, before you spit out some fire, bring me some real facts, like percentage of failures and so on...the report I've read above shows Apple as having the LOWEST repair rate and HIGHEST trust of all makers. This, for me, is relevant; not random screams in Mac forums.
Really no hard feelings. You are right, and the professionals who do test and write reports
are making their reports up... Statisics, as we all know can be made to look one way or the other. The fact, that APPLE is acknowledging quality issues just proves that they themselves are not happpy with what's going on since the intro of the new MB and MBPs.
Sony Ericsson Xperia X10
Sony XPERIA X10 le permite
As I said above, I am talking about facts and statistics...I am sure there a few cases where guys are just unlucky and receive one lemon after another...but this does NOT represent a trend nor a relevant percentage. You must have this impression because you go to an Apple Support forum and see 100 posts complaining the hell out of it...you just fail, and fail badly, to realize that there are some 1,000,000 users out there with no problems at all.
Anyway, before you start babbling again, check the link below...these are FACTS, not whines.
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,2006502,00.asp
So please, before you spit out some fire, bring me some real facts, like percentage of failures and so on...the report I've read above shows Apple as having the LOWEST repair rate and HIGHEST trust of all makers. This, for me, is relevant; not random screams in Mac forums.
Really no hard feelings. You are right, and the professionals who do test and write reports
are making their reports up... Statisics, as we all know can be made to look one way or the other. The fact, that APPLE is acknowledging quality issues just proves that they themselves are not happpy with what's going on since the intro of the new MB and MBPs.
merk850
Jul 28, 05:23 PM
I respectfully disagree. I say take it back and be ready for a much faster iMac Core 2 Duo. You want the latest, take it back. It won't be the latest for many more weeks. Core 2 Duo will be the latest for two more years.
I appreciate the thoughts on my quandry whether or not to return my 20 " iMac and purchase after the WWDC. Of course my decision is not any easier with one vote for and one vote against.
Thanks Grokgod and Multimedia for the thoughts...
I appreciate the thoughts on my quandry whether or not to return my 20 " iMac and purchase after the WWDC. Of course my decision is not any easier with one vote for and one vote against.
Thanks Grokgod and Multimedia for the thoughts...
manu chao
Jul 20, 06:14 PM
Definitely need 8 cores me.
One for running whatever program I'm working on.
One for running the OS X interface, with Core Image, and bells and whistles and brass knobs and shiny candy.
One for running Azerus or LimeWire or one of these Bittorrent clients that all seem to be in Java on the mac, and all slow my machine to a crawl..
One for running Firefox and rendering these java / flash adverts that seem to slow my machine to a crawl.
One for doing the video rendering that still slows my machine to a crawl for hours and hours.
One for running the Windows XP virtualisation machine in a window on my desktop that seemed to slow my machine to a crawl last time I tried it.
Sony Ericsson#39;s Mighty XPERIA
Sony Ericsson Xperia X10,
Sony ericsson xperia x10
Sony Ericsson, Xperia X10
Sony Ericsson Xperia X10a
SONY ERICSSON XPERIA X10
Sony-Ericsson-Xperia-X10-4
sony ericsson xperia x10a mini
Motorola Xperia x10
Sony Ericsson Xperia X10
se-xperia-x10
Sony Ericsson Xperia x10
sony ericsson xperia x10a mini
xperia
Unlocking Sony Ericsson Xperia
One for running whatever program I'm working on.
One for running the OS X interface, with Core Image, and bells and whistles and brass knobs and shiny candy.
One for running Azerus or LimeWire or one of these Bittorrent clients that all seem to be in Java on the mac, and all slow my machine to a crawl..
One for running Firefox and rendering these java / flash adverts that seem to slow my machine to a crawl.
One for doing the video rendering that still slows my machine to a crawl for hours and hours.
One for running the Windows XP virtualisation machine in a window on my desktop that seemed to slow my machine to a crawl last time I tried it.
OrangeSVTguy
Apr 25, 04:23 PM
Guess we all now know what that new data center is going to be used for now.
Chundles
Jul 20, 11:35 AM
any talk of a quad core merom or mobile cpu?
Here's a top article on Intel's future plans:
http://www.tomshardware.com/2005/12/04/top_secret_intel_processor_plans_uncovered/
Here's a top article on Intel's future plans:
http://www.tomshardware.com/2005/12/04/top_secret_intel_processor_plans_uncovered/
rdowns
Feb 28, 06:29 PM
Lee, I agree with you about what you say, but he clearly did say that this was only his opinion. People are allowed that, even if it is hateful and exclusionist.
Agreed, but when you air your opinions in public, others have the right to challenge them.
Agreed, but when you air your opinions in public, others have the right to challenge them.
thetexan
Apr 27, 08:46 AM
Didn't Google get in trouble for tagging SSIDs of hotspots when running their streetview vans through town? How is this any different, besides the fact you're the van instead of Google?
reden
Apr 6, 01:36 PM
I purchased a Xoom over the weekend it's a great device, a little heavy, but very awesome for its first pass. I used to own an iPad 1, gave it away, didn't want an iPad 2. Why do I need two devices of the same OS where the UI was designed for the iPhone (smaller device) to begin with? I love the versatility of honeycomb, widgets are phenomenal on a large tablet screen. Everything is great about the interface so far, although there are a few things here and there which make no sense, but I'm sure they'll fix that. I ran into some bugs, called Moto support, they troubleshooted with me, fixed it and were really cool about it. As far as hardware, the materials are great, but definitely Motorola needs to learn a thing or two about button placement. They put the sleep/wakeup button on the back of the device. I used to like to hit the home button on the iPad to wake it up and do stuff (while I was having a bowl of cereal for example), with the Xoom I can't do that, I HAVE to pick up the device. Another interface/hardware awkwardness are the volume buttons and I cannot find a way to change volume within the device itself, unless I press the volume hardware buttons a window will popup.
Other than that, I can live with all this, and the device is extremely awesome and a fresh feeling of a new UI the way it should be done for a tablet.
Other than that, I can live with all this, and the device is extremely awesome and a fresh feeling of a new UI the way it should be done for a tablet.
NJRonbo
Jun 14, 11:40 AM
BTW...
Quick question...
How does Radio Shack know what your upgrade
price will be?
I mean, I know already I am not eligible for a
discount and will have to pay $399 or $499.
Does Radio Shack have access to your AT&T
account to determine your upgrade price?
Quick question...
How does Radio Shack know what your upgrade
price will be?
I mean, I know already I am not eligible for a
discount and will have to pay $399 or $499.
Does Radio Shack have access to your AT&T
account to determine your upgrade price?
Lord Blackadder
Mar 23, 05:50 PM
Here we have an article laying out the case for non intervention (http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/03/2011322135442593945.html) by a Princeton law professor (emeritus) published by Al Jazeera. A worthy read, and here are two exerpts I've commented on.
In effect, overall historical trends vindicate trust in the dynamics of self-determination, even if short-term disasters may and do occur, and similarly underscores the problematic character of intervention, even given the purest of motivations, which rarely, if ever, exists in world politics.
I find it hard to disagree with this, but watching Gaddafi strongarm his way back into authority is a very bitter pill to swallow - plus, historical trends also suggest that other nations rarely resist the temptation to intervene when they feel they have something to gain by intervention (be it increased political influence, territorial gains, economic interests etc). The current structure of the UN is unable to prevent this. Also, even without direct intervention, the process of self-determination does not exist in a total vaccum. I wonder how the author regards more passive measures such as official censure, economic sanctions, asset-freezing etc etc? Do he consider those to be intereferences to self-determination?
The Charter in Article 2(7) accepts the limitation on UN authority to intervene in matters "essentially within the domestic jurisdiction" of member states unless there is a genuine issue of international peace and security present, which there was not, even in the claim, which was supposedly motivated solely to protect the civilian population of Libya.
But such a claim was patently misleading and disingenuous as the obvious goals, as manifest from the scale and character of military actions taken, were minimally to protect the armed rebels from being defeated, and possibly destroyed, and maximally, to achieve a regime change resulting in a new governing leadership that was friendly to the West, including buying fully into its liberal economic geopolitical policy compass.
Using a slightly altered language, the UN Charter embedded a social contract with its membership that privileged the politics of self-determination and was heavily weighted against the politics of intervention.
Neither position is absolute, but what seems to have happened with respect to Libya is that intervention was privileged and self-determination cast aside.
It is an instance of normatively dubious practise trumping the legal/moral ethos of containing geopolitical discretion with binding rules governing the use of force and the duty of non-intervention.
We do not know yet what will happen in Libya, but we do know enough to oppose such a precedent that exhibits so many unfortunate characteristics.
It is time to restore the global social contract between territorial sovereign states and the organised international community, which not only corresponds with the outlawry of aggressive war but also reflect the movement of history in support of the soft power struggles of the non-Western peoples of the world.
I do agree with him that it would be foolish not to recognize that the ultimate goal here is - yet again - regime change regardless of what the official statements and resolutions state.
But while the author adheres to a legal argument, reality is more expansive in my mind. Isn't the UN, by it's very nature, interventionalist on some level? Also, at what point does outside influence affect "self-determination" to the point that it is no longer that? Surely there will always be outside influence - but when does it interfere with self-determination?
Of course, all of these considerations are irrelevant if you are against the concept of the UN or even foreign alliances, as a vocal minority of conservatives are in the US. I imagine they'd prefer to let the "free market" somehow decide what happens.
In effect, overall historical trends vindicate trust in the dynamics of self-determination, even if short-term disasters may and do occur, and similarly underscores the problematic character of intervention, even given the purest of motivations, which rarely, if ever, exists in world politics.
I find it hard to disagree with this, but watching Gaddafi strongarm his way back into authority is a very bitter pill to swallow - plus, historical trends also suggest that other nations rarely resist the temptation to intervene when they feel they have something to gain by intervention (be it increased political influence, territorial gains, economic interests etc). The current structure of the UN is unable to prevent this. Also, even without direct intervention, the process of self-determination does not exist in a total vaccum. I wonder how the author regards more passive measures such as official censure, economic sanctions, asset-freezing etc etc? Do he consider those to be intereferences to self-determination?
The Charter in Article 2(7) accepts the limitation on UN authority to intervene in matters "essentially within the domestic jurisdiction" of member states unless there is a genuine issue of international peace and security present, which there was not, even in the claim, which was supposedly motivated solely to protect the civilian population of Libya.
But such a claim was patently misleading and disingenuous as the obvious goals, as manifest from the scale and character of military actions taken, were minimally to protect the armed rebels from being defeated, and possibly destroyed, and maximally, to achieve a regime change resulting in a new governing leadership that was friendly to the West, including buying fully into its liberal economic geopolitical policy compass.
Using a slightly altered language, the UN Charter embedded a social contract with its membership that privileged the politics of self-determination and was heavily weighted against the politics of intervention.
Neither position is absolute, but what seems to have happened with respect to Libya is that intervention was privileged and self-determination cast aside.
It is an instance of normatively dubious practise trumping the legal/moral ethos of containing geopolitical discretion with binding rules governing the use of force and the duty of non-intervention.
We do not know yet what will happen in Libya, but we do know enough to oppose such a precedent that exhibits so many unfortunate characteristics.
It is time to restore the global social contract between territorial sovereign states and the organised international community, which not only corresponds with the outlawry of aggressive war but also reflect the movement of history in support of the soft power struggles of the non-Western peoples of the world.
I do agree with him that it would be foolish not to recognize that the ultimate goal here is - yet again - regime change regardless of what the official statements and resolutions state.
But while the author adheres to a legal argument, reality is more expansive in my mind. Isn't the UN, by it's very nature, interventionalist on some level? Also, at what point does outside influence affect "self-determination" to the point that it is no longer that? Surely there will always be outside influence - but when does it interfere with self-determination?
Of course, all of these considerations are irrelevant if you are against the concept of the UN or even foreign alliances, as a vocal minority of conservatives are in the US. I imagine they'd prefer to let the "free market" somehow decide what happens.
Benjamins
Mar 31, 02:43 PM
You could say the same thing about Apple though. The Apple fad will go away and the extremely closed ecosystem which seems to not be really developing much in terms of UI or having an actual roadmap could end iOS.
I don't understand why people can't just see the pros and cons of both and accept both are great platforms. Its always a WAR with Apple fans. Apple against EVERYONE!
If Apple FAD goes away, where will Google copy from next?
You are delusional if you think Google is not building upon the Apple FAD.
I don't understand why people can't just see the pros and cons of both and accept both are great platforms. Its always a WAR with Apple fans. Apple against EVERYONE!
If Apple FAD goes away, where will Google copy from next?
You are delusional if you think Google is not building upon the Apple FAD.
samcraig
Apr 27, 08:39 AM
if any of you are concerned about being tracked - why on earth would you buy any product that has a GPS in it (all computers cash info) and why on earth would you buy a cell phone - the towers know almost exactly when (which apple doesn't know) and where you are? The reaction to this news is stupid.
Your type of apathy in the long term will do more harm than good.
There is a big difference between voluntarily and involuntarily giving out personal information and that's what was at stake here.
Apple admitted error - it's ok - you can admit it might not have been in the best interest of consumers too. Apple won't come and take your iPhone away.
Your type of apathy in the long term will do more harm than good.
There is a big difference between voluntarily and involuntarily giving out personal information and that's what was at stake here.
Apple admitted error - it's ok - you can admit it might not have been in the best interest of consumers too. Apple won't come and take your iPhone away.
macfan881
Sep 7, 01:06 PM
Prologue?
no defintly saw the logo for 5 in the game.
here are some vids from other various website that are on the demohttp://www.gtplanet.net/best-buys-gt5-demo-gameplay-video-collection/
no defintly saw the logo for 5 in the game.
here are some vids from other various website that are on the demohttp://www.gtplanet.net/best-buys-gt5-demo-gameplay-video-collection/
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
cait-sith
Aug 11, 12:44 PM
Doesn't Europe have many many carriers in each country? There's no carrier that spans the entire EU, is there?
Who wants to pay 400$ for a phone that will look like an antique 12 months from now? That's a lot of money to pay for the status of having a brand new phone.
Who wants to pay 400$ for a phone that will look like an antique 12 months from now? That's a lot of money to pay for the status of having a brand new phone.
4God
Jul 14, 11:00 PM
Power supplies produce a lot of heat. It makes great sense according to simply the most basic laws of thermodynamics.
Could you please explain this basic law of thermodynamics and I mean more extensively than "heat rises."
I always thought that the power supply was on top because of the heat generated by it. Since heat rises, it wouldn't pass over the rest of the computer on its way out. I still agree with you about the weight part though.
Bill the TaxMan
Well since the current G5's have a seperate chamber for the power supply, I guess that wouldn't matter. Also, isn't the air cooler at the bottom than at the already warm top? Go figure....
Could you please explain this basic law of thermodynamics and I mean more extensively than "heat rises."
I always thought that the power supply was on top because of the heat generated by it. Since heat rises, it wouldn't pass over the rest of the computer on its way out. I still agree with you about the weight part though.
Bill the TaxMan
Well since the current G5's have a seperate chamber for the power supply, I guess that wouldn't matter. Also, isn't the air cooler at the bottom than at the already warm top? Go figure....
amccune
Apr 12, 09:13 AM
I think the User's Group meeting isn't until 4:30, so we are in for a wait...
Manic Mouse
Aug 27, 04:54 AM
Yup, heat is no problem. :) Cost on the other hand is. Going from a 2.4 GHz Conroe from a 1.83 GHz Yonah on the low-end is roughly a 30% increase in cost JUST for the CPU. As for your "iMac Ultra"...
$1000 - 2.93 GHz Conroe
$800 - 23" Display
$300 - X1900
$400 - Hard Drive, Optical Drive, RAM etc.
+ Build costs, marketing costs, logic board cost, casing costs etc.
+ Apple's profit margin
And you are easily looking at a $3000 machine.
I want to see:
$1000 - 2.93 GHz Conroe
$800 - 23" Display
$300 - X1900
$400 - Hard Drive, Optical Drive, RAM etc.
+ Build costs, marketing costs, logic board cost, casing costs etc.
+ Apple's profit margin
And you are easily looking at a $3000 machine.
I want to see:
BlizzardBomb
Aug 6, 05:17 PM
Sources inform me that it is going to be blue.
:p
No way! :p Well looking back, it seems to get swooshier as time goes on, maybe that's a pointer ;) But what if... there's something radically different? :eek:
:p
No way! :p Well looking back, it seems to get swooshier as time goes on, maybe that's a pointer ;) But what if... there's something radically different? :eek:
janstett
Sep 15, 08:07 AM
The server/desktop division with Windows - as with OS X - is one of marketing, not software. Windows "Workstation" and Windows "Server" use the same codebase.
True (today anyway; in the NT era they were indeed separate platforms though. Which brings me to my next point..)
No, that is not true, in fact it couldn't be more untrue. Now, the 95 family (95/98/ME) was a totally different codebase. But with the NT family (NT/2000/XP) the client and the server were identical, even identical in distributed code. In fact there was a big scandal years ago where someone discovered the registry setting where you could turn NT Workstation into NT Server. Back then all that was different was the number of outbound IP connections and possibly the number of CPUs supported. All they were trying to do with Workstation was prevent you from using it as a server (thus the outbound IP limit) and at some point they didn't give you full-blown IIS on Workstation. That's it.
True (today anyway; in the NT era they were indeed separate platforms though. Which brings me to my next point..)
No, that is not true, in fact it couldn't be more untrue. Now, the 95 family (95/98/ME) was a totally different codebase. But with the NT family (NT/2000/XP) the client and the server were identical, even identical in distributed code. In fact there was a big scandal years ago where someone discovered the registry setting where you could turn NT Workstation into NT Server. Back then all that was different was the number of outbound IP connections and possibly the number of CPUs supported. All they were trying to do with Workstation was prevent you from using it as a server (thus the outbound IP limit) and at some point they didn't give you full-blown IIS on Workstation. That's it.
DudeDad
Mar 26, 05:17 PM
Reading most of the posts, especially the negative / critical ones, I'm relieved that you guys don't work for Apple!
IMO, Lion will "merge"/"blend" some of the IOS look and feel. It will be a great selling point for those who own iPhones and iPads, but have not taken the Mac plunge....familiarity will be a huge selling point.
Don't like Launchpad? Don't use it. Use the dock or finder. I don't use spaces, but know many who swear by it. To each, his own.
I welcome the next version of Mac OS X, but I do not expect something so radically different that I'm setting myself up for disappointment.
Cheers....
IMO, Lion will "merge"/"blend" some of the IOS look and feel. It will be a great selling point for those who own iPhones and iPads, but have not taken the Mac plunge....familiarity will be a huge selling point.
Don't like Launchpad? Don't use it. Use the dock or finder. I don't use spaces, but know many who swear by it. To each, his own.
I welcome the next version of Mac OS X, but I do not expect something so radically different that I'm setting myself up for disappointment.
Cheers....
terkans
Jul 20, 11:56 AM
yes, its known as reverse hyper threading. AMD are working on it
http://www.dvhardware.net/article10901.html
um, no:
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060713-7263.html
http://www.dvhardware.net/article10901.html
um, no:
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060713-7263.html
Abyssgh0st
Apr 28, 11:54 AM
Yikes. I just read through this entire thread and it was quite the read.
1. I still find it hard to accept that there are numbskulls out there who doubt that the freaking PRESIDENT of the UNITED STATES was not born here. Seriously? And then to claim it's not about race? Then what is it about, his politics? Just because you don't like what he does or says? Yeah right.
2. Conservatives really have tunnel vision. They focus on static topics such as homosexuals, abortion, marijuana, etc. They fail to realize that because these things will never disappear, they should still lobby against them. They think that they should never 'lay down' and not let 'evil' prevail. They are seriously wrong, especially since these issues don't actually effect them. It is ignorance on their parts because instead of fighting issues that can change (wars, spending, healthcare), they focus on the few that are not going anywhere (at least not a regression, they will only become more prevalent), rather than the sea of issues that are malleable.
1. I still find it hard to accept that there are numbskulls out there who doubt that the freaking PRESIDENT of the UNITED STATES was not born here. Seriously? And then to claim it's not about race? Then what is it about, his politics? Just because you don't like what he does or says? Yeah right.
2. Conservatives really have tunnel vision. They focus on static topics such as homosexuals, abortion, marijuana, etc. They fail to realize that because these things will never disappear, they should still lobby against them. They think that they should never 'lay down' and not let 'evil' prevail. They are seriously wrong, especially since these issues don't actually effect them. It is ignorance on their parts because instead of fighting issues that can change (wars, spending, healthcare), they focus on the few that are not going anywhere (at least not a regression, they will only become more prevalent), rather than the sea of issues that are malleable.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment