iJohnHenry
Mar 20, 10:21 AM
This should all go public.
But they have worked so hard, all these decades, to diminish the "one man, one vote" to something much less than that.
Won't you think of their children, and reconsider?
:rolleyes:
But they have worked so hard, all these decades, to diminish the "one man, one vote" to something much less than that.
Won't you think of their children, and reconsider?
:rolleyes:
DeathChill
Aug 5, 05:41 PM
Kevin Rose (?) usually reveals all the proper stuff a day or so before, no? Wonder if he'll have it this time~
DeathChill
Mar 31, 09:52 PM
No, it's "make up a fake day" day.
Good. I declare it dog moustache day.
Good. I declare it dog moustache day.
rdowns
Apr 27, 09:22 AM
Before yesterday?
Are you serious?
Are you serious?
Mike84
Apr 25, 03:47 PM
Being sued and breaking the law are two different things. I can sue you for killing the tree between our yards. You didnt break any law, but I can still sue.
I kinda see where he is a bit right. If I turn off or say no to allowing the apps to use my location this might suggest to the user that it is not tracking and storing this data. I do not think that it is a stretch to make that connection.
I do agree this is way out of hand though.
Then it would be a frivolous lawsuit and it would be dismissed.
So, there really isn't a point buddy. :D
I kinda see where he is a bit right. If I turn off or say no to allowing the apps to use my location this might suggest to the user that it is not tracking and storing this data. I do not think that it is a stretch to make that connection.
I do agree this is way out of hand though.
Then it would be a frivolous lawsuit and it would be dismissed.
So, there really isn't a point buddy. :D
Lord Blackadder
Mar 22, 10:19 PM
The U.N. Security Council perhaps, but not the entire assembly. It would have been interesting to open that issue up to debate and seen how all the members would have voted.
The security council, not the general assembly, is the organ tasked with authorizing UN military action. The point of the security council is to enable the UN to make rapid strategic decisions without a general debate. It's an imperfect system to be sure, but I don't think requiring a full debate in the general assembly would be an efficient way to respond to this sort of situation.
What I always wonder is what diplomatic efforts were used to pressure Qaddafi? There were no (as far as I know) threats of economic embargoes, freezing of assets, or other less violent methods to coerce Qaddafi. We didn't need to convince him to step dow. We simply needed to convince him that he needed to tone down, defend himself against the armed insurrection, but not cast a wider and violent campaign against innocent civilians.
We could have responded simply with economic sanctions.
Based on Gaddafi's treatment of the initial protests (not to mention his tendencies over 40 years of autocratic rule), I strongly question whether economic sanctions are going to apply sufficient pressure to Gaddafi to relinquish power. Like Mubarak, he is a political strongman who is not easily cowed by threats.
I need a clearer demonstration that serious steps were taken before resorting to war. War should be used as the last resort and only when it's clear that all other options have failed.
I agree that war should be considered a last resort. I also think that the US government is generally too quick to undertake armed intervention. But in this case we took sides in a war that was already in progress. The UN's choices were either non-intervention, non-military intervention, or direct military intervention in some form.
I suppose the point at which "all other options have failed" is a debatable one, since everyone has different opinions on what constitutes a valid option. There are many questions without simple answers. How do we judge failure? Is the purpose of the intervention (military or otherwise) to aid the rebels? Or is it merely to prevent Gaddafi killing civilians? If the latter is the case, does allowing him to remain in power serve that cause? If not, what should we do about it?
At the bottom of all this though, the goal of current foreign intervention (military or otherwise) is clear to me - to remove Gaddafi from power and recognize the rebel transitional government as the legitimate government of Libya.
The security council, not the general assembly, is the organ tasked with authorizing UN military action. The point of the security council is to enable the UN to make rapid strategic decisions without a general debate. It's an imperfect system to be sure, but I don't think requiring a full debate in the general assembly would be an efficient way to respond to this sort of situation.
What I always wonder is what diplomatic efforts were used to pressure Qaddafi? There were no (as far as I know) threats of economic embargoes, freezing of assets, or other less violent methods to coerce Qaddafi. We didn't need to convince him to step dow. We simply needed to convince him that he needed to tone down, defend himself against the armed insurrection, but not cast a wider and violent campaign against innocent civilians.
We could have responded simply with economic sanctions.
Based on Gaddafi's treatment of the initial protests (not to mention his tendencies over 40 years of autocratic rule), I strongly question whether economic sanctions are going to apply sufficient pressure to Gaddafi to relinquish power. Like Mubarak, he is a political strongman who is not easily cowed by threats.
I need a clearer demonstration that serious steps were taken before resorting to war. War should be used as the last resort and only when it's clear that all other options have failed.
I agree that war should be considered a last resort. I also think that the US government is generally too quick to undertake armed intervention. But in this case we took sides in a war that was already in progress. The UN's choices were either non-intervention, non-military intervention, or direct military intervention in some form.
I suppose the point at which "all other options have failed" is a debatable one, since everyone has different opinions on what constitutes a valid option. There are many questions without simple answers. How do we judge failure? Is the purpose of the intervention (military or otherwise) to aid the rebels? Or is it merely to prevent Gaddafi killing civilians? If the latter is the case, does allowing him to remain in power serve that cause? If not, what should we do about it?
At the bottom of all this though, the goal of current foreign intervention (military or otherwise) is clear to me - to remove Gaddafi from power and recognize the rebel transitional government as the legitimate government of Libya.
shamino
Jul 24, 05:40 PM
Next Spring??? Can you please point me to the source of that information.
I don't know. Almost-two-years seems like enough time :p
("coming in the spring" would mean spring-2007, since we're in summer 2006 right now. "next spring" means the one after that - spring-2008.)
I don't know. Almost-two-years seems like enough time :p
("coming in the spring" would mean spring-2007, since we're in summer 2006 right now. "next spring" means the one after that - spring-2008.)
toddybody
Apr 6, 02:59 PM
Funny, and true.
By the same token, if I explicitly told my wife I wanted a Xoom, Playbook, Tab 10.1 and she came home with an iPad, I wouldn't be the saddest kid on earth, but I do know that I'd be returning it for something I want.
Of course, I also hate it when she brings me home a cheeseburger when I wanted a hamburger.
Yeesh dude, at least your wife cares enough to do nice things for you. :(
By the same token, if I explicitly told my wife I wanted a Xoom, Playbook, Tab 10.1 and she came home with an iPad, I wouldn't be the saddest kid on earth, but I do know that I'd be returning it for something I want.
Of course, I also hate it when she brings me home a cheeseburger when I wanted a hamburger.
Yeesh dude, at least your wife cares enough to do nice things for you. :(
shawnce
Aug 6, 02:28 PM
So, you're comparing a mature product (Tiger) to one that's still in beta and which by all accounts has plenty of outstanding issues before it's ever released (Vista)? Ok soon lets compare Leopard and Vista.
The fact of the matter is that Vista has to be functionally complete now (or else they are going to miss shipping dates by a large margin)... so the functionality you see is basically what you are going to get. Put aside the crashes, performance issues, bugs and you can get a good sense for how it will operate when it is released.
Really MS has taken the transparency and visual effect so far that they are distracting and degrade usability (thank fully you can adjust them to some extent)... they are doing just like Apple did in Mac OS X 10.0 (transparent window title bars when in background, overly transparent menus, etc.) but thankfully Apple has been refining it for the last few years for looks and usability.
Also the new user security mode is going to be a big nightmare for folks until 3rd party software catches up with it... currently in my average usage it is always bouncing to out the full screen overlay with security confirmation dialog... I am at the point I don't read them any more since the disrupt what I am trying to do. (We have several developers in house struggling to keep up with changes and bugs in the beta, making it hard to get ready for Vista).
In the end Vista will be a good OS but it is going to be a little painful for the Windows world for the next year or so (into 2008).
The fact of the matter is that Vista has to be functionally complete now (or else they are going to miss shipping dates by a large margin)... so the functionality you see is basically what you are going to get. Put aside the crashes, performance issues, bugs and you can get a good sense for how it will operate when it is released.
Really MS has taken the transparency and visual effect so far that they are distracting and degrade usability (thank fully you can adjust them to some extent)... they are doing just like Apple did in Mac OS X 10.0 (transparent window title bars when in background, overly transparent menus, etc.) but thankfully Apple has been refining it for the last few years for looks and usability.
Also the new user security mode is going to be a big nightmare for folks until 3rd party software catches up with it... currently in my average usage it is always bouncing to out the full screen overlay with security confirmation dialog... I am at the point I don't read them any more since the disrupt what I am trying to do. (We have several developers in house struggling to keep up with changes and bugs in the beta, making it hard to get ready for Vista).
In the end Vista will be a good OS but it is going to be a little painful for the Windows world for the next year or so (into 2008).
gnasher729
Jul 31, 05:39 AM
I've built a gaming PC around the Core 2 Duo E6700. I'd like to be able to install OS X on it, because the only reason why I'd ever use Windows is for the latest games. Here are the spec's, think this would run OS X nicely? ;-)
For $599 you can buy a MacMini with a Core Solo processor. That is currently the cheapest way to get a legal copy of MacOS X for Intel. It is clearly illegal to install that copy of MacOS X on your home-built computer while it is still on the Macintosh, it is unclear whether it is legal or illegal to install it if you removed it from the Macintosh (seems legal in many european countries). If it is legal, then obviously you can also salvage parts for the MacMini, like DVD drive, harddisk, a bit of memory and save a bit of money that way. Unfortunately an unmodified MacOS X will refuse to run on anything that is not a Macintosh.
You may be able to get MacOS X slightly cheaper by buying a refurbished MacMini, or by buying one on eBay. And sometimes people sell broken computers on eBay.
For $599 you can buy a MacMini with a Core Solo processor. That is currently the cheapest way to get a legal copy of MacOS X for Intel. It is clearly illegal to install that copy of MacOS X on your home-built computer while it is still on the Macintosh, it is unclear whether it is legal or illegal to install it if you removed it from the Macintosh (seems legal in many european countries). If it is legal, then obviously you can also salvage parts for the MacMini, like DVD drive, harddisk, a bit of memory and save a bit of money that way. Unfortunately an unmodified MacOS X will refuse to run on anything that is not a Macintosh.
You may be able to get MacOS X slightly cheaper by buying a refurbished MacMini, or by buying one on eBay. And sometimes people sell broken computers on eBay.
peterdevries
Apr 20, 12:24 AM
Alright, I was originally going to take Apple's side on this, since I could clearly see it looks a lot like iOS, but having looked at Samsung's F700, I don' think Apple has any right to sue..
Although the Samsung F700 has very simple icons, Apple clearly has the same placement of icons, even looking at the bottom you find the four dock like icons..
http://img263.imageshack.us/img263/9559/samsungf700cellular.jpg
I'd say that Apple copied Samsung :P.. Honestly I'm not one to take sides just because I like Apple Products, I just think its wrong to sue since Samsung clearly had this type of UI first.. Apple has no right to sue..
Sure, but did Samsung patent it?
It's not about 'who copied who?', but 'who copied after who patented?'
All the corporations mentioned in this thread are dinosaurs and know what type of business they are in. If they fail to patent their (good) ideas than it's a given that someone else eventually will. Doesn't matter whether we or anyone thinks that's right or wrong. It's normal business practice. Any corporation thet develops products in a hot contested market like this and doesn't play this game will lose business or cash.
Although the Samsung F700 has very simple icons, Apple clearly has the same placement of icons, even looking at the bottom you find the four dock like icons..
http://img263.imageshack.us/img263/9559/samsungf700cellular.jpg
I'd say that Apple copied Samsung :P.. Honestly I'm not one to take sides just because I like Apple Products, I just think its wrong to sue since Samsung clearly had this type of UI first.. Apple has no right to sue..
Sure, but did Samsung patent it?
It's not about 'who copied who?', but 'who copied after who patented?'
All the corporations mentioned in this thread are dinosaurs and know what type of business they are in. If they fail to patent their (good) ideas than it's a given that someone else eventually will. Doesn't matter whether we or anyone thinks that's right or wrong. It's normal business practice. Any corporation thet develops products in a hot contested market like this and doesn't play this game will lose business or cash.
obeygiant
Apr 27, 01:43 PM
Hey! The birth issue is closed! End of story! I am yelling this!
boo-hoo my all-caps was undid. :(
boo-hoo my all-caps was undid. :(
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.
centauratlas
Apr 6, 04:39 PM
You both ignored HOT DOGS! Sheesh, hot dogs rule. The only problem is kids under 6 choking on them unless you cut them right. But that will be fixed in the v3.0 hot dog, they will come pre-sliced.
You busted me.
I am a hamburger fanboi, and will turn into a raving lunatic, foam at the mouth and make up opinions based on nothing all to defend my beloved hamburgers. After all they're lighter, slimmer and tastier than cheesburgers!!!
Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk
You busted me.
I am a hamburger fanboi, and will turn into a raving lunatic, foam at the mouth and make up opinions based on nothing all to defend my beloved hamburgers. After all they're lighter, slimmer and tastier than cheesburgers!!!
Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk
DiamondGCoupe
Apr 11, 11:58 AM
Where are all these bs claims coming from? Why wouldn't Apple release it in June as always?
VanNess
Aug 5, 05:59 PM
Im glad we will be getting a bit of closure on monday, while I love the rumors its been getting a bit to much, im actively avoiding all mac related sites... I dont want to be the boy that spoilt his own Xmas! :D
Here, let me show you the art and science of rumoring (http://www.misterbg.org/AppleProductCycle/), Apple-style.
Here, let me show you the art and science of rumoring (http://www.misterbg.org/AppleProductCycle/), Apple-style.
NoSmokingBandit
Aug 22, 08:57 AM
The psp doesnt have good enough controls to play a game that requires tons of precision. Making it portable just wasnt a good choice, leave that for NFS and Burnout.
whatever
Sep 13, 12:41 PM
All the people that just coughed up $3k for a quad core MacPro.
I'm one of those people who dropped $4K for a quad core MacPro and basically I'm happy that I did. It blows away everything else that is out there today and will be the top performing Mac until 2007. Apple will not be releasing an upgrade to the Mac Pro this year. No matter what anyone says.
Why you might ask, well they don't need to!
But what if the competition releases these super fast machines, won't Apple be left behind. No! What OS will these machines be running, Windows XP. One of the things that seperates Apple from everyone else is their OS. They have an OS which takes full advantage (important word is full) of the hardware. It's the big advantage that they have over Dell and HP, they create the software that runs on the computer.
So if I want to run Final Cut Pro as fast as possible on an optiomized machine, then I'll have to run it on a Mac. Alright, that's a bad example, but in a way it's not, because a lot of the people buying Mac Pros also live in Apple's Pro apps.
The next new computer we'll see from Apple anytime soon will be the MacBook Pro which will be redesigned (featuring the MacBook's keyboard), upgrades to the MacBook won't happen until January (however Apple may try to get them out in December).
Apple's goal is to have everything 64-Bit before Leopard is uncaged.
I'm one of those people who dropped $4K for a quad core MacPro and basically I'm happy that I did. It blows away everything else that is out there today and will be the top performing Mac until 2007. Apple will not be releasing an upgrade to the Mac Pro this year. No matter what anyone says.
Why you might ask, well they don't need to!
But what if the competition releases these super fast machines, won't Apple be left behind. No! What OS will these machines be running, Windows XP. One of the things that seperates Apple from everyone else is their OS. They have an OS which takes full advantage (important word is full) of the hardware. It's the big advantage that they have over Dell and HP, they create the software that runs on the computer.
So if I want to run Final Cut Pro as fast as possible on an optiomized machine, then I'll have to run it on a Mac. Alright, that's a bad example, but in a way it's not, because a lot of the people buying Mac Pros also live in Apple's Pro apps.
The next new computer we'll see from Apple anytime soon will be the MacBook Pro which will be redesigned (featuring the MacBook's keyboard), upgrades to the MacBook won't happen until January (however Apple may try to get them out in December).
Apple's goal is to have everything 64-Bit before Leopard is uncaged.
dernhelm
Aug 11, 11:07 AM
Doesn't that suggest Paris this year being a very likely time and place for the introduction of the iPhone? I doubt Apple will wait one more year considering the competition (see SE W810i (http://www.sonyericsson.com/spg.jsp?cc=us&lc=en&ver=4000&template=pp1_loader&php=PHP1_10376&zone=pp&lm=pp1&pid=10376) and others)
Agreed. I can't imagine anyone getting "all excited" about a product that's a year or more off.
Agreed. I can't imagine anyone getting "all excited" about a product that's a year or more off.
ryanw
Aug 26, 03:44 AM
I've owned 4 macs.
First a G3 iBook, then a G4 AluBook, then an eMac and now I'm on a G4 iBook.
NEVER had a problem with any of the machines. They have been great. Just to let you know it isn't all bad. I also pay for .mac and have done for 2 years now. I'm happy with it and yes I get spam but the filter is very good and its hardly an issue for me.
If you haven't been reading the comments, it would appear MOST people are complaining about the more recent models. I would agree with most that the Powermac G5's have had serious issues and now recent macbook's... Apple needs to do one of the following ... Higher Quality Assurance testing OR better support cause right now they're missing both.
First a G3 iBook, then a G4 AluBook, then an eMac and now I'm on a G4 iBook.
NEVER had a problem with any of the machines. They have been great. Just to let you know it isn't all bad. I also pay for .mac and have done for 2 years now. I'm happy with it and yes I get spam but the filter is very good and its hardly an issue for me.
If you haven't been reading the comments, it would appear MOST people are complaining about the more recent models. I would agree with most that the Powermac G5's have had serious issues and now recent macbook's... Apple needs to do one of the following ... Higher Quality Assurance testing OR better support cause right now they're missing both.
AppleFreak89
Jun 9, 08:58 AM
Everything BIBBZ is saying is correct and works the same at my store. we had a lot of people trade in their 3g for 3gs' and pay $5 out of pocket :). its a good deal.
ChrisA
Jul 27, 12:18 PM
With things like this, my rule is: If you have to ask, then you can't do it :-(
How true. The processor is soldered to the logic board on the notebooks It is in a socket in the iMac. So yes iMacs will be easy to upgrade but MB and MBP will require conciderable level of skill and some very specialized equipment. There may be 3rd parties offing the upgrade some day
Why would they solder the CPU? Saves the space of a socket. Heat transfer is better, very little chance of it comming loose. Those socets add not a small amount of height to the chip
How true. The processor is soldered to the logic board on the notebooks It is in a socket in the iMac. So yes iMacs will be easy to upgrade but MB and MBP will require conciderable level of skill and some very specialized equipment. There may be 3rd parties offing the upgrade some day
Why would they solder the CPU? Saves the space of a socket. Heat transfer is better, very little chance of it comming loose. Those socets add not a small amount of height to the chip
nefan65
Apr 25, 02:08 PM
They're suing...doesn't mean it'll go to court. They may find there's not enough grounds for suit, and deny...
4God
Jul 14, 11:07 PM
8 cores?! Wow, maybe one day!
8 cores, yeah you can get that in a jumbled amd setup today.
8 cores, yeah you can get that in a jumbled amd setup today.
Niciun comentariu:
Trimiteți un comentariu