iMikeT
Aug 24, 10:08 PM
I'll believe it when I see it.
Tomorrow
Apr 20, 11:01 AM
Automatics are for the elderly, and for fat and/or lazy people.
http://paradoxdgn.com/junk/avatars/trollface.jpg
Wow, really? :rolleyes:
So if someone wants to buy a Corvette, and they're neither elderly, fat, nor lazy, they should shell out extra and order one with a manual transmission rather than buy one off the lot?
If someone wants to buy a Ford Taurus, Nissan Maxima, Chevrolet Impala, or a host of similar cars, then they must be either elderly, fat, or lazy, right? Because none of those are available with a manual transmission.
That's because you only have automatics to drive :p
No, my first car had a manual transmission (on the column). It was even worse, but that's mostly because the car was a 1965 model and had no air conditioning, no power steering, no power brakes, no power windows, torn-up seats, and oddly chewed through right rear tail light bulbs at a blistering pace. That was back in the days when driving was less of a headache than it is today (I was much younger), but even then I would still rather ride shotgun.
http://paradoxdgn.com/junk/avatars/trollface.jpg
Wow, really? :rolleyes:
So if someone wants to buy a Corvette, and they're neither elderly, fat, nor lazy, they should shell out extra and order one with a manual transmission rather than buy one off the lot?
If someone wants to buy a Ford Taurus, Nissan Maxima, Chevrolet Impala, or a host of similar cars, then they must be either elderly, fat, or lazy, right? Because none of those are available with a manual transmission.
That's because you only have automatics to drive :p
No, my first car had a manual transmission (on the column). It was even worse, but that's mostly because the car was a 1965 model and had no air conditioning, no power steering, no power brakes, no power windows, torn-up seats, and oddly chewed through right rear tail light bulbs at a blistering pace. That was back in the days when driving was less of a headache than it is today (I was much younger), but even then I would still rather ride shotgun.
iStudentUK
Mar 28, 02:34 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8F190 Safari/6533.18.5)
A complete douche, I'd say.
Why is he a douche? Because he uses metaphoric language? He seems like a qualified high level guest. And he didn't say "US European Command". YOU are the one who introduced those "2 letters". I'm just quoting what he said.
Considering that the US sent like 100 tomahawks or whatever out of like 102, or something like that... And the US also has an "air field" there too. Not only in nearby countries, but a huge mobile one! Not to mention large fleets of intercontinental bombers. How do you know he's exagerating? You have a personal recon satelite overlooking that area? :rolleyes:
You are very selective with your figures- both the French and Italians also have carriers in position, the US didn't send all but two of the missiles. The French sent the first planes in and as far as I know are the only nation to have engaged Libyan planes.
Like I said, about 50% of the planes involved are US. Which makes sense as the US has a bigger airforce than France/UK (and the rest of the coalition) which is what you would expect from a country with many more people!
Perhaps it us you that doesnt like the fact that the US isn't the only real player here? The US, France or UK could do this whole thing alone- it isn't that big an operation! Or perhaps, as firestarter points out, you don't like the idea of US working as NATO currently headed by a Canadian?
This is a true coalition with all sorts of countires involved, and we should be happy about that.
A complete douche, I'd say.
Why is he a douche? Because he uses metaphoric language? He seems like a qualified high level guest. And he didn't say "US European Command". YOU are the one who introduced those "2 letters". I'm just quoting what he said.
Considering that the US sent like 100 tomahawks or whatever out of like 102, or something like that... And the US also has an "air field" there too. Not only in nearby countries, but a huge mobile one! Not to mention large fleets of intercontinental bombers. How do you know he's exagerating? You have a personal recon satelite overlooking that area? :rolleyes:
You are very selective with your figures- both the French and Italians also have carriers in position, the US didn't send all but two of the missiles. The French sent the first planes in and as far as I know are the only nation to have engaged Libyan planes.
Like I said, about 50% of the planes involved are US. Which makes sense as the US has a bigger airforce than France/UK (and the rest of the coalition) which is what you would expect from a country with many more people!
Perhaps it us you that doesnt like the fact that the US isn't the only real player here? The US, France or UK could do this whole thing alone- it isn't that big an operation! Or perhaps, as firestarter points out, you don't like the idea of US working as NATO currently headed by a Canadian?
This is a true coalition with all sorts of countires involved, and we should be happy about that.
crap freakboy
Jul 18, 04:03 AM
Until they at least come close to matching the model that Mac The Ripper, Toast and Blockbuster 3 dvd postal rental gives me, I'll have to decline the Studios kind offer regarding rental rather than ownership.;)
bokdol
Sep 1, 01:05 PM
Really? I heard that you can connect and external monitor using a hack software for dual screen support . But it does not support the cinema displays.
I hope I am wrong.:)
the imac now can do screen spaning up to a 23 inch monitor. it's only in the last revision.
http://www.apple.com/imac/graphics.html
check near bottom
I hope I am wrong.:)
the imac now can do screen spaning up to a 23 inch monitor. it's only in the last revision.
http://www.apple.com/imac/graphics.html
check near bottom
BWhaler
Jan 12, 12:45 AM
This is the dumbest fabrication of all time.
Existing Rumor + Sign = Macbook Air
So, so stupid.
Existing Rumor + Sign = Macbook Air
So, so stupid.
stoid
Aug 6, 09:57 PM
I'm at work tomorrow too, but seeing as my 'boss'/co-worker is also a huge Apple fanboy, and since the Keynote starts at noon local (CDST) I'm expecting that we'll fire up macrumorslive and eat lunch whilst get text updates. Too bad there's no live video tho...
wmmk
Jul 13, 11:17 PM
Yeah! Since this guy doesn't want it, neither do the rest of us!
Actually, he has a point. Bluray is not currently at a reasonable price, and doing away with combo drives would be a bigger deal than getting Bluray for at least 70% of users.
Actually, he has a point. Bluray is not currently at a reasonable price, and doing away with combo drives would be a bigger deal than getting Bluray for at least 70% of users.
Naimfan
Mar 22, 12:48 PM
Our Founding Fathers believed in God, proof alone is the pledge of allegiance "under god". Yes our country was founded on christian belief. Hate to say it, but it's true!
As for the invisible man in the sky I have no clue to what you are referring.
If you're in the service I can only suggest you avail yourself of the educational opportunities that are available. Many of the Founders were not "Christian," and a belief in God is no proof of a "Christian" belief system.
The United States was not founded as a "Christian" nation. I'd suggest you review the free exercise and establishment clauses of the First Amendment, as well as the history surrounding the settlement of what we often refer to as the original 13 colonies.
As for the invisible man in the sky I have no clue to what you are referring.
If you're in the service I can only suggest you avail yourself of the educational opportunities that are available. Many of the Founders were not "Christian," and a belief in God is no proof of a "Christian" belief system.
The United States was not founded as a "Christian" nation. I'd suggest you review the free exercise and establishment clauses of the First Amendment, as well as the history surrounding the settlement of what we often refer to as the original 13 colonies.
nonameowns
Mar 25, 09:01 PM
I can hook it up to my TV and play in 1080, but....why would I want to? I watched the video on YouTube, and compared to Gran Turismo 5, F1 DiRT 2 and the upcoming Shift 2, etc, this game looks like crap. And I get to play it with no wheel or even a gamepad? Thanks, but no thanks.
Why compare a mobile device to a game console? That's stupid. It's like comparing bananas to apples.
This is LAME and I'm say that in the nicest most passive agressive way. ;)
I'm coming from the standpoint of someone that owns a G25 racing wheel, a Track IR 5 head tracker, and racing games and sims all of which support my toys. Games that run dead-locked at 60 fps -- as I enable what's called VSYNC --- at a substantially higher detail level than any low-powered GPU/CPU can currently muster.
Sure it might be lame and inferior in your taste, but can you take your toys with you? Yeah. That's the power with the iPad.
In the future, the iPad will have the graphic power of PS3 or Xbox 360.
Why compare a mobile device to a game console? That's stupid. It's like comparing bananas to apples.
This is LAME and I'm say that in the nicest most passive agressive way. ;)
I'm coming from the standpoint of someone that owns a G25 racing wheel, a Track IR 5 head tracker, and racing games and sims all of which support my toys. Games that run dead-locked at 60 fps -- as I enable what's called VSYNC --- at a substantially higher detail level than any low-powered GPU/CPU can currently muster.
Sure it might be lame and inferior in your taste, but can you take your toys with you? Yeah. That's the power with the iPad.
In the future, the iPad will have the graphic power of PS3 or Xbox 360.
clj7
Jan 7, 04:02 AM
Is that a Vauxhall Corsa i see there? great little car, not very cool i admit but it just keeps on going =)
Yes, it's a Vauxhall Corsa. Brilliant car to start in, never broken down either. Except I did brake the hand-break once :D Pulled it to hard I think, had to park the car in gear over night.
Yes, it's a Vauxhall Corsa. Brilliant car to start in, never broken down either. Except I did brake the hand-break once :D Pulled it to hard I think, had to park the car in gear over night.
Consultant
Mar 25, 04:01 PM
There's still the practical limitations of using a touchscreen as a control device, though. It's never going to be as tactile as a controller with buttons and joysticks. Not to mention having the HDMI adaptor sticking out of the side of the iPad while you're holding it to play games...
Apart from that, I'm glad to see the iPad is able to hold its own as a gaming machine.
Good luck performing multi-touch and gestures with buttons and joysticks. :rolleyes:
Apart from that, I'm glad to see the iPad is able to hold its own as a gaming machine.
Good luck performing multi-touch and gestures with buttons and joysticks. :rolleyes:
JRM PowerPod
Aug 7, 05:08 AM
I dont follow cricket but I'll kick your ass at football! :D
Last time we played we beat you 3-0 in England im pretty sure.
We should have won the bloody world cup.
We dominated against Italy until Grosso dived and got the most dodgy penalty in history, then we would have smashed ukraine in the quarters, then we would have been in the semi's against Germany, then anythign could have happened. Lets just say FIFA didnt want us to win, because its the one sport we 'aren't meant to dominate'. So the ref played it that way.
People should have learned not to count out an Aussie. Our spirit means we have the best in every field from sport to soldiers.
We would kick ur ass
Last time we played we beat you 3-0 in England im pretty sure.
We should have won the bloody world cup.
We dominated against Italy until Grosso dived and got the most dodgy penalty in history, then we would have smashed ukraine in the quarters, then we would have been in the semi's against Germany, then anythign could have happened. Lets just say FIFA didnt want us to win, because its the one sport we 'aren't meant to dominate'. So the ref played it that way.
People should have learned not to count out an Aussie. Our spirit means we have the best in every field from sport to soldiers.
We would kick ur ass
poppe
Aug 24, 10:38 PM
a bit off topic... does any one know of a comparable pc and cost? the mini seems a bit expensive at 799 for a 1.6 dore duo
If you check CNET.com they acctually have a few... In about 15 minutes I can try to find some links for you, but if you want to do some quick searching yourself they have a few PC mini-like comps.
If you check CNET.com they acctually have a few... In about 15 minutes I can try to find some links for you, but if you want to do some quick searching yourself they have a few PC mini-like comps.
BruiserB
May 2, 04:18 PM
I guess that's way easier than dragging it to the trash?
Mobster Sauce
Apr 2, 07:08 PM
Nicely done.
swingerofbirch
Nov 29, 08:53 PM
Obviously it's going to have a Blu-Ray drive and go head to head with the PS3.
Apple may even include some games like Bejeweled that you can play with the remote.
Everyone is fighting over the living room now. You can bet your bottom dollar, that Apple, Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo are going to be knocking on your door for the next few years. If you let them in, are they going to run for the bathroom or kitchen? Not likely. They are going to be running for the living room. And they are going to be coming with cameras. They are going to want to stay for a long time. They'll want cash up front and then monthly allowances.
Who does that leave out? The one conglomerate that's never made a piece of hardware: Google. So where will Google look for help in integrating their software in living room hardware? Duh! Apple! But Apple better watch out, as soon as Google gets in the living room through Apple they'll open their services up to all hardware manufacturers and leave Apple in the dust. I just hope Apple has considered that likely possibility. Apple's like the Trojan horse which is carrying Google. We all know what happened to the soldiers inside the horse--they went and killed people. But we never hear about what happened to the actual horse. And that actual horse is Apple. Let's just hope they're full of something more than Google, or even worse just full of s_it.
Apple may even include some games like Bejeweled that you can play with the remote.
Everyone is fighting over the living room now. You can bet your bottom dollar, that Apple, Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo are going to be knocking on your door for the next few years. If you let them in, are they going to run for the bathroom or kitchen? Not likely. They are going to be running for the living room. And they are going to be coming with cameras. They are going to want to stay for a long time. They'll want cash up front and then monthly allowances.
Who does that leave out? The one conglomerate that's never made a piece of hardware: Google. So where will Google look for help in integrating their software in living room hardware? Duh! Apple! But Apple better watch out, as soon as Google gets in the living room through Apple they'll open their services up to all hardware manufacturers and leave Apple in the dust. I just hope Apple has considered that likely possibility. Apple's like the Trojan horse which is carrying Google. We all know what happened to the soldiers inside the horse--they went and killed people. But we never hear about what happened to the actual horse. And that actual horse is Apple. Let's just hope they're full of something more than Google, or even worse just full of s_it.
TangoCharlie
Sep 1, 12:05 PM
I couldn't disagree with you more.
This size represents the iMac that can display Full resolution 1080p HD content. If they introduce this and then eventually throw a Blu-ray in there they've got the killer combination. Front Row is already setup to be a home-theatre replacement. I mean come on, it's basically an HDTV...it's 1080p, it's got a remote, and it's got front row... This will sell like crack... Digital crack...
I think you're absolutely right!! They need to stick in a couple of digial tuners in it too tho.....
This size represents the iMac that can display Full resolution 1080p HD content. If they introduce this and then eventually throw a Blu-ray in there they've got the killer combination. Front Row is already setup to be a home-theatre replacement. I mean come on, it's basically an HDTV...it's 1080p, it's got a remote, and it's got front row... This will sell like crack... Digital crack...
I think you're absolutely right!! They need to stick in a couple of digial tuners in it too tho.....
emotion
Nov 27, 03:24 PM
While Apple is targeting professionals and pro-sumers, they know they need to still compete. Their prices on laptops are WAY off.
The macbook is very competitive for it's size and portablility. Compare it to a similar Vaio or IBM. You'll be surprised.
The macbook is very competitive for it's size and portablility. Compare it to a similar Vaio or IBM. You'll be surprised.
bobsentell
May 2, 04:53 PM
I wonder if this means MacOS will end up with iOS-style "multi-tasking."
Raska
Mar 31, 08:03 AM
3. Still buggy. For example - I just had to restart Safari to type in this field.
It does feel very slick though, app launch times, the smoothness of the animations and scrolling all make the machine feel MUCH faster than it does in Snow Leopard.
I've had that problem in both developer previews as well. At first I didn't mind it, but the more it happens the more annoying it gets.
I'm pretty sure I'm the only one that really likes the look of the new ical
I actually like it too.
It does feel very slick though, app launch times, the smoothness of the animations and scrolling all make the machine feel MUCH faster than it does in Snow Leopard.
I've had that problem in both developer previews as well. At first I didn't mind it, but the more it happens the more annoying it gets.
I'm pretty sure I'm the only one that really likes the look of the new ical
I actually like it too.
r.j.s
Jan 3, 02:30 PM
With or without integrated M249s? :D
Not mounted, but they are in the toolbox, along with a M2 that someone can operate while standing in the bed. :D
:eek:
Not mounted, but they are in the toolbox, along with a M2 that someone can operate while standing in the bed. :D
:eek:
jettredmont
May 2, 04:56 PM
This concept might seem alien to a lot of MacRumours users, but being a 'switcher', the method of deleting any app on OS X currently seems very ad hoc. I've been a mac user now for about 4 years and yet the idea of having to delete an app by dragging it to the trash seems very... strange. You never know if you've deleted ALL of that program.
Microsoft have managed to get one thing right in Windows. A specific tool (Add/Remove Programs) to delete a program. That's something that I genuinely feel is lacking in OS X and this idea of clicking and holding in LaunchPad makes sense. It's imple enough: most users who own an iPhone will have no trouble in adopting this method. And what's more, it makes it instantly accessible to anyone who uses a mac. In addition, it goes a step further than Microsoft. It avoids making more novice users from having to delve in to a complex window of settings. A step in the right direction? I think so!
So personally, I think this is a very simple yet very effective change to make to OS X and should be a welcome sign of the things to come in Lion!
When I switched (back in 2002), the hardest thing in this respect was getting it through my head that that one icon sitting in the /Applications folder really is the whole app (*for well-behaved drag-install apps). Yes, you have "tools" like AppCleaner which delete all the prefs and user files for an app as well, obliterating any trace that the app was ver on your system, but those are just prefs. If the app itself is removed, the prefs are just text (or sometimes binary compressed) files sitting on the hard drive. They don't matter.
This is in absolute contrast to Windows where any app worth its salt comes with an installer, which spreads unknowable components throughout the hard drive and changes various settings everywhere in the system. Of course you need another automated tool to (sometimes) undo all those changes.
Since the trend in Mac software has been a lot of large installers (the majority are well-behaved drag-install apps, but I see installers on apps which really shouldn't need an opaque installer at all). OS X doesn't have a good answer for those kinds of apps, and it is indeed messy.
The App Store, however, essentially moves us back to a compartmentalized app workspace which can be removed as automatically as it is laid down.
Microsoft have managed to get one thing right in Windows. A specific tool (Add/Remove Programs) to delete a program. That's something that I genuinely feel is lacking in OS X and this idea of clicking and holding in LaunchPad makes sense. It's imple enough: most users who own an iPhone will have no trouble in adopting this method. And what's more, it makes it instantly accessible to anyone who uses a mac. In addition, it goes a step further than Microsoft. It avoids making more novice users from having to delve in to a complex window of settings. A step in the right direction? I think so!
So personally, I think this is a very simple yet very effective change to make to OS X and should be a welcome sign of the things to come in Lion!
When I switched (back in 2002), the hardest thing in this respect was getting it through my head that that one icon sitting in the /Applications folder really is the whole app (*for well-behaved drag-install apps). Yes, you have "tools" like AppCleaner which delete all the prefs and user files for an app as well, obliterating any trace that the app was ver on your system, but those are just prefs. If the app itself is removed, the prefs are just text (or sometimes binary compressed) files sitting on the hard drive. They don't matter.
This is in absolute contrast to Windows where any app worth its salt comes with an installer, which spreads unknowable components throughout the hard drive and changes various settings everywhere in the system. Of course you need another automated tool to (sometimes) undo all those changes.
Since the trend in Mac software has been a lot of large installers (the majority are well-behaved drag-install apps, but I see installers on apps which really shouldn't need an opaque installer at all). OS X doesn't have a good answer for those kinds of apps, and it is indeed messy.
The App Store, however, essentially moves us back to a compartmentalized app workspace which can be removed as automatically as it is laid down.
bdkennedy1
Apr 19, 11:02 AM
FINALLY! I've been holding off for over a year upgrading my 2007 iMac because of the ancient ports. Give me my Thunderbolt!
No comments:
Post a Comment