Quark
Oct 11, 01:06 PM
There is a very good article in the latest Popular Science (just got it in the mail two days ago -- I assume it is Nov-2002 issue -- when I get home, I'll verify).
The article discusses everything you guys are talking about.
It shows, very clearly, how Mhz and Ghz for benchmarking is not a good idea - it compares AMD to Intel, then throws the PowerPC into the mix.
It's definitely worth a read.
Quark
The article discusses everything you guys are talking about.
It shows, very clearly, how Mhz and Ghz for benchmarking is not a good idea - it compares AMD to Intel, then throws the PowerPC into the mix.
It's definitely worth a read.
Quark
Natsus
Sep 13, 08:05 AM
The link does not say Apple will be using OLEDs in the next gens. It is RUMORED.The new Nano tech specs clearly say nothing about OLED. Since OLED has become a hot topic, I'm sure Steve Jobs or the specs would have called that to our attention.
True, but at the same time there two things to consider. A lot better battery life and brighter screen. Those are the two positives of having OLEDs in the first place. True it might just be a rumor, but I guess we'll find out when we get these new ipods. (OLEDS can do pure black)
True, but at the same time there two things to consider. A lot better battery life and brighter screen. Those are the two positives of having OLEDs in the first place. True it might just be a rumor, but I guess we'll find out when we get these new ipods. (OLEDS can do pure black)
Thex1138
Mar 12, 07:30 AM
Can't see why they'd bring all the stores down.
....
:D
....
:D
Mac-Addict
Sep 23, 09:36 AM
I mean what the hell� I live in America, not Wal-Mart-ica!
Lol @ Wal-Mart-ica, but yeah I can see where this is going.. over in england its most likely going to be tescos moaning about iTunes Movies..
Lol @ Wal-Mart-ica, but yeah I can see where this is going.. over in england its most likely going to be tescos moaning about iTunes Movies..
NT1440
Mar 11, 12:32 AM
To put the waste into perspective for you ... Bernie Madoff as one man squandered 65 Billion dollars.
The Military Budget is only 10 times that ...
should we shave the Military spending down to the 1.25 Billion they spent over one weekend on that G20 Party?
What you call the inadequate drop in the bucket ... would dwarf Military spending.
Madoff wasn't in the government. That had nothing to do with the government (other than showcasing the joke our regulation system has become) so bringing it up doesn't even make sense.
As for the G20, do things like that happen often in Canada?
Also, we need to stop flip flopping between talking about Canada and the USA, or at least do a better job of distinguishing the two when putting numbers out there as it gets confusing.
The Military Budget is only 10 times that ...
should we shave the Military spending down to the 1.25 Billion they spent over one weekend on that G20 Party?
What you call the inadequate drop in the bucket ... would dwarf Military spending.
Madoff wasn't in the government. That had nothing to do with the government (other than showcasing the joke our regulation system has become) so bringing it up doesn't even make sense.
As for the G20, do things like that happen often in Canada?
Also, we need to stop flip flopping between talking about Canada and the USA, or at least do a better job of distinguishing the two when putting numbers out there as it gets confusing.
AP_piano295
Mar 29, 12:43 PM
Curious about WWI. The Germans were attacking our merchant vessels and cruise ships with our citizens on them( now granted they were filled with weapons). The Germans were supposed to let the people abandon ship before they sunk it. They didn't do that with the Lusitania and in other cases I believe. So IMHO, WWI was a justified war.
Civil War I disagree with you as well.
But, my giant WTF goes to the bolded. You really think the Revolutionary War was unnecessary? How else would you have proposed separating from Britain?
WW1 was another silly European power struggle which we were pulled into. It isn't as if there was any nation I would call the "bad guys" in WW1. It was just a stupid squabble over resources and power.
I think you could make a point that the Civil War was necessary if you want to claim that freeing the slaves was the major motivator behind the war. The way things actually turned out I think things could probably been handled better through political discourse. Rather than spending several years ordering people to murder each other, then "freeing" the slaves and promptly changing the laws so that blacks were basically relegated to a slave state after the war any way...
The revolutionary war was necessary if you assume that the USA being its own sovereign nation is a particularly important thing. This is not a belief to which I subscribe, in my eyes the revolutionary war is more an example of an upstart colony being expected to work with its parent nation and deciding that it didn't feel like it (much like an 8 year old child). The motivations behind our separation from the British empire was basically "we don't want to pay taxes, also were miffed about you selling us tea cheaper than we could buy it from smugglers :confused::confused:".
I only support violent intervention when one side in a conflict has made it abundantly clear that murder and destruction is one of their actual goals. Once Hitler decided that exterminating millions of human beings was a reasonable thing to do I believe he was beyond the point of reasoning.
Basically what I'm saying is that I believe that violence should only ever be used in order to stop others from doing violence. In any other situation war shouldn't even be viewed as a viable option.
Of course this isn't how most humans behave or view the world, we claim that we only use war as a "last resort". But really people are willing to engage in war over silly conflicts which could easily be settled peacefully if people could just learn to behave reasonably :eek:.
Civil War I disagree with you as well.
But, my giant WTF goes to the bolded. You really think the Revolutionary War was unnecessary? How else would you have proposed separating from Britain?
WW1 was another silly European power struggle which we were pulled into. It isn't as if there was any nation I would call the "bad guys" in WW1. It was just a stupid squabble over resources and power.
I think you could make a point that the Civil War was necessary if you want to claim that freeing the slaves was the major motivator behind the war. The way things actually turned out I think things could probably been handled better through political discourse. Rather than spending several years ordering people to murder each other, then "freeing" the slaves and promptly changing the laws so that blacks were basically relegated to a slave state after the war any way...
The revolutionary war was necessary if you assume that the USA being its own sovereign nation is a particularly important thing. This is not a belief to which I subscribe, in my eyes the revolutionary war is more an example of an upstart colony being expected to work with its parent nation and deciding that it didn't feel like it (much like an 8 year old child). The motivations behind our separation from the British empire was basically "we don't want to pay taxes, also were miffed about you selling us tea cheaper than we could buy it from smugglers :confused::confused:".
I only support violent intervention when one side in a conflict has made it abundantly clear that murder and destruction is one of their actual goals. Once Hitler decided that exterminating millions of human beings was a reasonable thing to do I believe he was beyond the point of reasoning.
Basically what I'm saying is that I believe that violence should only ever be used in order to stop others from doing violence. In any other situation war shouldn't even be viewed as a viable option.
Of course this isn't how most humans behave or view the world, we claim that we only use war as a "last resort". But really people are willing to engage in war over silly conflicts which could easily be settled peacefully if people could just learn to behave reasonably :eek:.
4np
Aug 24, 05:54 PM
But Apple's server is getting hammered right now... I got through to print out the affected serial numbers, then powered down my AlBook, just to be safe, popped out the battery to see if I had a lucky number, and now that I know I do, I can't get back onto the site.
Oh well. I'll try again later.
One thing I wonder about is what the consequences of keeping the 'dangerous' battery as a back-up would be... I'm not really worried about it exploding, but will the Apple police come after me for not returning the old battery once they ship me a new one? Obviously, it would be my own fault if my laptop exploded when using the old battery, but I'm willing to take that risk.
Cheers
Interesting question... You need to prove in some way you indeed had that defective battery
Oh well. I'll try again later.
One thing I wonder about is what the consequences of keeping the 'dangerous' battery as a back-up would be... I'm not really worried about it exploding, but will the Apple police come after me for not returning the old battery once they ship me a new one? Obviously, it would be my own fault if my laptop exploded when using the old battery, but I'm willing to take that risk.
Cheers
Interesting question... You need to prove in some way you indeed had that defective battery
nygfan80
Mar 21, 03:39 PM
this made my day. little things like this go a long way for a companies user base. Reminds me of Pixar's stint for a little girls dying request to see the movie (http://www.justpressplay.net/movies/movie-news/5530-pixar-grants-dying-10-year-olds-wish-to-see-qupq-before-she-dies.html)
Wow, puts things in perspective.
Wow, puts things in perspective.
spicyapple
Nov 8, 08:43 AM
Still, this is a very nice machine, probaby the best iBook ever. The C2D is so powerful compared to the G4 it's mind boggling.What's worse, it's more powerful than my dual G5 tower. And my machine is only 2 years old! Same with my 12" PowerBook. All in all, for what I paid for my PB, today for the same cash, I can buy a machine with 8x the computing power. Maybe if I wait another two years to upgrade, computing power would be 64x!! :)
motulist
Aug 8, 09:24 PM
... I don't know how processor hungry remote control and front row are, but I do know these users require the most power out of their machines...
The remote and Front Row use essentially no system resources when they are not in use. So they do not take away any processor power or anything else when people are working on power hungry projects. So that's not the reason they were omitted.
So far the best answer I've heard is that the tower will often be under a desk where the remote wouldn't work because it needs a line of sight, but that still doesn't explain why they don't allow it as a custom option.
The remote and Front Row use essentially no system resources when they are not in use. So they do not take away any processor power or anything else when people are working on power hungry projects. So that's not the reason they were omitted.
So far the best answer I've heard is that the tower will often be under a desk where the remote wouldn't work because it needs a line of sight, but that still doesn't explain why they don't allow it as a custom option.
VidPro
May 5, 08:25 AM
I do understand people hate for 3D displays, but people calling it a fad, it's not. Not any more anyways.
It is now a part of technological evolution for TVs and image devices.
Calling 3D a fad right now is like calling colour TV a fad in the 1950s. Just like how colour TV to start wasn't perfect, 3D isn't perfect yet either.
We all know Apple is the king of imaging technologies, they wouldn't release a product with something like a 3D screen without it being perfect and "magical".
Perfect? I'm going on perfect iPad number 6 because of screen issues.
Anyway, 3D is a gimmick. I'd rather a TV with perfect blacks and color over a nauseating trick.
It is now a part of technological evolution for TVs and image devices.
Calling 3D a fad right now is like calling colour TV a fad in the 1950s. Just like how colour TV to start wasn't perfect, 3D isn't perfect yet either.
We all know Apple is the king of imaging technologies, they wouldn't release a product with something like a 3D screen without it being perfect and "magical".
Perfect? I'm going on perfect iPad number 6 because of screen issues.
Anyway, 3D is a gimmick. I'd rather a TV with perfect blacks and color over a nauseating trick.
Edge100
Nov 27, 01:05 PM
Lets hope they remaster them - the stereo effects on the original versions can be really painful on a pair of headphones.
+1
The quality of The Beatles CD releases are, for the most part, poor. Of course, they date from 1987, and digital tech has improved greatly since then.
The music itself could also do with a remix. Mixing drums entirely in one stereo channel is difficult to take in headphones!
+1
The quality of The Beatles CD releases are, for the most part, poor. Of course, they date from 1987, and digital tech has improved greatly since then.
The music itself could also do with a remix. Mixing drums entirely in one stereo channel is difficult to take in headphones!
Mark-Mac-Attack
Oct 15, 03:12 AM
Mark - what desk is that?
Mikael for the majority of shots (first one with optional glass), then another Ikea desk that I don't know (I didn't buy that one).
Mark.
Mikael for the majority of shots (first one with optional glass), then another Ikea desk that I don't know (I didn't buy that one).
Mark.
Jacqui83
Nov 8, 06:21 AM
The US Store was like up a few minutes ago though and now it's down, could it really be?! Ugh I can't wait! please let it be!
AvSRoCkCO1067
Sep 6, 10:14 AM
As a MBP owner who bought a rev1 model right when they came out -- and has been sending it in to fix its many, many problems constantly, and is now seeing it lag behind the iMacs in speed and power -- I feel like I bought a lemon. Thanks, Apple, for pissing in my face.
....:rolleyes:
As everyone says, technology will always get better and better. You should be happy that Apple is updating its computers, so that when you need a new one, you'll get the latest and greatest (it's much better than never updating and having to wait months and months for a puny, pathetic upgrade...)
As for your problems, I'm sorry :( - I haven't had a single problem with my MacBook Pro yet <fingers crossed> :)
....:rolleyes:
As everyone says, technology will always get better and better. You should be happy that Apple is updating its computers, so that when you need a new one, you'll get the latest and greatest (it's much better than never updating and having to wait months and months for a puny, pathetic upgrade...)
As for your problems, I'm sorry :( - I haven't had a single problem with my MacBook Pro yet <fingers crossed> :)
spencers
Oct 26, 09:12 AM
http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc4/hs903.snc4/71648_164866660198726_100000261799253_456073_3612241_n.jpg
That's quite a bit of BEIGE!
That's quite a bit of BEIGE!
iMacZealot
Sep 23, 09:45 PM
i refuse to shop 'walmart again
I've never liked walmart --- it's sooo creepy; even creepier than rite aid, the dress barn, and guns'n'ammo combined.
I don't see why they're freaking out about this; i wouldn't see iTMS being such a threat to their customers who seem to be pennypinching old ladies that don't know whether it's tuesday or december.
I've never liked walmart --- it's sooo creepy; even creepier than rite aid, the dress barn, and guns'n'ammo combined.
I don't see why they're freaking out about this; i wouldn't see iTMS being such a threat to their customers who seem to be pennypinching old ladies that don't know whether it's tuesday or december.
paradillon
Sep 6, 09:13 AM
The "Digitally Amplified Speakers" makes me wonder about apples patent on surround sound technology for movie veiwing.
http://forums.macrumors.com/images/attach/jpg.gif
http://forums.macrumors.com/images/attach/jpg.gif
bob232
Mar 25, 09:46 PM
Download links please?
ummm, ever heard of itune?
ummm, ever heard of itune?
rdlink
Apr 17, 07:25 AM
Err... seems like a broad estimate like "2-3 weeks" is a rough idea. It's also not a long time. If people would just order and get on with their life there would be no need to hunt and peck and moan.
Agreed. Recipe for sucess:
Click.
Enter credit card information.
Get on with life.
Sign for package when it arrives in about three weeks.
Enjoy your new device.
The delays were actually a good thing for me. Gave me time to "cool off" and realize that my iPad 1 is working just fine for me, and I can get along without upgrading to this generation.
Agreed. Recipe for sucess:
Click.
Enter credit card information.
Get on with life.
Sign for package when it arrives in about three weeks.
Enjoy your new device.
The delays were actually a good thing for me. Gave me time to "cool off" and realize that my iPad 1 is working just fine for me, and I can get along without upgrading to this generation.
hagjohn
Oct 26, 08:10 PM
I'm installed the updated but my temps have gone up.. from about 34C degrees to about 54C.
mscriv
Apr 7, 07:07 PM
This is not true. There is no specific assertion in the Old Testament of any triune nature of god.
I could type up a bunch of stuff, but this website (http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/triunity.html) does a good job of covering all the bases regarding our difference of opinion on this matter. Here's two quick excerpts:
Jews say that the Shema (pronounced Shmah), "Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God is one Lord"1 contradicts the Christian doctrine that Jesus is God. In addition, there are a number of other verses that proclaim that God is one (see God is One). However, the triunity of God is taught throughout the Old Testament, including the Shema! How can a statement of oneness imply plurality? The word translated "one" from the Hebrew is echad, which demonstrates compound unity of oneness.
and
Some of the verses above include all members of the triunity (Isaiah 42:1, Isaiah 48:16, and Isaiah 61:1). Therefore, the Old Testament does reveal the Christian concept of the Godhead, with God being one God, consisting of three persons.
Remember what I said in the beginning. Complete understanding of the old testament comes through knowledge gained by the revelation of the new testament. They really can't be separated in terms of understanding the whole of God's message and work throughout history. Additionally, for the average person (who cannot read Hebrew and is not familiar with Jewish history and doctrine) it could be difficult to see the trinity in the old testament. That's why I suggest to people that they invest in a study Bible, possibly a Bible Encyclopedia, and some commentaries. These additional tools can help bring out the contextual clues provided by the original languages, the historical context, and the skill of cross referencing within the Bible.
Of course not any interpretation is valid; however, the Bible is very complex and contradicts itself in places. There is no set interpretation that can said to be right, rather a spectrum that can be justified. "Clear" is not a word I would use.
Again, we'll just have to agree to disagree. The Bible does not contradict itself in it's overall message of God's revelation of himself and plan for restoring the relationship with man that was destroyed by sin. Sure there are differences of application and interpretation regarding secondary matters (food laws, sexuality, alcohol, etc. etc.) and that is why we have different denominations within the Christian faith. However, the primary matter of who God is, how he dealt with the problem of sin, and how he we are to treat one another is clear and without contradiction. That is why I feel confident in telling you that Westboro is "off the mark" because they are not following Christ's example with how they treat their fellow man and how they represent God to others.
I realize that, to you, what I'm about to say might be viewed as an issue of semantics or "word manipulation", but to a genuine follower of Christ there is no such thing as "my interpretation". I believe what God says in his word and if I am confused about something I look to other parts of scripture to help me get at the correct interpretation of what is confusing me. You see it doesn't matter what I think or what I wish it would say, I come to the Bible with no preconceived notions and let it stand on it's own.
This is obviously where we part ways. For me the Bible is the product of man. Nothing more.
I understand. In most, if not all, of these discussions the eventual impasse that arises is centered on the issue of faith. Some choose to believe, some don't. Some are open to putting God to the test, some are not.
I could type up a bunch of stuff, but this website (http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/triunity.html) does a good job of covering all the bases regarding our difference of opinion on this matter. Here's two quick excerpts:
Jews say that the Shema (pronounced Shmah), "Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God is one Lord"1 contradicts the Christian doctrine that Jesus is God. In addition, there are a number of other verses that proclaim that God is one (see God is One). However, the triunity of God is taught throughout the Old Testament, including the Shema! How can a statement of oneness imply plurality? The word translated "one" from the Hebrew is echad, which demonstrates compound unity of oneness.
and
Some of the verses above include all members of the triunity (Isaiah 42:1, Isaiah 48:16, and Isaiah 61:1). Therefore, the Old Testament does reveal the Christian concept of the Godhead, with God being one God, consisting of three persons.
Remember what I said in the beginning. Complete understanding of the old testament comes through knowledge gained by the revelation of the new testament. They really can't be separated in terms of understanding the whole of God's message and work throughout history. Additionally, for the average person (who cannot read Hebrew and is not familiar with Jewish history and doctrine) it could be difficult to see the trinity in the old testament. That's why I suggest to people that they invest in a study Bible, possibly a Bible Encyclopedia, and some commentaries. These additional tools can help bring out the contextual clues provided by the original languages, the historical context, and the skill of cross referencing within the Bible.
Of course not any interpretation is valid; however, the Bible is very complex and contradicts itself in places. There is no set interpretation that can said to be right, rather a spectrum that can be justified. "Clear" is not a word I would use.
Again, we'll just have to agree to disagree. The Bible does not contradict itself in it's overall message of God's revelation of himself and plan for restoring the relationship with man that was destroyed by sin. Sure there are differences of application and interpretation regarding secondary matters (food laws, sexuality, alcohol, etc. etc.) and that is why we have different denominations within the Christian faith. However, the primary matter of who God is, how he dealt with the problem of sin, and how he we are to treat one another is clear and without contradiction. That is why I feel confident in telling you that Westboro is "off the mark" because they are not following Christ's example with how they treat their fellow man and how they represent God to others.
I realize that, to you, what I'm about to say might be viewed as an issue of semantics or "word manipulation", but to a genuine follower of Christ there is no such thing as "my interpretation". I believe what God says in his word and if I am confused about something I look to other parts of scripture to help me get at the correct interpretation of what is confusing me. You see it doesn't matter what I think or what I wish it would say, I come to the Bible with no preconceived notions and let it stand on it's own.
This is obviously where we part ways. For me the Bible is the product of man. Nothing more.
I understand. In most, if not all, of these discussions the eventual impasse that arises is centered on the issue of faith. Some choose to believe, some don't. Some are open to putting God to the test, some are not.
Apple OC
Mar 15, 03:57 PM
What's illogical about it?
Why should we subsidize the defense industry, a multi-multi-billion dollar expense to our government, merely to maintain some jobs?
Please show me the evidence that demonstrates that is a positive investment for our country.
show me, show me? ... if you can not see the value for the economy in the people that work in and around the Military ... from Mom and Pop stores to direct suppliers to the Military? ... and your solution is ...
I'd suggest that those who's careers are based on maintaining our military can file for unemployment and search the want ads just like everybody else.
like I said ... good thing you are not part of the decision process. :cool:
Why should we subsidize the defense industry, a multi-multi-billion dollar expense to our government, merely to maintain some jobs?
Please show me the evidence that demonstrates that is a positive investment for our country.
show me, show me? ... if you can not see the value for the economy in the people that work in and around the Military ... from Mom and Pop stores to direct suppliers to the Military? ... and your solution is ...
I'd suggest that those who's careers are based on maintaining our military can file for unemployment and search the want ads just like everybody else.
like I said ... good thing you are not part of the decision process. :cool:
wordoflife
Apr 2, 12:22 AM
WOW!!!! 8 megapixe?!!!!!!! i remember like 5 years ago when i bought a 200$ camera and it was 6 megapixels and it was considered amazing and here is the iphone with a 8!!! ITS CRAZZZYYY:confused:
I remember 7 or so years ago we bought a 3.2mp Kodak camera with SD card. It wasn't cheap either.
I remember 7 or so years ago we bought a 3.2mp Kodak camera with SD card. It wasn't cheap either.
No comments:
Post a Comment