daneoni
Aug 27, 05:24 AM
Damn PowerPC fans.
Apple is INTEL now. We Love Intel Because Stevie Tells Us So.
We hate AMD and IBM. Should Apple ever move to another CPU provider, we will seamlessly transition to hating Intel again. This is the Way of the Mac.
What's so good about G5's anyway? They are slow, too hot, and skull juice.
Why do we love Intel? Because Steve says to, and Core 2 Duo is powerful, cool, not permanently drunk, allows us to run Windows and helps Apple increase its market share.
We love ATi because just like Intel, their products are the best at the moment. We still love nVIDIA because their GPUs are in the Mac Pro.
We love Israel because they make our Core 2 Duos and we love China because they make our Macs. We love California because that's where Our Lord Stevie J is (Don't particularly care about the rest of the US, sorry guys).
We love our Big Cats because they run so fast and look so clean and powerful (Hmmm... Mystery of OS codenames revealed?) and of course because they are not Windows, which are susceptible to breaking...
People who live in Windows shouldn't throw Viruses?
Off track...
Anyway, Rawr to all you PowerPC fanboys (And girls)
Intel 4EVER!
...yeah whatever you say fanboy
Apple is INTEL now. We Love Intel Because Stevie Tells Us So.
We hate AMD and IBM. Should Apple ever move to another CPU provider, we will seamlessly transition to hating Intel again. This is the Way of the Mac.
What's so good about G5's anyway? They are slow, too hot, and skull juice.
Why do we love Intel? Because Steve says to, and Core 2 Duo is powerful, cool, not permanently drunk, allows us to run Windows and helps Apple increase its market share.
We love ATi because just like Intel, their products are the best at the moment. We still love nVIDIA because their GPUs are in the Mac Pro.
We love Israel because they make our Core 2 Duos and we love China because they make our Macs. We love California because that's where Our Lord Stevie J is (Don't particularly care about the rest of the US, sorry guys).
We love our Big Cats because they run so fast and look so clean and powerful (Hmmm... Mystery of OS codenames revealed?) and of course because they are not Windows, which are susceptible to breaking...
People who live in Windows shouldn't throw Viruses?
Off track...
Anyway, Rawr to all you PowerPC fanboys (And girls)
Intel 4EVER!
...yeah whatever you say fanboy
decimortis
Apr 6, 10:38 AM
I loves me my 11.6 ultimate and it hasn't let me down yet in the power department for my work with CS5, but of course, updated more faster, more shiny MBA's are always welcome. Can't say I'll upgrade but nice to see them progressing.
D.
D.
pyramid6
Apr 6, 03:44 PM
I think it's great that some people like the Xoom, but for me it's a nonstarter.
As a developer, 100,000 units is not even worth considering developing for. I know I'm not the only one. I really don't like the walled garden of the Apple App store, but it is where the tablets are at the moment.
As a developer, 100,000 units is not even worth considering developing for. I know I'm not the only one. I really don't like the walled garden of the Apple App store, but it is where the tablets are at the moment.
ctdonath
Mar 22, 03:05 PM
I would rather buy that one than the iPad
Thing is...you can't.
Thing is...you can't.
Blue Velvet
Mar 23, 06:11 AM
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.
Well exactly. Far easier to tag together some buzzwords, maybe pull something from FoxNews than it is to think critically about the issue. This inane comparison between coalition numbers was also picked up by Steve M.:
Fox Nation huffily declares that "Bush Had 2 Times More Coalition Partners in Iraq Than Obama Has in Libya." Bush's thirty-nation list, of course, included such global powers as Azerbaijan, Estonia, Latvia, and Uzbekistan, and didn't include the likes of, y'know, Germany and France.
But if we're going to play games like this, in the run-up to the war, how many coalition partners did Bush attract per week? The Libyan uprising started just about a month ago and Obama's coalition is fifteen nations. When do you date the start of the "Iraq crisis" the Bushies manufactured? The Axis of Evil speech, fourteen months before the war began? The Battle of Tora Bora, a month before that? The first administration meetings on Iraq regime change, mere days after Bush's inauguration, and more than two years before the Iraq War started? By that standard, Bush barely acquired one coalition partner a month! Obama obtained more than three partners a week!
I'm reminded of the 2000 electoral maps that measured Bush's vote by geography, as if winning a county with more jackrabbits than people was the equivalent of winning a county full of apartment buildings.
http://nomoremister.blogspot.com/2011/03/well-if-were-going-to-be-ridiculous.html
Meanwhile, Juan Cole lays out ten reasons why this is not like Iraq:
Here are the differences between George W. Bush�s invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the current United Nations action in Libya:
1. The action in Libya was authorized by the United Nations Security Council. That in Iraq was not. By the UN Charter, military action after 1945 should either come as self-defense or with UNSC authorization. Most countries in the world are signatories to the charter and bound by its provisions.
2. The Libyan people had risen up and thrown off the Qaddafi regime, with some 80-90 percent of the country having gone out of his hands before he started having tank commanders fire shells into peaceful crowds. It was this vast majority of the Libyan people that demanded the UN no-fly zone. In 2002-3 there was no similar popular movement against Saddam Hussein.
3. There was an ongoing massacre of civilians, and the threat of more such massacres in Benghazi, by the Qaddafi regime, which precipitated the UNSC resolution. Although the Saddam Hussein regime had massacred people in the 1980s and early 1990s, nothing was going on in 2002-2003 that would have required international intervention.
4. The Arab League urged the UNSC to take action against the Qaddafi regime, and in many ways precipitated Resolution 1973. The Arab League met in 2002 and expressed opposition to a war on Iraq. (Reports of Arab League backtracking on Sunday were incorrect, based on a remark of outgoing Secretary-General Amr Moussa that criticized the taking out of anti-aircraft batteries. The Arab League reaffirmed Sunday and Moussa agreed Monday that the No-Fly Zone is what it wants).
5. None of the United Nations allies envisages landing troops on the ground, nor does the UNSC authorize it. Iraq was invaded by land forces.
6. No false allegations were made against the Qaddafi regime, of being in league with al-Qaeda or of having a nuclear weapons program. The charge is massacre of peaceful civilian demonstrators and an actual promise to commit more such massacres.
7. The United States did not take the lead role in urging a no-fly zone, and was dragged into this action by its Arab and European allies. President Obama pledges that the US role, mainly disabling anti-aircraft batteries and bombing runways, will last �days, not months� before being turned over to other United Nations allies.
8. There is no sectarian or ethnic dimension to the Libyan conflict, whereas the US Pentagon conspired with Shiite and Kurdish parties to overthrow the Sunni-dominated Baathist regime in Iraq, setting the stage for a prolonged and bitter civil war.
9. The US has not rewarded countries such as Norway for entering the conflict as UN allies, but rather a genuine sense of outrage at the brutal crimes against humanity being committed by Qaddafi and his forces impelled the formation of this coalition. The Bush administration�s �coalition of the willing� in contrast was often brought on board by what were essentially bribes.
10. Iraq in 2002-3 no longer posed a credible threat to its neighbors. A resurgent Qaddafi in Libya with petroleum billions at his disposal would likely attempt to undermine the democratic experiments in Tunisia and Egypt, blighting the lives of millions.
http://www.juancole.com/2011/03/top-ten-ways-that-libya-2011-is-not-iraq-2003.html
Well exactly. Far easier to tag together some buzzwords, maybe pull something from FoxNews than it is to think critically about the issue. This inane comparison between coalition numbers was also picked up by Steve M.:
Fox Nation huffily declares that "Bush Had 2 Times More Coalition Partners in Iraq Than Obama Has in Libya." Bush's thirty-nation list, of course, included such global powers as Azerbaijan, Estonia, Latvia, and Uzbekistan, and didn't include the likes of, y'know, Germany and France.
But if we're going to play games like this, in the run-up to the war, how many coalition partners did Bush attract per week? The Libyan uprising started just about a month ago and Obama's coalition is fifteen nations. When do you date the start of the "Iraq crisis" the Bushies manufactured? The Axis of Evil speech, fourteen months before the war began? The Battle of Tora Bora, a month before that? The first administration meetings on Iraq regime change, mere days after Bush's inauguration, and more than two years before the Iraq War started? By that standard, Bush barely acquired one coalition partner a month! Obama obtained more than three partners a week!
I'm reminded of the 2000 electoral maps that measured Bush's vote by geography, as if winning a county with more jackrabbits than people was the equivalent of winning a county full of apartment buildings.
http://nomoremister.blogspot.com/2011/03/well-if-were-going-to-be-ridiculous.html
Meanwhile, Juan Cole lays out ten reasons why this is not like Iraq:
Here are the differences between George W. Bush�s invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the current United Nations action in Libya:
1. The action in Libya was authorized by the United Nations Security Council. That in Iraq was not. By the UN Charter, military action after 1945 should either come as self-defense or with UNSC authorization. Most countries in the world are signatories to the charter and bound by its provisions.
2. The Libyan people had risen up and thrown off the Qaddafi regime, with some 80-90 percent of the country having gone out of his hands before he started having tank commanders fire shells into peaceful crowds. It was this vast majority of the Libyan people that demanded the UN no-fly zone. In 2002-3 there was no similar popular movement against Saddam Hussein.
3. There was an ongoing massacre of civilians, and the threat of more such massacres in Benghazi, by the Qaddafi regime, which precipitated the UNSC resolution. Although the Saddam Hussein regime had massacred people in the 1980s and early 1990s, nothing was going on in 2002-2003 that would have required international intervention.
4. The Arab League urged the UNSC to take action against the Qaddafi regime, and in many ways precipitated Resolution 1973. The Arab League met in 2002 and expressed opposition to a war on Iraq. (Reports of Arab League backtracking on Sunday were incorrect, based on a remark of outgoing Secretary-General Amr Moussa that criticized the taking out of anti-aircraft batteries. The Arab League reaffirmed Sunday and Moussa agreed Monday that the No-Fly Zone is what it wants).
5. None of the United Nations allies envisages landing troops on the ground, nor does the UNSC authorize it. Iraq was invaded by land forces.
6. No false allegations were made against the Qaddafi regime, of being in league with al-Qaeda or of having a nuclear weapons program. The charge is massacre of peaceful civilian demonstrators and an actual promise to commit more such massacres.
7. The United States did not take the lead role in urging a no-fly zone, and was dragged into this action by its Arab and European allies. President Obama pledges that the US role, mainly disabling anti-aircraft batteries and bombing runways, will last �days, not months� before being turned over to other United Nations allies.
8. There is no sectarian or ethnic dimension to the Libyan conflict, whereas the US Pentagon conspired with Shiite and Kurdish parties to overthrow the Sunni-dominated Baathist regime in Iraq, setting the stage for a prolonged and bitter civil war.
9. The US has not rewarded countries such as Norway for entering the conflict as UN allies, but rather a genuine sense of outrage at the brutal crimes against humanity being committed by Qaddafi and his forces impelled the formation of this coalition. The Bush administration�s �coalition of the willing� in contrast was often brought on board by what were essentially bribes.
10. Iraq in 2002-3 no longer posed a credible threat to its neighbors. A resurgent Qaddafi in Libya with petroleum billions at his disposal would likely attempt to undermine the democratic experiments in Tunisia and Egypt, blighting the lives of millions.
http://www.juancole.com/2011/03/top-ten-ways-that-libya-2011-is-not-iraq-2003.html
Rafterman
Apr 27, 08:05 AM
I know of no cell tower or wifi device that works up to 100 miles away.
Macnoviz
Jul 20, 08:07 AM
heavy
It looks like 2006 won't be like 1984
It looks like 2006 won't be like 1984
barkomatic
Mar 31, 03:58 PM
At a glance your statement sounds fine. But that logic can be used for following logics:
1. I don't care what US does to rest of world as long as I as an american can live nice, prosperous life.
but i digress...
You're comparing a phone or a tablet to U.S. foreign policy? I'm sorry, I don't think gadgets are as important as that but apparently you do. I think you need a check on your perspective.
1. I don't care what US does to rest of world as long as I as an american can live nice, prosperous life.
but i digress...
You're comparing a phone or a tablet to U.S. foreign policy? I'm sorry, I don't think gadgets are as important as that but apparently you do. I think you need a check on your perspective.
bibbz
Jun 14, 06:08 PM
Wait a sec...
Had to read that again...
If I get a PIN tomorrow at 1pm EST I am guaranteed
a phone on launch day? I don't have to stand in line
that morning?
They told me differently when I called the store citing
NO RESERVATIONS.
If you get a reservation pin, you will have a phone on launch day, bottom line. No pin, no guarantee of a phone. With the pin, you can pick it up when you want. At opening or 8pm at night. I would make damn sure i am the 1st person in line at 1PM EST to be sure you get a PIN.
We just cant call it a pre-order, and cant take money before the 24th.
Be srue you talk to the store manager, and again, if you get something other than what i said, call another store.
Had to read that again...
If I get a PIN tomorrow at 1pm EST I am guaranteed
a phone on launch day? I don't have to stand in line
that morning?
They told me differently when I called the store citing
NO RESERVATIONS.
If you get a reservation pin, you will have a phone on launch day, bottom line. No pin, no guarantee of a phone. With the pin, you can pick it up when you want. At opening or 8pm at night. I would make damn sure i am the 1st person in line at 1PM EST to be sure you get a PIN.
We just cant call it a pre-order, and cant take money before the 24th.
Be srue you talk to the store manager, and again, if you get something other than what i said, call another store.
ArchaicRevival
Apr 5, 09:51 PM
Ugh. Final Cut is fine the way it is for now... We need iWeb overhaul!! Make it more search engine friendly, none of the text as an image crap. grrr...
Abstract
Aug 12, 01:35 AM
What OS will the iPhone be running? :confused:
Mac OS Kitten.
Mac OS Kitten.
shawnce
Jul 27, 01:12 PM
The next gen of chips has 4 core versions of conroe and woodcrest, each with the same sockets as the ones they're replacing.
Those aren't next generation version of the Core 2 just MCM (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-Chip_Module) of the existing Core 2.
Those aren't next generation version of the Core 2 just MCM (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-Chip_Module) of the existing Core 2.
LegendKillerUK
Apr 6, 10:46 AM
fingers crossed for no Over-heating issues, you know how those turbo speeds can get and how they've treated the 13'' Pros
Any overheating would be caused by the lack of appropriate thermal paste.
My experience is at best anecdotal but I tend to run Windows 7 in Parallels and have a flash stream running in Safari and the CPU doesn't go above 80c, which is perfectly acceptable. :)
Any overheating would be caused by the lack of appropriate thermal paste.
My experience is at best anecdotal but I tend to run Windows 7 in Parallels and have a flash stream running in Safari and the CPU doesn't go above 80c, which is perfectly acceptable. :)
rdowns
Apr 28, 04:06 PM
Because there was never a question of wither or not any of those men were born in the US, with Obama the past was always a bit hazy as to if he was actually born in Hawaii or thats just what his parents told him. Obviously he doesn�t remember BEING BORN in hawaii..his parents could have just told him that.
But now we have proof and its all over with there�s no need to be calling names about it.
BS, we already had proof from 2008.
But now we have proof and its all over with there�s no need to be calling names about it.
BS, we already had proof from 2008.
ChrisA
Aug 16, 10:53 PM
My main interest is in FCP the FCP results.
On a fixed budget, does anyone know the advantage/disadvantage of going for the 2.0Ghz with 1900XT over 2.6Ghz with the std video card?
I think movie editing depends a lot on the speed of the disk subsystem. After all Mini DV is 12GB per hour. That's a of data. When yo "scrub" a shot all that data has to move off the disk and onto the video card. Even with 16MB of RAM not much of the video data can be help in RAM. So the G5 and Intel machine have disks that are about the same speed. Speed of a disk is measured by how fast the bit fly under the read/write head not the interface speed. So I am not surprized the Intel Mac Pro is not hugly faster for video.
On a fixed budget, does anyone know the advantage/disadvantage of going for the 2.0Ghz with 1900XT over 2.6Ghz with the std video card?
I think movie editing depends a lot on the speed of the disk subsystem. After all Mini DV is 12GB per hour. That's a of data. When yo "scrub" a shot all that data has to move off the disk and onto the video card. Even with 16MB of RAM not much of the video data can be help in RAM. So the G5 and Intel machine have disks that are about the same speed. Speed of a disk is measured by how fast the bit fly under the read/write head not the interface speed. So I am not surprized the Intel Mac Pro is not hugly faster for video.
TennisandMusic
Apr 10, 12:20 AM
Interesting news, but the bit about booting competitors is downright disgusting.
p0intblank
Aug 5, 04:50 PM
Just an opinion p0intblank.We all have em :)
Oh, I know. Don't think I was shooting yours down or anything. I'm all for listening to others and hearing what they think.
Oh, I know. Don't think I was shooting yours down or anything. I'm all for listening to others and hearing what they think.
SevenInchScrew
Dec 11, 12:19 PM
Click to HUGE-size
http://imgur.com/ryCe3.jpg
http://imgur.com/Wtf3t.jpg
http://imgur.com/pFSJf.jpg
http://imgur.com/Tq0Qs.jpg
http://imgur.com/XHCNW.jpg
http://imgur.com/NFVE1.jpg
http://imgur.com/ryCe3.jpg
http://imgur.com/Wtf3t.jpg
http://imgur.com/pFSJf.jpg
http://imgur.com/Tq0Qs.jpg
http://imgur.com/XHCNW.jpg
http://imgur.com/NFVE1.jpg
ECUpirate44
Apr 27, 08:13 AM
I think it's kind of cool. How do I see the tracking map before Apple throws out the update :o
andrewm
Aug 23, 11:07 AM
I did...:D
DIE POWER PC...DIE!!!
Most agreed. I'm using an iBook G4 right now, but I'd practically sell my kidneys (both of 'em!) to convert it to a MacBook Pro.
Let us continue to pray for a speedy death to the Macintosh PowerPC computer.
DIE POWER PC...DIE!!!
Most agreed. I'm using an iBook G4 right now, but I'd practically sell my kidneys (both of 'em!) to convert it to a MacBook Pro.
Let us continue to pray for a speedy death to the Macintosh PowerPC computer.
Moyank24
Apr 27, 12:45 PM
Maybe the certificate is legitimate, but I think the original short form would have been more convincing than a pristine copy of the long one. I like Obama, but I loathe his extreme liberalism.
Maybe I'm beating a dead horse, but the copy is pristine because it is a copy. If you requested your birth certificate, they wouldn't give you an original...they would give you a certified copy. Brand new. Just typed up. They aren't going to hand you the original long form.
I suspected it was a copy, I've never trusted the president, and I probably never will. It's one thing to doubt that the certificate is legitimate. It's quite another to believe that the certificate is not legitimate.
You sure do like to go back and edit, don't you? :D
And you sure do like to talk in circles. So doubting and not believing the certificate is legitimate are two different things. What in the heck are you talking about?? You birthers are all alike...in the face of being proven wrong, you just try to make stuff up as you go along.
I now know that the certificate is a copy, and no, I don't trust President Obama
You don't trust Obama because of his extreme liberalism, or because of this certificate?
Maybe I'm beating a dead horse, but the copy is pristine because it is a copy. If you requested your birth certificate, they wouldn't give you an original...they would give you a certified copy. Brand new. Just typed up. They aren't going to hand you the original long form.
I suspected it was a copy, I've never trusted the president, and I probably never will. It's one thing to doubt that the certificate is legitimate. It's quite another to believe that the certificate is not legitimate.
You sure do like to go back and edit, don't you? :D
And you sure do like to talk in circles. So doubting and not believing the certificate is legitimate are two different things. What in the heck are you talking about?? You birthers are all alike...in the face of being proven wrong, you just try to make stuff up as you go along.
I now know that the certificate is a copy, and no, I don't trust President Obama
You don't trust Obama because of his extreme liberalism, or because of this certificate?
mkruck
Apr 6, 03:10 PM
Ok ok ok... xoom, ipad, whatever...
you'd rather have a hamburger than a delicious, melty CHEESEBURGER?
Frigging hamburger fanbois... :p
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'd rather have a hamburger than a delicious, melty CHEESEBURGER?
Frigging hamburger fanbois... :p
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
relimw
Sep 12, 11:15 AM
Very cool. Now to find apps (os10.5 direct blind support?) that can make use of all those cores. :cool:
phalseHUD
Apr 10, 01:58 PM
Interesting news, but the bit about booting competitors is downright disgusting.
Couldn't agree more, disgraceful to be honest. This part of Apple I cannot abide.
Couldn't agree more, disgraceful to be honest. This part of Apple I cannot abide.
