Blue Velvet
Mar 20, 09:02 AM
Oil reserves in Libya are the largest in Africa and the ninth largest in the world with 41.5 billion barrels (6.60�109 m3) as of 2007. Oil production was 1.8 million barrels per day (290�103 m3/d) as of giving Libya 63 years of reserves at current production rates if no new reserves were to be found. Libya is considered a highly attractive oil area due to its low cost of oil production (as low as $1 per barrel at some fields), and proximity to European markets.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_reserves_in_Libya
The average cost of a Tomahawk missile is close to $1.5 million. But this takes into account the initial research and development costs. As a pure production cost it costs less that $500,000.
http://www.buzzle.com/editorials/11-10-2004-61475.asp
The maths doesn't lie.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_reserves_in_Libya
The average cost of a Tomahawk missile is close to $1.5 million. But this takes into account the initial research and development costs. As a pure production cost it costs less that $500,000.
http://www.buzzle.com/editorials/11-10-2004-61475.asp
The maths doesn't lie.
Tomorrow
Mar 1, 04:51 PM
That may be true of the huge American diesel truck engines, but go examine a new VW, BMW or Mercedes diesel and you'll see that this is just not the case anymore.
That could be true, but I can't verify it - simply because I don't really see any of those around here....
You can barely even smell the exhaust - if at all - even from the new truck engines with DPFs.
...This, on the other hand, has not been my experience at all.
I live out in the country (horse and cattle farms), and about half the pickups out here are 3/4 ton and 1 ton diesels, mostly Chevys and Fords. Following one down the highway it's hard to hear them, but if you're behind one you can damn sure smell it - and yes, I'm talking about the new ones, too.
Caveat - you specifically mentioned a Dodge, and I don't recall seeing (or smelling) any of those around here lately.
That could be true, but I can't verify it - simply because I don't really see any of those around here....
You can barely even smell the exhaust - if at all - even from the new truck engines with DPFs.
...This, on the other hand, has not been my experience at all.
I live out in the country (horse and cattle farms), and about half the pickups out here are 3/4 ton and 1 ton diesels, mostly Chevys and Fords. Following one down the highway it's hard to hear them, but if you're behind one you can damn sure smell it - and yes, I'm talking about the new ones, too.
Caveat - you specifically mentioned a Dodge, and I don't recall seeing (or smelling) any of those around here lately.
Westside guy
Oct 23, 08:40 AM
Okay, calm down, I have the real dirt here.
What's really happening is MacRumors has a 4000 post limit on its threads; it's known about this bug for a while yet hasn't dealt with it. The old C2D MBP thread is almost at 3700 posts now, and Arn is starting to panic... so he's hoping this will resolve the problem.
I kid, I kid... :D
What's really happening is MacRumors has a 4000 post limit on its threads; it's known about this bug for a while yet hasn't dealt with it. The old C2D MBP thread is almost at 3700 posts now, and Arn is starting to panic... so he's hoping this will resolve the problem.
I kid, I kid... :D
shawnce
Aug 25, 12:07 PM
I've seen 50� C from Conroe under full load. That's a lot lower then the 75� C on my iMac G5. CPU temp is a result of how efficient the heat dissipation is relative to the heat generated by the CPU... so without knowing how the heat dissipation capabilities varied between the two systems you cannot make much of a judgement on the CPU itself. (you would need the same case, same cooling system, same work load, etc. to make such a comparison)
The first generation iMac G5 had worse heat dissipating capabilities then later revisions of the iMac G5.
Should also note that the temp sensors are also potentially measuring at different points along the thermal chain (not looked into that myself).
The first generation iMac G5 had worse heat dissipating capabilities then later revisions of the iMac G5.
Should also note that the temp sensors are also potentially measuring at different points along the thermal chain (not looked into that myself).
louis Fashion
Apr 3, 01:55 PM
This ad will never work. People want ads that make them feel like teenage boys. I know this from Android ads. Steel and lasers, Apple. Steel and lasers!
Great post. Maybe we should ban all iPad sales to "over 18" that would firmly place Apple in the "elitist" camp
Great post. Maybe we should ban all iPad sales to "over 18" that would firmly place Apple in the "elitist" camp
LeeTom
Mar 22, 04:20 PM
Woah. Here's something I haven't seen mentioned -
The 10th Anniversary iPod Touch: a 220gb iPod Touch. It's an iPod touch with the storage of an iPod Classic. Or rather, an iPod Classic with the interface of an iPod Touch.
Discuss.
The 10th Anniversary iPod Touch: a 220gb iPod Touch. It's an iPod touch with the storage of an iPod Classic. Or rather, an iPod Classic with the interface of an iPod Touch.
Discuss.
Consultant
Mar 25, 04:01 PM
There's still the practical limitations of using a touchscreen as a control device, though. It's never going to be as tactile as a controller with buttons and joysticks. Not to mention having the HDMI adaptor sticking out of the side of the iPad while you're holding it to play games...
Apart from that, I'm glad to see the iPad is able to hold its own as a gaming machine.
Good luck performing multi-touch and gestures with buttons and joysticks. :rolleyes:
Apart from that, I'm glad to see the iPad is able to hold its own as a gaming machine.
Good luck performing multi-touch and gestures with buttons and joysticks. :rolleyes:
Dave K
Aug 27, 08:51 PM
Could the deciding factor be the noise?
Not arguing about whether a Conroe would fit in the iMacIntel case - but wondering whether the extra heat would result in extra noise from the cooling fans.
The iMacIntel doesn't have to as fast as it possibly can, especially since the New Form-Factor Conroe Mini-Tower/Home-Theatre Mac® will be there for people who want a bit more power without the size and cost of the maxi-tower ProMacIntel.I know Maximum PC was playing around with the Core 2 Duo Extreme and, with an aftermarket heatsink + fan, were able to keep it at ~50 degrees C running at 100% U. on both cores. For fun, they unplugged the fan, made it recode an entire DVD to DivX and couldn't get it to a) go over 75 C, b) report a cut in processor speed, or c) shut off in protest.
So, with a well designed cooling system, i suspect they shouldn't have any problem fitting that in a iMac and keeping it quiet.
Not arguing about whether a Conroe would fit in the iMacIntel case - but wondering whether the extra heat would result in extra noise from the cooling fans.
The iMacIntel doesn't have to as fast as it possibly can, especially since the New Form-Factor Conroe Mini-Tower/Home-Theatre Mac® will be there for people who want a bit more power without the size and cost of the maxi-tower ProMacIntel.I know Maximum PC was playing around with the Core 2 Duo Extreme and, with an aftermarket heatsink + fan, were able to keep it at ~50 degrees C running at 100% U. on both cores. For fun, they unplugged the fan, made it recode an entire DVD to DivX and couldn't get it to a) go over 75 C, b) report a cut in processor speed, or c) shut off in protest.
So, with a well designed cooling system, i suspect they shouldn't have any problem fitting that in a iMac and keeping it quiet.
WildGuess
Apr 2, 09:16 PM
This edition will be forever known as the light bleed model. Mine has it, only slightly annoying. But it certainly knocks down the resale value, almost forcing me to consider exchanging it. Also slightly annoying.
nagromme
Sep 6, 06:12 PM
Does anyone else think that Apple really really needs a rental model for the movie store? I'm against it with music but it's not the same a movies. I don't want my harddrive full of these things. I would be nice to rent one for much less, watch it and delete it. I don't see it being very successful if it is for purchase only.
Yes. I want rentals. I almost never want to see the same movie again, so I won't want to store it.
Rentals are what I would use. At a sufficiently low price, of course. $2 for close to DVD quality would be OK. (I'm less picky about rental quality than purchase quality.)
Yes. I want rentals. I almost never want to see the same movie again, so I won't want to store it.
Rentals are what I would use. At a sufficiently low price, of course. $2 for close to DVD quality would be OK. (I'm less picky about rental quality than purchase quality.)
Multimedia
Aug 29, 10:25 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
Think Secret claims (http://www.thinksecret.com/news/0608macmini.html) to have information on the rumored revision (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/08/20060824183848.shtml) to the Mac Mini. According to the site, Apple will replace the existing Core Solo model with the existing 1.66 GHz Core Duo model, and add a 1.83 GHz Core Duo model, effectively eliminating all single-core CPUs from Apple's computer product line.
The new systems are said to be "ready for production." Think Secret believes the models will be introduced in a few weeks time with little fanfare, although not totally under the radar like the last Mac Mini update (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2005/09/20050930023909.shtml).Not Core 2 Duo??!! :eek: :confused: :( I can't beleive they are not going to go Core 2 Duo in the mini before Thanksgiving.Only if they don't drop prices. Just depends what they charge, if they had core solo for $399 sales would go through the roof.And Apple would be losing money with every sale. :rolleyes:
And for all you Yonah FanBoys out there I say you are completely out of touch with reality living in some sort of parallel dimension where old obsolete stopgap technology prevails beyond it's short useful lifespan. :) It makes no sense to me why would a laptop be more powerful than a desktop. If you're gonna stay with core duo why not just make the mini a 1.83 & 2.00 GHz Core Duo machine like the macbooks. 1.66 & 1.83 on a core duo is pathetic in my opinions and solidifies my believe that the mini and i will never get along....at least for now. Thats just too much crippling to handle.Here here. I totally agree. Staying with Core Duo is insane, rude and greedy.
Think Secret claims (http://www.thinksecret.com/news/0608macmini.html) to have information on the rumored revision (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/08/20060824183848.shtml) to the Mac Mini. According to the site, Apple will replace the existing Core Solo model with the existing 1.66 GHz Core Duo model, and add a 1.83 GHz Core Duo model, effectively eliminating all single-core CPUs from Apple's computer product line.
The new systems are said to be "ready for production." Think Secret believes the models will be introduced in a few weeks time with little fanfare, although not totally under the radar like the last Mac Mini update (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2005/09/20050930023909.shtml).Not Core 2 Duo??!! :eek: :confused: :( I can't beleive they are not going to go Core 2 Duo in the mini before Thanksgiving.Only if they don't drop prices. Just depends what they charge, if they had core solo for $399 sales would go through the roof.And Apple would be losing money with every sale. :rolleyes:
And for all you Yonah FanBoys out there I say you are completely out of touch with reality living in some sort of parallel dimension where old obsolete stopgap technology prevails beyond it's short useful lifespan. :) It makes no sense to me why would a laptop be more powerful than a desktop. If you're gonna stay with core duo why not just make the mini a 1.83 & 2.00 GHz Core Duo machine like the macbooks. 1.66 & 1.83 on a core duo is pathetic in my opinions and solidifies my believe that the mini and i will never get along....at least for now. Thats just too much crippling to handle.Here here. I totally agree. Staying with Core Duo is insane, rude and greedy.
GFLPraxis
Aug 25, 01:55 AM
In addition, Core 2 Duo vs Core Duo performance increase really isn't all that dramatic:
http://anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2808
Certainly not worth buying one to upgrade your current Yonah machine, assuming that really would be possible without some sort of EFI update.
While Merom isn't much faster than Yonah, Conroe in an iMac would be superb with the faster clock and bus speeds.
Actually, it's quite dramatic. From those benchmarks, Intel's claims are correct; at the SAME CLOCK SPEED, Merom is 20% faster than Yonah, however, Merom comes at a higher clock speed at the same price as Yonah, making the difference even more dramatic. A 2.33 Merom is the price of a 2.16 Yonah.
And it's 64-bit.
Demi Lovato amp; Selena Gomez
Selena Gomez and Demi Lovato
Did Demi Lovato amp; Selena Gomez
DEMI LOVATO AND SELENA GOMEZ
selena gomez and demi lovato
Demi Lovato, Selena Gomez
+arney+with+selena+gomez
http://anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2808
Certainly not worth buying one to upgrade your current Yonah machine, assuming that really would be possible without some sort of EFI update.
While Merom isn't much faster than Yonah, Conroe in an iMac would be superb with the faster clock and bus speeds.
Actually, it's quite dramatic. From those benchmarks, Intel's claims are correct; at the SAME CLOCK SPEED, Merom is 20% faster than Yonah, however, Merom comes at a higher clock speed at the same price as Yonah, making the difference even more dramatic. A 2.33 Merom is the price of a 2.16 Yonah.
And it's 64-bit.
peterjhill
Sep 6, 06:58 PM
I'd rather buy than rent... but that's me. I am already ripping my dvds to disk anyway (thanks handbrake). I would guess that just like songs, we will be able to burn a dvd that will play in any dvd player... likely limiting the number of times you can burn a dvd. Of course we will be able to back up the DRMd copy. It is about time that people start considering using hard disks to back up their files and not dvd-r's. When 10.5 comes out, everyone will want an external drive to use with time machine anyway..
As for other companies coming out with downloadable movies, will they work on both mac and pcs? What DRM works on both Mac and Windows? fairplay or windows media? Maybe the mac market is small, but I wonder how the market is with people who buy media online that buy fairplay content versus WMP?
As for other companies coming out with downloadable movies, will they work on both mac and pcs? What DRM works on both Mac and Windows? fairplay or windows media? Maybe the mac market is small, but I wonder how the market is with people who buy media online that buy fairplay content versus WMP?
Reverend Wally
Jan 1, 08:34 PM
OK ....
This is what will happen at MWSF.
A new technology will be introduced. About 2 minutes after that a wavering shimmer will appear on stage and "POP" ... A capsule will appear, and out of it will climb an iAndroid which in reality will be an android built by future Apple, Inc. and will have Steve Job's brain installed in it. He will then announce that as a result of the previously announced new technonlogy the iTraveler, an Apple time travel machine was made possible and was built in the future enabling him to come back in his new android body to show us all just how truly advanced Apple has really become.
Then we will all gather to sing "We Are The World" to bring the MWSF to a dramatic and exciting climax.
:p
This is what will happen at MWSF.
A new technology will be introduced. About 2 minutes after that a wavering shimmer will appear on stage and "POP" ... A capsule will appear, and out of it will climb an iAndroid which in reality will be an android built by future Apple, Inc. and will have Steve Job's brain installed in it. He will then announce that as a result of the previously announced new technonlogy the iTraveler, an Apple time travel machine was made possible and was built in the future enabling him to come back in his new android body to show us all just how truly advanced Apple has really become.
Then we will all gather to sing "We Are The World" to bring the MWSF to a dramatic and exciting climax.
:p
neiltc13
Mar 25, 06:50 PM
It's pretty astounding, little more than a year later, that this is even possible on a tablet device, and to this degree of ease and sophistication. Compare the growth and advancement from January 2010 to March 2011.
You're not getting the point.
It is quite impressive, but a racing game is definitely not the sort of thing that is remotely comfortable to play on a touch screen. They need precise control to be fun and no tablet or touch screen device will ever off that.
You're not getting the point.
It is quite impressive, but a racing game is definitely not the sort of thing that is remotely comfortable to play on a touch screen. They need precise control to be fun and no tablet or touch screen device will ever off that.
kingtj
Mar 22, 04:56 PM
For starters, current models of iPods can also hold podcasts, photo collections and other video! If you have a good sized music collection and/or any of this other stuff? Yes, filling 220GB is VERY possible!
Beyond that, though? I'm in the camp of people who really like the iPod Classic. The "touch" models are less appropriate to leave in a car, attached to a stereo system. My 120GB Classic spends 90% of its time in my car, inside the glove-box, attached to an interface cable. I usually only pull it out when I want to update it in some manner, or when I'm actually headed out someplace like a park where I might want to stick a pair of headphones in it and use it. The iPod Touch is more of an all-purpose "pocket computer" that you can play games on and everything else. Fine, but sometimes you just want a good device with plenty of storage space that plays your media.
Do people seriously have that many songs?!!! seriously?!!!
220gb = 50,000 songs?!!!!! That is totally not necessary.
Apple discontinue that dinosaur! It makes you look bad to just have it on your website.
Beyond that, though? I'm in the camp of people who really like the iPod Classic. The "touch" models are less appropriate to leave in a car, attached to a stereo system. My 120GB Classic spends 90% of its time in my car, inside the glove-box, attached to an interface cable. I usually only pull it out when I want to update it in some manner, or when I'm actually headed out someplace like a park where I might want to stick a pair of headphones in it and use it. The iPod Touch is more of an all-purpose "pocket computer" that you can play games on and everything else. Fine, but sometimes you just want a good device with plenty of storage space that plays your media.
Do people seriously have that many songs?!!! seriously?!!!
220gb = 50,000 songs?!!!!! That is totally not necessary.
Apple discontinue that dinosaur! It makes you look bad to just have it on your website.
Charlie Sheen
Mar 24, 01:04 PM
next step amd cpus
MacFanJeff
Mar 26, 04:00 AM
While professionals can say bye bye to nVidia's CUDA processing and PhysX.
:-(
ATI/AMD is doing what they can, developing an OpenCL driven bullet physics port to Maya but they always seem to be one step behind - announcing a plugin for Maya 2011 in the same week that Autodesk announced that nVidia Physx is being integrated directly into Maya 2012 with real time physx cloth deformation, rigid body dynamics, and physx accelerated calculations for DMM destruction.
On the windows side, 3ds Max is getting Physx integration, too. Open CL is cool but it's got some ground to make up in the application world.
If you refer to my prior post in this thread, I too am a professional 3D content creator. As things stand currently, all software I use take better advantage of nVidia compared to ATI. Most of what I use prefer "CUDA" cores and eventually more "PhysX" integration.
This is why I can no longer use Apple at all in my work, I can not come close to getting what I can from a pair of 580 GTX factory OC cards in SLI for a Mac Pro. In fact, most of what Apple offers is still behind the curve.
It is the single area where Apple fails and I know from attending conferences that most of the big names simply don't care because they do not have enough users on that platform to matter. Don't get me wrong, I still think Apple is great for most all other areas and I recommend them to family and friends. But for the 3D professional market, there is no way I can use Apple without making many sacrifices.
:-(
ATI/AMD is doing what they can, developing an OpenCL driven bullet physics port to Maya but they always seem to be one step behind - announcing a plugin for Maya 2011 in the same week that Autodesk announced that nVidia Physx is being integrated directly into Maya 2012 with real time physx cloth deformation, rigid body dynamics, and physx accelerated calculations for DMM destruction.
On the windows side, 3ds Max is getting Physx integration, too. Open CL is cool but it's got some ground to make up in the application world.
If you refer to my prior post in this thread, I too am a professional 3D content creator. As things stand currently, all software I use take better advantage of nVidia compared to ATI. Most of what I use prefer "CUDA" cores and eventually more "PhysX" integration.
This is why I can no longer use Apple at all in my work, I can not come close to getting what I can from a pair of 580 GTX factory OC cards in SLI for a Mac Pro. In fact, most of what Apple offers is still behind the curve.
It is the single area where Apple fails and I know from attending conferences that most of the big names simply don't care because they do not have enough users on that platform to matter. Don't get me wrong, I still think Apple is great for most all other areas and I recommend them to family and friends. But for the 3D professional market, there is no way I can use Apple without making many sacrifices.
Lord Blackadder
Mar 7, 06:20 PM
Because there is not enough of it, and it will increase our need of foreign oil not lessen it.
There is twice as much gasoline refined from a barrel of sweet crude than diesel.
Can you quote a source on that? As far as I'm aware, that is not necessarily true (http://www.theoildrum.com/node/2174). It all depends on what is in highest demand. Diesel can be refined into gasoline, and gasoline is what people in the US want at the moment. I will try to find some more citeable links than this (http://cr4.globalspec.com/thread/26624/Maximum-gallons-of-diesel-from-a-barrel-of-crude-oil), but my impression is that a single barrel of crude always potentially contains more diesel fuel than gasoline. This is a very market-driven process. Refineries make what people want to buy.
It's also worth pointing out that a lot of gasoline has ethanol and other compounds in it that diesel does not have, and that stuff had to be refined before being added - increasing the engery cost of refining gasoline. Regular unleaded gasoline also has more sulphur in it than the now mandatory-for-passenger-cars ULSD fuel.
For a long time, and in many places people that drove diesel vehicles did so because of the tax advantages. The taxes were kept lower in order to make commercial usage cheaper.
Diesel may be cheaper in Europe due to tax structures, but the same could be said about gasoline here. It doesn't have to be that way in either case. On a purely technical level, gasoline should actually cost more because it takes more energy to refine.
It is not greener to go diesel. It takes that resource from other parts of the economy and puts it into cars. Cars do just fine with gasoline. They are relatively clean and there is twice as much of the stuff in a gallon of oil. They don't get better mileage except in volume of stuff. Which is not the correct measurement. If cars became more diesel, then diesel would become dramatically more expensive, affecting the overall livelihood of everyone, dramatically increase the cost of oil and bring about energy devastation much faster than anyone could imagine.
Diesel takes less energy to refine, contains more energy per unit of volume, emits less CO2, you get potentially more of it out of a barrel of crude and diesel engines are always more fuel efficient than equivalent gasoline engines. Where's the problem?
I can't see how you are going to argue that it is necessary for us to drive gasoline-engined cars in order to prevent "energy devastation". Most other countries already use a much larger proportion of diesel and they seem just fine. We could make a lot more diesel with the crude we are currently extracting, and the market for gasoline will never go away.
By moving to hybrids and electrics, we actually decrease our dependence on foreign oil, and make our cars greener per mile driven. This is why it is the answer and diesel isn't.
I am not advocating that we all switch to diesel. Nor do I want to get rid of the gasoline engine (especially in performance cars!). But the USA has an unecessary obsession with the gasoline-engined car. We need diesel serial hybrids for starters, and more hybrids and diesel-engined cars of all types. There is no one solution. If tens of thousands of people in the US started buying diesel Cruzes, it would not destroy the world's energy infrastructure.
But come on - "energy devastation"?
the argument for that silent agreement ? they don't want "a horsepower arms race"... look how well that has turned out
Indeed. Same with the Japanese and their 280hp/180 km/h limit. Some of the cars made under this "agreement" were considerably faster/more powerful than was officially admitted, and anyway they did away with that a number of years ago.
There is twice as much gasoline refined from a barrel of sweet crude than diesel.
Can you quote a source on that? As far as I'm aware, that is not necessarily true (http://www.theoildrum.com/node/2174). It all depends on what is in highest demand. Diesel can be refined into gasoline, and gasoline is what people in the US want at the moment. I will try to find some more citeable links than this (http://cr4.globalspec.com/thread/26624/Maximum-gallons-of-diesel-from-a-barrel-of-crude-oil), but my impression is that a single barrel of crude always potentially contains more diesel fuel than gasoline. This is a very market-driven process. Refineries make what people want to buy.
It's also worth pointing out that a lot of gasoline has ethanol and other compounds in it that diesel does not have, and that stuff had to be refined before being added - increasing the engery cost of refining gasoline. Regular unleaded gasoline also has more sulphur in it than the now mandatory-for-passenger-cars ULSD fuel.
For a long time, and in many places people that drove diesel vehicles did so because of the tax advantages. The taxes were kept lower in order to make commercial usage cheaper.
Diesel may be cheaper in Europe due to tax structures, but the same could be said about gasoline here. It doesn't have to be that way in either case. On a purely technical level, gasoline should actually cost more because it takes more energy to refine.
It is not greener to go diesel. It takes that resource from other parts of the economy and puts it into cars. Cars do just fine with gasoline. They are relatively clean and there is twice as much of the stuff in a gallon of oil. They don't get better mileage except in volume of stuff. Which is not the correct measurement. If cars became more diesel, then diesel would become dramatically more expensive, affecting the overall livelihood of everyone, dramatically increase the cost of oil and bring about energy devastation much faster than anyone could imagine.
Diesel takes less energy to refine, contains more energy per unit of volume, emits less CO2, you get potentially more of it out of a barrel of crude and diesel engines are always more fuel efficient than equivalent gasoline engines. Where's the problem?
I can't see how you are going to argue that it is necessary for us to drive gasoline-engined cars in order to prevent "energy devastation". Most other countries already use a much larger proportion of diesel and they seem just fine. We could make a lot more diesel with the crude we are currently extracting, and the market for gasoline will never go away.
By moving to hybrids and electrics, we actually decrease our dependence on foreign oil, and make our cars greener per mile driven. This is why it is the answer and diesel isn't.
I am not advocating that we all switch to diesel. Nor do I want to get rid of the gasoline engine (especially in performance cars!). But the USA has an unecessary obsession with the gasoline-engined car. We need diesel serial hybrids for starters, and more hybrids and diesel-engined cars of all types. There is no one solution. If tens of thousands of people in the US started buying diesel Cruzes, it would not destroy the world's energy infrastructure.
But come on - "energy devastation"?
the argument for that silent agreement ? they don't want "a horsepower arms race"... look how well that has turned out
Indeed. Same with the Japanese and their 280hp/180 km/h limit. Some of the cars made under this "agreement" were considerably faster/more powerful than was officially admitted, and anyway they did away with that a number of years ago.
aswitcher
Aug 24, 08:27 PM
New iPods, New iMacs and now New Mac Minis. September could be really busy it seems.
Yakuza
Nov 24, 10:08 AM
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41C0o2GAJGL._SS500_.jpg
Props if anyone knows who used that bag.
i would say Indidana Jones, but i'm not sure
Props if anyone knows who used that bag.
i would say Indidana Jones, but i'm not sure
Tmelon
Apr 2, 02:12 PM
You feel like it�s a new experience? So much better?
Well it's still Mac OS X so I can't call it a completely new experience. There's still a menu bar, still a dock, etc. But they've definitely made some improvements. And there's most likely still more to come in terms of speed and stability.
Well it's still Mac OS X so I can't call it a completely new experience. There's still a menu bar, still a dock, etc. But they've definitely made some improvements. And there's most likely still more to come in terms of speed and stability.
portishead
Apr 21, 12:34 PM
At least he's got a birth certificate. You and Full of Win must be related. Or married. Or both.
yuyi64
Sep 24, 10:54 AM
I've been waiting so long for this case :( Does anyone know when they're gonna release it?
It's already been released. Best Buy has been selling them for more than a week now.
It's already been released. Best Buy has been selling them for more than a week now.
No comments:
Post a Comment