longball11
May 24, 05:12 PM
Um why wouldnt it?
JUst wondering...so it doesoes it work max settings on everything?
JUst wondering...so it doesoes it work max settings on everything?
AhmedFaisal
Apr 8, 05:45 PM
Interestingly, Paul Ryan's proposal decidedly does NOT include any legislation forcing private payers to insure elderly people at reasonable rates. Talk about death panels.......... what most of these morons in the Tea Party don't realize is that the net effect of the Ryan plan is that the vast majority of elderly people will simply NOT have insurance because either they can't afford it or no private payer will take them, which translates into no access to healthcare especially if they have their way with medicaid. Congratulations USA, you are about the reduce your average life expectancy to that of Russia, but hey, it will fix social security because there will be no one left alive to receive retirement benefits.............
The argument is using Tax Dollars to pay for the abortions as it is forbidden by Federal Law for Planned Parenthood to use the funding in that way...of course they have found ways around it, which is the cause for concern..Me personally, I am on the fence on the entire issue as I am not a woman. That stated, I don't believe abortions should be used as a birth control device either....
If the laughably few moronic women who indeed believe this to be a form of birth control do not procreate because of it, I am happy for the genepool. No harm done I say. You people do realize that every abortion has a significant risk of causing infertility and other complications, right? And these risk compound with every procedure....... I'd like to actually meet a woman that thinks this is a good way of contraception... just saying...........
The argument is using Tax Dollars to pay for the abortions as it is forbidden by Federal Law for Planned Parenthood to use the funding in that way...of course they have found ways around it, which is the cause for concern..Me personally, I am on the fence on the entire issue as I am not a woman. That stated, I don't believe abortions should be used as a birth control device either....
If the laughably few moronic women who indeed believe this to be a form of birth control do not procreate because of it, I am happy for the genepool. No harm done I say. You people do realize that every abortion has a significant risk of causing infertility and other complications, right? And these risk compound with every procedure....... I'd like to actually meet a woman that thinks this is a good way of contraception... just saying...........
rednano74
May 2, 09:08 PM
Over the weekend I was in the Philly Walnut store to see just how much thicker the white was over the black. You can instantly notice the white phone was thicker and my friend said, "wow and it feels heavier too."
Basically what Phil is saying people, it's all an illusion. Don't trust your eyes or any other measurements. :confused:
Basically what Phil is saying people, it's all an illusion. Don't trust your eyes or any other measurements. :confused:
P-Worm
Sep 19, 11:00 PM
Please, enough with the spec matching. :rolleyes: I'll tell you where the missing $1500 went: research and development, OS X (That's a big one...), and the fact that you know that your computer is an all around better machine.
Don't make me use the Geo and Viper car anology again. :eek:
P-Worm
Don't make me use the Geo and Viper car anology again. :eek:
P-Worm
more...
CEAbiscuit
Aug 14, 10:53 AM
The guy should just stick to Dodgeball.
iPhelim
Oct 27, 06:09 PM
Hah, you got me at the bottom of the stairs on this one! Me and my two friends, I'm in the middle.
-Matt
Is that you!? I was standing like 2 people in front of you, in front of the guy with the iPhone who you got talking to about your camera.
-Matt
Is that you!? I was standing like 2 people in front of you, in front of the guy with the iPhone who you got talking to about your camera.
more...
toddybody
Apr 20, 09:19 AM
Had to share this PIC from ENGADGET...http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2011/02/white-iphone-5-unicorn-rumor-edn.jpg
joebells
Sep 1, 09:18 AM
well apple did do some stuff about osx86project.
But anyway it would be nearly impossibly to track and go after someone with the semi widely distributed wwdc beta as people are allowed to install it on laptops for one so that right there leads to a multitude of different ip's from just going from hotspot to hotspot and two I can't imagine apple had people write down their ip's when they signed up for wwdc and many times you do have a changing ip so that whole argument is out the window.
Now if apple really wanted to go after the leakers they could have made it all download based and embedded a serial number in the download corresponding to the adc membership and a counter appended to the end. Then when they saw multiple copies getting the update all with the same serial number then they could go after the originating adc membership holder. But otherwise they cannot track you based on your IP thats just foolish to think as they can't determine legal copy from illegal copy.
For the record I do not have it but I wouldn't feel worried about getting it.
But anyway it would be nearly impossibly to track and go after someone with the semi widely distributed wwdc beta as people are allowed to install it on laptops for one so that right there leads to a multitude of different ip's from just going from hotspot to hotspot and two I can't imagine apple had people write down their ip's when they signed up for wwdc and many times you do have a changing ip so that whole argument is out the window.
Now if apple really wanted to go after the leakers they could have made it all download based and embedded a serial number in the download corresponding to the adc membership and a counter appended to the end. Then when they saw multiple copies getting the update all with the same serial number then they could go after the originating adc membership holder. But otherwise they cannot track you based on your IP thats just foolish to think as they can't determine legal copy from illegal copy.
For the record I do not have it but I wouldn't feel worried about getting it.
more...
redscull
Apr 5, 12:13 PM
the iPad will be for normal people when you don't have the sync it.
all this syncing ********* needs to stop.
I shouldn't need another computer to use my iPad.
Makes no sense at all.
This is the primary design flaw with the iPad. This tablet can't be the normal person's computer unless every normal person has a tech friend/relative to keep the tablet working/updated. So while Woz is correct that the tablet will be the normal person's computer, Apple's iPad is not yet that tablet.
all this syncing ********* needs to stop.
I shouldn't need another computer to use my iPad.
Makes no sense at all.
This is the primary design flaw with the iPad. This tablet can't be the normal person's computer unless every normal person has a tech friend/relative to keep the tablet working/updated. So while Woz is correct that the tablet will be the normal person's computer, Apple's iPad is not yet that tablet.
tvguru
Sep 25, 10:47 AM
waaaaaaah Apple only anounced a photo editing program and a photography centered event. I am selling my macbook and G5 this is total BS!!!!!!
lol, you go girl! :p
lol, you go girl! :p
more...
wonderbread57
Dec 29, 12:11 AM
This is the stupidest POS news. AM I RIGHT? Can't buy an iPhone ONLINE in NY for a day and something is interesting about this? I can't believe CNBC is so anxiously awaiting tablet and new iphone news that they think this is significant.
weckart
Feb 19, 09:30 AM
Microsoft is based in Redmond, Washington.
So Microsoft weren't invited (http://thenextweb.com/microsoft/2011/02/18/why-ballmer-wasnt-at-the-obama-tech-dinner/). ;)
I am alarmed at the growth rate of Microsoft in the space of your post. One company is more than enough.:eek:
So Microsoft weren't invited (http://thenextweb.com/microsoft/2011/02/18/why-ballmer-wasnt-at-the-obama-tech-dinner/). ;)
I am alarmed at the growth rate of Microsoft in the space of your post. One company is more than enough.:eek:
more...
MacCoaster
Sep 22, 07:29 AM
Originally posted by avkills
Ok, so Intel has the Itanium, well they have the Itanium2 I guess if you want to get super current, so what! The Itanium is based on a brand new design that looks good on paper, but Intel will be the first to admit it has not performed as good as they hoped.
I simply meant the Itanium family, including both the original Itanium and the current Intamium 2.
Sun, IBM and SGI have had 64bit processors way before Intel. So if you say the Itanium is ok for the high-end consumer, then It's safe to say that a Sun Ultra10 or a SGI Octane would also be a high-end consumer machine.
Sure, okay. Compare the prices. The Itanium solution is much cheaper.
What makes you so sure that a 16 processor G4 machine would not perform, because of the bus speed. What about super high-end servers like the CM5 or the Cray T3D. I seriously doubt those machines have 500Mhz bus speeds, or DDR memory. I know for a fact that the CM5 had dedicated memory for each processor node, and each node had 2 vector units. If you want, I can find out specifics from my brother, who has actually programmed code for it, when he worked at Las Alamos. Whether a 16 processor G4 machine is relevant or not, it could be built and if built right, would be very fast.
Very irrevelant. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the G4 wasn't designed to be run in anything more than a dual configuration.
So the .NET family is limited to 32 processors huh....Weak, very weak. You can say what you want, UNIX still scales better than Windows, no matter what the flavor.
Windows isn't designed nor targeted at customers with more than 32 processors. If anyone wanted a 2048-way server, they'd either custom build it and load UNIX on it or have some large corporation develop the computer. It's a lot cheaper clustering 32 high-availablity servers than buying that one 2048-way server. Duh, Windows isn't scalable. It was NEVER designed primarily to be used on 2048-way supercomputers. That's way out of Microsoft's scope and market.
In my opinion, Microsoft is beginning to die a slow painful death. Everyone is tired of their ************ and half-assed attempts of secure computing. Everyone always complains that Macs are not open enough, well I think the opposite is true. Apple embraces open standards and even invents and shares them when none exist, while Microsoft shuns and sometimes even steals others work, in a attempt to push their own proprietary formats and stifle progress.
Funny that Microsoft pushed the ever-so-slow W3C to standardize further dynamic HTML/etc. technologies to become standard. Of course, W3C can't keep current to allow people to innovate in the web presentation standards. Microsoft is even pushing XML very hard with .NET Web Services. And yes, Macs are closed. Not in software, but in hardware. Maybe you were confused by the definition of Macs being closed. The older Macintosh hardware is so proprietary it's not funny. Recent Macs adopt technology that had been in PCs before, except FireWire of course, because Apple invented that. But the hardware is still proprietary. I don't see that we are able to take off-the-shelf high quality components and build our own PowerPC computers then slap Mac OS X on it. Also, Microsoft indeed is "against" open source, and yet they maintain a "shared source" implementation of .NET for FreeBSD. In fact, it's a very well done implementation -- not that most-feeble-possible-implementation that we thought could possible be.
I find it funny that Intel invented USB, but it was Apple that took the leap of faith and pushed it into the mainstream. Apple, in my opinion is the only company thinking "outside the box" and in the end, they will win because of it.
-mark
Maybe it was Apple and Microsoft (Windows 98) who popularized USB, but you've got to realize this. PCs have had USB a few years before Apple. It wasn't until iMac/Windows 98 (note, same year: 1998) that USB got popular.
Ok, so Intel has the Itanium, well they have the Itanium2 I guess if you want to get super current, so what! The Itanium is based on a brand new design that looks good on paper, but Intel will be the first to admit it has not performed as good as they hoped.
I simply meant the Itanium family, including both the original Itanium and the current Intamium 2.
Sun, IBM and SGI have had 64bit processors way before Intel. So if you say the Itanium is ok for the high-end consumer, then It's safe to say that a Sun Ultra10 or a SGI Octane would also be a high-end consumer machine.
Sure, okay. Compare the prices. The Itanium solution is much cheaper.
What makes you so sure that a 16 processor G4 machine would not perform, because of the bus speed. What about super high-end servers like the CM5 or the Cray T3D. I seriously doubt those machines have 500Mhz bus speeds, or DDR memory. I know for a fact that the CM5 had dedicated memory for each processor node, and each node had 2 vector units. If you want, I can find out specifics from my brother, who has actually programmed code for it, when he worked at Las Alamos. Whether a 16 processor G4 machine is relevant or not, it could be built and if built right, would be very fast.
Very irrevelant. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the G4 wasn't designed to be run in anything more than a dual configuration.
So the .NET family is limited to 32 processors huh....Weak, very weak. You can say what you want, UNIX still scales better than Windows, no matter what the flavor.
Windows isn't designed nor targeted at customers with more than 32 processors. If anyone wanted a 2048-way server, they'd either custom build it and load UNIX on it or have some large corporation develop the computer. It's a lot cheaper clustering 32 high-availablity servers than buying that one 2048-way server. Duh, Windows isn't scalable. It was NEVER designed primarily to be used on 2048-way supercomputers. That's way out of Microsoft's scope and market.
In my opinion, Microsoft is beginning to die a slow painful death. Everyone is tired of their ************ and half-assed attempts of secure computing. Everyone always complains that Macs are not open enough, well I think the opposite is true. Apple embraces open standards and even invents and shares them when none exist, while Microsoft shuns and sometimes even steals others work, in a attempt to push their own proprietary formats and stifle progress.
Funny that Microsoft pushed the ever-so-slow W3C to standardize further dynamic HTML/etc. technologies to become standard. Of course, W3C can't keep current to allow people to innovate in the web presentation standards. Microsoft is even pushing XML very hard with .NET Web Services. And yes, Macs are closed. Not in software, but in hardware. Maybe you were confused by the definition of Macs being closed. The older Macintosh hardware is so proprietary it's not funny. Recent Macs adopt technology that had been in PCs before, except FireWire of course, because Apple invented that. But the hardware is still proprietary. I don't see that we are able to take off-the-shelf high quality components and build our own PowerPC computers then slap Mac OS X on it. Also, Microsoft indeed is "against" open source, and yet they maintain a "shared source" implementation of .NET for FreeBSD. In fact, it's a very well done implementation -- not that most-feeble-possible-implementation that we thought could possible be.
I find it funny that Intel invented USB, but it was Apple that took the leap of faith and pushed it into the mainstream. Apple, in my opinion is the only company thinking "outside the box" and in the end, they will win because of it.
-mark
Maybe it was Apple and Microsoft (Windows 98) who popularized USB, but you've got to realize this. PCs have had USB a few years before Apple. It wasn't until iMac/Windows 98 (note, same year: 1998) that USB got popular.
iJohnHenry
Apr 23, 09:03 PM
... it can only get worse. Either way, really.
Yep, pick the guy with the biggest thumb, because that dike is gonna blow, either way.
Yep, pick the guy with the biggest thumb, because that dike is gonna blow, either way.
more...
Eraserhead
Dec 18, 07:56 AM
Well they are both owned by Sony BMG :p.
That said I did buy RATM, the music industry has produced rubbish for the past 10 years. So much so that at the O2 (http://www.theo2.co.uk/) some of the greatest moments in music in the last 10 years include a song by NSync.
That said I did buy RATM, the music industry has produced rubbish for the past 10 years. So much so that at the O2 (http://www.theo2.co.uk/) some of the greatest moments in music in the last 10 years include a song by NSync.
steadysignal
Apr 1, 08:51 AM
2011. People are still watching TV? Scary.
indeed. the day will come that it wont matter what you watch content on, just how it gets paid for...
wishing that advertising would just die is fun. pipe-dream, but fun nonetheless. everyone wants to be paid.
indeed. the day will come that it wont matter what you watch content on, just how it gets paid for...
wishing that advertising would just die is fun. pipe-dream, but fun nonetheless. everyone wants to be paid.
more...
eburr
Mar 15, 11:48 AM
Willow Bend did not get any today. There were at least 50 people in line.
mdntcallr
Nov 21, 04:19 PM
Wow! what a great concept.
Pretty much like some hybrid cars getting power from when they brake.
Pretty much like some hybrid cars getting power from when they brake.
gdlcjr
Jan 7, 07:44 AM
New facebook update now appear.
DrEwe
May 2, 07:32 PM
It is not thicker, don't believe all the junk you see.
I have the white and the black iPhone 4 and the white one is slightly thicker. The front glass plate has a raised perimeter "lip" that prevents the front face from coming in contact with a smooth surface if you place it face down, my black iPhone 4 does not. Incidentally - this makes it almost impossible to put the antiglare screen protecting plastic on, as the edges are always pushed ever-so-slightly up unless it is perfectly centered.
I have the white and the black iPhone 4 and the white one is slightly thicker. The front glass plate has a raised perimeter "lip" that prevents the front face from coming in contact with a smooth surface if you place it face down, my black iPhone 4 does not. Incidentally - this makes it almost impossible to put the antiglare screen protecting plastic on, as the edges are always pushed ever-so-slightly up unless it is perfectly centered.
Sun Baked
Sep 16, 04:00 PM
Nah, that was for the cheaper is better debate.
If that were true we would all be buying Daewoo's right now.
And you'll note I didn't compare them to Mercedes, because I would have purchased the big Daewoo (the one with the Mercedes powertrain) if they imported it for under 20k.
However the 200MPH Yugo is just plain silly, and could be considered a cheap suicide note.
I just didn't want to get into the Apple vs. PC debate - because I lack the reality distorting drugs.
Once again
Note: the above post has no basis in reality. But for those that have always used Apples, sometimes it's really hard to think like a PC user without drugs.
If that were true we would all be buying Daewoo's right now.
And you'll note I didn't compare them to Mercedes, because I would have purchased the big Daewoo (the one with the Mercedes powertrain) if they imported it for under 20k.
However the 200MPH Yugo is just plain silly, and could be considered a cheap suicide note.
I just didn't want to get into the Apple vs. PC debate - because I lack the reality distorting drugs.
Once again
Note: the above post has no basis in reality. But for those that have always used Apples, sometimes it's really hard to think like a PC user without drugs.
davidjearly
Dec 22, 07:20 AM
You seem to have all the time in the world to come in here and point out how "pathetic" we all are. Really nice of you btw, thanks.
1. I said I had "limited" time to discuss the idea behind the campaign. Limited is the key word. Note, I've not spent significantly more time discussing it than you or others in the thread. I enjoy discussing the idea behind things, trying to get to understand the logic involved. I apologise for expressing an opposing view to the OP. Obviously I have misunderstood the whole concept of a discussion forum.
2. Like another poster above who seems to have incorrectly comprehended my earlier post, I described the campaign as "pathetic". At no point did I describe you, or any other individual as pathetic. There was no personal insults so lets avoid making stuff up, ok?
Call people "pathetic" all you want.
See point 2 above.
I think it's pretty laughable how you've clearly been far more put out by it's very existence than any of those who took part were.
I haven't actually. Again, you seem to be making stuff up. I already explained how I haven't been out out by this at all. I just thought that the whole campaign was totally pointless, and still do.
People seem to be looking in to what was supposed to be a simple bit of fun/rebellion too much. No one cares what record label people are with. It wasn't an attack on labels or the music industry. The point was simple, to have something the complete opposite of X Factor at number 1. We did it, quickly and simply, with minimal fuss, and all from the comfort of sitting in front of our own computers.
If it has made you all feel as though you have more power now to get things done then that's great. I'm really really pleased for you.
1. I said I had "limited" time to discuss the idea behind the campaign. Limited is the key word. Note, I've not spent significantly more time discussing it than you or others in the thread. I enjoy discussing the idea behind things, trying to get to understand the logic involved. I apologise for expressing an opposing view to the OP. Obviously I have misunderstood the whole concept of a discussion forum.
2. Like another poster above who seems to have incorrectly comprehended my earlier post, I described the campaign as "pathetic". At no point did I describe you, or any other individual as pathetic. There was no personal insults so lets avoid making stuff up, ok?
Call people "pathetic" all you want.
See point 2 above.
I think it's pretty laughable how you've clearly been far more put out by it's very existence than any of those who took part were.
I haven't actually. Again, you seem to be making stuff up. I already explained how I haven't been out out by this at all. I just thought that the whole campaign was totally pointless, and still do.
People seem to be looking in to what was supposed to be a simple bit of fun/rebellion too much. No one cares what record label people are with. It wasn't an attack on labels or the music industry. The point was simple, to have something the complete opposite of X Factor at number 1. We did it, quickly and simply, with minimal fuss, and all from the comfort of sitting in front of our own computers.
If it has made you all feel as though you have more power now to get things done then that's great. I'm really really pleased for you.
Xtremehkr
Apr 2, 01:15 PM
It has the underpinnings of a great program. The UI is a little unfriendly and could be more intuitive. Hopefully it progresses faster than .Mac has in improving.
Ugg
Apr 29, 01:01 PM
And yes, some driving can be cut down, but not all of it. Plus a large chuck of driving is required, many people live in suburban areas and need to drive to work.
There was a study recently that showed that the bulk of suburban driving was non-work related and that most of those trips were less than two miles. We need to drive a lot less than we think we do.
There was a study recently that showed that the bulk of suburban driving was non-work related and that most of those trips were less than two miles. We need to drive a lot less than we think we do.
No comments:
Post a Comment