Multimedia
Jul 30, 03:25 PM
Gee, talk about getting ahead of yourself.
Core 3 will be out before Vista is. I'm going to call it now.
Everybody, be my witness, Core 3 (any processor that goes beyond Core 2 because I don't know if they'll call it "Core 3") will be out before a consumer version of Vista is shipped.Here's an example of a post based in fantasy instead of fact. Core 3 is a distinct next generation set of processors based on a 45nm manufacturing process that will not begin before LATE 2008 and reign all of 2009 and 2010. :rolleyes:
We are your witness. And what we are witnessing is that you have not studied the Intel Roadmap at all.You don't think Vista will be out before the revision to the Core 2 Duo due in Q1 2007 with the Santa Rosa chipset??? I bet Vista will ship by the time the Santa Rosa chipset is ready, especially because MS is suggesting Vista systems use harddrives or Mobos with flash RAM to speed up the boot process.Vista ships early 2007 and way preceeds the Core 3 launch. :rolleyes:
Core 2 is with us for the next two years, all of 2007 and most of 2008.:)
Core 3 will be out before Vista is. I'm going to call it now.
Everybody, be my witness, Core 3 (any processor that goes beyond Core 2 because I don't know if they'll call it "Core 3") will be out before a consumer version of Vista is shipped.Here's an example of a post based in fantasy instead of fact. Core 3 is a distinct next generation set of processors based on a 45nm manufacturing process that will not begin before LATE 2008 and reign all of 2009 and 2010. :rolleyes:
We are your witness. And what we are witnessing is that you have not studied the Intel Roadmap at all.You don't think Vista will be out before the revision to the Core 2 Duo due in Q1 2007 with the Santa Rosa chipset??? I bet Vista will ship by the time the Santa Rosa chipset is ready, especially because MS is suggesting Vista systems use harddrives or Mobos with flash RAM to speed up the boot process.Vista ships early 2007 and way preceeds the Core 3 launch. :rolleyes:
Core 2 is with us for the next two years, all of 2007 and most of 2008.:)
CaoCao
Mar 4, 01:46 PM
This is true because you say it's true?
Nope, you just want to make sure that we can't have access to the same protections for our families that you do. How silly of me to want that.
Not at all. Gay people raise kids just as well as straight people- that's been proven. And we do have families. There is no risk of destroying society. The question is valid. Answer it.
A bit of delay in my response because I had to look it up, but thanks for letting us have this right for 7 years now..
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0e/Map_of_US_sodomy_laws.svg/400px-Map_of_US_sodomy_laws.svg.png
Red = Sodomy Laws struck down by the US Supreme Court in 2003
And yet I doubt Macaroony sees opposite-sex attractions as immoral or placing oneself in grave danger. I know what your religious beliefs tell you, and it is your right to follow those as explicitly as you are legally able. But why does that have to impact the rest of the world when you know many of them share different beliefs and have different experiences?
Personally, I think people who believe in gods are weak-minded fools. But I would never support a law that mandated atheism or banned religious gatherings. Because these religious things, while they are not in line with my worldview, do not impact my way of life directly, and allow people to live how they think they need to, not how I think they need to.
I'm gonna go out on a limb here and venture a guess that you don't have a non-biased fact source for a retarded statement like that. :rolleyes:
CaoCao, could you please elaborate as to how gays could cause the collapse of society? I keep hearing that but I don't understand the sentiment behind it. And please, do not skirt around the answer, I always try to be as clear as day with mine.
The only explanation I can come up with as to why you would see being gay and giving gays the same civil rights as the collapse of society is that it differs so much from your worldview, it causes your world to collapse to the point where you feel nothing but uncomfortable to live in such a society. In other words; if gays are treated equal under every law under the sun, your society would collapse.
I often hear that same-sex marriage devalues marriage and threatens those that are already married. I wonder why and how. I doubt that your straight neighbor's happy marriage affects you at all unless you're so jealous, you want their marriage to be annulled - a happy same-sex couple must be killing you inside. I have said it here and in another thread before, marriage is nothing but a contract between two members of two families and the state to secure their fortune and legacy. Every attorney will tell you the same.
I have to say, it's very exhausting coming up with a defense convincing enough for those that don't seem to follow the world by logic. I'm glad I'm not a lawyer because if law is like that all the time, I'd rather give up on it and live in exile.
Logic is my source. Society needs people, no people means no society. If there were no more babies society would eventually collapse.
Source?
:rolleyes:
Nope, you just want to make sure that we can't have access to the same protections for our families that you do. How silly of me to want that.
Not at all. Gay people raise kids just as well as straight people- that's been proven. And we do have families. There is no risk of destroying society. The question is valid. Answer it.
A bit of delay in my response because I had to look it up, but thanks for letting us have this right for 7 years now..
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0e/Map_of_US_sodomy_laws.svg/400px-Map_of_US_sodomy_laws.svg.png
Red = Sodomy Laws struck down by the US Supreme Court in 2003
And yet I doubt Macaroony sees opposite-sex attractions as immoral or placing oneself in grave danger. I know what your religious beliefs tell you, and it is your right to follow those as explicitly as you are legally able. But why does that have to impact the rest of the world when you know many of them share different beliefs and have different experiences?
Personally, I think people who believe in gods are weak-minded fools. But I would never support a law that mandated atheism or banned religious gatherings. Because these religious things, while they are not in line with my worldview, do not impact my way of life directly, and allow people to live how they think they need to, not how I think they need to.
I'm gonna go out on a limb here and venture a guess that you don't have a non-biased fact source for a retarded statement like that. :rolleyes:
CaoCao, could you please elaborate as to how gays could cause the collapse of society? I keep hearing that but I don't understand the sentiment behind it. And please, do not skirt around the answer, I always try to be as clear as day with mine.
The only explanation I can come up with as to why you would see being gay and giving gays the same civil rights as the collapse of society is that it differs so much from your worldview, it causes your world to collapse to the point where you feel nothing but uncomfortable to live in such a society. In other words; if gays are treated equal under every law under the sun, your society would collapse.
I often hear that same-sex marriage devalues marriage and threatens those that are already married. I wonder why and how. I doubt that your straight neighbor's happy marriage affects you at all unless you're so jealous, you want their marriage to be annulled - a happy same-sex couple must be killing you inside. I have said it here and in another thread before, marriage is nothing but a contract between two members of two families and the state to secure their fortune and legacy. Every attorney will tell you the same.
I have to say, it's very exhausting coming up with a defense convincing enough for those that don't seem to follow the world by logic. I'm glad I'm not a lawyer because if law is like that all the time, I'd rather give up on it and live in exile.
Logic is my source. Society needs people, no people means no society. If there were no more babies society would eventually collapse.
Source?
:rolleyes:
Dr.Gargoyle
Aug 11, 03:42 PM
A good chunk of the remaining 19% is CDMA.
Ever heard of DoCoMo?
Ever heard of DoCoMo?
MacRumors
Apr 19, 01:21 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/19/analysis-of-apples-lawsuit-against-samsung-includes-ios-device-sales-numbers/)
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/19/142014-apple_samsung_lawsuit.jpg
By the time Mortal Kombat
mortal kombat 2011 sub zero
sub zero mortal kombat 2011.
Sub Zero Mortal Kombat Legacy
mortal kombat 2011 sub zero vs
Mortal Kombat Sub Zero
Yes, Original Sub-Zero will
sub zero mortal kombat 2011
mortal kombat 2011 sub zero
mileena vs sub zero
By contrast, Sub-Zero#39;s
First Look at Sub-Zero in MK:L
mortal kombat 2011 sub zero
our Mortal Kombat (2011)
mortal kombat 2011 sub zero
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/19/142014-apple_samsung_lawsuit.jpg
freezerburrn
Sep 13, 01:50 PM
After reading the Anandtech article, I'm curious to know how much of a concern the FBD memory latency is to some of you, seeing that the Core 2 extreme came out on top in many of the benchmark tests.
wmmk
Jul 14, 06:19 PM
The thing I like least about this rumor is that it specifies only a 320GB harddrive.
The current configs (quad g5) were released in October of last year, in that time harddrive capacities have increased well beyond that (320) small number.
The new machines will get 500GB drives I have to believe.
:confused:
320 would be the standard. you could upgrade to a terabyte if there are still two HDD bays.
The current configs (quad g5) were released in October of last year, in that time harddrive capacities have increased well beyond that (320) small number.
The new machines will get 500GB drives I have to believe.
:confused:
320 would be the standard. you could upgrade to a terabyte if there are still two HDD bays.
andiwm2003
Apr 25, 02:50 PM
But that's different from APPLE "EXPLOITING" you, isn't it? Perhaps a dictionary reference will help you "understand it"?
Verb 1. exploit - use or manipulate to one's advantage;
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/exploit
So, pray tell, what's Apple's advantage over you here?
Where did I say Apple is exploiting me?:confused:
Apple did a shoddy programming job by not encrypting the data. Thaty is why Apple is under pressure by the various govenments and rightfully so. Nobody says Apple is using this data in a malicious way. (aside of this lawsuit but that is only here in the USA and stupid and greed driven by lawyers and totally besides the real issue)
Verb 1. exploit - use or manipulate to one's advantage;
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/exploit
So, pray tell, what's Apple's advantage over you here?
Where did I say Apple is exploiting me?:confused:
Apple did a shoddy programming job by not encrypting the data. Thaty is why Apple is under pressure by the various govenments and rightfully so. Nobody says Apple is using this data in a malicious way. (aside of this lawsuit but that is only here in the USA and stupid and greed driven by lawyers and totally besides the real issue)
Homy
Jul 20, 11:44 AM
eight cores + Tiger = Octopussy?!?:p
Sydde
Mar 22, 12:50 AM
...the US's role will remain very limited. Like the Gulf War, we will let our Arab League allies be the first ones across the border, and give the security operations to the French and British.
This makes me want to go have lunch at the Cafe My Lai.
This makes me want to go have lunch at the Cafe My Lai.
gnasher729
Sep 19, 02:54 AM
APPLE I NEED A NEW MACBOOK PRO. I NEED FIREWIRE 800, I NEED A DL SuperDrive, i'd like MEMROM.
I found a shop that sells MacBook Pros with Memrom chips. At the same shop, you can buy Rolox watches, Pravda shoes, Gutchy watches, all at knock down prices.
I found a shop that sells MacBook Pros with Memrom chips. At the same shop, you can buy Rolox watches, Pravda shoes, Gutchy watches, all at knock down prices.
840quadra
Apr 25, 03:10 PM
statistics show that distribution of firearms mainly lead to more homocides and also suicides using firearms.
if guns are outlawed, their distribution is greatly limited, making it a lot harder for outlaws to obtain them.
the more you spread guns, the greater is the risk of them being used in illegal activities.
..oh wait... this forum is about apple and computers, right? :rolleyes:
Noted,
But this is totally off topic, and this falls into the relm of Politics, Religion, Social Issues (http://forums.macrumors.com/forumdisplay.php?f=47) .
When you have a high enough post count, I am sure a few of us would love to discuss the inaccuracies of the facts you think you understand on this subject. ;) .
if guns are outlawed, their distribution is greatly limited, making it a lot harder for outlaws to obtain them.
the more you spread guns, the greater is the risk of them being used in illegal activities.
..oh wait... this forum is about apple and computers, right? :rolleyes:
Noted,
But this is totally off topic, and this falls into the relm of Politics, Religion, Social Issues (http://forums.macrumors.com/forumdisplay.php?f=47) .
When you have a high enough post count, I am sure a few of us would love to discuss the inaccuracies of the facts you think you understand on this subject. ;) .
ninjadex
Mar 31, 02:44 PM
What so many fail to realize is iOS was made for the iPad from the get-go. It's been mentioned many times that what became the iPad was in development longer than the original iPhone.
This goes to show that iOS conceptualization is light years ahead of Android. It's so obvious Google is scrambling, and seems to be making this stuff as they go along, without any sense of a master design guiding the way.
This goes to show that iOS conceptualization is light years ahead of Android. It's so obvious Google is scrambling, and seems to be making this stuff as they go along, without any sense of a master design guiding the way.
grue
Apr 12, 01:26 AM
Oh, and here's one I just ran into that reminds me:
Is it so much to ask to have it go to and from the background cleanly? Christ in a cartoon, you'd think backgrounding the application is a huge exercise in resource allocation by how long it takes to bring back all the windows sometimes, if they reappear at all. FCP is bad enough about this sometimes, but Compressor is even worse.
Minor, sure, but annoying as hell.
Is it so much to ask to have it go to and from the background cleanly? Christ in a cartoon, you'd think backgrounding the application is a huge exercise in resource allocation by how long it takes to bring back all the windows sometimes, if they reappear at all. FCP is bad enough about this sometimes, but Compressor is even worse.
Minor, sure, but annoying as hell.
aswitcher
Aug 7, 06:58 PM
Norton's GoBack, which was purchased from some other company, has a similar feature for restoring single files. This isn't quite the same thing, but the whole concept isn't entirely new. GoBack was introduced well before Microsoft came out with System Restore... That said, I think its a great feature to include and I'm sure I'll find many uses for it.
GoBack was key to my last 2 years as a PC owner.
GoBack was key to my last 2 years as a PC owner.
rosalindavenue
Jul 28, 06:11 AM
I am waiting until the new MBP is released with merom. I don't care if it's now or in January.
My question is: What's the fastest way to get the new MBP into my hands? Is ordering it online after it's announcement the fastest, or going to an apple store?
I live within 3 stores. So I can play the call and place one on hold bit.
I'd think you would have a better chance to get one fast with the stores. I don't live near one and I ordered an ibook last August when it was upgraded-- even with expedited shipping it still took 10 days to arrive from China. (Apple refunded the expedited shipping fee).
My question is: What's the fastest way to get the new MBP into my hands? Is ordering it online after it's announcement the fastest, or going to an apple store?
I live within 3 stores. So I can play the call and place one on hold bit.
I'd think you would have a better chance to get one fast with the stores. I don't live near one and I ordered an ibook last August when it was upgraded-- even with expedited shipping it still took 10 days to arrive from China. (Apple refunded the expedited shipping fee).
VanMac
Aug 11, 10:26 AM
I say it everytime they talk about this..... I'll buy one.....just go ahead and release it already
daneoni
Aug 26, 05:38 AM
Might as well add my story. My 2005 PB (non Hi-Res) i bought in august 05 started forcefully going to sleep. The genius almost gave me hell saying he couldnt prove anything and that i should re-install...yeah that'll happen.
Luckily every record of the sleeps could be found in console logs so i simply save them and marched down there the next day. This time he had no choice but to take it in. After supposedly getting fixed i picked up the laptop,got home, powered it up and lo and behold it slept in like 10 seconds and had a wonky trackpad. Took it back and they replaced the MLB again this time giving me a 1.67 MLB (i had a 1.5GHz).
I got home and things were fine for a while until the powerbook this time refused to go to sleep talk about irony. Off to the Apple store again, took it in again this time for about a week and a half (this is the only machine i have) and when it came back "fixed" i had been given my original MLB (my clock speed was now back to 1.5GHz, my serial number was back to what it was after not having one due to replacements) and there were scratches and crud on the casing. In essence i wasted my time completely.
I immidiately took it home and sold it as is, i just couldn't be bothered to complain anymore.
Hmmm support could be better but it could also be worse.
PS i'm in the UK.
Luckily every record of the sleeps could be found in console logs so i simply save them and marched down there the next day. This time he had no choice but to take it in. After supposedly getting fixed i picked up the laptop,got home, powered it up and lo and behold it slept in like 10 seconds and had a wonky trackpad. Took it back and they replaced the MLB again this time giving me a 1.67 MLB (i had a 1.5GHz).
I got home and things were fine for a while until the powerbook this time refused to go to sleep talk about irony. Off to the Apple store again, took it in again this time for about a week and a half (this is the only machine i have) and when it came back "fixed" i had been given my original MLB (my clock speed was now back to 1.5GHz, my serial number was back to what it was after not having one due to replacements) and there were scratches and crud on the casing. In essence i wasted my time completely.
I immidiately took it home and sold it as is, i just couldn't be bothered to complain anymore.
Hmmm support could be better but it could also be worse.
PS i'm in the UK.
macMan228
Mar 26, 08:34 AM
To my knowledge, all these features everyone is complaining about, can be disabled or just worked around, so whats the big deal?
Bring on the Lion, i can handle it :apple:
Bring on the Lion, i can handle it :apple:
easy4lif
Nov 28, 07:22 PM
steve jobs replied earlier this year to such nonsense
"the music companies are trying to be greedy"
I approve this messsage
"the music companies are trying to be greedy"
I approve this messsage
maclaptop
Apr 12, 07:51 AM
Maybe they need to wait in order to get 28/32nm A5 chips. No point in having an iPhone 5 with a 3 hour battery life
Or maybe their waiting while the new antenna engineers they hired try and convince Steve to leave them alone to do their job.
They want to put the antenna inside where it belongs.
Jobs ego can't handle it.
Or maybe their waiting while the new antenna engineers they hired try and convince Steve to leave them alone to do their job.
They want to put the antenna inside where it belongs.
Jobs ego can't handle it.
hunkaburningluv
Mar 23, 06:09 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/532.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Mobile/8B117 Safari/6531.22.7)
Competition is good.
Make a case for your argument.
Well, you only need to look at what happened with the gameboy to see that competition is good.
After seeing off the game gear and lynx, the gameboy stagnated for almost a decade. How long did it take before there was a colour version? Years, yet we've seen some great revisions since the PSP was announced.
Competition is good.
Make a case for your argument.
Well, you only need to look at what happened with the gameboy to see that competition is good.
After seeing off the game gear and lynx, the gameboy stagnated for almost a decade. How long did it take before there was a colour version? Years, yet we've seen some great revisions since the PSP was announced.
Billy Boo Bob
Nov 28, 11:02 PM
1 Random artist finds inspiration and writes a song
2 Artist decides his song is so good that he/she records it in a professional studio (which he can rent) so the sound quality is superb
3 Artists logs into the iTMS and publishes his song
4 Artists gets $ from every song sold and the iTMS charges the artist for the distribution
See, that's the catch-22 for new artists. The labels are the ones that get tunes played on the radio. In the 50's and 60's they would strong-arm their stuff in, but I'm sure even nowadays they provide incentives (read: bribes) to get new stuff on the air. Especially if they think the band is really good and will make it in the long run. And don't fool yourself into thinking a new band can get huge without radio.
The problem is that the labels get the artists by the balls when they sign them up to ridiculous contracts. Your 1-4 examples look pretty good on paper, but in order to sell any significant number of copies of their music, anyone wanting it (but doesn't know it yet) has to wade through tons of (what that persons sees as) crap just to get any exposure to something they'll consider good. I'm sure there's a lot of music in the indie catalog that I would just love, but I don't have the time to wade through it all to find it. Instead, I'll listen to the radio and when I hear something I like, I'll try to pay attention to who it is. I may or may not end up buying it, or checking out what else they do, but without radio exposure, most good indie bands don't have a chance in hell of selling to anyone except those that happen to be in the bar where they're playing one weekend.
Now, if you take a look at already established and popular bands, that's a different story. Someone mentioned huge bands like Pink Floyd. Their last couple of CDs didn't need a big label to sell. People were going to buy it if they like Floyd no matter what. And in a case of that kind of popularity, the radio stations were going to play them with or without a major label. The same could be applied to other huge (classic) rock bands, as well as established artists in other music styles (country, rap, R&B, blues, etc...). Another example would be someone like Eric Clapton. He could put one out on "Clapton Records" and would sell nearly, if not exactly, the same number of CDs as he will on a major label.
Unfortunately, the number of artists (of any type of music) that could dismiss the labels and still sell as many CDs and get the same radio exposure are limited. And any new band is going to go nowhere without radio (or MTV/VH1) exposure.
In the end, I don't see the labels going away totally any time soon. They're in cahoots with the big FM music stations and in general, they do a good job of promoting new good bands that sign up. It's just a shame that there's really nothing to keep them from raping the artists. If there were just some way for new bands to get exposure to the masses without having to sell their souls to the labels then things would be better. Unfortunately, the Internet can only go so far in helping a new band with this.
2 Artist decides his song is so good that he/she records it in a professional studio (which he can rent) so the sound quality is superb
3 Artists logs into the iTMS and publishes his song
4 Artists gets $ from every song sold and the iTMS charges the artist for the distribution
See, that's the catch-22 for new artists. The labels are the ones that get tunes played on the radio. In the 50's and 60's they would strong-arm their stuff in, but I'm sure even nowadays they provide incentives (read: bribes) to get new stuff on the air. Especially if they think the band is really good and will make it in the long run. And don't fool yourself into thinking a new band can get huge without radio.
The problem is that the labels get the artists by the balls when they sign them up to ridiculous contracts. Your 1-4 examples look pretty good on paper, but in order to sell any significant number of copies of their music, anyone wanting it (but doesn't know it yet) has to wade through tons of (what that persons sees as) crap just to get any exposure to something they'll consider good. I'm sure there's a lot of music in the indie catalog that I would just love, but I don't have the time to wade through it all to find it. Instead, I'll listen to the radio and when I hear something I like, I'll try to pay attention to who it is. I may or may not end up buying it, or checking out what else they do, but without radio exposure, most good indie bands don't have a chance in hell of selling to anyone except those that happen to be in the bar where they're playing one weekend.
Now, if you take a look at already established and popular bands, that's a different story. Someone mentioned huge bands like Pink Floyd. Their last couple of CDs didn't need a big label to sell. People were going to buy it if they like Floyd no matter what. And in a case of that kind of popularity, the radio stations were going to play them with or without a major label. The same could be applied to other huge (classic) rock bands, as well as established artists in other music styles (country, rap, R&B, blues, etc...). Another example would be someone like Eric Clapton. He could put one out on "Clapton Records" and would sell nearly, if not exactly, the same number of CDs as he will on a major label.
Unfortunately, the number of artists (of any type of music) that could dismiss the labels and still sell as many CDs and get the same radio exposure are limited. And any new band is going to go nowhere without radio (or MTV/VH1) exposure.
In the end, I don't see the labels going away totally any time soon. They're in cahoots with the big FM music stations and in general, they do a good job of promoting new good bands that sign up. It's just a shame that there's really nothing to keep them from raping the artists. If there were just some way for new bands to get exposure to the masses without having to sell their souls to the labels then things would be better. Unfortunately, the Internet can only go so far in helping a new band with this.
samcraig
Apr 27, 08:39 AM
if any of you are concerned about being tracked - why on earth would you buy any product that has a GPS in it (all computers cash info) and why on earth would you buy a cell phone - the towers know almost exactly when (which apple doesn't know) and where you are? The reaction to this news is stupid.
Your type of apathy in the long term will do more harm than good.
There is a big difference between voluntarily and involuntarily giving out personal information and that's what was at stake here.
Apple admitted error - it's ok - you can admit it might not have been in the best interest of consumers too. Apple won't come and take your iPhone away.
Your type of apathy in the long term will do more harm than good.
There is a big difference between voluntarily and involuntarily giving out personal information and that's what was at stake here.
Apple admitted error - it's ok - you can admit it might not have been in the best interest of consumers too. Apple won't come and take your iPhone away.
Luph67
Mar 31, 11:02 PM
I'd take an iPhone over an android any day, but let's get real--the apple community is having a field day with this because of how much the competition has stressed "open" over "closed" in the past. Really the whole argument is so bogged down in brand loyalty that it's not even worth having anymore.
No comments:
Post a Comment