DouchGod
Nov 27, 05:00 AM
Swatch New Gent "black Rebel"
Seagate Momentus XT 500Gb 32Mb Cache 4Gb "SSD"
http://www.yugatech.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/seagate-momentus-xt.jpg
What do you think of this drive?
Seagate Momentus XT 500Gb 32Mb Cache 4Gb "SSD"
http://www.yugatech.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/seagate-momentus-xt.jpg
What do you think of this drive?
Starchitect
Oct 24, 12:46 AM
Here it is! 8 hours early!
60499
60499
dmw007
Nov 15, 08:42 AM
Perhaps this would allow me to play a large map on Civ4 without the terrible huge long pauses...
Maybe, although the lag in Civ IV may have more to do with the program itself, rather than the hardware (depending on what type of Mac you are using). :)
Maybe, although the lag in Civ IV may have more to do with the program itself, rather than the hardware (depending on what type of Mac you are using). :)
imac_japan
Apr 8, 09:05 AM
maybe thats because its not true and most mac articles are written by very wintel biased writers.
Well....then Is this the Mac-files ?
Is there a conspiracy ???
Well....then Is this the Mac-files ?
Is there a conspiracy ???
speakerwizard
Nov 15, 08:11 AM
well, OSX whooped xp for multicore usage then
extrafuzzyllama
Sep 30, 03:32 PM
I got the clear one. I don't know if the inside was was matte or not. Took 2 days off an ebay seller.
did u get that weird watermarks like on wolfboy's post a few posts up?
did u get that weird watermarks like on wolfboy's post a few posts up?
ingenious
Mar 27, 06:45 PM
reasons your wrong
1. he didnt make up a word of it
2. apple made safari before ms pulled ie
3.the ipod has a long time to go their not going to just say screw it when its selling
4.ITMS is making them money after the record companies are paid back for the use of the songs every cent is profit
5. less than 20 people have signed your petition and do you really think its going to get apple to change their entire strategyi can see it now steve jobs sees our online pettion and immediatly calls a meating "i just had an appihany some kid said to make a cheap computer that hooks up to your tv weve been completely wrong all theese yearsapple is now only going to make web tv type systems and nothing else my god what have i been doing"
for once someone agrees with me ;)
1. he didnt make up a word of it
2. apple made safari before ms pulled ie
3.the ipod has a long time to go their not going to just say screw it when its selling
4.ITMS is making them money after the record companies are paid back for the use of the songs every cent is profit
5. less than 20 people have signed your petition and do you really think its going to get apple to change their entire strategyi can see it now steve jobs sees our online pettion and immediatly calls a meating "i just had an appihany some kid said to make a cheap computer that hooks up to your tv weve been completely wrong all theese yearsapple is now only going to make web tv type systems and nothing else my god what have i been doing"
for once someone agrees with me ;)
dietwater5
Apr 21, 11:17 AM
If you have a passcode on your phone then you cant sync/create a backup if your phone was lost or stolen
dime21
Apr 20, 09:26 PM
sorry no longer the case for most of that.
Manuals now cost more to buy than autos due to fewer of them being built so supply is lower.
No really cheaper to maintain. Hell manuals can go 200+k with out the tranny or the engine needing to be pulled. Manuals sorry you have to pull one of those items ever 100k miles to replace the clutch. That eats up the saving so at best it is a break even in that department.
Tranny might last longer but that is about it. Still has to be pulled ever 100k to replace clutch. Hell an auto tranny will out last the car any how so a non issue.
Power wise yes auto is going to eat a little more of the power off the engine but really not much less than the manuals eat due to modern hydrolics and more physical locking together of the engine and tranny.
Fuel economy. Sorry no longer the case. High way the get the same due to the fact that the tranny of both are physically locked to with the engine so no gain there. City mileage Autos can and often times do get better MPG even more so with the modern CVT. CVT for the extra gear ratios and on top of that you have computer controlled shifting that can time it quicker and faster and at better points for MPG than any human can.
Even Autos now have 5-7 gears so that gain is even lost from the manuals. They have the same number of gears pretty much standard now.
Now control. I will give you that. but that is about it.
sorry, but wherever you got your information, it is not correct. fwiw, my last car, a vw passat, i sold with 312k miles on it. i bought it new at the dealer. still had the original clutch. your 100k replacement claim is bogus.
highway mileage is different due to gear ratios, not "physically locked". automatics use different ratios than manuals, even with same engine. shift speed is irrelevant for mileage.
and lastly, manuals do not cost more. every car i've ever owned, new or old, including my 2007 porsche 911, have come standard with a manual transmission. if you want automatic, that's an option you pay extra for, several $thousand in some cases. i've never owned an American car, so maybe the domestics are different, but your blanket statement is still wrong.
on my wife's mercedes, it needs automatic fluid change every 30k miles. dealer charges ~$300 for this. That's $1000 in service in 90k miles assuming nothing breaks. My manual transmission requires no service or fluid changes for 100k miles. $1000 in maintenance vs $0 in maintenance. automatic is far more expensive from a maintenance standpoint.
Manuals now cost more to buy than autos due to fewer of them being built so supply is lower.
No really cheaper to maintain. Hell manuals can go 200+k with out the tranny or the engine needing to be pulled. Manuals sorry you have to pull one of those items ever 100k miles to replace the clutch. That eats up the saving so at best it is a break even in that department.
Tranny might last longer but that is about it. Still has to be pulled ever 100k to replace clutch. Hell an auto tranny will out last the car any how so a non issue.
Power wise yes auto is going to eat a little more of the power off the engine but really not much less than the manuals eat due to modern hydrolics and more physical locking together of the engine and tranny.
Fuel economy. Sorry no longer the case. High way the get the same due to the fact that the tranny of both are physically locked to with the engine so no gain there. City mileage Autos can and often times do get better MPG even more so with the modern CVT. CVT for the extra gear ratios and on top of that you have computer controlled shifting that can time it quicker and faster and at better points for MPG than any human can.
Even Autos now have 5-7 gears so that gain is even lost from the manuals. They have the same number of gears pretty much standard now.
Now control. I will give you that. but that is about it.
sorry, but wherever you got your information, it is not correct. fwiw, my last car, a vw passat, i sold with 312k miles on it. i bought it new at the dealer. still had the original clutch. your 100k replacement claim is bogus.
highway mileage is different due to gear ratios, not "physically locked". automatics use different ratios than manuals, even with same engine. shift speed is irrelevant for mileage.
and lastly, manuals do not cost more. every car i've ever owned, new or old, including my 2007 porsche 911, have come standard with a manual transmission. if you want automatic, that's an option you pay extra for, several $thousand in some cases. i've never owned an American car, so maybe the domestics are different, but your blanket statement is still wrong.
on my wife's mercedes, it needs automatic fluid change every 30k miles. dealer charges ~$300 for this. That's $1000 in service in 90k miles assuming nothing breaks. My manual transmission requires no service or fluid changes for 100k miles. $1000 in maintenance vs $0 in maintenance. automatic is far more expensive from a maintenance standpoint.
macgeek18
Feb 20, 11:49 PM
It is time to drink the intel Kool-aid my friend
Lol I again drank it 2 days ago by buying a Intel MacBook. Sorry G4's, looks like retirement is looming again. ;)
Lol I again drank it 2 days ago by buying a Intel MacBook. Sorry G4's, looks like retirement is looming again. ;)
mterlouw
Aug 27, 05:26 PM
Or, more likely, when the computer is obsolete you have a good screen that you can't use.
Apple needs something between the horribly constrained MiniMac, and the preposterously huge ProMac.
I agree. I have a 20" widescreen, and don't see a need to replace that any time soon. Over on the PC side, "they" are going to try and push you into upgrading if you want to watch hi-def content, as they will restrict playback to monitors that support HDCP. I guess Apple can try and entice you with a built-in iSight or semi-forced bundling of monitors with the iMac. But really, a good monitor can last you through at least two computers, so why waste the money?
Apple needs something between the horribly constrained MiniMac, and the preposterously huge ProMac.
I agree. I have a 20" widescreen, and don't see a need to replace that any time soon. Over on the PC side, "they" are going to try and push you into upgrading if you want to watch hi-def content, as they will restrict playback to monitors that support HDCP. I guess Apple can try and entice you with a built-in iSight or semi-forced bundling of monitors with the iMac. But really, a good monitor can last you through at least two computers, so why waste the money?
biscuitdunker
Apr 3, 12:50 PM
wow an ipad 2 being used in the dark and it doesnt leak light! where can i buy one?;)
ipodG8TR
Sep 7, 10:10 AM
When will the studios get a clue. I can rent movies almost anywhere for a couple dollars (only $1 at the grocery store vending machine with my debit card). So, why buy?
More convenient - I don't think so. It will take a decent amount of time to download.
Better quality - I doubt it. Don't expect much better than iTunes offers now.
More convenient - I don't think so. It will take a decent amount of time to download.
Better quality - I doubt it. Don't expect much better than iTunes offers now.
Cue
Aug 7, 04:09 AM
Why does the counter on MR homepage say it starts today?
Is that the official opening time with the main event i.e. Keynote Tuesday?
Excuse my ignorance but right up till now I thought it started Tuesday. I even saw a page on Apples site that had the week planner on it for WWDC. :confused: Maybe I was too excited and missed Monday?
Steve Jobs Headlines Keynote Address and Leopard Preview (http://developer.apple.com/wwdc/schedules/monday_am.html)
Is that the official opening time with the main event i.e. Keynote Tuesday?
Excuse my ignorance but right up till now I thought it started Tuesday. I even saw a page on Apples site that had the week planner on it for WWDC. :confused: Maybe I was too excited and missed Monday?
Steve Jobs Headlines Keynote Address and Leopard Preview (http://developer.apple.com/wwdc/schedules/monday_am.html)
Stella
Jun 22, 01:13 PM
Sounds OK - run the apps on your apple mobile as your desktop.
As long as iOS didn't replace OSX.... many people would be pissed if desktop apps were controlled by Apple.
As long as iOS didn't replace OSX.... many people would be pissed if desktop apps were controlled by Apple.
henrikrox
Mar 25, 07:36 PM
Actually, I don't think there's any reason someone couldn't develop a way to use a PS3 controller with an iOS device. It would probably take some work, and Apple wouldn't allow it in the App Store, but I don't see why it can't be done right now. I mean, I use a PS3 as a mouse for my TV Mac Mini.
Apple won't allow it. They see this as a touch device. They would thereof never allow s controller. Also if you did have a controller.
Its not going to work on any game on the iPad. It's not written for it. So it will not ever happen.
People? Wireless projection of a game to a screen? Really guys. Be reasonable. It would delay as hell
Apple won't allow it. They see this as a touch device. They would thereof never allow s controller. Also if you did have a controller.
Its not going to work on any game on the iPad. It's not written for it. So it will not ever happen.
People? Wireless projection of a game to a screen? Really guys. Be reasonable. It would delay as hell
Josias
Nov 27, 01:49 PM
Don't they already make one? Its called a 17" MacBook Pro... :)
Yes, they also make an iMac.
No way people get a MacMini and a MacBook Pro. Pull out the display, hack it in a dell casing etc...:confused:
BTW, with the intro of the low end iMac, I find this to be bogus.
Yes, they also make an iMac.
No way people get a MacMini and a MacBook Pro. Pull out the display, hack it in a dell casing etc...:confused:
BTW, with the intro of the low end iMac, I find this to be bogus.
lordonuthin
Oct 16, 02:20 PM
congrats to whiterabbit for hitting 1 million!
Thanks, and sorry I just moved past you:D for now anyway...
Thanks, and sorry I just moved past you:D for now anyway...
ipedro
Apr 12, 08:45 PM
Final Cut express strips out a lot of features people won't need unless they are doing some pretty heavy lifting. I use Final Cut Pro (and have since 1.0) but for the type of editing I do here at work (small TV station) Final Cut Express would work just fine. I just use what they give me 8-).
Pro takes more video formats. It has a few other tools, I think.
It's basically designed so that if you really are a hobbyist with an HDV camcorder you really won't notice a difference between the 2 since the extra things FCP has are things you'd never use anyway.
Pretty sure FCE doesn't support 24fps, which is kinda a problem for film editing, and an increasingly bigger problem for other work as 24fps gets used more. IIRC, it doesn't have stuff like the color scopes or audio mixer either. The main difference is the suite though.
Thanks. It seems to be what I need. I'm a photographer who does the occasional video. I don't want to make video the main part of my business, just a complement. A $1000 suite is overkill. I'd be happy to pay $300 though for just Final Cut Pro or $200 for a new Final Cut Express. Fingers crossed. :)
Pro takes more video formats. It has a few other tools, I think.
It's basically designed so that if you really are a hobbyist with an HDV camcorder you really won't notice a difference between the 2 since the extra things FCP has are things you'd never use anyway.
Pretty sure FCE doesn't support 24fps, which is kinda a problem for film editing, and an increasingly bigger problem for other work as 24fps gets used more. IIRC, it doesn't have stuff like the color scopes or audio mixer either. The main difference is the suite though.
Thanks. It seems to be what I need. I'm a photographer who does the occasional video. I don't want to make video the main part of my business, just a complement. A $1000 suite is overkill. I'd be happy to pay $300 though for just Final Cut Pro or $200 for a new Final Cut Express. Fingers crossed. :)
Slix
May 2, 07:00 PM
Windows pop ups are always confusing, I agree.
I guess this is helpful, but for me, I'll probably do it the old way, because I'm so used to it.
I guess this is helpful, but for me, I'll probably do it the old way, because I'm so used to it.
jxyama
Apr 2, 09:09 AM
You have some good points here....but the basic arguement is how to survive in the future - How to grow the business....Itms doesn't make any money for Apple, the ipod is going to have too many similar players. So why not go for the lower end of the market - eg: like they did with the old "LC"s machines. People buy software but they don't want to shell out alot of money for hardware.
no worry, people's been saying that apple's been dying since like 10 years ago. and increasing the marketshare doesn't mean it's growing and not increasing the marketshare doesn't mean its future is doomed.
look at gateway. it just acquired eMachines and "doubled" its marketshare to 7%. apple is half that. and guess which company has been more profitable recently? which company is debt free? (hint: it's not gateway) and which company had to expand beyond just selling cheap PCs to continue its operation? (another hint: it's not apple.)
i see absolutely no economic reason why apple should bother selling cheap macs.
people who know what they want will pay for Macs. if they don't know what they want, they won't care if they got a Mac.
no worry, people's been saying that apple's been dying since like 10 years ago. and increasing the marketshare doesn't mean it's growing and not increasing the marketshare doesn't mean its future is doomed.
look at gateway. it just acquired eMachines and "doubled" its marketshare to 7%. apple is half that. and guess which company has been more profitable recently? which company is debt free? (hint: it's not gateway) and which company had to expand beyond just selling cheap PCs to continue its operation? (another hint: it's not apple.)
i see absolutely no economic reason why apple should bother selling cheap macs.
people who know what they want will pay for Macs. if they don't know what they want, they won't care if they got a Mac.
ADMProducer
Feb 20, 02:06 PM
http://img403.imageshack.us/img403/3229/screenshot20110220at200.png
Travis Bickle
Mar 24, 01:34 PM
Probably a daft question but i'll ask anyhows so forgive my techie noobness!
With the advent of thunderbolt and its high bandwidth, will it possible for a gfx card to be sited externally in some kind of cradle and be used as the main gfx card or wouldn't the internal "plumbing" allow it to happen ?
/noob mode off
;)
With the advent of thunderbolt and its high bandwidth, will it possible for a gfx card to be sited externally in some kind of cradle and be used as the main gfx card or wouldn't the internal "plumbing" allow it to happen ?
/noob mode off
;)
miloblithe
Aug 31, 02:36 PM
I really think it's about time the Superdrive came standard on all Apple computers, it 2006 not 1996. Hopefully the MacBook will also get Superdrive in both models.
The first mac to even come with the option of a superdrive (meaning writes DVDs) was the PowerMac G4 that came out January 2001. In 1996, Macs didn't even come with CD-R drives.
The first mac to even come with the option of a superdrive (meaning writes DVDs) was the PowerMac G4 that came out January 2001. In 1996, Macs didn't even come with CD-R drives.
0 comments:
Post a Comment