skiltrip
Oct 5, 08:25 PM
Glad you're getting one!! It fits really well and won't slip out compared to the silicone case. I don't understand why Belkin can't make some normal colors, though. The bright colors look nice, but I would NOT want to be seen around with it under certain occasions. ;)
Best Buy ended up screwing me. I went to pick up the Night Sky grip vue, and they had the pink one pulled for me. Then they went to look for the 2 Night Sky ones they said they had in stock, but they found nothing. So I walked out empty handed. But I did go back today and pick up the Aqua colored one because they went on sale for 19.99. I don't hate the Aqua, don't love it either though. If the Night Sky ends up in stock in the next 30 days, I'm exchanging it. But for now, I like the case, just want the volume buttons to loosen up a bit. And I got tired of the Hong Kong silicone collection I had bought for it. Feels good to have a case that's easy on and off, that stays on, grips in the hands, but slides in the pocket.
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/4387684/front.jpg
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/4387684/back.jpg
Best Buy ended up screwing me. I went to pick up the Night Sky grip vue, and they had the pink one pulled for me. Then they went to look for the 2 Night Sky ones they said they had in stock, but they found nothing. So I walked out empty handed. But I did go back today and pick up the Aqua colored one because they went on sale for 19.99. I don't hate the Aqua, don't love it either though. If the Night Sky ends up in stock in the next 30 days, I'm exchanging it. But for now, I like the case, just want the volume buttons to loosen up a bit. And I got tired of the Hong Kong silicone collection I had bought for it. Feels good to have a case that's easy on and off, that stays on, grips in the hands, but slides in the pocket.
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/4387684/front.jpg
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/4387684/back.jpg
YS2003
Oct 23, 04:32 PM
If this update is for 15", it does make sense. I think 15" was the first intel Mac, followed by 17" and MB.
SplinterCell
Nov 28, 12:33 PM
Heh.
Suck it, Microsoft :cool:
I watched a television show on the history of video games a couple of weeks ago. I forget what channel it was on...History or Discovery or something like that, but I specifically remember them saying that Microsoft lost a lot of money on the xbox, but that they didn't care...they just wanted to get their foot in the door.
I think it was this show:
http://games.ign.com/articles/744/744878p1.html
Just last week I was watching Larry King interview Bill Gates & one the topics was the first gen xbox & Bill Gates said they broke even on the xbox but still considered it a success because they had a good position in the market.
Suck it, Microsoft :cool:
I watched a television show on the history of video games a couple of weeks ago. I forget what channel it was on...History or Discovery or something like that, but I specifically remember them saying that Microsoft lost a lot of money on the xbox, but that they didn't care...they just wanted to get their foot in the door.
I think it was this show:
http://games.ign.com/articles/744/744878p1.html
Just last week I was watching Larry King interview Bill Gates & one the topics was the first gen xbox & Bill Gates said they broke even on the xbox but still considered it a success because they had a good position in the market.
critter13
Mar 25, 05:01 PM
I think this is a glimpse of what will be achievable with AirPlay technology. visible controls on the device, and maps like in this case, with the gameplay pushed to big screen thru :apple:tv2
Michaelgtrusa
Mar 21, 09:01 PM
Chinese naval vessel in the Med,to apparently to extract Chinese workers from Libya (I thought they got them all out before the western nations)?
Or they have them their to spy.
Or they have them their to spy.
NathanMuir
Mar 19, 05:52 PM
More? No. This app says that homosexuals need help, a bit like alcoholics. That is far more offensive than farts or t&m.
Hence I said 'IMO', as I was certain that some, if not most, users, such as yourself, would disagree.
Hence I said 'IMO', as I was certain that some, if not most, users, such as yourself, would disagree.
Yakuza
Nov 24, 10:08 AM
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41C0o2GAJGL._SS500_.jpg
Props if anyone knows who used that bag.
i would say Indidana Jones, but i'm not sure
Props if anyone knows who used that bag.
i would say Indidana Jones, but i'm not sure
econgeek
Apr 12, 09:16 PM
http://twitpic.com/4k71a8
It does look like iMovie Pro.
And even though it is a ground up rewrite, 64-bit, modern, professional application, that alone is going to have people complaining about it-- I predict-- even before they've used it and found that it is - I'd bet a large sum- quite featureful in all the ways that are important to a professional.
It does look like iMovie Pro.
And even though it is a ground up rewrite, 64-bit, modern, professional application, that alone is going to have people complaining about it-- I predict-- even before they've used it and found that it is - I'd bet a large sum- quite featureful in all the ways that are important to a professional.
EJR
Sep 14, 09:04 PM
I caved and decided to just go ahead and order the Incipio dermaSHOT case today. I'm really waiting for Otterbox to release their new case, but apparently they haven't even made a final decision on it yet and I'm going to need something to hold me over till they do, so this seemed to be the best choice for me right now. I'm pretty sure a screen protector would have cost me about 5 bucks after shipping, so 19.99 for both the case/screen protector/stand looked like a pretty good deal to me. I'll put pics up whenever I do receive it.
Thanks guys.
Thanks guys.
Xero910
Mar 31, 10:11 AM
Regarding the launchpad... I can't remove applications anymore...
When I click "option" the icons get to "shake" but there is not X sign to click to delete the app... they just wiggle and can't be deleted.
Any of you the same?
Also very difficult to move them around...
In my experience launchpad was working better on preview 1!
Ideas?
Yea it's a little buggy right now. You can delete apps the same as as before with some added frustration.
1. Press and hold, CMD+OPT+CTRL (so they all wiggle)
2. Next press and hold one app until they stop wiggling.
3. Now click the apps you want once to delete them.
4. Make sure you hold those 3 keys throughout all steps.
The only thing I haven't figured out yet is adding apps manually. When I drag them to the LaunchPad icon, nothing happens.
When I click "option" the icons get to "shake" but there is not X sign to click to delete the app... they just wiggle and can't be deleted.
Any of you the same?
Also very difficult to move them around...
In my experience launchpad was working better on preview 1!
Ideas?
Yea it's a little buggy right now. You can delete apps the same as as before with some added frustration.
1. Press and hold, CMD+OPT+CTRL (so they all wiggle)
2. Next press and hold one app until they stop wiggling.
3. Now click the apps you want once to delete them.
4. Make sure you hold those 3 keys throughout all steps.
The only thing I haven't figured out yet is adding apps manually. When I drag them to the LaunchPad icon, nothing happens.
BlizzardBomb
Aug 29, 01:51 PM
you can be certain that the price-difference is there. since merom and yonah are 1:1 compatible, why would anyone use yonah istead of merom? but since the two will be sold side-by-side, yonah obviously has some benefits that merom does not have. and that benefit is most likely price.
I've got hard facts to back up my claim. Do you have any for yours? :)
I've got hard facts to back up my claim. Do you have any for yours? :)
sord
Aug 6, 11:55 PM
Ok - I've been into Macs for a couple years now, so I don't have the history with the company of many of you do.
That said, it seems to me that with these ads or banners for Leopard, that it is closer to being released than we all might think. Has Apple promoted a product this way -- bashing M$ -- with out releasing the product soon after?
To me it just seems like real strong words to use if Leopard wont be out for a while, esp. if it will only be released around the time Vista will be next year.
Anyone know what I mean, or feel the same way?
Last WWDC Stevie said that Leopard would be announced at this WWDC - or at least demonstrated. My guess - late this year or early next it will be in stores.
Oh - and Powerbook G5s (dual core) tomorrow!!
That said, it seems to me that with these ads or banners for Leopard, that it is closer to being released than we all might think. Has Apple promoted a product this way -- bashing M$ -- with out releasing the product soon after?
To me it just seems like real strong words to use if Leopard wont be out for a while, esp. if it will only be released around the time Vista will be next year.
Anyone know what I mean, or feel the same way?
Last WWDC Stevie said that Leopard would be announced at this WWDC - or at least demonstrated. My guess - late this year or early next it will be in stores.
Oh - and Powerbook G5s (dual core) tomorrow!!
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.;)
tribalogical
Jun 22, 06:11 PM
I always find Apple's innovations appealing... they tend to get it right these days.
But the first thought that leapt to my mind upon seeing the headline was, "if you think it's hard keeping your iPhone/iPad screens clean now... just wait!"
I hate fingerprints on my desktop monitor as it is... I'm like the guard dog barking at anyone jabbing the screen leaving smudges on it. :p
What might be cooler is a "touchpad" that sits on the desk, acts like a laptop trackpad, but also enables direct interaction with "iOS" elements onscreen?
Oh. Wait... there's an iPad for that...
But the first thought that leapt to my mind upon seeing the headline was, "if you think it's hard keeping your iPhone/iPad screens clean now... just wait!"
I hate fingerprints on my desktop monitor as it is... I'm like the guard dog barking at anyone jabbing the screen leaving smudges on it. :p
What might be cooler is a "touchpad" that sits on the desk, acts like a laptop trackpad, but also enables direct interaction with "iOS" elements onscreen?
Oh. Wait... there's an iPad for that...
Nermal
Nov 23, 08:07 PM
A slice of cake. I've already eaten it so I don't have a pic... but it was very good :p
theelysium
Apr 21, 11:15 AM
They are blowing it out of proportion.
What about Google? Why don't they go after them for tracking every little thing you do with their services. If you want to talk about a company that violates & then documents our privacy go after Google.
What about Google? Why don't they go after them for tracking every little thing you do with their services. If you want to talk about a company that violates & then documents our privacy go after Google.
petteri
Aug 17, 06:56 AM
Very interesting. Wonder why they did a "wobbly" geo-synch, and how their receivers cope with it. I'd guess it's a cost-related thing, but maybe there's an engineering reason for it (certainly does keep at least one bird near-vertical within the US at all times ...) Note that XM is depicted there as a "true" stationary orbit above the equator.
In any case, still, you're not going to see those satellites from Bombay, no matter how long and hard you look, without a really big mirror ...
That's exactly why they did it. The higher the "look angle" ,the fewer drop outs of the signal there are due to something (tall building) blocking the signal. It cut the cost of building repeaters in every nook and cranny of every urban area. Although now with the new portable unit they have been putting more of these up. An added benefit of the orbit is that those three people living in Northern Canada can get a signal!
I don't think Apple is concerned so much about not being able to sell a Sat ready iPod outside North America. It's more about how to integrate the Satellite service into a revenue stream for iTunes. If they can find a way to make cash with satellite radio, it will happen.
In any case, still, you're not going to see those satellites from Bombay, no matter how long and hard you look, without a really big mirror ...
That's exactly why they did it. The higher the "look angle" ,the fewer drop outs of the signal there are due to something (tall building) blocking the signal. It cut the cost of building repeaters in every nook and cranny of every urban area. Although now with the new portable unit they have been putting more of these up. An added benefit of the orbit is that those three people living in Northern Canada can get a signal!
I don't think Apple is concerned so much about not being able to sell a Sat ready iPod outside North America. It's more about how to integrate the Satellite service into a revenue stream for iTunes. If they can find a way to make cash with satellite radio, it will happen.
dscuber9000
Apr 3, 12:54 PM
I saw the ad yesterday on TV and I really liked it. It didn't show a bunch of apps I'll never use, it kind of drove home the point that the future of computing will be something like this.
MacSA
Aug 29, 08:55 AM
Pretty much in line with what I expected... probably just a simple processor update, everything else about them will stay the same.
blybug
Jan 12, 07:03 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.
I wonder...Apple would definitely be a bit ahead of the curve (wouldn't be the first time) releasing an iPADD :p but there are a lot of puzzle pieces coming together suggesting we're close to a first-generation of such a device. It's the logical "top-end" of the Touch-iPhone family. Apps and widgets created with the upcoming SDK could span all 3 devices. But the killer app for the big iPADD due to its actual usable screen size would be VNC/BTTM.
Think of all the people in corporate/hospital/university environments carrying laptops around to meetings, rounds, classes, Starbucks, then back to their offices where their desktops are no longer "up to date". In these WiFi saturated environments why not just bring your home/office/dorm computer with you through "the air" on your iPADD? Could definitely cut into the actual laptop computer market, but I bet whatever MacBook sales are lost could be more than made up for by folks buying the iPADD instead of a Windows laptop! Would also make a cozier gadget to curl up on the couch with at home than a traditional laptop, and could literally control and manage all your other local WiFi devices (:apple:TV!).
OK I've convinced myself. Mark this thread...may be referring to it on Tuesday...:D
I wonder...Apple would definitely be a bit ahead of the curve (wouldn't be the first time) releasing an iPADD :p but there are a lot of puzzle pieces coming together suggesting we're close to a first-generation of such a device. It's the logical "top-end" of the Touch-iPhone family. Apps and widgets created with the upcoming SDK could span all 3 devices. But the killer app for the big iPADD due to its actual usable screen size would be VNC/BTTM.
Think of all the people in corporate/hospital/university environments carrying laptops around to meetings, rounds, classes, Starbucks, then back to their offices where their desktops are no longer "up to date". In these WiFi saturated environments why not just bring your home/office/dorm computer with you through "the air" on your iPADD? Could definitely cut into the actual laptop computer market, but I bet whatever MacBook sales are lost could be more than made up for by folks buying the iPADD instead of a Windows laptop! Would also make a cozier gadget to curl up on the couch with at home than a traditional laptop, and could literally control and manage all your other local WiFi devices (:apple:TV!).
OK I've convinced myself. Mark this thread...may be referring to it on Tuesday...:D
Lord Blackadder
Mar 1, 12:56 PM
I wish there were more affordable Diesels in the States. A Cruze might be a bit "too" affordable, but neither can I step up to a Mercedes. The BMW 330d is sweet, though. I have to rule out VWs based on a personal bias. What to do... :o
The VW diesels are very well-built cars. A friend bought an '09 Jetta TDI and he is satisfied with it. I checked out the BMW 335d at the Detroit Auto show a year ago or so, and while I like the car BMW only offers it as a sedan and the base price is a laughably expensive $44k. If you won't buy a VW and want a newish diesel, your only other vaguely affordable option is a used W210/W211 (1996-2009) Mercedes Benz E-Class diesel. Nice cars, but you'll have to find one and it will be used (and not particularly cheap).
I currently have a 4.7L V8 Dodge Dakota. I'd buy a diesel version of it in a heartbeat. I could still get the power/hauling ability needed but have the mileage to justify having the pickup.
But now with the possibility of having $5/gal gas looming, the 18 HWY MPG may force my hand.
Had the truck for over 5 years, but it may get too cost prohibitive to keep.
that the US car makers still sells trucks, pickups etc. without diesel options is simply a complete lack of any common sense. diesel engines are practically made to be perfect for pulling and towing in commercial vehicles
Chrysler is particularly stupid in my opinion, because they should have put the Mercedes diesel engines from the Sprinter van (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodge_Sprinter#North_America), which they were already selling here, into the Ram. The Sprinter came with four, five and six cylinder diesels that would fit into a variety of other vehicles, and would be particularly useful in trucks and SUVs. While weaker than the biggest V8s, they still offer a lot of torque for their size and much better fuel economy. Why, Chrysler? Why?
Mercedes sells the Sprinter here now, so the opportunity was lost for Chrysler.
The VW diesels are very well-built cars. A friend bought an '09 Jetta TDI and he is satisfied with it. I checked out the BMW 335d at the Detroit Auto show a year ago or so, and while I like the car BMW only offers it as a sedan and the base price is a laughably expensive $44k. If you won't buy a VW and want a newish diesel, your only other vaguely affordable option is a used W210/W211 (1996-2009) Mercedes Benz E-Class diesel. Nice cars, but you'll have to find one and it will be used (and not particularly cheap).
I currently have a 4.7L V8 Dodge Dakota. I'd buy a diesel version of it in a heartbeat. I could still get the power/hauling ability needed but have the mileage to justify having the pickup.
But now with the possibility of having $5/gal gas looming, the 18 HWY MPG may force my hand.
Had the truck for over 5 years, but it may get too cost prohibitive to keep.
that the US car makers still sells trucks, pickups etc. without diesel options is simply a complete lack of any common sense. diesel engines are practically made to be perfect for pulling and towing in commercial vehicles
Chrysler is particularly stupid in my opinion, because they should have put the Mercedes diesel engines from the Sprinter van (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodge_Sprinter#North_America), which they were already selling here, into the Ram. The Sprinter came with four, five and six cylinder diesels that would fit into a variety of other vehicles, and would be particularly useful in trucks and SUVs. While weaker than the biggest V8s, they still offer a lot of torque for their size and much better fuel economy. Why, Chrysler? Why?
Mercedes sells the Sprinter here now, so the opportunity was lost for Chrysler.
Lord Blackadder
Mar 7, 06:20 PM
Because there is not enough of it, and it will increase our need of foreign oil not lessen it.
There is twice as much gasoline refined from a barrel of sweet crude than diesel.
Can you quote a source on that? As far as I'm aware, that is not necessarily true (http://www.theoildrum.com/node/2174). It all depends on what is in highest demand. Diesel can be refined into gasoline, and gasoline is what people in the US want at the moment. I will try to find some more citeable links than this (http://cr4.globalspec.com/thread/26624/Maximum-gallons-of-diesel-from-a-barrel-of-crude-oil), but my impression is that a single barrel of crude always potentially contains more diesel fuel than gasoline. This is a very market-driven process. Refineries make what people want to buy.
It's also worth pointing out that a lot of gasoline has ethanol and other compounds in it that diesel does not have, and that stuff had to be refined before being added - increasing the engery cost of refining gasoline. Regular unleaded gasoline also has more sulphur in it than the now mandatory-for-passenger-cars ULSD fuel.
For a long time, and in many places people that drove diesel vehicles did so because of the tax advantages. The taxes were kept lower in order to make commercial usage cheaper.
Diesel may be cheaper in Europe due to tax structures, but the same could be said about gasoline here. It doesn't have to be that way in either case. On a purely technical level, gasoline should actually cost more because it takes more energy to refine.
It is not greener to go diesel. It takes that resource from other parts of the economy and puts it into cars. Cars do just fine with gasoline. They are relatively clean and there is twice as much of the stuff in a gallon of oil. They don't get better mileage except in volume of stuff. Which is not the correct measurement. If cars became more diesel, then diesel would become dramatically more expensive, affecting the overall livelihood of everyone, dramatically increase the cost of oil and bring about energy devastation much faster than anyone could imagine.
Diesel takes less energy to refine, contains more energy per unit of volume, emits less CO2, you get potentially more of it out of a barrel of crude and diesel engines are always more fuel efficient than equivalent gasoline engines. Where's the problem?
I can't see how you are going to argue that it is necessary for us to drive gasoline-engined cars in order to prevent "energy devastation". Most other countries already use a much larger proportion of diesel and they seem just fine. We could make a lot more diesel with the crude we are currently extracting, and the market for gasoline will never go away.
By moving to hybrids and electrics, we actually decrease our dependence on foreign oil, and make our cars greener per mile driven. This is why it is the answer and diesel isn't.
I am not advocating that we all switch to diesel. Nor do I want to get rid of the gasoline engine (especially in performance cars!). But the USA has an unecessary obsession with the gasoline-engined car. We need diesel serial hybrids for starters, and more hybrids and diesel-engined cars of all types. There is no one solution. If tens of thousands of people in the US started buying diesel Cruzes, it would not destroy the world's energy infrastructure.
But come on - "energy devastation"?
the argument for that silent agreement ? they don't want "a horsepower arms race"... look how well that has turned out
Indeed. Same with the Japanese and their 280hp/180 km/h limit. Some of the cars made under this "agreement" were considerably faster/more powerful than was officially admitted, and anyway they did away with that a number of years ago.
There is twice as much gasoline refined from a barrel of sweet crude than diesel.
Can you quote a source on that? As far as I'm aware, that is not necessarily true (http://www.theoildrum.com/node/2174). It all depends on what is in highest demand. Diesel can be refined into gasoline, and gasoline is what people in the US want at the moment. I will try to find some more citeable links than this (http://cr4.globalspec.com/thread/26624/Maximum-gallons-of-diesel-from-a-barrel-of-crude-oil), but my impression is that a single barrel of crude always potentially contains more diesel fuel than gasoline. This is a very market-driven process. Refineries make what people want to buy.
It's also worth pointing out that a lot of gasoline has ethanol and other compounds in it that diesel does not have, and that stuff had to be refined before being added - increasing the engery cost of refining gasoline. Regular unleaded gasoline also has more sulphur in it than the now mandatory-for-passenger-cars ULSD fuel.
For a long time, and in many places people that drove diesel vehicles did so because of the tax advantages. The taxes were kept lower in order to make commercial usage cheaper.
Diesel may be cheaper in Europe due to tax structures, but the same could be said about gasoline here. It doesn't have to be that way in either case. On a purely technical level, gasoline should actually cost more because it takes more energy to refine.
It is not greener to go diesel. It takes that resource from other parts of the economy and puts it into cars. Cars do just fine with gasoline. They are relatively clean and there is twice as much of the stuff in a gallon of oil. They don't get better mileage except in volume of stuff. Which is not the correct measurement. If cars became more diesel, then diesel would become dramatically more expensive, affecting the overall livelihood of everyone, dramatically increase the cost of oil and bring about energy devastation much faster than anyone could imagine.
Diesel takes less energy to refine, contains more energy per unit of volume, emits less CO2, you get potentially more of it out of a barrel of crude and diesel engines are always more fuel efficient than equivalent gasoline engines. Where's the problem?
I can't see how you are going to argue that it is necessary for us to drive gasoline-engined cars in order to prevent "energy devastation". Most other countries already use a much larger proportion of diesel and they seem just fine. We could make a lot more diesel with the crude we are currently extracting, and the market for gasoline will never go away.
By moving to hybrids and electrics, we actually decrease our dependence on foreign oil, and make our cars greener per mile driven. This is why it is the answer and diesel isn't.
I am not advocating that we all switch to diesel. Nor do I want to get rid of the gasoline engine (especially in performance cars!). But the USA has an unecessary obsession with the gasoline-engined car. We need diesel serial hybrids for starters, and more hybrids and diesel-engined cars of all types. There is no one solution. If tens of thousands of people in the US started buying diesel Cruzes, it would not destroy the world's energy infrastructure.
But come on - "energy devastation"?
the argument for that silent agreement ? they don't want "a horsepower arms race"... look how well that has turned out
Indeed. Same with the Japanese and their 280hp/180 km/h limit. Some of the cars made under this "agreement" were considerably faster/more powerful than was officially admitted, and anyway they did away with that a number of years ago.
takao
Mar 1, 07:31 PM
Still, the bottom line is, passenger car diesel engines from Germany and Italy in particular are excellent and nothing like the big clunkers in American trucks. If a diesel Cruze makes it here, it will be very smooth and quiet by comparison.
there are videos on youtube of 2.0 diesel cruze owners sprinting to 200+ km/h and apart of reving higher it doesn't sound that bad... over 150 the wind noise sure gets quite noisy though
but it shows that even on the diesel that last gear change is coming around 180km/h which means for legal highway cruising speed that last gear isn't going to have to work much ;)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3404FpjqPB8
in germany though it means you are banned from the left lane if it takes you so long to hit 200 ;)
there are videos on youtube of 2.0 diesel cruze owners sprinting to 200+ km/h and apart of reving higher it doesn't sound that bad... over 150 the wind noise sure gets quite noisy though
but it shows that even on the diesel that last gear change is coming around 180km/h which means for legal highway cruising speed that last gear isn't going to have to work much ;)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3404FpjqPB8
in germany though it means you are banned from the left lane if it takes you so long to hit 200 ;)
twoodcc
Nov 21, 08:32 AM
Folks, I'm trying to run FAH on my i7 iMac. I put in "-bigadv -smp 8 -local " into the 'extra parameters' tab of the Settings app. I've got 8 processes going and it all looks good.
Apart from entering "3446" as the team number, do I need a passkey?
yes, you need a passkey to get the bonus. and you won't get the bonus until you have 10 units with that passkey.
but please let us know how long it takes to do a frame. i would like to know how that machine does
Apart from entering "3446" as the team number, do I need a passkey?
yes, you need a passkey to get the bonus. and you won't get the bonus until you have 10 units with that passkey.
but please let us know how long it takes to do a frame. i would like to know how that machine does
No comments:
Post a Comment