ictiosapiens
Aug 17, 04:39 AM
Could you give some evidence for that, except that they are underclocked on the MacBook Pro _when they are idle_?
And the Macbook... Nearly 50% underclocked, like the 950 was so amazing that it could be crippled by half of its mindblowing performance...
And the Macbook... Nearly 50% underclocked, like the 950 was so amazing that it could be crippled by half of its mindblowing performance...
wizard
Apr 10, 04:29 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
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.
Are you sure you understand what is happening here? Apple is presenting at the FCP Users Group Supermeet, no one is getting booted from the NAB show!
Now step back for a minute and THINK what are the members of this group interested in? Come on you can spit it out. If the users group management didn't respond to Apples request they would like have a rank and file revolt on their hands. Why be cause it is the FCP users group. At times people can be very dense.
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.
Are you sure you understand what is happening here? Apple is presenting at the FCP Users Group Supermeet, no one is getting booted from the NAB show!
Now step back for a minute and THINK what are the members of this group interested in? Come on you can spit it out. If the users group management didn't respond to Apples request they would like have a rank and file revolt on their hands. Why be cause it is the FCP users group. At times people can be very dense.
waldobushman
Mar 26, 04:40 PM
It's this mentality that makes me smile.
Without knowing any of the details as to what the final shipping version will be, mezmerized (hypnotized ?) by Apple, enthusiasts are ready to pay whatever Apple demands for the product.
I get to sit back without any effort, and watch with delight as they pour the money into Apples coffers. In turn, my vast amount of Apple stock climbs higher & higher as they brag about Apples Billions.
Their blind trust pays me well. Thanks Apple !
Of course one should upgrade to the next OS X release. Apple makes substantial changes in each major release; if not functionally, then in refactoring code for future enhancements. I'll wait until it is known to be stable, and know that the software I use will run under the new version.
Apple is not MS. I stayed with Windows XP until Windows 7 was reasonably stable. The only reason to not move to the new OS would be lack of support for current hardware. Not likely to happen with Lion.
Without knowing any of the details as to what the final shipping version will be, mezmerized (hypnotized ?) by Apple, enthusiasts are ready to pay whatever Apple demands for the product.
I get to sit back without any effort, and watch with delight as they pour the money into Apples coffers. In turn, my vast amount of Apple stock climbs higher & higher as they brag about Apples Billions.
Their blind trust pays me well. Thanks Apple !
Of course one should upgrade to the next OS X release. Apple makes substantial changes in each major release; if not functionally, then in refactoring code for future enhancements. I'll wait until it is known to be stable, and know that the software I use will run under the new version.
Apple is not MS. I stayed with Windows XP until Windows 7 was reasonably stable. The only reason to not move to the new OS would be lack of support for current hardware. Not likely to happen with Lion.
khollister
Mar 22, 01:37 PM
Yeah a 50% smaller screen for the same price and less battery life is certainly going to crush the iPad2.
Plus RIM's usually obtuse software - I hate my company BlackBerry
Plus RIM's usually obtuse software - I hate my company BlackBerry
noisycats
Mar 22, 05:10 PM
x
gnasher729
Aug 18, 03:31 PM
Thats showing that the quad core Mac Pro is essentially the same speed as dual core Mac Pro. To translate it to normal mac scenario: If apple releases a 2.66GHz Conroe iMac/Mac/whathaveyou it will be able to crunch through FCP/Photoshop/etc faster than a Mac Pro because it can use regular DDR2 and won't suffer from horrendous memory latency.
It only shows that one company can expect to get massive complaints from its customers soon about its crappy software. An H.264 encoder can easily use two dozen cores if they are there (apart from the fact that it might be limited by the speed of the DVD drive if you encode straight from DVD); there is no reason at all why this software shouldn't be twice as fast on a Quad core and four times as fast on an eight core machine.
It only shows that one company can expect to get massive complaints from its customers soon about its crappy software. An H.264 encoder can easily use two dozen cores if they are there (apart from the fact that it might be limited by the speed of the DVD drive if you encode straight from DVD); there is no reason at all why this software shouldn't be twice as fast on a Quad core and four times as fast on an eight core machine.
Nuks
Aug 26, 06:31 PM
Can someone briefly explain the huge benefits of Santa Rosa (in layman's terms) or post a link to a thread/description of it?
Much thanks.
Much thanks.
bendejo
Jul 27, 10:57 AM
Since the WWDC is focused on developers, wouldn't it make the most sense for Apple to do all of the chip transition announcements plus the Leopard preview at WWDC and wait until MW SanFran or hold a special event for the video iPod/iTunes movie announcements? After all, developers want to know what to expect in the forthcoming OS and what the processing abilities for the full range of hardware will be so they can devise applications to fully exploit the specs on the OS and the various hardware configs. iPod and iTunes announcements may be neat, but they would seem to be less relevant to the WWDC audience.
SkyStudios
Apr 25, 04:36 PM
First things first, let Apple pay the fines becuase this is indeed a violation of our privacy, Google and facebook paid ober 300,000 dollars to Europe for it why should Apple not pay the fine?
Lets get to the real deal, Apple was already sued for violating privacy laws last year, they where not only storing location data but collecting users political views which required fallowing personal emails, chats, web history recorded regardless of you cleaning it afterwards with some paid apps.
Its a federal offense to not only tap someones line, stalk them with location recording but sell them a device, if people knew this they would never of purchased the device., let those poeple in Top companies who have FBI protecting them from Espionage SUE APPLE and Android companies too if they violate privacy laws becuase thats info you can topple a company with fast, especially competitors.
As for the naive kids who claim police can use this location data to find a rapists or perpetrator at large your dead wrong kids, here is a list of proceedings which have to be met to do this,
The cops can not at all even look into your phone, etc, unless your dumb enough to give them info, how ever a PI or detective can., cops and everyone else need warrants if they want to use this info legally, anything other then that is a personal decision and violation of someones rights, if cops had access to your phone who knows what issues we would have, they are not trained on legal matters, detectives, PIs, federal agents, Pis and detectives working under a lawyer who does, all going through the district attorneys office can, even journalists who are retired Feds, detectives, Pis or CIA agents can, they know the laws or their work is worthless in court.
Cops can however use police jammers, eves drop on your line through the district attorneys office via the phone company, they can even turn your phone into a video camera if it has one with out software or you knowing this, so can the feds, this all is also useless unless a warrant is issued, if cuaght they lose their license or get fined,
Maybe Apple will just pay the fine and walk away with money they made toppling other companies by spying on their employees. , but one thing is for sure, they HAVE TO CHANGE THIS GAME and also REMOVE KIDS APPS that prey on children to pay for more games with out them even knowing it.
Lets get to the real deal, Apple was already sued for violating privacy laws last year, they where not only storing location data but collecting users political views which required fallowing personal emails, chats, web history recorded regardless of you cleaning it afterwards with some paid apps.
Its a federal offense to not only tap someones line, stalk them with location recording but sell them a device, if people knew this they would never of purchased the device., let those poeple in Top companies who have FBI protecting them from Espionage SUE APPLE and Android companies too if they violate privacy laws becuase thats info you can topple a company with fast, especially competitors.
As for the naive kids who claim police can use this location data to find a rapists or perpetrator at large your dead wrong kids, here is a list of proceedings which have to be met to do this,
The cops can not at all even look into your phone, etc, unless your dumb enough to give them info, how ever a PI or detective can., cops and everyone else need warrants if they want to use this info legally, anything other then that is a personal decision and violation of someones rights, if cops had access to your phone who knows what issues we would have, they are not trained on legal matters, detectives, PIs, federal agents, Pis and detectives working under a lawyer who does, all going through the district attorneys office can, even journalists who are retired Feds, detectives, Pis or CIA agents can, they know the laws or their work is worthless in court.
Cops can however use police jammers, eves drop on your line through the district attorneys office via the phone company, they can even turn your phone into a video camera if it has one with out software or you knowing this, so can the feds, this all is also useless unless a warrant is issued, if cuaght they lose their license or get fined,
Maybe Apple will just pay the fine and walk away with money they made toppling other companies by spying on their employees. , but one thing is for sure, they HAVE TO CHANGE THIS GAME and also REMOVE KIDS APPS that prey on children to pay for more games with out them even knowing it.
toolbox
Mar 26, 06:33 AM
Good stuff, waiting and ready to pay! :o
Same! soon as available for pre order / order
Same! soon as available for pre order / order
Zadillo
Aug 27, 05:19 PM
hmmm... the funny part is that it's been done to death.* that's the bit.* i guess you don't see it as funny.* ever heard of a reoccuring joke with a little aphormism mixed in?
But that's the problem. The joke was that it was done to death...... but THAT part has been done to death too, which is why most people no longer find it to be all that funny.
I'm happy that some people still seem to be able to find humor in it, but that doesn't mean that the people who no longer find it to be funny just don't "get it". It just means that the lifespan of this joke has long since passed for many people.
But that's the problem. The joke was that it was done to death...... but THAT part has been done to death too, which is why most people no longer find it to be all that funny.
I'm happy that some people still seem to be able to find humor in it, but that doesn't mean that the people who no longer find it to be funny just don't "get it". It just means that the lifespan of this joke has long since passed for many people.
2IS
Apr 6, 10:37 AM
For most people the ipad is more useful than the air anyway imo. Yes i owned an air, the ipad 1, and now the ipad 2 and the air was just a watered down macbook pro more than the ipad is a scaled up ipod touch
More portable yes. More useful, not by a long shot.
More portable yes. More useful, not by a long shot.
boncellis
Jul 29, 05:59 PM
Ok, here goes. (Quick pass)
Eeek. Not so sure I like that.
Hmmm... maybe with just one slot?
A little better. I personally prefer the taller narrower one, though.
It looks pretty good! The extra room would allow for the 3.5" HDD and a dedicated GPU--making it a "true" media center.
Not to nitpick, but maybe it would only have to be 1.5x wider rather than 2x wide. Either way, I think it's pretty cool. Thanks! ;)
Eeek. Not so sure I like that.
Hmmm... maybe with just one slot?
A little better. I personally prefer the taller narrower one, though.
It looks pretty good! The extra room would allow for the 3.5" HDD and a dedicated GPU--making it a "true" media center.
Not to nitpick, but maybe it would only have to be 1.5x wider rather than 2x wide. Either way, I think it's pretty cool. Thanks! ;)
awesomebase
Mar 31, 07:08 PM
Google's "openness" reminds me of the days when people got all excited about being able to use different fonts and font sizes... sure it is exciting to see the possibilities and to be able to "customize" your documents, etc., but in the end, you only end up using a hand full of them (despite thousands of them being available), and most of what is being used is STILL what was the default choices back then.
Just like a kid that thinks they're going to be greater and better than those older than them because they know better; well, surprise, surprise... Google has turned out to be worse than IBM or Microsoft or Apple ever was. The deal with them will just keep getting worse and worse until people come up with genuine alternatives to their constant lying and deceptiveness (oh, yes, picking up 10M wi-fi SSIDs was purely accidental...).
I don't blame them for having to switch gears on this... I blame them for not being able to see 5 mins in front of their face on this issue (like so many other things) and insisting that "they're" correct every time it is obvious to everyone outside their company that they're not...
Just like a kid that thinks they're going to be greater and better than those older than them because they know better; well, surprise, surprise... Google has turned out to be worse than IBM or Microsoft or Apple ever was. The deal with them will just keep getting worse and worse until people come up with genuine alternatives to their constant lying and deceptiveness (oh, yes, picking up 10M wi-fi SSIDs was purely accidental...).
I don't blame them for having to switch gears on this... I blame them for not being able to see 5 mins in front of their face on this issue (like so many other things) and insisting that "they're" correct every time it is obvious to everyone outside their company that they're not...
guzhogi
Jul 14, 07:16 PM
Power supplies produce a lot of heat. It makes great sense according to simply the most basic laws of thermodynamics.
I'm no physicist, but even I know that warmer air rises so if the power supply was at the bottom, all that heat would go up the entire case (not counting whatever fans are in there) and make it harder to cool maybe. But as I said, I'm no physicist & I don't know how all this all works. It would be cool (pun not intended) if it were possible to create a vacuum inside, that woould help solve heating issues since (if I remember my high school physics) temperature is just how much energy matter has. If there's no matter in the case other than the components, then it should be pretty cold in there.
I'm no physicist, but even I know that warmer air rises so if the power supply was at the bottom, all that heat would go up the entire case (not counting whatever fans are in there) and make it harder to cool maybe. But as I said, I'm no physicist & I don't know how all this all works. It would be cool (pun not intended) if it were possible to create a vacuum inside, that woould help solve heating issues since (if I remember my high school physics) temperature is just how much energy matter has. If there's no matter in the case other than the components, then it should be pretty cold in there.
Patch^
Sep 13, 06:52 AM
cool!! They should hopefully increase speed :)
I like the fact that you can upgrade the processors now, but Xeons are pretty expensive.
I like the fact that you can upgrade the processors now, but Xeons are pretty expensive.
superfula
Apr 6, 10:53 AM
Since you have no clue how the sandy bridge airs will perform, I'll take your statement as FUD.
Of course we do. The integrated graphics card will perform just as poorly as every other Sandy Bridge processor because it's the same.
Of course we do. The integrated graphics card will perform just as poorly as every other Sandy Bridge processor because it's the same.
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
Macnoviz
Jul 20, 05:07 PM
Let's hope the "opposite of Hyperthreading" will come along (Leopard feature???).. So, instead of a "emulating" a Dual Core / CPU config (like on later Pentium 4's), emulate a Single CPU on multiple cores. :cool:
Then, you get 8 * 3 GHz = 1 * 24 GHz...!!!
I think Reverse Hyperthreading will have to be processor-bound, like Hyperthreading. Intel has its mitosis project, so let's hope that works out well!
Then, you get 8 * 3 GHz = 1 * 24 GHz...!!!
I think Reverse Hyperthreading will have to be processor-bound, like Hyperthreading. Intel has its mitosis project, so let's hope that works out well!
AidenShaw
Jul 14, 03:54 PM
Now, that is FUNNY!
However, based on availability, Apple could get up to 3GHz if they
really wanted to:
Dual Core Intel� Xeon� Processors 5160 (4MB L2 Cache, 3 GHz 1333MHz FSB)
Perhaps "one more thing......"
Seven day delivery (which is standard) for dual 3.0 GHz Woodies.
Availability is not a big problem.
However, based on availability, Apple could get up to 3GHz if they
really wanted to:
Dual Core Intel� Xeon� Processors 5160 (4MB L2 Cache, 3 GHz 1333MHz FSB)
Perhaps "one more thing......"
Seven day delivery (which is standard) for dual 3.0 GHz Woodies.
Availability is not a big problem.
Al Coholic
Mar 26, 10:45 AM
I think there are two distinct OSX expectations out there:
1.) The "Let's make it pretty" crowd.
2.) Those of us that want some useful features.
...like resume and versions for me. Mission control looks mildly enticing if I could figure it out.
I'm looking forward to all the subtle feature changes and additions. Couldn't care less about a facelift. Leave the Fisher-Price toy themes to MS.
Still not sure what the hell Launcher does differently that can't be achieved with the App folder in the dock but whatever...
1.) The "Let's make it pretty" crowd.
2.) Those of us that want some useful features.
...like resume and versions for me. Mission control looks mildly enticing if I could figure it out.
I'm looking forward to all the subtle feature changes and additions. Couldn't care less about a facelift. Leave the Fisher-Price toy themes to MS.
Still not sure what the hell Launcher does differently that can't be achieved with the App folder in the dock but whatever...
jeremy.king
Jun 15, 09:58 AM
My wife walked into store about an hour ago. Reserved a 16GB and a 32GB without issue. We were offered store credit for trade-ins but don't have to decide until we purchase, and $20 accessory credit as well. We were informed that we may not get them on launch day, but we would have them by 6/28 at the latest. I'm fine with this, and so far I'm pleased with Radio Shack.
clevin
Aug 7, 07:13 PM
I keep reading stuff like this. I don't think Time Machine works with the reagular harddrive. You have to use it with an external drive.
thats a kinda harsh requirement, i would think it will allow you to choose local/external hard drive/network server.
Buts till, it will cost lot of space, no matter where the space is from.
thats a kinda harsh requirement, i would think it will allow you to choose local/external hard drive/network server.
Buts till, it will cost lot of space, no matter where the space is from.
leekohler
Apr 28, 09:58 AM
You accuse every 'liberal' in this forum of being blinded by their bias. I suppose all of the 'conservatives' see clearly and are willing to consider all reasonable alternatives. Lol. And then the debate becomes what is reasonable? :p
If he can't stand the heat, he knows where the kitchen door is.
If he can't stand the heat, he knows where the kitchen door is.
