JGowan
Aug 6, 07:25 PM
It won't be a live video stream. In the afternoon Apple will begin streaming a compressed HD recording of it. I guess you'll have to go to a terrestrial café system. Have you complained to your Satellite provider?
I know it won't be live, but that's ok -- I just hate missing a Steve keynote -- I've watching them for several years now...
It's the streams I can't get w/the satellite internet. What exactly is a terrestrial café system? (And I haven't complained... this Apple stream thing is the only thing I've not been able to view... everything else works fine so I don't know what the deal is.
I know it won't be live, but that's ok -- I just hate missing a Steve keynote -- I've watching them for several years now...
It's the streams I can't get w/the satellite internet. What exactly is a terrestrial café system? (And I haven't complained... this Apple stream thing is the only thing I've not been able to view... everything else works fine so I don't know what the deal is.
CaoCao
Mar 3, 10:05 PM
Well Catholic people believe its a Sin to be gay, and in fear of parents saying anything about a gay man teaching their kids....Well being gay and teaching at a religious school and being gay just doesnt work...that sucks though for him
Being gay is not a sin, homosexual actions are a sin.
Bill, it's OK to react emotionally. We're people, not robots. :)
Query: How do meat bags such as yourself live with such amounts of water sloshing around in you?
Being gay is not a sin, homosexual actions are a sin.
Bill, it's OK to react emotionally. We're people, not robots. :)
Query: How do meat bags such as yourself live with such amounts of water sloshing around in you?
Yamcha
Apr 19, 02:41 PM
The First Commercial GUI
http://img62.imageshack.us/img62/5659/star1vg.gif
Xerox's Star workstation was the first commercial implementation of the graphical user interface. The Star was introduced in 1981 and was the inspiration for the Mac and all the other GUIs that followed.
http://img217.imageshack.us/img217/7892/leopardpreviewdesktop4.jpghttp://img714.imageshack.us/img714/5733/xerox8010star.gif
http://img62.imageshack.us/img62/5659/star1vg.gif
Xerox's Star workstation was the first commercial implementation of the graphical user interface. The Star was introduced in 1981 and was the inspiration for the Mac and all the other GUIs that followed.
http://img217.imageshack.us/img217/7892/leopardpreviewdesktop4.jpghttp://img714.imageshack.us/img714/5733/xerox8010star.gif
dustinsc
Mar 22, 12:53 PM
Assuming this gets out of vaporware status, it looks pretty good. The custom interface also looks good. Apple better have some improvements to the UI (ahem, notifications) in iOS 5
Dan==
Jul 31, 09:35 AM
I think that the bigger issue with Dan=='s design (full credit and kudos for the idea!) is that the Mac Mini is so small that it only uses laptop components. If you want to have a full-size optical drive or a full-size hard drive, you need to use a larger form factor. This is part of the reason for the size of my design.
Here's a comparison in sizes (I've also changed the floor because my wife thought that the reflection was confusing...)
http://www.ghwphoto.com/3MacsFrontSm.png
http://www.ghwphoto.com/3MacsBackSm.png
Cheers!
Now you've got some skills. I especially like the shadowing, reflections and detail on the back side. Very nice.
I agree with your size assessment.
Actually, our designs are quite close, differing primarily in cosmetics. What I'm refering to is my earlier design, (which I suspect you missed) not boncellis'. boncellis wished to see a wider, flatter version for use in home entertainment, so I conjured that 2nd one up for visualization. While that form factor has grown on me somewhat, I still like the taller version, as I had done earlier, and you've shown here, as well.
Here's my initial design, from earlier in this thread.
http://img92.imageshack.us/img92/9648/macandmacminipx9.jpg
The size of mine is a little smaller (narrower) - I wanted the whole thing less than 8" wide, though it could go back a little deeper, i.e. not necessarily square.
Also, see possible/hoped for product specs earlier in the thread.
Personally, I think I still prefer the smoother Mini-like skin than the perforated look of the Pro, but I'm just quibbling.
Thanks for the imagery.
-Dan
Here's a comparison in sizes (I've also changed the floor because my wife thought that the reflection was confusing...)
http://www.ghwphoto.com/3MacsFrontSm.png
http://www.ghwphoto.com/3MacsBackSm.png
Cheers!
Now you've got some skills. I especially like the shadowing, reflections and detail on the back side. Very nice.
I agree with your size assessment.
Actually, our designs are quite close, differing primarily in cosmetics. What I'm refering to is my earlier design, (which I suspect you missed) not boncellis'. boncellis wished to see a wider, flatter version for use in home entertainment, so I conjured that 2nd one up for visualization. While that form factor has grown on me somewhat, I still like the taller version, as I had done earlier, and you've shown here, as well.
Here's my initial design, from earlier in this thread.
http://img92.imageshack.us/img92/9648/macandmacminipx9.jpg
The size of mine is a little smaller (narrower) - I wanted the whole thing less than 8" wide, though it could go back a little deeper, i.e. not necessarily square.
Also, see possible/hoped for product specs earlier in the thread.
Personally, I think I still prefer the smoother Mini-like skin than the perforated look of the Pro, but I'm just quibbling.
Thanks for the imagery.
-Dan
e-coli
Nov 29, 08:12 AM
Ha! I can't WAIT until they sit down to Apple's board and put that proposition on the table.
I haven't bought a piece of major-label music in years (because it's mostly crap), but my guess is Steve is going to absolutely go nuts, then tell them to bugger off and create their own media device.
I haven't bought a piece of major-label music in years (because it's mostly crap), but my guess is Steve is going to absolutely go nuts, then tell them to bugger off and create their own media device.
other
Aug 7, 04:29 PM
*shrug* I don't think TM is a copy of System Restore. But I think how much that feature has caught on with Win users is also not unrelated to the presence of TM in Leopard. All's fair in love, war, and operating systems. :)
Well, do you think it's a copy of "Previous versions", which someone posted a link to in this thread?
(Here's the link again: http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060730-7383.html)
Well, do you think it's a copy of "Previous versions", which someone posted a link to in this thread?
(Here's the link again: http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060730-7383.html)
Lesser Evets
Apr 6, 03:45 PM
Should be called XOOSH: the sound of a toilet flushing.
CaoCao
Mar 1, 04:37 PM
No, not really. Why is this relevant?
They are not permitted to marry their chosen partner, so no, this is again complete bollocks.
Retrogress is a verb, and they were not retrograde, on the contrary they were very progressive in many respects.
In short, your cogency is significantly inferior to Lee's.
To argue a point one have a definition of the point. On what point of the definition do you dissent?
The legal definition of marriage according to the government of the United States of America "...'marriage' means only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife..."
Thank you for point out an error in my sentence structure.
They are not permitted to marry their chosen partner, so no, this is again complete bollocks.
Retrogress is a verb, and they were not retrograde, on the contrary they were very progressive in many respects.
In short, your cogency is significantly inferior to Lee's.
To argue a point one have a definition of the point. On what point of the definition do you dissent?
The legal definition of marriage according to the government of the United States of America "...'marriage' means only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife..."
Thank you for point out an error in my sentence structure.
nagromme
Jul 14, 03:11 PM
Except Conroes don't support dual processor configuration. Woodcrest does, hence the reason it will be in the Pro line machines while Conroe is put into new iMacs.
Right, but I didn't say dual processors, I said dual cores.
I see no reason why ALL Pro machines need quad cores, when today's dual core G5s are FAR slower than that and still blaze through a lot of useful work! An all-quad pro lineup would be "cool" (and I seek a quad anyway, personally) but would simply add cost without justification, for many people.
In addition, if the new chips are supply-constrained at all having both Conroe and Woodcrest in the pro towers could help. (And the iMac does fine with Yonah for a while if need be--which seems likely to happen to me.)
Right, but I didn't say dual processors, I said dual cores.
I see no reason why ALL Pro machines need quad cores, when today's dual core G5s are FAR slower than that and still blaze through a lot of useful work! An all-quad pro lineup would be "cool" (and I seek a quad anyway, personally) but would simply add cost without justification, for many people.
In addition, if the new chips are supply-constrained at all having both Conroe and Woodcrest in the pro towers could help. (And the iMac does fine with Yonah for a while if need be--which seems likely to happen to me.)
Multimedia
Jul 28, 06:00 PM
I'll chime in and try to help alleviate your quandary. I would take it back. You've got a narrow window of opportunity to take it back, and we're just a few days away from an event that will likely harold the release of a new iMac. Even if you wanted to keep this model, if you take it back and then buy it after the release of the new one, you'll likely be able to get it at a fairly discounted price. So, that's what you have to weigh against having a computer to play with for the next couple of weeks...Point. You will be able to repurchase as refurbished - which you could have done already BTW - for the same as what you will get back. Refurbished is same as new with new warranty but lower price. Core 2 Duo iMac may be an entirely new design. It's not necessarily going to be just a tweak. I wouldn't risk keeping the one you bought.
We're not saying it will be out after WWDC. We're saying it is DUE by September.
We're not saying it will be out after WWDC. We're saying it is DUE by September.
gus6464
Mar 22, 05:13 PM
I would really love for the Playbook or the Touchpad to succeed over the fragmented Android POS ecosystem. The HTC tablet that they announced today won't even come with Honeycomb.
RIM and HP have the right idea when it comes to their tablets. Geekyness does not make you popular (Android).
RIM and HP have the right idea when it comes to their tablets. Geekyness does not make you popular (Android).
Abstract
Aug 12, 01:35 AM
What OS will the iPhone be running? :confused:
Mac OS Kitten.
Mac OS Kitten.
daneoni
Aug 25, 03:52 PM
Another person who can never be satisfied.:rolleyes:
What is that even supposed to mean?
What is that even supposed to mean?
Silentwave
Aug 26, 10:42 PM
I agree with you wholeheartedly.
But, I guess they COULD have put a pentium d in them...didnt they have dual cores?
yes, but they were significantly hotter, consumed much more power, and worst of all were incredibly inefficient per clock versus C2D. If memory serves, when the Conroe/Allendale (the codename for C2D desktop chips under 2.4GHz with 2MB L2) benchmarks first came out after the NDA lifted, the best Pentium Extreme Edition (3.73GHz Pentium D Presler core, dual core, 2x2MB L2, 1066 FSB, 130W TDP) was in many of the tests at least equaled by the Core 2 Duo E6300, a chip with the following specs:
Speed: 1.86 GHz Dual core
2MB L2 Cache
1066 MT/S FSB
TDP 65W
So a much slower, far cheaper C2D chip matches the best Pentium D Extreme Edition, though both are dual-core, have the same FSB speed, the Pentium D has a bigger L2 Cache, and each core is clocking at twice the speed of the Core 2 chip.
The C2D chips with the sole exception of the Core 2 Extreme X6800 version have a TDP of 65W- HALF that of the Pentium D series. Even the X6800 only has an 80W TDP.
To give you an idea of pricing, the *retail* version of the Core 2 Duo 1.86GHz chip at Newegg is listed at $193.
The retail version of the Pentium Extreme Edition dual core 3.73GHz chip at Newegg is listed at $1,015.
The rest of the Pentium D line has been dropped in price significantly since Core 2 Duo came out, its almost a fire sale. then again, they are much hotter, less efficient processors by far.
But, I guess they COULD have put a pentium d in them...didnt they have dual cores?
yes, but they were significantly hotter, consumed much more power, and worst of all were incredibly inefficient per clock versus C2D. If memory serves, when the Conroe/Allendale (the codename for C2D desktop chips under 2.4GHz with 2MB L2) benchmarks first came out after the NDA lifted, the best Pentium Extreme Edition (3.73GHz Pentium D Presler core, dual core, 2x2MB L2, 1066 FSB, 130W TDP) was in many of the tests at least equaled by the Core 2 Duo E6300, a chip with the following specs:
Speed: 1.86 GHz Dual core
2MB L2 Cache
1066 MT/S FSB
TDP 65W
So a much slower, far cheaper C2D chip matches the best Pentium D Extreme Edition, though both are dual-core, have the same FSB speed, the Pentium D has a bigger L2 Cache, and each core is clocking at twice the speed of the Core 2 chip.
The C2D chips with the sole exception of the Core 2 Extreme X6800 version have a TDP of 65W- HALF that of the Pentium D series. Even the X6800 only has an 80W TDP.
To give you an idea of pricing, the *retail* version of the Core 2 Duo 1.86GHz chip at Newegg is listed at $193.
The retail version of the Pentium Extreme Edition dual core 3.73GHz chip at Newegg is listed at $1,015.
The rest of the Pentium D line has been dropped in price significantly since Core 2 Duo came out, its almost a fire sale. then again, they are much hotter, less efficient processors by far.
twoodcc
Aug 12, 09:04 PM
I don't really care if you count the Prologues as full releases or not. The fact remains...
GT1 + GT2 + GT3 + GT4 = 46M
...not 57M like you originally, and incorrectly, said.
but you do care. you are pointing out that you care by what you just typed. if you count the prologues, you get over 57M sold.
You brought up sales, not me. And last I checked, objectively, 100 is more than 57, regardless of how you subjectively look at it.
i disagree. let's bring math into the equation, since you seem to have missed it.
100,000,000/15 = 6,666,667.
57,000,000/8 = 7,125,000.
so GT has sold more copies per game.
No, the only thing that adds to is a stat point on the back of the box. I mean, hooray, someone's 87 CRX is in a racing game. YAY!! :rolleyes:
That is the problem with GT these days. Too much fluff, and lacking in the racing. I mean, whatever, they can make whatever kind of game they want. If they want to fill the game with 1000 cars, 800 of which most people never touch, they can do that. To me, though, they are losing what made the series great years ago.
well again this is your opinion. we all have one. i personally think that if someone is into cars, they will care about their car. not everyone can afford the cars in the game, but it might be nice to see that car that you can afford and have in real life in the game. i mean, the game is meant for people into cars.
NO WAY!!! I never knew that. :rolleyes:
just pointing out the facts. are you doing any different?
Sure, but a "Guinness Record" for it? Again, to much fluff.
they have records for everything. like how much cheese you can eat, or whatever. that's what Guinness Records are
No, it is a concept car that Citro�n paraded around at car shows. Lots of concept cars get built with the fake intention of going into production. But you know what? Almost none of them do. This Citro�n is no different.
but the intention of the car was for the game. how do you not see that? specifically for the game. in fact, it's named GT after the game
My point is, he was trying to use GT's high sales as a quantifier of the series greatness. Then, when I showed 2 examples of other racing game series with higher sales, he said they were different types of racing games, and that they don't count. Which is understandable, because they are not the same type of game. But then, ultimately, as I said before, if you don't count those other types of racing games, you're really only comparing GT to Forza, since that is the only other similar game.
But what does that prove? A game series that has been out for almost 13 years has sold more than a similar type of game series that has only been out for a little over 5 years. Big shock there. I'll be the first to admit that Forza isn't even remotely close to as big of a sales hit as the GT series. But, like I've said before, liking a game is a subjective thing, and everyone is entitled to their own choices. But sales are an objective thing, that has no relevance to somethings greatness.
how does sales have no relevance if something is great? so iPhone sales show nothing to how good it is? or iPod sales mean nothing to how well it is? of course it does. you make games to sell. if they don't sell, you stop making games. and then there wouldn't be this thread, b/c there would be no GT5.
GT1 + GT2 + GT3 + GT4 = 46M
...not 57M like you originally, and incorrectly, said.
but you do care. you are pointing out that you care by what you just typed. if you count the prologues, you get over 57M sold.
You brought up sales, not me. And last I checked, objectively, 100 is more than 57, regardless of how you subjectively look at it.
i disagree. let's bring math into the equation, since you seem to have missed it.
100,000,000/15 = 6,666,667.
57,000,000/8 = 7,125,000.
so GT has sold more copies per game.
No, the only thing that adds to is a stat point on the back of the box. I mean, hooray, someone's 87 CRX is in a racing game. YAY!! :rolleyes:
That is the problem with GT these days. Too much fluff, and lacking in the racing. I mean, whatever, they can make whatever kind of game they want. If they want to fill the game with 1000 cars, 800 of which most people never touch, they can do that. To me, though, they are losing what made the series great years ago.
well again this is your opinion. we all have one. i personally think that if someone is into cars, they will care about their car. not everyone can afford the cars in the game, but it might be nice to see that car that you can afford and have in real life in the game. i mean, the game is meant for people into cars.
NO WAY!!! I never knew that. :rolleyes:
just pointing out the facts. are you doing any different?
Sure, but a "Guinness Record" for it? Again, to much fluff.
they have records for everything. like how much cheese you can eat, or whatever. that's what Guinness Records are
No, it is a concept car that Citro�n paraded around at car shows. Lots of concept cars get built with the fake intention of going into production. But you know what? Almost none of them do. This Citro�n is no different.
but the intention of the car was for the game. how do you not see that? specifically for the game. in fact, it's named GT after the game
My point is, he was trying to use GT's high sales as a quantifier of the series greatness. Then, when I showed 2 examples of other racing game series with higher sales, he said they were different types of racing games, and that they don't count. Which is understandable, because they are not the same type of game. But then, ultimately, as I said before, if you don't count those other types of racing games, you're really only comparing GT to Forza, since that is the only other similar game.
But what does that prove? A game series that has been out for almost 13 years has sold more than a similar type of game series that has only been out for a little over 5 years. Big shock there. I'll be the first to admit that Forza isn't even remotely close to as big of a sales hit as the GT series. But, like I've said before, liking a game is a subjective thing, and everyone is entitled to their own choices. But sales are an objective thing, that has no relevance to somethings greatness.
how does sales have no relevance if something is great? so iPhone sales show nothing to how good it is? or iPod sales mean nothing to how well it is? of course it does. you make games to sell. if they don't sell, you stop making games. and then there wouldn't be this thread, b/c there would be no GT5.
SevenInchScrew
Aug 11, 07:33 PM
i know there have been more 'titles'. but they are not full releases, but i did leave out Gran Turismo for PSP, so they are up to 5 full releases now.
My point is, earlier you were saying that they only have 4 games and they sold 57M copies. If you look at that link, which is right from Polyphony themselves, you will see that if you only count the 4 main games, as you were eluding to, that only totals 46M.
yes i know, but there are more games in that series, and again, it's a different type of racing game.
So, you don't count NFS? Ok then. If I'm understanding you correctly, you are really only comparing GT to 1 other console game; Forza. It is the only other console game of any similar type. But, using your own logic, is it fair to compare GT to Forza, since GT has been out much longer and has many more games in the series? I mean, if we don't get to compare GT to NFS because of that, then surely you shouldn't compare GT to Forza for the same reason.
take a look here: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gran_Turismo_(series)) -{Wikipedia Quote}-
I really like you're choice of quoting.
Largest Number of cars in a Racing game
...of which about 1/3 of them are various Civics, Skylines and Imprezas.
Highest Selling PlayStation Game
...ok, that one is good. That says something.
Oldest Car in a Racing Game
...that no one ever drove, because it couldn't even get up the hilly parts of some tracks. Total waste.
Largest Instruction Guide for a Racing Game
...really? Oldest car and Largest guide?? REALLY?? Yikes.
GT by Citro�n (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GT_by_Citro�n).
granted, only 6 were made, but still, it's a real car. its not a fake one
Um, according to your OWN link, the car was cancelled. And really, that isn't surprising. It is a concept car, plain and simple. So again I ask, what REAL cars have ever ACTUALLY been made just to be in this game??
My point is, earlier you were saying that they only have 4 games and they sold 57M copies. If you look at that link, which is right from Polyphony themselves, you will see that if you only count the 4 main games, as you were eluding to, that only totals 46M.
yes i know, but there are more games in that series, and again, it's a different type of racing game.
So, you don't count NFS? Ok then. If I'm understanding you correctly, you are really only comparing GT to 1 other console game; Forza. It is the only other console game of any similar type. But, using your own logic, is it fair to compare GT to Forza, since GT has been out much longer and has many more games in the series? I mean, if we don't get to compare GT to NFS because of that, then surely you shouldn't compare GT to Forza for the same reason.
take a look here: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gran_Turismo_(series)) -{Wikipedia Quote}-
I really like you're choice of quoting.
Largest Number of cars in a Racing game
...of which about 1/3 of them are various Civics, Skylines and Imprezas.
Highest Selling PlayStation Game
...ok, that one is good. That says something.
Oldest Car in a Racing Game
...that no one ever drove, because it couldn't even get up the hilly parts of some tracks. Total waste.
Largest Instruction Guide for a Racing Game
...really? Oldest car and Largest guide?? REALLY?? Yikes.
GT by Citro�n (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GT_by_Citro�n).
granted, only 6 were made, but still, it's a real car. its not a fake one
Um, according to your OWN link, the car was cancelled. And really, that isn't surprising. It is a concept car, plain and simple. So again I ask, what REAL cars have ever ACTUALLY been made just to be in this game??
hulugu
Mar 23, 12:19 AM
Although I backed the implementation of a no-fly zone a few weeks ago, I wouldn't describe my position as one of wholehearted support. More a queasy half-hearted recognition that something had to be done and that all alternatives lead to rabbit holes of some degree or another. When all is said and done, my usual fallback position is an intense weariness at the evil that men do.
For the record, I actually supported (if silence is considered consent) both Gulf wars at the start; I believed in the fictional WMD, I believed it when Colin Powell held his little vial up at the UN... but I, like many was tied down with work and other concerns and was only paying cursory attention to the news at the time. Like Obama, I also initially supported the war in Afghanistan, or at least the idea of it, initiated by a Republican president, but since then it seems to have become a fiasco of Catch-22 proportions.
Slowly discovering the real agenda and true ineptness of the Bush administration was a pivotal point in my reawakening political understanding of US current affairs after reading Hunter Thompson for so many years. Disgusted and appalled at the casual way in which we all were lied to, I'm quite happy to hold my hands up and say 'I was wrong'.
Thing is about Obama, I never had any starry-eyed notion about him being a peace-maker. He's an American president, the incentives are cemented into the role as one of using power and protecting wealth. Not that many conservatives were paying attention at the time, but he stood up in front of the Nobel academy when accepting his Nobel Peace Prize and laid out a justification for war.
Since the second Gulf War, the entire circus has been one of my occasional interests, because I've never seen a political process elsewhere riddled with so many bald-faced liars, grotesque characters and half-baked casual hate speech. What power or the sniff of it does to people, twisting them out of shape, is infinitely more interesting and has more impact on us than any other endeavour, except for possibly the parallel development of technology.
I used you as an example more out of rhetoric than anything else. However, I think your essay is spot on.
I didn't believe the Bush administration's call for war in Iraq because I was reading Hans Blix's reports and I was suspicious of the whole endeavor: the Bushies struck me as a group wholly unprepared for the difficulty of governing a foreign country after a military invasion. I did hope, like Tom Friedman, that an Iraq without Saddam might be a powerful symbol in the Middle East, but I was deeply concerned about the war.
Reading Anthony Shadid's reporting on Iraq told me that the situation was, days in, already spinning out of control. Once it became apparent that looters were able to steal artifacts from the museums, office chairs pilled with computers from the bureaus and weapons from Iraq's hundreds of ammunition dumps I knew we were in trouble.
Libya is more like Bosnia than Iraq. A moment of force has the potential to change the scope of the conflict, hopefully for the positive, in a way that a full-blown invasion would merely complicate. That's the central part that fivepoint, who is merely interested in making another partisan screed, is ignoring.
We have complicated thoughts about the use of force in the world, which leads us to appear hypocritical when all things are made to appear equal to make straw.
George W. Bush is responsible for another calamity: me posting in PRSI, one of my many occasional weaknesses.
Me too. I wandered in here by accident as a new member and haven't left.
For the record, I actually supported (if silence is considered consent) both Gulf wars at the start; I believed in the fictional WMD, I believed it when Colin Powell held his little vial up at the UN... but I, like many was tied down with work and other concerns and was only paying cursory attention to the news at the time. Like Obama, I also initially supported the war in Afghanistan, or at least the idea of it, initiated by a Republican president, but since then it seems to have become a fiasco of Catch-22 proportions.
Slowly discovering the real agenda and true ineptness of the Bush administration was a pivotal point in my reawakening political understanding of US current affairs after reading Hunter Thompson for so many years. Disgusted and appalled at the casual way in which we all were lied to, I'm quite happy to hold my hands up and say 'I was wrong'.
Thing is about Obama, I never had any starry-eyed notion about him being a peace-maker. He's an American president, the incentives are cemented into the role as one of using power and protecting wealth. Not that many conservatives were paying attention at the time, but he stood up in front of the Nobel academy when accepting his Nobel Peace Prize and laid out a justification for war.
Since the second Gulf War, the entire circus has been one of my occasional interests, because I've never seen a political process elsewhere riddled with so many bald-faced liars, grotesque characters and half-baked casual hate speech. What power or the sniff of it does to people, twisting them out of shape, is infinitely more interesting and has more impact on us than any other endeavour, except for possibly the parallel development of technology.
I used you as an example more out of rhetoric than anything else. However, I think your essay is spot on.
I didn't believe the Bush administration's call for war in Iraq because I was reading Hans Blix's reports and I was suspicious of the whole endeavor: the Bushies struck me as a group wholly unprepared for the difficulty of governing a foreign country after a military invasion. I did hope, like Tom Friedman, that an Iraq without Saddam might be a powerful symbol in the Middle East, but I was deeply concerned about the war.
Reading Anthony Shadid's reporting on Iraq told me that the situation was, days in, already spinning out of control. Once it became apparent that looters were able to steal artifacts from the museums, office chairs pilled with computers from the bureaus and weapons from Iraq's hundreds of ammunition dumps I knew we were in trouble.
Libya is more like Bosnia than Iraq. A moment of force has the potential to change the scope of the conflict, hopefully for the positive, in a way that a full-blown invasion would merely complicate. That's the central part that fivepoint, who is merely interested in making another partisan screed, is ignoring.
We have complicated thoughts about the use of force in the world, which leads us to appear hypocritical when all things are made to appear equal to make straw.
George W. Bush is responsible for another calamity: me posting in PRSI, one of my many occasional weaknesses.
Me too. I wandered in here by accident as a new member and haven't left.
tartufo
Apr 12, 08:28 AM
I hope not. I want the 5 now :)
http://www.truffles.bg
http://www.truffles-bg.com
http://www.truffles.bg
http://www.truffles-bg.com
Glassman
Sep 19, 02:03 AM
there's no reason not to switch to Core 2 Duo as they sell for the same price as Core Duo and are drop in replacement.. the only possible reason for the delay is supply shortage.. it's not unusual to see PC vendors announce new processors even though they are unable to ship them at that time, but at the same time they keep options for the older model, which ships instantly.. Apple thinks differently, they will announce the update when they're ready to ship and starting that day they cease selling the older models.. I think thats fair.. the only difference is that they don't make announcements several weeks in advance..
Apple has no reason not to follow Intel's speed bumps, because on each speed bump the prices shifts towards the lower models, in other words Intel keeps the prices the same but speed bumps at every level.. if Apple does not update, they're keeping extra money in their pockets..
as for the updates, I'm curious wheter it's gonna be just a processor switch or wheter they will also move from ATi to nVidia as they did in iMacs.. ATi is now owned by AMD and maybe somehow Apple bets more on nVidia because of using Intel processors only.. also I don't expect MXM slots for video cards for the same reason there's no processor socket in MBP, they ough to keep this as tight as possible..
I personally don't care about DL SuperDrive, but as they managed to fit it into same 1" thick 17" model, they should do it with 15.4" models too..
what I miss absolutely the most is WSXGA+ resolution in 15.4" and WUXGA in 17" - make that an option, it's so easy to do so - the displays are bog standard and can be exchanged w/o any redesign..
I'd be in for a model with lesser GPU like X1400 or Go 7400 because it would save battery life and run cooler.. and for those who don't play - just perfect..
otherwise I'm pretty much content with MBP..
let's see..
Apple has no reason not to follow Intel's speed bumps, because on each speed bump the prices shifts towards the lower models, in other words Intel keeps the prices the same but speed bumps at every level.. if Apple does not update, they're keeping extra money in their pockets..
as for the updates, I'm curious wheter it's gonna be just a processor switch or wheter they will also move from ATi to nVidia as they did in iMacs.. ATi is now owned by AMD and maybe somehow Apple bets more on nVidia because of using Intel processors only.. also I don't expect MXM slots for video cards for the same reason there's no processor socket in MBP, they ough to keep this as tight as possible..
I personally don't care about DL SuperDrive, but as they managed to fit it into same 1" thick 17" model, they should do it with 15.4" models too..
what I miss absolutely the most is WSXGA+ resolution in 15.4" and WUXGA in 17" - make that an option, it's so easy to do so - the displays are bog standard and can be exchanged w/o any redesign..
I'd be in for a model with lesser GPU like X1400 or Go 7400 because it would save battery life and run cooler.. and for those who don't play - just perfect..
otherwise I'm pretty much content with MBP..
let's see..
dongmin
Jul 14, 04:07 PM
A 2.66 Ghz Woodcrest will probably be faster than a 2.93Ghz Conroe. A 1.83Ghz Yonah is faster than a 3.2Ghz Pentium, right?;)I thought the two processors were identical (in a single processor config) except that the Woodcrests have a higher FSB (1066mhz vs. 1333mhz). According to the Anandtech review, the 1333mhz FSB gives you only about 3% boost in speed.
Core 2 Duo
2.13 ghz - $224 (2MB L2 cache)
2.40 ghz - $316
2.67 ghz - $530
Xeon 5100 series
2.00 ghz - $316
2.33 ghz - $455
2.66 ghz - $690
It makes more sense to go with a 2.4 ghz Conroe for a single-processor config, since it's cheaper than the 2.33 ghz Woodcrest. What I'd like to see:
GOOD
2.40 ghz Core 2 Duo - $1499
BETTER
2 x 2.00 ghz Xeon - $1999
BEST
2 x 2.67 ghz Xeon - $2799
Of course, if Apple were REALLY ambitious, they should release a mini tower using Conroes and release the Mac Pros in quad-only configs.
Core 2 Duo
2.13 ghz - $224 (2MB L2 cache)
2.40 ghz - $316
2.67 ghz - $530
Xeon 5100 series
2.00 ghz - $316
2.33 ghz - $455
2.66 ghz - $690
It makes more sense to go with a 2.4 ghz Conroe for a single-processor config, since it's cheaper than the 2.33 ghz Woodcrest. What I'd like to see:
GOOD
2.40 ghz Core 2 Duo - $1499
BETTER
2 x 2.00 ghz Xeon - $1999
BEST
2 x 2.67 ghz Xeon - $2799
Of course, if Apple were REALLY ambitious, they should release a mini tower using Conroes and release the Mac Pros in quad-only configs.
JFreak
Aug 8, 04:05 AM
Looks like this will be a significant upgrade. Tiger was not what it was promised to be, in my eyes at least, so now I'm thinking they have finally made it better than Panther.
Let's see...
Let's see...
SuperCachetes
Mar 1, 10:48 AM
I refuse to protect others from negative consequences when they need to learn from them.
Negative consequences? :rolleyes:
I believe that people with same-sex attractions are endangering themselves at least physically when they have sex with each other. So I'll post a link to some evidence for my opinion (http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/homosexuality/ho0075.html). Notice, the document's author is a medical doctor.
Endangering themselves? And a Catholic website as backup? :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
Wow. Just wow.
At least we're back to the childhood anecdotes again - so in between reading all the ignorant, antiquated, religion-clouded bollocks you are spewing, we can find a little entertainment value.
Negative consequences? :rolleyes:
I believe that people with same-sex attractions are endangering themselves at least physically when they have sex with each other. So I'll post a link to some evidence for my opinion (http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/homosexuality/ho0075.html). Notice, the document's author is a medical doctor.
Endangering themselves? And a Catholic website as backup? :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
Wow. Just wow.
At least we're back to the childhood anecdotes again - so in between reading all the ignorant, antiquated, religion-clouded bollocks you are spewing, we can find a little entertainment value.
Anonymous Freak
Jul 15, 02:16 PM
Can anyone tell me the purpose of dual drive slots nowadays? I can see the use for them (and had computers with) when they were limited to one function, i.e. DVD-ROM for one and a CD-RW for the other but now that everything can happen in one drive with speed not being an issue, is it really nececcary to have two?
Early Blu-Ray burners can't read or write CDs, and are slow at DVDs. Maybe we'll see a Blu-Ray burner and a high-speed DVD�R(W)/CD-R(W).
Early Blu-Ray burners can't read or write CDs, and are slow at DVDs. Maybe we'll see a Blu-Ray burner and a high-speed DVD�R(W)/CD-R(W).
