Tomorrow
Apr 20, 03:46 PM
Were your other cars manual? The Camaro isn't helping your argument any more than the Lotus is helping mine.
;)
What argument? My main point is that I hate driving, and a manual transmission doesn't help me enjoy it any more than an automatic.
;)
What argument? My main point is that I hate driving, and a manual transmission doesn't help me enjoy it any more than an automatic.
iJohnHenry
Mar 20, 07:03 PM
seems like they may be targeting Gaddafi now ...
http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/africa/03/20/libya.civil.war/index.html?hpt=T1&iref=BN1
Wow, that is a shocker.
The U.S. Congress passed a law to prohibit any attempt to assassinate any foreign leader.
Why, I don't know, but there it is. :confused:
http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/africa/03/20/libya.civil.war/index.html?hpt=T1&iref=BN1
Wow, that is a shocker.
The U.S. Congress passed a law to prohibit any attempt to assassinate any foreign leader.
Why, I don't know, but there it is. :confused:
iSax1234
Mar 24, 12:13 PM
So someone who is sterile due to medical reasons shouldn't be allowed to marry either? There's no natural way for them to reproduce.
You're twisting the argument. Guy + Girl have the possibility to make baby (if they're sterile that's an isolated case). Guy + Guy or Girl + Girl will never be able to have sexual intercourse and have children. Marriage today to most people is nothing more than a loosely binded formal contract, since it can be terminated at any time with little to no repercussions.
You're twisting the argument. Guy + Girl have the possibility to make baby (if they're sterile that's an isolated case). Guy + Guy or Girl + Girl will never be able to have sexual intercourse and have children. Marriage today to most people is nothing more than a loosely binded formal contract, since it can be terminated at any time with little to no repercussions.
plinden
Jul 20, 04:55 PM
That's funny that is not what they told us when I worked for Aldus, although there was one time that we could not trade.
I think the blackout period is only for execs and VPs, most of the time.
Last company I worked for, there was a blackout period for everyone, but it was longer for executive and sales staff, or in fact for anyone who might have had detailed inside knowledge. For instance one colleague, a software engineer, shared an office for a few months with a sales manager, and during that time he had a longer blackout period than the rest of us because he might have overheard some insider information.
Also, we weren't allowed to short the company stock ... since that's kind of like athletes betting that their team will lose, and you might be tempted to release information that would tank the stock.
I think the blackout period is only for execs and VPs, most of the time.
Last company I worked for, there was a blackout period for everyone, but it was longer for executive and sales staff, or in fact for anyone who might have had detailed inside knowledge. For instance one colleague, a software engineer, shared an office for a few months with a sales manager, and during that time he had a longer blackout period than the rest of us because he might have overheard some insider information.
Also, we weren't allowed to short the company stock ... since that's kind of like athletes betting that their team will lose, and you might be tempted to release information that would tank the stock.
maverick808
Oct 24, 06:26 AM
dun get excited it is just routine maintanace. The new mbk will will be released late november
sorry
There has NEVER been routine maintainence carried out early on Tuesday mornings. NEVER.
Maintainence always happens in the evenings.
Also, what's and MBK?
sorry
There has NEVER been routine maintainence carried out early on Tuesday mornings. NEVER.
Maintainence always happens in the evenings.
Also, what's and MBK?
dr Dunkel
Apr 22, 06:14 AM
The NASCAR and F1 cars are not consumer, road-driven vehicles. This is like comparing a Mac Pro to the giant supercomputers that run NASA. Keep in mind, there are varying degrees of professionality (I may have made that word up).
I think one could make the same comaprison with the M3 and the M3 GT2. The former is a high-ish end consumer product, much like the MBP and the latter is a professional product for three times the money.
The NASA supercomputer/F1 comparison is too extreme.
I think one could make the same comaprison with the M3 and the M3 GT2. The former is a high-ish end consumer product, much like the MBP and the latter is a professional product for three times the money.
The NASA supercomputer/F1 comparison is too extreme.
bassfingers
Apr 26, 04:07 PM
well we all know who really controls the goverment and everyone involved ... companies. so whoever throws more money at them is obvs gonna win
silliness
silliness
Goldfinger
Aug 31, 12:12 PM
http://www.hardmac.com/news/2006-08-31/#5869
What about this ? :)
What about this ? :)
mozmac
Jul 14, 02:43 AM
Apple is frequently the first to incorporate new technologies. USB, ditching the floppy drive, airport wireless networking, firewire. I remember when I had my iBook on campus back in 2002. I was one of the ONLY people that had wireless. A few buildings offered it, and I didn't see many other people sitting around on their laptops, unless they had an illuminated Apple shining on their lap.:)
I wouldn't be surprised if Apple was one of the first to use Blu-Ray, especially seeing they are a contributing company. They have a tendency to take new technologies and make them mainstream. They did it with the Apple II, the original Mac, and they continue to do it today.
I wouldn't be surprised if Apple was one of the first to use Blu-Ray, especially seeing they are a contributing company. They have a tendency to take new technologies and make them mainstream. They did it with the Apple II, the original Mac, and they continue to do it today.
I WAS the one
Jun 23, 08:30 PM
iOS and Mac OS will merge. Very slowly over the years. Eventually,This sounds great to me! I can imagine Photoshop don't count on adobe products pal, Apple wants you to use Apple products and grab to your seat ... I bet it will be just one way to install apps... The AppStore pro. We are screwed.
RayLancer
Oct 2, 10:36 AM
Actually I kind of like my gel case. It perfectly fits and makes the back look great. I intended to wait for the belkin's clear hard case to come out, but now I'm going to order the full set of this gel case and it's still cheaper.
http://i603.photobucket.com/albums/tt114/longasau/IMG_0357.jpg
http://i603.photobucket.com/albums/tt114/longasau/IMG_0358.jpg
Where did you get yours from? I ordered one off ebay and it was horribly warped, both of them. It was pretty loose and stretched so it wouldn't fit my iPod at all.
http://i603.photobucket.com/albums/tt114/longasau/IMG_0357.jpg
http://i603.photobucket.com/albums/tt114/longasau/IMG_0358.jpg
Where did you get yours from? I ordered one off ebay and it was horribly warped, both of them. It was pretty loose and stretched so it wouldn't fit my iPod at all.
Mulyahnto
Jul 19, 03:55 PM
I think iPod and Mac sales volume was towards the high end of the range of analysts' predictions. iPod and Mac sales volume is a more important indicator than revenue, I think.
Multimedia
Sep 6, 09:18 AM
It may have been introduced then, but that wasn't the last time it was refreshed . See here (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/05/20060516092750.shtml) which is actually on May 16th.I do not consider a minor speed bump to be a refresh.
Angrisano
Sep 6, 07:40 PM
I'm a bit disappointed by this latest update as well. I'm still waiting for a headless Mac that will support my 19 inch dual monitors for under $2K. I recently built a nice Shuttle mini PC (not much bigger than the mini) with a P4 3ghz processor, 2gb ram, 250gb hard drive, 256mb graphics card and Litescribe DVD burner all for under $500.
Now I don't expect to pay so little for so much when buying a Mac. In fact I'm willing to pay double for the same specs. The trouble is, right now in Apple's line up you simply can't do it. Where is our mid-range expandable tower? I don't need all the power of the quad Xeon and my pocketbook doesn't need to pay that price.
I just want a decent middle of the road, expandable Mac for around $1K. I can build two really nice PCs for this price. Why can't I get one Mac?
Now I don't expect to pay so little for so much when buying a Mac. In fact I'm willing to pay double for the same specs. The trouble is, right now in Apple's line up you simply can't do it. Where is our mid-range expandable tower? I don't need all the power of the quad Xeon and my pocketbook doesn't need to pay that price.
I just want a decent middle of the road, expandable Mac for around $1K. I can build two really nice PCs for this price. Why can't I get one Mac?
BlizzardBomb
Aug 29, 02:00 PM
Intel is expected to drop the price in September/October by almost everyone (including most analysts and media outlets), it's extremely likely they will.
Yeah, that's why I said yet :) I'm guessing it'll be about a 10 - 25% drop.
Yeah, that's why I said yet :) I'm guessing it'll be about a 10 - 25% drop.
MattyMac
Aug 6, 09:14 PM
Looks like I'll be taking my lunch break at 1PM tomorrow:p
bit density
Mar 7, 05:20 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.
Diesel has the advantage of longer carbon chains which represents more power per volume than gasoline. On a joule level gas engines are on par.
But because of the greater energy difference, this is important for use in commercial engines that are meant to tow or carry tremendous amounts of weight, like trucks and ships. But especially trucks. This allows engines to be significantly smaller for the weight that they have to carry than diesel.
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.
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.
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.
There is twice as much gasoline refined from a barrel of sweet crude than diesel.
Diesel has the advantage of longer carbon chains which represents more power per volume than gasoline. On a joule level gas engines are on par.
But because of the greater energy difference, this is important for use in commercial engines that are meant to tow or carry tremendous amounts of weight, like trucks and ships. But especially trucks. This allows engines to be significantly smaller for the weight that they have to carry than diesel.
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.
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.
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.
Waterboy4
Apr 19, 01:05 PM
The iMac update is likely to be a spec bump, Sandy Bridge, better Graphics, etc...plus Thunderbolt. I plan to hang on to my current model for now.
I am more excited about a potential Mac Mini Update, because I need one of those.
+1 for the mac mini update. My G4 is getting long in the tooth (ancient by computer standards), but still chuggin' away. I want a MM and Lion upgrade.
I am more excited about a potential Mac Mini Update, because I need one of those.
+1 for the mac mini update. My G4 is getting long in the tooth (ancient by computer standards), but still chuggin' away. I want a MM and Lion upgrade.
dagamer34
Mar 24, 01:06 PM
Would definitely be great if they would just support off-the-shelf graphics cards. I'd be a little surprised, but I've given up saying that Apple will or won't do something just because of their prior decisions.
jW
Apple writes all the drivers for the cards. It supports, so that will probably never happen.
jW
Apple writes all the drivers for the cards. It supports, so that will probably never happen.
Multimedia
Aug 29, 12:26 PM
Ya, that is off topic. WAY off topic. Why would you post that here? There's already threads started about this. Bah.
Enthusiasm. Haven't seen a thread about this new Bob Dylan Ad yet - only the ones by the fat & skinny guys.yes it is, and you already entioned it another discussion. and there is aready a dedicated discussion about it. so why spam this thread?You think my post is spam? :confused:
I'm sorry. I overlooked the new Dylan Thread (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=228809). Please forgive my enthusiasm.
Enthusiasm. Haven't seen a thread about this new Bob Dylan Ad yet - only the ones by the fat & skinny guys.yes it is, and you already entioned it another discussion. and there is aready a dedicated discussion about it. so why spam this thread?You think my post is spam? :confused:
I'm sorry. I overlooked the new Dylan Thread (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=228809). Please forgive my enthusiasm.
Squire
Jan 12, 10:57 AM
People here seem to want to condone ANY decision Apple may wish to make. Already people seem to be defensive on the "MacBook Air" name which is probably just a rumor and also seem to be defensive of Apple's decision to remove the optical drive - something we don't even know will happen!
Keep in mind the fact that this is a rumor site. People are expressing their opinions on things Apple is rumored to be doing. With respect to the name, the "MacBook Air" moniker was suggested by what the site administrators feel is a reliable source. As I mentioned previously, I don't mind the name. And, no, I'm not just saying that because I'm an Apple fan. (I did/do not like the name MacBook, for instance. It took some time to get used to. I still prefer iBook and PowerBook.)
With respect to the rumored removal of the optical drive, someone in another post put it best: Why should I have to carry around my (internal) optical drive now when I rarely use it? For a primary computer, it's pretty much essential. As a second computer with portability being a primary feature, I say get rid of it.
Again, I'm commenting on what Apple is rumored to do because, well, this particular thread relates to a rumor.
-Squire
P.S. I know where you're coming from in relation to people defending Apple's every move, even when it's unfair to the consumer. Sometimes that happens. This, however, isn't one of those cases in my opinion.
Keep in mind the fact that this is a rumor site. People are expressing their opinions on things Apple is rumored to be doing. With respect to the name, the "MacBook Air" moniker was suggested by what the site administrators feel is a reliable source. As I mentioned previously, I don't mind the name. And, no, I'm not just saying that because I'm an Apple fan. (I did/do not like the name MacBook, for instance. It took some time to get used to. I still prefer iBook and PowerBook.)
With respect to the rumored removal of the optical drive, someone in another post put it best: Why should I have to carry around my (internal) optical drive now when I rarely use it? For a primary computer, it's pretty much essential. As a second computer with portability being a primary feature, I say get rid of it.
Again, I'm commenting on what Apple is rumored to do because, well, this particular thread relates to a rumor.
-Squire
P.S. I know where you're coming from in relation to people defending Apple's every move, even when it's unfair to the consumer. Sometimes that happens. This, however, isn't one of those cases in my opinion.
Earendil
Nov 27, 06:02 PM
Congratulations on starting your point with not one but two violent images... clearly, you must be a real PRO.
They are figures of speech that are quite common where I live. My apologies if they were taken the wrong way by you.
And since when did I say I was a Pro?
This thread is about the possible introduction of a 17" monitor to possibly complement the Mac Mini, Apple's only headless consumer desktop.
Go Apple if they want to make a consumer monitor to compete with Dell. I'm all for it, as consumer monitors are all I have ever bought. I've already said that though, and I am not at all against Apple doing so, if you think I was, please go re-read my posts, as you might have missed my real point.
My point is that introducing a new size will do little to plug the consumer-sized hole in Apple's monitor line-up. If Apple can squeeze extra money out of some egotists who like to think of themselves as prosumers, fine, but the overwhelming majority of users aren't going to get anal about some supposed color-accuracy issues: they want a good-quality, good-looking reliable monitor and if Apple can't provide that at a decent price, Apple loses them to someone who can..
See, that is what my counter point was to. Yes, the thread is about Apple's possible entry into Consumer level LCDs. However by claiming that only "egotists" with a hankering for "supposed" statistics are the ones that buy Apple displays is just insulting. And when your comparison is with a Dell monitor, it just shows ignorance of what the Apple monitors provide.
You seem to be coming at me as if I stand on some high ground, when in fact I own (as stated in my signature) a 20" wide Dell monitor :cool:
So just trust me when I say that the difference in my Photographs, and Photo editing on my Dell vs an Apple monitor is different, and a noticeable difference not just in color, but in backlighting and change incolor based on viewing angle. When I'm surfing the web I don't notice/care, or playing games, or just about anything else. And since I don't make money on my photos, or do too much printing, I went with the Dell because the price/benafits ratio did not justify the Apple monitor. I wish Apple had provided a consumer level montior for me to buy, it would go far better with my Powerbook, but they didn't. I'm not going to discount their current line up just because I can't afford it, and I don't think you should discount it just because you don't understand it technically.
Apple could, of course, bring out two lines of monitors, one for print professionals and one to compete directly with Dell but, of course, they won't because it wouldn't take long for people to realize that there isn't really that much difference.
I think your conclusion is correct, but I think it is for different reasons. Those that buy Apple monitors either have the money to burn, or actually do want what the monitor provides over Dell. I think the reason they may not is the same reason they don't make cheap computers. Apple afaik has had quality certified monitors for a long time running. It might be confusing if they offer both, as anyone that knows that Apple only sells quality monitors may buy the new less expensive monitor and find out it doesn't do what they think it should.
However I think that it would be worth it in sales. And worth it for me :D
They are figures of speech that are quite common where I live. My apologies if they were taken the wrong way by you.
And since when did I say I was a Pro?
This thread is about the possible introduction of a 17" monitor to possibly complement the Mac Mini, Apple's only headless consumer desktop.
Go Apple if they want to make a consumer monitor to compete with Dell. I'm all for it, as consumer monitors are all I have ever bought. I've already said that though, and I am not at all against Apple doing so, if you think I was, please go re-read my posts, as you might have missed my real point.
My point is that introducing a new size will do little to plug the consumer-sized hole in Apple's monitor line-up. If Apple can squeeze extra money out of some egotists who like to think of themselves as prosumers, fine, but the overwhelming majority of users aren't going to get anal about some supposed color-accuracy issues: they want a good-quality, good-looking reliable monitor and if Apple can't provide that at a decent price, Apple loses them to someone who can..
See, that is what my counter point was to. Yes, the thread is about Apple's possible entry into Consumer level LCDs. However by claiming that only "egotists" with a hankering for "supposed" statistics are the ones that buy Apple displays is just insulting. And when your comparison is with a Dell monitor, it just shows ignorance of what the Apple monitors provide.
You seem to be coming at me as if I stand on some high ground, when in fact I own (as stated in my signature) a 20" wide Dell monitor :cool:
So just trust me when I say that the difference in my Photographs, and Photo editing on my Dell vs an Apple monitor is different, and a noticeable difference not just in color, but in backlighting and change incolor based on viewing angle. When I'm surfing the web I don't notice/care, or playing games, or just about anything else. And since I don't make money on my photos, or do too much printing, I went with the Dell because the price/benafits ratio did not justify the Apple monitor. I wish Apple had provided a consumer level montior for me to buy, it would go far better with my Powerbook, but they didn't. I'm not going to discount their current line up just because I can't afford it, and I don't think you should discount it just because you don't understand it technically.
Apple could, of course, bring out two lines of monitors, one for print professionals and one to compete directly with Dell but, of course, they won't because it wouldn't take long for people to realize that there isn't really that much difference.
I think your conclusion is correct, but I think it is for different reasons. Those that buy Apple monitors either have the money to burn, or actually do want what the monitor provides over Dell. I think the reason they may not is the same reason they don't make cheap computers. Apple afaik has had quality certified monitors for a long time running. It might be confusing if they offer both, as anyone that knows that Apple only sells quality monitors may buy the new less expensive monitor and find out it doesn't do what they think it should.
However I think that it would be worth it in sales. And worth it for me :D
peestandingup
Jul 15, 12:33 AM
I usually think Apple makes great decisions, but my guess is that Blu-Ray was a bad one. I think it will ultimately fail with consumers.
There is A LOT riding on this right now & given Sony's track record with this sorta stuff, im a little concerned. Their PSP (UMD) format is already on its way out & is being discontinued. Not to mention all the other failed Sony formats over the years.
Now, they announce the PS3 is gonna have that ridiculous price tag of $600, which could have been much cheaper if they didnt include Blu-Ray in every single machine. They should have made it an add-on & gave people a choice instead of shoving it in everyones face. Correct me if im wrong, but dont gamers just wanna play games? You're looking at upwards of $1,000 for the system, a couple games, add-ons, etc. If PS3 fails (which it very well might), then kiss Blu-Ray goodbye.
Sony is setting themselves up for a huge backlash & I could really care less about them. I just wish Apple wasnt supporting their format.
There is A LOT riding on this right now & given Sony's track record with this sorta stuff, im a little concerned. Their PSP (UMD) format is already on its way out & is being discontinued. Not to mention all the other failed Sony formats over the years.
Now, they announce the PS3 is gonna have that ridiculous price tag of $600, which could have been much cheaper if they didnt include Blu-Ray in every single machine. They should have made it an add-on & gave people a choice instead of shoving it in everyones face. Correct me if im wrong, but dont gamers just wanna play games? You're looking at upwards of $1,000 for the system, a couple games, add-ons, etc. If PS3 fails (which it very well might), then kiss Blu-Ray goodbye.
Sony is setting themselves up for a huge backlash & I could really care less about them. I just wish Apple wasnt supporting their format.
archurban
Nov 28, 01:53 PM
zune, zune, zune. it's like crackin'lacking! hilarious. :p
No comments:
Post a Comment