Eraserhead
Mar 20, 03:57 PM
No-one could possibly be offended by homeopathy.
garybUK
Feb 24, 03:13 AM
Hold it right there! The Kia models sold in Europe actually nowadays borrow from the current Hyundai Motor Company parts bin, and as such are way more civilized cars. Anyone who's driven the Kia Cee'd hatchback in Europe know it's a way better car than people think.
Your using Hyundai to make Kia/Chevy seem a good car?! hah, the ONLY good Hyundai is the Coupe, all the others are pretty nasty.
Most of the dealerships here lump Proton, Hyundai and Kia... why? they are cheap cars for mums and old people that goto the supermarket, they are no where near upto the quality of the big german cars. Even most jap cars are pretty rubbish to be honest, even Honda dealers are shutting down left, right and centre, GM (Opel/Vauxhall's) new Astra's and the other bigger horrible thing, seem to have just styled them on the Japanese cars... yuk! World cars do not work, different markets want different things.
Your using Hyundai to make Kia/Chevy seem a good car?! hah, the ONLY good Hyundai is the Coupe, all the others are pretty nasty.
Most of the dealerships here lump Proton, Hyundai and Kia... why? they are cheap cars for mums and old people that goto the supermarket, they are no where near upto the quality of the big german cars. Even most jap cars are pretty rubbish to be honest, even Honda dealers are shutting down left, right and centre, GM (Opel/Vauxhall's) new Astra's and the other bigger horrible thing, seem to have just styled them on the Japanese cars... yuk! World cars do not work, different markets want different things.
ipedro
Nov 29, 10:34 PM
I think Apple will use the iTV (can't wait to find out the permanent name) as their living room connection to many other Mac features.
The most notable of which would be iChat on your TV. It should be pretty straightforward to add a Front Row menu for iChat and allow users to connect an iSight to the iTV. Result: Instant video phone made user friendly.
I have a feeling that Leopard will be a lot about iChat and communications in general. iChat will likely move into the VoIP arena like Skype and this is where iTV and the iPhone will come in.
Apple is already a computer company, a consumer electronics company, a music (and other entertainment media) company and will likely become a communications company (a multi billion dollar industry). Apple stock is dirt cheap right now. :eek:
The most notable of which would be iChat on your TV. It should be pretty straightforward to add a Front Row menu for iChat and allow users to connect an iSight to the iTV. Result: Instant video phone made user friendly.
I have a feeling that Leopard will be a lot about iChat and communications in general. iChat will likely move into the VoIP arena like Skype and this is where iTV and the iPhone will come in.
Apple is already a computer company, a consumer electronics company, a music (and other entertainment media) company and will likely become a communications company (a multi billion dollar industry). Apple stock is dirt cheap right now. :eek:
iJohnHenry
Mar 19, 03:57 PM
(Jesus, BBC reporting septics have fired 110 Tomahawks already, at $1 million each.
Raytheon shares will be on the up soon).
(plus the Brits have fired some)
Nice edit. CNN was first. :p
Raytheon shares will be on the up soon).
(plus the Brits have fired some)
Nice edit. CNN was first. :p
twoodcc
Apr 30, 06:07 AM
congrats to lyzardking for 7 million points!
i see your output is up! care to share what machines you got folding?
i see your output is up! care to share what machines you got folding?
coder12
Apr 21, 12:20 PM
Good catch! I just noticed this once you pointed it out.
I will be having fun with this +1 deally...
I will be having fun with this +1 deally...
javaguy
Dec 27, 10:09 PM
An obvious one, but not one that I see mentioned:
unny cake with you.
Easter Bunny Cake!
Vintage Easter Spring Bunny
Bugs Bunny Cake submitted by:
I love this pan.
Print the pattern and cut out.
“Easter Bunny Cake” from
Easter Bunny cup cake pan
How To Make a Bunny Cake for a
WILTON Easter Bunny cake
easter bunny cake ideas.
Easter bunny cake
Reacent Post
Rodimus Prime
Apr 23, 12:27 PM
for all your defending of this feature ... can you give me even one positive reason this is good for the average person that out-weighs the negative ones ... just one
LTD is posting and been called out directly on this question multiple times and complete is avoiding answering it. It speaking volumes about him.
LTD is posting and been called out directly on this question multiple times and complete is avoiding answering it. It speaking volumes about him.
Evangelion
Aug 29, 01:10 PM
It seems that if this rumor is correct, then why now? Why not 2 months ago?
because merom is being releaased now, not two months ago. with merom, yonah will propably get very cheap
because merom is being releaased now, not two months ago. with merom, yonah will propably get very cheap
MattDell
Sep 6, 08:29 PM
Renting would never fly. It's far too easy to just burn the movie to DVD if it's already in digital format. The movie executives would flip. It would take some impressive coding to prevent users from doing this, and even then... somebody will figure out a way around it.
So, no. I don't think any movie corporation will allow digital movie rentals.
-Matt
So, no. I don't think any movie corporation will allow digital movie rentals.
-Matt
yg17
Mar 22, 11:43 AM
I love how "gays" freak out when non-homosexual people do something. But yet when "gays" want to do something extreme it's because we don't accept them, so when they get in trouble it's a huge ordeal.
To me this is like the people that don't support war. If a veteran was killed in action and a funeral is happening they can picket the funeral all day long (talk about bull ****!) But yet if we don't let them picket they freak out scream free rights free rights. Well guess what those veterans (me included since I serve) gave them that freedom to stand there in picket.
Gays are the same way. I have no issue with gays, I don't agree with it but if your gay, be gay. Just don't expect the world to conform to your way of life, especially a country (United States) founded on Christianity. If anything go to a foreign country and complain then see how bad it really is to come out, unless it's Amsterdam, Iraq or Afghan they'll love your butt over there.
The US was not founded on Christianity, and some 2,000 book written by man about an invisible man in the sky should not be basis for law.
To me this is like the people that don't support war. If a veteran was killed in action and a funeral is happening they can picket the funeral all day long (talk about bull ****!) But yet if we don't let them picket they freak out scream free rights free rights. Well guess what those veterans (me included since I serve) gave them that freedom to stand there in picket.
Gays are the same way. I have no issue with gays, I don't agree with it but if your gay, be gay. Just don't expect the world to conform to your way of life, especially a country (United States) founded on Christianity. If anything go to a foreign country and complain then see how bad it really is to come out, unless it's Amsterdam, Iraq or Afghan they'll love your butt over there.
The US was not founded on Christianity, and some 2,000 book written by man about an invisible man in the sky should not be basis for law.
bigpics
Mar 24, 12:57 PM
Dude, I'm sorry to inform you that what you're saying is an outright lie, and there are guys from the Lossless Compression Clan, called "Apple Lossless codec", "FLAC", and "APE", standing with heavy cluebats in their hands, ready to perform a painful reality sync on anyone thinking compression ALWAYS degrades quality.
Because it doesn't, full stop.You're (very probably) right. My comments were aimed at those who were saying the Classic is overkill because who could ever "need" anything more than 128 or even 256 kbps AAC's or mp3's. (Nobody even mentioned 320, at which many of my fave songs are ripped.)
So as for the "lossless" CODECs, my reach exceeds my grasp. When it comes to photo files I pretty much understand the principles of ZFW lossless compression in TIFF files and have thousands of 'em. And in case anyone doesn't know, if you work on JPEG's and do multiple editing sessions on a photo, you do introduce new compression artifacts every time you re-save even at the highest settings. I've done tests for kicks and giggles - repeatedly opening and saving .jpg's and you reach a point where the image looks like a (very) bad xerox copy.
Back to audio, I've plowed through a few articles on formats - years ago - and I've seen slightly differing conclusions about Apple Lossless and FLAC ('tho all felt that these were alternatives worth considering for at least the great majority of people serious about sound), but, frankly, I lack the chops to have an informed opinion of my own, and know nada about APE.
And, no, while I can appreciate friends' systems that are tricked out with vacuum tube amps, "reference" speakers and high-end vinyl pressings, I'm hardly one of the hard-core audiophiles in practice. My files are mostly 256 and 320 kbps, my home speaker placements are wrong and I use preset ambiance settings that totally mess with the sound to produce surround effects from AAC's.
Worse, the great majority of my listening is on the mid-level rig in my car at freeway speeds or in city traffic, meaning I and millions of others are constantly fighting like, what, 20-30 db of non-music noise that totally overwhelms delicate nuances in sound. And worst, some of my earliest pre-iPod rips (back when I had a massive 20 GB HDD) were done in RealPlayer at 96 or even 64 kbps - before I sold or traded those CDs - and yeah, in the car, some of those still sound "pretty good" to me (tho' some clearly don't).
Add the (lack of) quality of most ear buds and headsets used by most people, and there's probably less than 5% of music listeners experiencing "true high-fidelity." To turn around an old ad campaign, no, our music listening today is "not live - it's Memorex."
But my point was and is that there's no reason to champion lossy compression per se other than for the economies of storage space it provides, and for fungible uses like topical podcasts.
As long as we have the space, "data fidelity" is desirable so that the files we produce which will be around for many years - and get spread to many people - don't discard signal for no real gain. No one would put up with "lossy" word processing compression that occasionally turned "i's" into "l's" after all.
And those audio files will still be around in a future of better DAC's, speakers, active systems which routinely monitor and cancel out things like apartment, road and car noise (in quieter electric cars with better road noise supression in the first place), better mainstream headsets and who knows what other improvements.
Compatibility between players (software or hardware) used to be another reason to choose, say, mp3's, but there's really no meaningful competition to Apple's portable sound wonders any more.
So please keep those "cluebats" holstered! No offense intended. ;)
Because it doesn't, full stop.You're (very probably) right. My comments were aimed at those who were saying the Classic is overkill because who could ever "need" anything more than 128 or even 256 kbps AAC's or mp3's. (Nobody even mentioned 320, at which many of my fave songs are ripped.)
So as for the "lossless" CODECs, my reach exceeds my grasp. When it comes to photo files I pretty much understand the principles of ZFW lossless compression in TIFF files and have thousands of 'em. And in case anyone doesn't know, if you work on JPEG's and do multiple editing sessions on a photo, you do introduce new compression artifacts every time you re-save even at the highest settings. I've done tests for kicks and giggles - repeatedly opening and saving .jpg's and you reach a point where the image looks like a (very) bad xerox copy.
Back to audio, I've plowed through a few articles on formats - years ago - and I've seen slightly differing conclusions about Apple Lossless and FLAC ('tho all felt that these were alternatives worth considering for at least the great majority of people serious about sound), but, frankly, I lack the chops to have an informed opinion of my own, and know nada about APE.
And, no, while I can appreciate friends' systems that are tricked out with vacuum tube amps, "reference" speakers and high-end vinyl pressings, I'm hardly one of the hard-core audiophiles in practice. My files are mostly 256 and 320 kbps, my home speaker placements are wrong and I use preset ambiance settings that totally mess with the sound to produce surround effects from AAC's.
Worse, the great majority of my listening is on the mid-level rig in my car at freeway speeds or in city traffic, meaning I and millions of others are constantly fighting like, what, 20-30 db of non-music noise that totally overwhelms delicate nuances in sound. And worst, some of my earliest pre-iPod rips (back when I had a massive 20 GB HDD) were done in RealPlayer at 96 or even 64 kbps - before I sold or traded those CDs - and yeah, in the car, some of those still sound "pretty good" to me (tho' some clearly don't).
Add the (lack of) quality of most ear buds and headsets used by most people, and there's probably less than 5% of music listeners experiencing "true high-fidelity." To turn around an old ad campaign, no, our music listening today is "not live - it's Memorex."
But my point was and is that there's no reason to champion lossy compression per se other than for the economies of storage space it provides, and for fungible uses like topical podcasts.
As long as we have the space, "data fidelity" is desirable so that the files we produce which will be around for many years - and get spread to many people - don't discard signal for no real gain. No one would put up with "lossy" word processing compression that occasionally turned "i's" into "l's" after all.
And those audio files will still be around in a future of better DAC's, speakers, active systems which routinely monitor and cancel out things like apartment, road and car noise (in quieter electric cars with better road noise supression in the first place), better mainstream headsets and who knows what other improvements.
Compatibility between players (software or hardware) used to be another reason to choose, say, mp3's, but there's really no meaningful competition to Apple's portable sound wonders any more.
So please keep those "cluebats" holstered! No offense intended. ;)
Stridder44
Aug 29, 10:47 AM
I don't care about a measly speedbump. Begin to produce the media center already! How hard can it be? Just slap in a TV-card and beef up frontrow. done.
ok, slightly over simplified... But I dont see why Apple procrastinate on this matter. They would sell a bundle by releasing an Apple "media center".
Maybe FrontRow 2 (I believe/assume comes with Leopard) is where this will play in. Maybe instead of making a single device and labeling it a media center Apple will allow for any Mac (any new Mac...) to be used as a media center via FrontRow 2.
ok, slightly over simplified... But I dont see why Apple procrastinate on this matter. They would sell a bundle by releasing an Apple "media center".
Maybe FrontRow 2 (I believe/assume comes with Leopard) is where this will play in. Maybe instead of making a single device and labeling it a media center Apple will allow for any Mac (any new Mac...) to be used as a media center via FrontRow 2.
KnightWRX
May 2, 06:04 PM
LOL! Yeah... and I remember crashing faster than you click your mouse on those systems. Windows 3.0 and 3.1 were a mess. But of course... most things were back then. how far we've come.
Uh ? You say the crashing is somehow related to pre-emptive multi-tasking and yet you talk about Windows 3.0 and 3.1 which had... cooperative multi-tasking ? :confused:
I was talking about Unix systems on 386s (think BSD, think SCO UnixWare, think early Linux). Those had true pre-emptive multi-tasking and they didn't "crash faster than you click your mouse". (heck, my first DOS computer had no mouse and I don't think it ever crashed).
Crashing has nothing to do with the type of multi-tasking.
I think what he is saying is that programs that are actually doing work in the background can continue running, while those that aren't can suspend iOS style. That is how Lion works. It brings the benefits of both iOS & Mac OS.
What's working ? Is a program that's sitting in its idle loop waiting on a listen() operation not working ? Is a program that's firing a heartbeat every X seconds not working ?
Are we that ressource limited that we need to suspend these programs and have system level services to do these tasks, which the programs will register with on launch ? What's the benefit of a system level service vs the program doing it itself ?
Let's face it, it's not like a program sitting in the background is digging into the CPU much with a idle loop...
Uh ? You say the crashing is somehow related to pre-emptive multi-tasking and yet you talk about Windows 3.0 and 3.1 which had... cooperative multi-tasking ? :confused:
I was talking about Unix systems on 386s (think BSD, think SCO UnixWare, think early Linux). Those had true pre-emptive multi-tasking and they didn't "crash faster than you click your mouse". (heck, my first DOS computer had no mouse and I don't think it ever crashed).
Crashing has nothing to do with the type of multi-tasking.
I think what he is saying is that programs that are actually doing work in the background can continue running, while those that aren't can suspend iOS style. That is how Lion works. It brings the benefits of both iOS & Mac OS.
What's working ? Is a program that's sitting in its idle loop waiting on a listen() operation not working ? Is a program that's firing a heartbeat every X seconds not working ?
Are we that ressource limited that we need to suspend these programs and have system level services to do these tasks, which the programs will register with on launch ? What's the benefit of a system level service vs the program doing it itself ?
Let's face it, it's not like a program sitting in the background is digging into the CPU much with a idle loop...
Counterfit
Mar 19, 06:12 PM
Only 2% use MACs so they're unlikely to be exposed to one, PC users (98%) will bad mouth a MAC, and Apples advertising, while award winning does very little to enlighten people about the product. two notes: 1.) MAC is a networking thing, among others. Mac is a computer or a nickname.
2.) market share is not the same as installed user base.
2.) market share is not the same as installed user base.
paul4339
Apr 27, 01:20 AM
...Thats the exact same thing going on here with App store. Companies trademark "generic" terms all the time. Most trademarks ARE generic. But once it becomes used to associate a brand or product, its no longer generic.
I think that's the point MS was making with it's objection, citing that Eastern Airlines had tried to trademark "Shuttle", and even though people associated Shuttle with Eastern, because the word was used so often, "shuttle" had (or became?) a "de-facto secondary" meaning. The courts ruled against Eastern and all the other airlines (New York airlines shuttle, Delta shuttle, etc) were allowed to use the word. MS then pointed out a list of examples of how 'app store' is used and has now attained a "de-facto secondary' meaning too. (I'm not saying it's right or wrong, just pointing out the Microsoft's case)
I think that's the point MS was making with it's objection, citing that Eastern Airlines had tried to trademark "Shuttle", and even though people associated Shuttle with Eastern, because the word was used so often, "shuttle" had (or became?) a "de-facto secondary" meaning. The courts ruled against Eastern and all the other airlines (New York airlines shuttle, Delta shuttle, etc) were allowed to use the word. MS then pointed out a list of examples of how 'app store' is used and has now attained a "de-facto secondary' meaning too. (I'm not saying it's right or wrong, just pointing out the Microsoft's case)
LethalWolfe
Apr 12, 10:17 PM
You really are worried that Final Cut Pro will not be more complicated than iMovie??!
No, I'm worried that FCP could be dumbed down too much to properly do the job at hand.
Lethal
No, I'm worried that FCP could be dumbed down too much to properly do the job at hand.
Lethal
Thares
Apr 24, 03:52 PM
I hope, they bring the new iMacs on the market soon. I just purchased the new MBP 13" base and thought of getting an extra 27" external monitor in addition. But as I am not comfortable with the screen size and portability seems to be an inferior factor for me, I will send the MBP back these days and purchase the upcoming iMac 27".
If I still need a mobile device, I will get a cheap laptop.
If I still need a mobile device, I will get a cheap laptop.
rjohnstone
Apr 26, 02:38 PM
You make it sound as though this is such an obvious distinction that Apple could never get a trademark for "app store". But apparently this argument is not so strong in trademark law as Apple actually has the trademark already. If that were not the case how could they sue another entity for trademark infringement?
NO... they do not "have it already".
It's still in the opposition phase. No registration has been granted.
http://sites.google.com/site/wjohnstone/appstoretm.jpg
Learn how to read TESS and understand the coding.
Apple is filing a preemptive lawsuit against Amazon.
This is perfectly normal for anyone who is going through the trademark process.
The lawsuit's merits will be determined by the outcome of the opposition phase from the USPTO.
Now step away from the keyboard.
NO... they do not "have it already".
It's still in the opposition phase. No registration has been granted.
http://sites.google.com/site/wjohnstone/appstoretm.jpg
Learn how to read TESS and understand the coding.
Apple is filing a preemptive lawsuit against Amazon.
This is perfectly normal for anyone who is going through the trademark process.
The lawsuit's merits will be determined by the outcome of the opposition phase from the USPTO.
Now step away from the keyboard.
NAG
Jan 12, 06:32 PM
I've always been a fan of the device that lets you remote access your computer (like a Star Trek PADD). Doubt we'll see one anytime soon though.
beagleybeagley
Apr 19, 11:28 AM
What's up with the consumer MacBook timeline?
We've been waiting for its refresh. Are they just trying to make me jump at the bottom end MacBook Pro? (Of course they are!)
I hereby request a MacBook rumor, end of the week at the latest. Please deliver. :-)
We've been waiting for its refresh. Are they just trying to make me jump at the bottom end MacBook Pro? (Of course they are!)
I hereby request a MacBook rumor, end of the week at the latest. Please deliver. :-)
fixyourthinking
Nov 28, 10:42 AM
My local Office Depot has sold 1 (one) (a white one) since it launched. They have 8 in stock.
I predict it will be one of the biggest flops in consumer history but will be sugarcoated for many more months to come.
I also predict that Apple will beat the iPod holiday sales estimates by greater than 10%.
MSNBC or the Today show will certainly try to do other "puff pieces" to hype it (the Zune) up.
I predict it will be one of the biggest flops in consumer history but will be sugarcoated for many more months to come.
I also predict that Apple will beat the iPod holiday sales estimates by greater than 10%.
MSNBC or the Today show will certainly try to do other "puff pieces" to hype it (the Zune) up.
Tmelon
Apr 2, 04:31 PM
Is anyone else losing their toolbar buttons and address bars in the toolbar when they enter Safari into fullscreen mode? I'm getting just a solid graphite bar at the top of the screen when I go into fullscreen. Tabs aren't showing in fullscreen either. This wasn't happening in DP 1.
I've been using a keyboard shortcut to remove the toolbar altogether when I don't need it, but that doesn't affect the solid graphite bar. Right now I need to exit fullscreen if I need to use the toolbar at all, and either way I still have the hardly-useful block of graphite at the top taking up some of the screen.
That block of graphite at the top should contain your Address bar, Back/Forward and search bar. DP2 autohides the tab bar and the favorites bar until you bring your mouse to the top of the screen. There's a screenshot of it earlier in the thread.
I've been using a keyboard shortcut to remove the toolbar altogether when I don't need it, but that doesn't affect the solid graphite bar. Right now I need to exit fullscreen if I need to use the toolbar at all, and either way I still have the hardly-useful block of graphite at the top taking up some of the screen.
That block of graphite at the top should contain your Address bar, Back/Forward and search bar. DP2 autohides the tab bar and the favorites bar until you bring your mouse to the top of the screen. There's a screenshot of it earlier in the thread.
lizard79
Dec 3, 03:40 AM
one thing i was wondering about the iTV is: why hasn't it got an iPod dock on top of it?!
0 comments:
Post a Comment