redgaz26
Jul 7, 06:41 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU like Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/420.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.0 Mobile/4A102 Safari/419.3)
might join you there. I'm in Filey the now. What time does o2 open at????
might join you there. I'm in Filey the now. What time does o2 open at????
hampy
Nov 11, 09:28 AM
Wow, the Japanese Justin looks about a thousand years old. Would you wear that hoodie if you were past 30? I think the actor didn't show up and they had to get the director to be in it. I can't wait for the Gisele one.
elusion
May 4, 07:55 AM
I am a very new mac user, having just switched in February with the purchase of my iBook. I'm 17 and have been using computers since I was like 6. I remember DOS, Apple IIes, Windows 3.1/95/98/ME/NT, Mac 8. I also spent a year using linux (Mandrake, Redhat, Debian) before going to a mac. I hate PCs.
You ask about hardware. That's not why I switched, though it was a nice bonus. I switched because of OS X.
I always use to be a Windows guy, from a Windows family. My brother's a MCSE. The previous experience I had with Apple was horrible. We had Apple's in our school computer lab, and they were crap. Nothing worked. Now I know that they weren't multitasking. I hated them with a passion and said I'd never use one.
Oh how things have changed. PCs have become the pieces of crap. Windows may be getting better with XP, but it's a different experience. Everything is just better with a Mac. Things just work, right away. I haven't used XP much, but I can tell you it doesn't work like this does.
Windows' interface sucks. Really it does. I'm sure you think the interface in MacOS X is horrible. It's not, it's different. And, it's better. It's easier just use, just because of the interface.
Windows' filesystem sucks. Unix machines have a much better filesystem -- none of the drive crap.
Windows software sucks. There is much less software for OS X than there is for XP. No one can deny that. Fortunately, the software for OS X is usually of a very high quality. It's very well designed and stable.
Windows' interoperability sucks. Windows runs on a huge variety of hardware, but that's noticible from the software. OS X just detects and sets up -- no wizards.
Really I don't expect you to believe this or anything. Maybe you will if you try using one. Things are going to be different for you because you use computers primarily for gaming. Maybe someday you'll end up switching to Linux because you don't like Windows. If you do, I almost guarentee you'll switch to Mac, because Linux's a pain to set up.
Oh, and getting away from Microsoft was good too. They are evil. Apple has potential to start a monopoly and become evil, but that's besides the point. Microsoft is doing things that are bad for the consumer. Wait and see.
You ask about hardware. That's not why I switched, though it was a nice bonus. I switched because of OS X.
I always use to be a Windows guy, from a Windows family. My brother's a MCSE. The previous experience I had with Apple was horrible. We had Apple's in our school computer lab, and they were crap. Nothing worked. Now I know that they weren't multitasking. I hated them with a passion and said I'd never use one.
Oh how things have changed. PCs have become the pieces of crap. Windows may be getting better with XP, but it's a different experience. Everything is just better with a Mac. Things just work, right away. I haven't used XP much, but I can tell you it doesn't work like this does.
Windows' interface sucks. Really it does. I'm sure you think the interface in MacOS X is horrible. It's not, it's different. And, it's better. It's easier just use, just because of the interface.
Windows' filesystem sucks. Unix machines have a much better filesystem -- none of the drive crap.
Windows software sucks. There is much less software for OS X than there is for XP. No one can deny that. Fortunately, the software for OS X is usually of a very high quality. It's very well designed and stable.
Windows' interoperability sucks. Windows runs on a huge variety of hardware, but that's noticible from the software. OS X just detects and sets up -- no wizards.
Really I don't expect you to believe this or anything. Maybe you will if you try using one. Things are going to be different for you because you use computers primarily for gaming. Maybe someday you'll end up switching to Linux because you don't like Windows. If you do, I almost guarentee you'll switch to Mac, because Linux's a pain to set up.
Oh, and getting away from Microsoft was good too. They are evil. Apple has potential to start a monopoly and become evil, but that's besides the point. Microsoft is doing things that are bad for the consumer. Wait and see.
wpotere
Apr 1, 06:45 AM
I when to France once before. I remember the cheapest gas had an octane rating of 95 or so, the next level up was 98 octane. I'm assuming that regular in the UK is around 95 octane as well? That tops what get. Our gas starts at 87 octane and tops out at 93 octane for so called premium (about $0.40 per gallon more than regular where I'm at).
Anyhow, judging by how our gas is priced, it's about 2x what we pay here in the States. You win some (having better cars), you lose some (higher priced gas).
Octane ratings are calculated differently in Europe than they are here in the USA. MON versus RON and AKI....
In the USA the number we see is the AKI (Anti Knock Index) and our 93 - 94 is equivalent with Europe 98. Here is a good read on it...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octane_rating
That being said, I did live in Germany for 4 years and remember paying 9 to 10 dollars a gallon for gas. Most of that was tax, but I didn't mind paynig it because the roads are awesome.
Anyhow, judging by how our gas is priced, it's about 2x what we pay here in the States. You win some (having better cars), you lose some (higher priced gas).
Octane ratings are calculated differently in Europe than they are here in the USA. MON versus RON and AKI....
In the USA the number we see is the AKI (Anti Knock Index) and our 93 - 94 is equivalent with Europe 98. Here is a good read on it...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octane_rating
That being said, I did live in Germany for 4 years and remember paying 9 to 10 dollars a gallon for gas. Most of that was tax, but I didn't mind paynig it because the roads are awesome.
more...
Tommyg117
Sep 25, 10:36 PM
whenever i hear podcast i immediately think of apple, so why is apple shutting down free advertising?
Very good point, I associate it with Apple as well. I think it is a part of iTunes kind of like a cd in relation to a best buy.
Very good point, I associate it with Apple as well. I think it is a part of iTunes kind of like a cd in relation to a best buy.
toddybody
Apr 19, 09:51 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
Anything beats the embarrassment that Apple has in the current iOS.
? Is the weather nice where you live ?
Anything beats the embarrassment that Apple has in the current iOS.
? Is the weather nice where you live ?
more...
MacCoaster
Oct 2, 08:29 PM
Originally posted by ooartist
To squash some WinTel people in this forum/post trying to say Windows scales better than UNIX.
I never said it scaled better. In fact, I said the opposite.
However, the fact that Mac OS X's kernel is *NOT* BSD, but Mach remains. Mach is a microkernel and a freaking good one, but Mach microkernels that OS X uses has poor task switching; I'm not sure if the Mach microkernels in OS X is based on GNU/Mach (based off CMU's Mach) or the actual Mach microkernel from Carnegie-Mellon. So some of the scalability of UNIX is lost through this. But trust me, UNIX scales way beyond Windows. I've said Windows isn't for computers with more than 32 processors--that's what UNIX is for--pure science--no one needs the crap from Mac OS X and Windows to do science and mathematics research. Real men use UNIX on 8192-way systems. :) :D :)
To squash some WinTel people in this forum/post trying to say Windows scales better than UNIX.
I never said it scaled better. In fact, I said the opposite.
However, the fact that Mac OS X's kernel is *NOT* BSD, but Mach remains. Mach is a microkernel and a freaking good one, but Mach microkernels that OS X uses has poor task switching; I'm not sure if the Mach microkernels in OS X is based on GNU/Mach (based off CMU's Mach) or the actual Mach microkernel from Carnegie-Mellon. So some of the scalability of UNIX is lost through this. But trust me, UNIX scales way beyond Windows. I've said Windows isn't for computers with more than 32 processors--that's what UNIX is for--pure science--no one needs the crap from Mac OS X and Windows to do science and mathematics research. Real men use UNIX on 8192-way systems. :) :D :)
mi5moav
Sep 25, 10:20 AM
They are just trying to please the shareholders, without capsizing the boat. I highly doubt we will ever see such an inovative product such as the ipod from Apple again(hardware) It still shocks me that they came out with an MP3 player 5 years ago. One product. There have been a plethora of great products out since not including DAP/MP3 and Apple hasn't had there name on one. I needed a stinking Camera!!!!!!! Though it looks like the MacBooks not Pros are getting a little bump.
more...
jctevere
Feb 4, 10:50 AM
I just use map quest application. It is a free application and offers voice-based turn by turn directions with street names and all. Traffic updates really aren't worth the extra $40 if you ask me. And half the time I shut off the screen and just listen to the voice direction to save battery life, so 3D maps are a mute point with me... OTA map pulling really isn't all that bad. It loads your entire route when you load your destination (unless its extremely long, like cross-country) so if you don't deviate from its directions, you won't need service again to pull directions.
I have only had 1 issue on OTA map pulling with Map Quest. I once took a different way then suggested and caused the unit to re-rout me automatically. However, at that moment I didn't have service (Thanks AT&T, I was in NYC...) so the app prompted saying "re-routing not available at this time" and then 1 minute later it re-rerouted me when I got service. Not bad. It does everything I want it to. The only thing I wish it had was traffic updates. I have no idea why anyone charges for this. We should get it free with our data packages...
Anyone know if there is a jailbreak version of this app or will it not work because it is authenticated on the server side?
I have only had 1 issue on OTA map pulling with Map Quest. I once took a different way then suggested and caused the unit to re-rout me automatically. However, at that moment I didn't have service (Thanks AT&T, I was in NYC...) so the app prompted saying "re-routing not available at this time" and then 1 minute later it re-rerouted me when I got service. Not bad. It does everything I want it to. The only thing I wish it had was traffic updates. I have no idea why anyone charges for this. We should get it free with our data packages...
Anyone know if there is a jailbreak version of this app or will it not work because it is authenticated on the server side?
bella92108
Apr 1, 01:40 PM
What they do in other countries has nothing to do with how they would do it in the USA. Do you seriously think the cable companies would introduce a choice where they stand to lose money? There's no way, unless the FCC forced them, that this would happen.
Also, $1/channel is way too low. Just because you can get 10 channels for $60, doesn't mean each channel would be priced at 60 cents. IIRC, a popular channel like ESPN costs the cable provider $4/subscriber ... and that's with Disney forcing the whole ABC/ESPN/Disney package of channels onto the cable co.
If ALC does happen, I would guess that most people would pay the same or more than they currently do. A small percentage may pay less, but it really depends on what channels they pick (and whether those channels survive).
It's a con when channels that focus on specific programming are forced to close up or offer the same old crap that everyone else does. For instance, a channel like BET may not survive to provide focused programming to the African American community because they would likely lose over half their subscriber base.
This isn't the goal of diverse television programming. Take a look at Obama's position on ALC. This is what I'm referring to.
As for letting the less popular networks whither, I do see this as a con. Networks will need to appeal to a broader audience in order to compete. Get ready for 15 channels showing the same formuliac sitcom. 20 channels of reality TV shows. 10 channels of daytime/social talk shows. 15 channels of sports. And 13 channels of news. No room for channels like History Channel or Discovery Health ... as they'll morph into a TNT or SpikeTV.
So I pay $60 a month and get all of the channels you mentioned above:
SpikeTV - Unsubscribe Please
TNT - Unsubscribe Please
History Channel - Unsubscribe Please
Discovery Health - Unsubscribe Please
BET - Unsubscribe Please
ESPN - Unsubscribe Please
ABC Family - Unsubscribe Please
Disney - Unsubscribe Please
I'll take:
Discovery
TBS
Comedy Central
A&E
CNN
HGTV
I'd gladly pay $5 per channel knowing those channels are supported and any funding is stripped from the others. That'd half my monthly bill, and $5 a channel is more than fair, right?
If the others can't appeal to their subscribers, bye bye crap channels.
But PS - All of the above is utterly irrelevant. These cable channels are ADVERTISEMENT supported, like newspapers, NOT subscription supported.... so they'd fail because they could no longer sell false numbers of "potential viewers" anymore, so they'd fail because they suck, not because they don't make money from subscribers.
Also, $1/channel is way too low. Just because you can get 10 channels for $60, doesn't mean each channel would be priced at 60 cents. IIRC, a popular channel like ESPN costs the cable provider $4/subscriber ... and that's with Disney forcing the whole ABC/ESPN/Disney package of channels onto the cable co.
If ALC does happen, I would guess that most people would pay the same or more than they currently do. A small percentage may pay less, but it really depends on what channels they pick (and whether those channels survive).
It's a con when channels that focus on specific programming are forced to close up or offer the same old crap that everyone else does. For instance, a channel like BET may not survive to provide focused programming to the African American community because they would likely lose over half their subscriber base.
This isn't the goal of diverse television programming. Take a look at Obama's position on ALC. This is what I'm referring to.
As for letting the less popular networks whither, I do see this as a con. Networks will need to appeal to a broader audience in order to compete. Get ready for 15 channels showing the same formuliac sitcom. 20 channels of reality TV shows. 10 channels of daytime/social talk shows. 15 channels of sports. And 13 channels of news. No room for channels like History Channel or Discovery Health ... as they'll morph into a TNT or SpikeTV.
So I pay $60 a month and get all of the channels you mentioned above:
SpikeTV - Unsubscribe Please
TNT - Unsubscribe Please
History Channel - Unsubscribe Please
Discovery Health - Unsubscribe Please
BET - Unsubscribe Please
ESPN - Unsubscribe Please
ABC Family - Unsubscribe Please
Disney - Unsubscribe Please
I'll take:
Discovery
TBS
Comedy Central
A&E
CNN
HGTV
I'd gladly pay $5 per channel knowing those channels are supported and any funding is stripped from the others. That'd half my monthly bill, and $5 a channel is more than fair, right?
If the others can't appeal to their subscribers, bye bye crap channels.
But PS - All of the above is utterly irrelevant. These cable channels are ADVERTISEMENT supported, like newspapers, NOT subscription supported.... so they'd fail because they could no longer sell false numbers of "potential viewers" anymore, so they'd fail because they suck, not because they don't make money from subscribers.
more...
Eidorian
Jun 17, 10:39 PM
The older models are no longer being made, that is correct.
My guess, as I stated earlier...So the only model they're going to sell is the Elite Slim one once the supplies on the current Arcade and Pro are out?
My guess, as I stated earlier...So the only model they're going to sell is the Elite Slim one once the supplies on the current Arcade and Pro are out?
Applespider
Oct 17, 05:10 PM
match bar for cocktails :p
Have you met dcv or me before? :confused: :D
Have you met dcv or me before? :confused: :D
more...
AppliedVisual
Oct 10, 09:59 AM
They're switching from ASUS to Foxconn so hopefully you'll get a Macbook that doesn't turn off Randomly in the middle of important work.
There's actually no proof of this other than the rumor showing up this morning. And no way to confirm this one just yet... Not sure if it means much of anything. Apple switches manufacturers from time to time and this could very well mean a new Macbook is on the way. But if Foxconn just secured the contract, it's doubtful that new MB models from them would ship this year... October is basically half over.
I would also doubt that Apple will switch MBP contracts away from Quanta. At least not until a complete and total redesign is in the works. And even then, I'm not sure if there's anyone out there more qualified or capable than Quanta to build such a system.
There's actually no proof of this other than the rumor showing up this morning. And no way to confirm this one just yet... Not sure if it means much of anything. Apple switches manufacturers from time to time and this could very well mean a new Macbook is on the way. But if Foxconn just secured the contract, it's doubtful that new MB models from them would ship this year... October is basically half over.
I would also doubt that Apple will switch MBP contracts away from Quanta. At least not until a complete and total redesign is in the works. And even then, I'm not sure if there's anyone out there more qualified or capable than Quanta to build such a system.
itcheroni
Apr 4, 05:16 AM
However, both the OP and citizenzen's posts show that lowering a state's tax rate doesn't guarantee either high-income for its citizens or create high tax receipts.
This is a common refrain from conservatives who will often reference the Laffer Curve and will argue that if only a state lowered its taxes, more money would become available.
I wasn't making that argument so I guess I was confused why it was brought up. I've only been making an argument that the article can't conclude cutting taxes resulted in the budget problem. A state may have cut taxes and their economy might not have improved since cutting taxes, but the author of the article needs to fill in the gap and explain why there is a correlation/causation. I propose that you could run a state with some income tax or no income tax if the budget was made competently. So, IMO, cutting taxes does not, in and of itself, mean it has caused a budget shortfall. I personally think cutting taxes does help the economy but that's not what is at issue here.
I have only a general understanding of the theories those guys you mentioned are famous for. I think Austrian economics make much more sense. A theory of how to get the maximum tax dollars out of the people is irrelevant to me. It's like studying how much blood you can drain from people while keeping them alive. My preferred income tax rate is 0.
You understand that you're probably unique in your circumstances.
I wouldn't have believed it 3 years ago but now I can say from experience that anyone can do it if that's what they want to do. It's all a matter of hard work and willingness to live cheaply. The only thing that might tie you down is a family. I live for traveling so I've just worked my life to be able to do what I like. 3 years ago I was a law school dropout with no prospects and a monthly loan repayment of $1100. The highest paying job I qualified for was tutoring.
This is a common refrain from conservatives who will often reference the Laffer Curve and will argue that if only a state lowered its taxes, more money would become available.
I wasn't making that argument so I guess I was confused why it was brought up. I've only been making an argument that the article can't conclude cutting taxes resulted in the budget problem. A state may have cut taxes and their economy might not have improved since cutting taxes, but the author of the article needs to fill in the gap and explain why there is a correlation/causation. I propose that you could run a state with some income tax or no income tax if the budget was made competently. So, IMO, cutting taxes does not, in and of itself, mean it has caused a budget shortfall. I personally think cutting taxes does help the economy but that's not what is at issue here.
I have only a general understanding of the theories those guys you mentioned are famous for. I think Austrian economics make much more sense. A theory of how to get the maximum tax dollars out of the people is irrelevant to me. It's like studying how much blood you can drain from people while keeping them alive. My preferred income tax rate is 0.
You understand that you're probably unique in your circumstances.
I wouldn't have believed it 3 years ago but now I can say from experience that anyone can do it if that's what they want to do. It's all a matter of hard work and willingness to live cheaply. The only thing that might tie you down is a family. I live for traveling so I've just worked my life to be able to do what I like. 3 years ago I was a law school dropout with no prospects and a monthly loan repayment of $1100. The highest paying job I qualified for was tutoring.
more...
Medium Rare
Mar 27, 11:58 AM
$106.9 litre.... Edmonton,Canada
bobbleheadbob
Mar 28, 08:36 AM
Can't wait to head back to SF! :apple:
more...
AdeFowler
Oct 27, 05:43 AM
I've had .mac for about three years now and I love it.
However, I've always thought that Apple should make it much cheaper ($25) so that the majority of users would snap it up. Storage is cheap nowadays and I seriously doubt that many users are using more than 50% of their allocation.
Also, I'd like .mac to be tied into iLife 07 and Leopard more, but made affordable for everyone.
However, I've always thought that Apple should make it much cheaper ($25) so that the majority of users would snap it up. Storage is cheap nowadays and I seriously doubt that many users are using more than 50% of their allocation.
Also, I'd like .mac to be tied into iLife 07 and Leopard more, but made affordable for everyone.
JoeG4
Mar 27, 06:07 AM
How about no driving tax. How about we tax people appropriately and get rid of crap like business tax incentives and farm subsidies since they're only ever abused by people that 'play the game'.
Why should we be screwing over regular people so much.
Why should we be screwing over regular people so much.
scrapple
Mar 24, 02:54 PM
good deal, might get one for the wifey and kid..
I sold my ipad 1 for $529 a week before the ipad 2 was announced...
phew
I sold my ipad 1 for $529 a week before the ipad 2 was announced...
phew
darbus69
Mar 13, 09:51 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8F190 Safari/6533.18.5)
never once had a time prob with my IP4, or any other model for that matter.
never once had a time prob with my IP4, or any other model for that matter.
Sydde
Mar 11, 06:25 PM
Maybe I should educate myself. What is the scoop? Where I used to live in Minnesota I shopped at Menards. In Houston mostly it's Lowes or HD.
Nothing really major. If you think Norm Coleman was a good guy, and that EFCA was a bad, bad idea, HD is the place for you to be going. Mostly a matter of personal taste, really.
Nothing really major. If you think Norm Coleman was a good guy, and that EFCA was a bad, bad idea, HD is the place for you to be going. Mostly a matter of personal taste, really.
advocate
Sep 28, 12:42 AM
You are correct!!! 10 will always be 2. 01 will always be 1. Endianness swaps the bytes, not the bits. Binary addition would be hell if the bits were swapped... Plus then writing bit-operators and using bit-masks in C would just be a pain in the arse when it came time to compile that game for 5 different platforms.
The bits ARE "swapped", but the whole processor is "swapped" so nobody notices- until you start looking at multibyte values.
The bits ARE "swapped", but the whole processor is "swapped" so nobody notices- until you start looking at multibyte values.
DeSnousa
May 14, 06:37 PM
i would love it if Arn would do that!
what is that American?
it depends if you want to go intel or amd. also, you have to consider that the new GPU client is coming eventually, which should help ATI video cards greatly
Australian dollars, I thought AMD just so I could afford a better GPU, maybe even a GTX285. Is ATI going to get better by a lot? I have only looked at Nvidea because of folding. I will use the rig for light gaming but would love to play WOW on High and any current games at Med with 1080 res.
What Intel would you recommend on a budget?
what is that American?
it depends if you want to go intel or amd. also, you have to consider that the new GPU client is coming eventually, which should help ATI video cards greatly
Australian dollars, I thought AMD just so I could afford a better GPU, maybe even a GTX285. Is ATI going to get better by a lot? I have only looked at Nvidea because of folding. I will use the rig for light gaming but would love to play WOW on High and any current games at Med with 1080 res.
What Intel would you recommend on a budget?
kingdonk
Feb 28, 07:13 PM
work group manager and x-grid manager
No comments:
Post a Comment