twoodcc
Aug 5, 08:41 PM
NO iPODS OR iPHONE I DON'T CARE FOR THEM ONE JOT
Ok, Stevie J, You can introduce the Mac Pro, the new XServe, and Leopard on Monday.
But please don't deny us our new conroe iMac with x1800XT! Release it on Tuesday!!! And Merom Macbooks and Macbook Pros. You will lose too many sales and potential switchers if you wait until the end of September!
Plus I'll cry.
We beggs of you Stevie J, we wants it, we needs it, it must come to me!
The iMac Ultra is mine. My own. My precious.
Alright, give precious back to master now......
Ok, Stevie J, You can introduce the Mac Pro, the new XServe, and Leopard on Monday.
But please don't deny us our new conroe iMac with x1800XT! Release it on Tuesday!!! And Merom Macbooks and Macbook Pros. You will lose too many sales and potential switchers if you wait until the end of September!
Plus I'll cry.
We beggs of you Stevie J, we wants it, we needs it, it must come to me!
The iMac Ultra is mine. My own. My precious.
Alright, give precious back to master now......
CaoCao
Mar 4, 01:46 PM
This is true because you say it's true?
Nope, you just want to make sure that we can't have access to the same protections for our families that you do. How silly of me to want that.
Not at all. Gay people raise kids just as well as straight people- that's been proven. And we do have families. There is no risk of destroying society. The question is valid. Answer it.
A bit of delay in my response because I had to look it up, but thanks for letting us have this right for 7 years now..
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0e/Map_of_US_sodomy_laws.svg/400px-Map_of_US_sodomy_laws.svg.png
Red = Sodomy Laws struck down by the US Supreme Court in 2003
And yet I doubt Macaroony sees opposite-sex attractions as immoral or placing oneself in grave danger. I know what your religious beliefs tell you, and it is your right to follow those as explicitly as you are legally able. But why does that have to impact the rest of the world when you know many of them share different beliefs and have different experiences?
Personally, I think people who believe in gods are weak-minded fools. But I would never support a law that mandated atheism or banned religious gatherings. Because these religious things, while they are not in line with my worldview, do not impact my way of life directly, and allow people to live how they think they need to, not how I think they need to.
I'm gonna go out on a limb here and venture a guess that you don't have a non-biased fact source for a retarded statement like that. :rolleyes:
CaoCao, could you please elaborate as to how gays could cause the collapse of society? I keep hearing that but I don't understand the sentiment behind it. And please, do not skirt around the answer, I always try to be as clear as day with mine.
The only explanation I can come up with as to why you would see being gay and giving gays the same civil rights as the collapse of society is that it differs so much from your worldview, it causes your world to collapse to the point where you feel nothing but uncomfortable to live in such a society. In other words; if gays are treated equal under every law under the sun, your society would collapse.
I often hear that same-sex marriage devalues marriage and threatens those that are already married. I wonder why and how. I doubt that your straight neighbor's happy marriage affects you at all unless you're so jealous, you want their marriage to be annulled - a happy same-sex couple must be killing you inside. I have said it here and in another thread before, marriage is nothing but a contract between two members of two families and the state to secure their fortune and legacy. Every attorney will tell you the same.
I have to say, it's very exhausting coming up with a defense convincing enough for those that don't seem to follow the world by logic. I'm glad I'm not a lawyer because if law is like that all the time, I'd rather give up on it and live in exile.
Logic is my source. Society needs people, no people means no society. If there were no more babies society would eventually collapse.
Source?
:rolleyes:
Nope, you just want to make sure that we can't have access to the same protections for our families that you do. How silly of me to want that.
Not at all. Gay people raise kids just as well as straight people- that's been proven. And we do have families. There is no risk of destroying society. The question is valid. Answer it.
A bit of delay in my response because I had to look it up, but thanks for letting us have this right for 7 years now..
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0e/Map_of_US_sodomy_laws.svg/400px-Map_of_US_sodomy_laws.svg.png
Red = Sodomy Laws struck down by the US Supreme Court in 2003
And yet I doubt Macaroony sees opposite-sex attractions as immoral or placing oneself in grave danger. I know what your religious beliefs tell you, and it is your right to follow those as explicitly as you are legally able. But why does that have to impact the rest of the world when you know many of them share different beliefs and have different experiences?
Personally, I think people who believe in gods are weak-minded fools. But I would never support a law that mandated atheism or banned religious gatherings. Because these religious things, while they are not in line with my worldview, do not impact my way of life directly, and allow people to live how they think they need to, not how I think they need to.
I'm gonna go out on a limb here and venture a guess that you don't have a non-biased fact source for a retarded statement like that. :rolleyes:
CaoCao, could you please elaborate as to how gays could cause the collapse of society? I keep hearing that but I don't understand the sentiment behind it. And please, do not skirt around the answer, I always try to be as clear as day with mine.
The only explanation I can come up with as to why you would see being gay and giving gays the same civil rights as the collapse of society is that it differs so much from your worldview, it causes your world to collapse to the point where you feel nothing but uncomfortable to live in such a society. In other words; if gays are treated equal under every law under the sun, your society would collapse.
I often hear that same-sex marriage devalues marriage and threatens those that are already married. I wonder why and how. I doubt that your straight neighbor's happy marriage affects you at all unless you're so jealous, you want their marriage to be annulled - a happy same-sex couple must be killing you inside. I have said it here and in another thread before, marriage is nothing but a contract between two members of two families and the state to secure their fortune and legacy. Every attorney will tell you the same.
I have to say, it's very exhausting coming up with a defense convincing enough for those that don't seem to follow the world by logic. I'm glad I'm not a lawyer because if law is like that all the time, I'd rather give up on it and live in exile.
Logic is my source. Society needs people, no people means no society. If there were no more babies society would eventually collapse.
Source?
:rolleyes:
aohus
Apr 19, 02:05 PM
Hardly. Samsung would have been fine had they stuck to that original theme, rather than move into Apple's house as a squatter with a subsequent model
Apple can try and patent a grid of icons all they want. It won't fly in court. That Samsung F700 model is very telling, namely that the external candybar style device was used BEFORE the iPhone was even announced in January 2007. In fact, it almost looks as though Apple copied the external 'look and feel' of the Samsung music player.
Apple can try and patent a grid of icons all they want. It won't fly in court. That Samsung F700 model is very telling, namely that the external candybar style device was used BEFORE the iPhone was even announced in January 2007. In fact, it almost looks as though Apple copied the external 'look and feel' of the Samsung music player.
kdarling
Apr 20, 09:49 AM
No they wouldn't. They have to prove likelihood of confusion, not actual confusion. Actual confusion is evidence of likelihood of confusion, but it's not necessary.
Yes sir, that's why I explicitly said "could" have to provide proof, because I read of cases where evidence of actual confusion ended up being one of the methods used.
Thank you, as always, for making the clarification in any case.
Yes sir, that's why I explicitly said "could" have to provide proof, because I read of cases where evidence of actual confusion ended up being one of the methods used.
Thank you, as always, for making the clarification in any case.
Denarius
Mar 22, 07:15 PM
I'm willing to accept the current level of US involvment, provided it is short-term and really is part of a broader coalition with UN backing. Whether it turns out to be justified depends on subsequent events.
Poor old Obama has been dragged into this kicking and screaming by Sarkozy, Cameron, the Arab League request for a no-fly zone and the request by the Libyan revolutionaries themselves. He's been stressing all the way that he wants another nation to take the lead and now nobody can decide who. The Italian's want NAC to be in control, whereas the French don't. The Arab League doesn't want NATO running it so the French are proposing that we do it by committee. :confused:
I think they need to offer a deal to Gadaffi of some sort. He needs to go, but if there are charges against him in the international courts then it'll be a fight to the death. Offer him an amnesty if he agrees to go into exile quickly.
Poor old Obama has been dragged into this kicking and screaming by Sarkozy, Cameron, the Arab League request for a no-fly zone and the request by the Libyan revolutionaries themselves. He's been stressing all the way that he wants another nation to take the lead and now nobody can decide who. The Italian's want NAC to be in control, whereas the French don't. The Arab League doesn't want NATO running it so the French are proposing that we do it by committee. :confused:
I think they need to offer a deal to Gadaffi of some sort. He needs to go, but if there are charges against him in the international courts then it'll be a fight to the death. Offer him an amnesty if he agrees to go into exile quickly.
gnasher729
Jul 20, 01:21 PM
Is having more cores more energy efficient than having one big fat ass 24Ghz processor? Maybe thats a factor in the increasing core count.
Absolutely.
The power consumption of a chip is proportional to the clock speed, multiplied by the voltage squared. So at the same voltage, a hypothetical 24 GHz chip would use eight times as much power as a single 3 GHz chip, and the same as eight 3 GHz chips.
However, with any given technology, you need higher voltage to achieve the higher clock speed. So with the same technology, that 24 GHz chip would need much much higher voltage than the 3 GHz chips and accordingly it would take much more energy than eight 3 GHz chips.
As an example, some iPods have two ARM chips running at half the clock speed and lower power instead of a single ARM chip running at higher speed, in order to safe power.
Absolutely.
The power consumption of a chip is proportional to the clock speed, multiplied by the voltage squared. So at the same voltage, a hypothetical 24 GHz chip would use eight times as much power as a single 3 GHz chip, and the same as eight 3 GHz chips.
However, with any given technology, you need higher voltage to achieve the higher clock speed. So with the same technology, that 24 GHz chip would need much much higher voltage than the 3 GHz chips and accordingly it would take much more energy than eight 3 GHz chips.
As an example, some iPods have two ARM chips running at half the clock speed and lower power instead of a single ARM chip running at higher speed, in order to safe power.
Lord Blackadder
Nov 28, 09:49 PM
It would be a nice idea.
Nice. idea. For whom, you greedy scum? :mad:
**** them and their greed. I shall say no more.
Nice. idea. For whom, you greedy scum? :mad:
**** them and their greed. I shall say no more.
Ace25
Aug 26, 04:10 PM
I am now pretty sure that new MacBooks are being released in the next few days.
I ordered one on the 17th of august and it was scheduled to ship on the 24th of august. Then for some reason it was bumped to a new ship date of august 31st, just enough time to drop a new merom processor in it!
I ordered one on the 17th of august and it was scheduled to ship on the 24th of august. Then for some reason it was bumped to a new ship date of august 31st, just enough time to drop a new merom processor in it!
Bubba Satori
Mar 26, 12:23 PM
Is Apple moving to close the source on more and more of OS X ?
Yes, as more and more of iOS moves into OS X.
Yes, as more and more of iOS moves into OS X.
thejakill
Mar 22, 01:00 PM
I hope these catch on enough that I can actually buy an iPad.
WillEH
Mar 25, 10:26 PM
Good stuff, waiting and ready to pay! :o
CaptMurdock
Mar 22, 07:02 AM
Fox News, huh?
That reminds me -- I gotta put some pine cleaner down my toilet.
That reminds me -- I gotta put some pine cleaner down my toilet.
dougny
Nov 29, 08:58 AM
Do you work for Universal, or the RIAA?
No actually, I represent recording artists, songwriters and producers. I am on the other side usually trying to fight the labels for every nickle an artist can try to get. However, because of that, I am on the same page with them in trying to get my artists and writers compensated from a digital marketplace that only pays for a small percentage of the material transferred. My artists only get paid for between 10 - 20% of the digital material out there (the rest pirated), so, anywhere we can get some income, even if through this flawed iPod royalty, I support.
I am just sick of people who think that they have a right to free music. Why don't you all think you have a right to free computers, or free software. How dare Apple charge you for iLife?
If all of you on here bought all of your music either from iTunes or from a record store, then, absolutely, complain away if that dollar is passed on to you. But, which is likely in just about every case, you have a few songs you burned off a friend's CD or downloaded from a file-sharing site, then shut up, you are the reason this is necessary.
No actually, I represent recording artists, songwriters and producers. I am on the other side usually trying to fight the labels for every nickle an artist can try to get. However, because of that, I am on the same page with them in trying to get my artists and writers compensated from a digital marketplace that only pays for a small percentage of the material transferred. My artists only get paid for between 10 - 20% of the digital material out there (the rest pirated), so, anywhere we can get some income, even if through this flawed iPod royalty, I support.
I am just sick of people who think that they have a right to free music. Why don't you all think you have a right to free computers, or free software. How dare Apple charge you for iLife?
If all of you on here bought all of your music either from iTunes or from a record store, then, absolutely, complain away if that dollar is passed on to you. But, which is likely in just about every case, you have a few songs you burned off a friend's CD or downloaded from a file-sharing site, then shut up, you are the reason this is necessary.
miamijim
Apr 8, 01:33 AM
As best as I can figure, it works like this. Managers get good grades if they sell certain amounts of products.
I'll use low numbers here. Let's say BB corporate wants you to sell at least 5 iPads a day to make your "Quota". One day, 10 iPads come in. You sell all ten, yay, you made quota for the day.
But the next day, none get shipped to the store. So, boo, you didn't make quota, since you didn't have any to sell.
So, if you get 10 the day after that, & not knowing if more are coming tomorrow, you sell 5, make quota, and hold the other 5 for the next day when, low and behold, none get shipped to the store. You still have 5 left over to sell, which you do, and again you make quota for the day.
Basically the more days you make quota, the happier BB corporate is, and the better chance Mr. Manager gets a bonus down the road.
Mr. Manager (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O4DMPmoJkJQ)
This plus...
If you sell X amount of product in the 1st quarter of this year your target for 1st quarter of the next year is based upon the previous years take, so say next year a large product is not released in the first quarter your sales year on year will be down.
By easing product out across the days and weeks the best Buy managers are securing their target figures for the following years year on year targets.
The managers bonus's are based upon % performance above sales. So if you are able to massage your sales you are effectively able to manage your expected performance against target figures.
It's called cooking the books, and technically it is illegal.
I used to be in management for HMV so I know of what I speak.
I'll use low numbers here. Let's say BB corporate wants you to sell at least 5 iPads a day to make your "Quota". One day, 10 iPads come in. You sell all ten, yay, you made quota for the day.
But the next day, none get shipped to the store. So, boo, you didn't make quota, since you didn't have any to sell.
So, if you get 10 the day after that, & not knowing if more are coming tomorrow, you sell 5, make quota, and hold the other 5 for the next day when, low and behold, none get shipped to the store. You still have 5 left over to sell, which you do, and again you make quota for the day.
Basically the more days you make quota, the happier BB corporate is, and the better chance Mr. Manager gets a bonus down the road.
Mr. Manager (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O4DMPmoJkJQ)
This plus...
If you sell X amount of product in the 1st quarter of this year your target for 1st quarter of the next year is based upon the previous years take, so say next year a large product is not released in the first quarter your sales year on year will be down.
By easing product out across the days and weeks the best Buy managers are securing their target figures for the following years year on year targets.
The managers bonus's are based upon % performance above sales. So if you are able to massage your sales you are effectively able to manage your expected performance against target figures.
It's called cooking the books, and technically it is illegal.
I used to be in management for HMV so I know of what I speak.
teme
Jul 20, 09:00 AM
All these rumors are making it so hard to decide when to get a new computer... my desktop and laptop are both about five years old. Though I don't have an urgent need to get a new ones, something new would surely be nice and useful.
At first I was waiting for a portable with Merom, but now I'm interested in portable with Santa Rosa platform and Merom... and that's not available until March 2007. For desktop I was waiting for Conroe, but it all depends how Apple is gonna use that chip. If they release a minitower (which I'm hoping for), I'm not sure would I get it right now or some months later (if Kentsfield is going to be released this year).
At first I was waiting for a portable with Merom, but now I'm interested in portable with Santa Rosa platform and Merom... and that's not available until March 2007. For desktop I was waiting for Conroe, but it all depends how Apple is gonna use that chip. If they release a minitower (which I'm hoping for), I'm not sure would I get it right now or some months later (if Kentsfield is going to be released this year).
MacRumors
Aug 16, 10:33 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
Barefeats provides (http://www.barefeats.com/quad06.html) benchmarks comparing the Quad 3GHz Mac Pro (Xeon) vs the Quad G5 2.5GHz Power Mac (G5). This represents the new top of the line vs the old top of the line Mac.
They provide benchmarks for both non-Universal and Universal applications between the Mac Pro 3GHz, Mac Pro 2.66GHz and PowerMac G5 Quad 2.5GHz.
The top-end Mac Pro performed well compared to the Quad G5 with both Photoshop CS2 and After Effects 7.0 despite running under Rosetta emulation on the Mac Pro. Universal upgrades to these applications should provide additional performance boosts.
Meanwhile, Universal applications iMovie HD 6, Final Cut Pro 5, FileMaker Pro 8.5 and Cinebench 9.5 generally showed substantial improvements even in the 2.66GHz Mac Pro vs the 2.5GHz PowerMac.
There's no doubt that both versions of the Mac Pro are faster than the G5 Quad-Core running Universal Binary apps like iMovie, Final Cut Pro, etc. As you can see from the four UB tests we ran in this session, the Mac Pro 2.66GHz was as much as 62% faster than the Quad-Core G5/2.5GHz. The Mac Pro 3.0GHz was as much as 85% faster.
Barefeats provides (http://www.barefeats.com/quad06.html) benchmarks comparing the Quad 3GHz Mac Pro (Xeon) vs the Quad G5 2.5GHz Power Mac (G5). This represents the new top of the line vs the old top of the line Mac.
They provide benchmarks for both non-Universal and Universal applications between the Mac Pro 3GHz, Mac Pro 2.66GHz and PowerMac G5 Quad 2.5GHz.
The top-end Mac Pro performed well compared to the Quad G5 with both Photoshop CS2 and After Effects 7.0 despite running under Rosetta emulation on the Mac Pro. Universal upgrades to these applications should provide additional performance boosts.
Meanwhile, Universal applications iMovie HD 6, Final Cut Pro 5, FileMaker Pro 8.5 and Cinebench 9.5 generally showed substantial improvements even in the 2.66GHz Mac Pro vs the 2.5GHz PowerMac.
There's no doubt that both versions of the Mac Pro are faster than the G5 Quad-Core running Universal Binary apps like iMovie, Final Cut Pro, etc. As you can see from the four UB tests we ran in this session, the Mac Pro 2.66GHz was as much as 62% faster than the Quad-Core G5/2.5GHz. The Mac Pro 3.0GHz was as much as 85% faster.
ConnorTurnbull
Apr 25, 01:37 PM
They cant lose this surely?
Even Android stores your location in the exact same way iOS does.
What are you talking about? This is Apple. When they do something wrong, it's ten times worse than if one of their competitors had done it!
Even Android stores your location in the exact same way iOS does.
What are you talking about? This is Apple. When they do something wrong, it's ten times worse than if one of their competitors had done it!
Burger King
Apr 27, 09:23 AM
Just to be clear - you think someone who wants to question what is and what is not being tracked is a whiner?
Did I read you correctly. Nice name calling.
After an issue has arose and been debated to death and then even after the manufacturer has addressed the concerns of the paranoid, it is time to give it a rest.
But then when those who wish to beat what should now be a dead horse into little bitty pieces continue, then yes you are correct. Maybe whiner is not the correct title for these people. ;)
Did I read you correctly. Nice name calling.
After an issue has arose and been debated to death and then even after the manufacturer has addressed the concerns of the paranoid, it is time to give it a rest.
But then when those who wish to beat what should now be a dead horse into little bitty pieces continue, then yes you are correct. Maybe whiner is not the correct title for these people. ;)
bearbear
Mar 31, 07:16 PM
Will wait to see what exactly results from this, as right now it seems like everyone is just jumping to their own (wild) conclusions.
AwakenedLands
Mar 31, 05:58 PM
"We have no idea if it will even work on phones."
Um, so rather than find out, let's just not release it so we never know. That's an awesome decision. Way to take a chance there Google.
On the same note, I'm not sure if I can run the trail by my house in under 10 minutes, so I'm not even going to try.
Um, so rather than find out, let's just not release it so we never know. That's an awesome decision. Way to take a chance there Google.
On the same note, I'm not sure if I can run the trail by my house in under 10 minutes, so I'm not even going to try.
Popeye206
Mar 31, 04:16 PM
And the Apple haters do yet another 180...
1. Macs
1995 to 2007: Don't use a Mac. Noone uses Macs.
2007 to Present: Don't use a Mac. Everyone uses a Mac.
2. Apps
1995 to 2/22/2011: Don't use Apple. There is no software and they can't do anything.
2/22 to Present: Apps? Who needs Apps as long as you have a robust UI?
3. Open
2007 to Today: Apple is a walled garden that only stupid lemmings use.
Today going forward: Controlling the OS is necessary and good for the consumer.
+1! Love this analogy!
You could also add to it:
1984-1991: GUI? Who needs a GUI? Real computers use command lines!
1999 - Vista: Thank goodness that Microsoft invented the GUI interface.
:D
1. Macs
1995 to 2007: Don't use a Mac. Noone uses Macs.
2007 to Present: Don't use a Mac. Everyone uses a Mac.
2. Apps
1995 to 2/22/2011: Don't use Apple. There is no software and they can't do anything.
2/22 to Present: Apps? Who needs Apps as long as you have a robust UI?
3. Open
2007 to Today: Apple is a walled garden that only stupid lemmings use.
Today going forward: Controlling the OS is necessary and good for the consumer.
+1! Love this analogy!
You could also add to it:
1984-1991: GUI? Who needs a GUI? Real computers use command lines!
1999 - Vista: Thank goodness that Microsoft invented the GUI interface.
:D
LethalWolfe
Apr 5, 08:07 PM
As someone who's attended NAB yearly, (and again this year) Apple has not had a presence there since and currently are NOT on the exhibitor list for this years convention. Will take pics if I'm wrong though.
The Supermeet is a meet-up of Final Cut Pro User Groups from across the country that coincides with NAB. It is not a part of NAB itself.
Lethal
The Supermeet is a meet-up of Final Cut Pro User Groups from across the country that coincides with NAB. It is not a part of NAB itself.
Lethal
j_maddison
Sep 19, 05:22 AM
In Macbook/Pro are updating in Novemeber...It means Apple is 3 months behind all laptop manufactures...
I seriously doubt that Apple will let that happen, but then again, they are apple, they think differently!
Yep they do think 'differently', sadly it backfires on them occasionally. They already have the label of being a company that sells expensive/ overpriced hardware. Now they're risking developing a reputation for outdated hardware. Clever marketing there Apple :rolleyes:
I seriously doubt that Apple will let that happen, but then again, they are apple, they think differently!
Yep they do think 'differently', sadly it backfires on them occasionally. They already have the label of being a company that sells expensive/ overpriced hardware. Now they're risking developing a reputation for outdated hardware. Clever marketing there Apple :rolleyes:
BillyShears
Aug 7, 10:03 PM
Perhaps sometime between now and Spring 2007 they might find the time to change that.
Right, but certainly not "all the pictures" show a unified interface, which is what I was replying to. I'd like if it were unified, though.
Right, but certainly not "all the pictures" show a unified interface, which is what I was replying to. I'd like if it were unified, though.