skunk
Mar 1, 04:55 PM
The legal definition of marriage according to the government of the United States of America "...'marriage' means only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife..."I can't help it if you live in a backward country. I was talking about civilised norms. And whatever your cockeyed definition, it is still not equality.
ruutiveijari
Oct 15, 01:06 PM
Why would Apple show their Clovertown workstations after HP and not simultaneusly with HP?
Because HP is a much bigger company with much bigger sales volume and probably gets all the new processors before Apple does.
Because HP is a much bigger company with much bigger sales volume and probably gets all the new processors before Apple does.
iliketyla
Mar 31, 08:46 PM
This is where the Android "community" is going to split.
The ones we've heard from today don't give a crap about "open" or "closed" or Google or anything else other than the fact that Android is not Apple and is stealing some sales from Apple. They'll defend whatever Google does, because all they want is a platform that's not by Apple to take over the mobile space.
The true believers in the "open" propaganda, as ridiculous as it is and as untrue as it's always been, are probably still in a state of shock. By tomorrow they'll split into two warring camps. One will defend everything Google does because they perceive—wrongly of course—that Android is still in some indefinable way more open than iOS, and they'll blow that little invisible kernel of "openness" up until that's all they can see.
The other camp will be viciously angry at Google's betrayal of the True Religion™ and will be flailing around for some other messiah to deliver them from the "Walled Garden" of Apple and now, Android. These are the people who were saying the other day that "Motorola could rot" with their own OS.
Any suggestions on who the zealots will turn to in their hour of despair? I honestly can't think of a candidate, but then I'm not nuts—at least not that way.
Yeah! That's what'll happen!
Or they'll do further research and realize that the implications in this SINGLE ARTICLE might not be 100% true.
To the everyday user this means NOTHING as they have no knowledge of what open truly means, and therefore can't take advantage of it.
To the users who actually have the knowhow to utilize open source operating systems, this might mean a minor hinderance, but not a complete game changer.
And for clarification, the former is the vast majority.
Did no one notice the obvious bias in this article? It's slanted, and the author clearly thinks that Google has been wrong this entire time.
The ones we've heard from today don't give a crap about "open" or "closed" or Google or anything else other than the fact that Android is not Apple and is stealing some sales from Apple. They'll defend whatever Google does, because all they want is a platform that's not by Apple to take over the mobile space.
The true believers in the "open" propaganda, as ridiculous as it is and as untrue as it's always been, are probably still in a state of shock. By tomorrow they'll split into two warring camps. One will defend everything Google does because they perceive—wrongly of course—that Android is still in some indefinable way more open than iOS, and they'll blow that little invisible kernel of "openness" up until that's all they can see.
The other camp will be viciously angry at Google's betrayal of the True Religion™ and will be flailing around for some other messiah to deliver them from the "Walled Garden" of Apple and now, Android. These are the people who were saying the other day that "Motorola could rot" with their own OS.
Any suggestions on who the zealots will turn to in their hour of despair? I honestly can't think of a candidate, but then I'm not nuts—at least not that way.
Yeah! That's what'll happen!
Or they'll do further research and realize that the implications in this SINGLE ARTICLE might not be 100% true.
To the everyday user this means NOTHING as they have no knowledge of what open truly means, and therefore can't take advantage of it.
To the users who actually have the knowhow to utilize open source operating systems, this might mean a minor hinderance, but not a complete game changer.
And for clarification, the former is the vast majority.
Did no one notice the obvious bias in this article? It's slanted, and the author clearly thinks that Google has been wrong this entire time.
reden
Apr 6, 01:36 PM
I purchased a Xoom over the weekend it's a great device, a little heavy, but very awesome for its first pass. I used to own an iPad 1, gave it away, didn't want an iPad 2. Why do I need two devices of the same OS where the UI was designed for the iPhone (smaller device) to begin with? I love the versatility of honeycomb, widgets are phenomenal on a large tablet screen. Everything is great about the interface so far, although there are a few things here and there which make no sense, but I'm sure they'll fix that. I ran into some bugs, called Moto support, they troubleshooted with me, fixed it and were really cool about it. As far as hardware, the materials are great, but definitely Motorola needs to learn a thing or two about button placement. They put the sleep/wakeup button on the back of the device. I used to like to hit the home button on the iPad to wake it up and do stuff (while I was having a bowl of cereal for example), with the Xoom I can't do that, I HAVE to pick up the device. Another interface/hardware awkwardness are the volume buttons and I cannot find a way to change volume within the device itself, unless I press the volume hardware buttons a window will popup.
Other than that, I can live with all this, and the device is extremely awesome and a fresh feeling of a new UI the way it should be done for a tablet.
Other than that, I can live with all this, and the device is extremely awesome and a fresh feeling of a new UI the way it should be done for a tablet.
gkarris
Apr 5, 05:18 PM
will run only on iPhone 4 or iPad 2... :eek:
;)
;)
guzhogi
Jul 14, 07:16 PM
Power supplies produce a lot of heat. It makes great sense according to simply the most basic laws of thermodynamics.
I'm no physicist, but even I know that warmer air rises so if the power supply was at the bottom, all that heat would go up the entire case (not counting whatever fans are in there) and make it harder to cool maybe. But as I said, I'm no physicist & I don't know how all this all works. It would be cool (pun not intended) if it were possible to create a vacuum inside, that woould help solve heating issues since (if I remember my high school physics) temperature is just how much energy matter has. If there's no matter in the case other than the components, then it should be pretty cold in there.
I'm no physicist, but even I know that warmer air rises so if the power supply was at the bottom, all that heat would go up the entire case (not counting whatever fans are in there) and make it harder to cool maybe. But as I said, I'm no physicist & I don't know how all this all works. It would be cool (pun not intended) if it were possible to create a vacuum inside, that woould help solve heating issues since (if I remember my high school physics) temperature is just how much energy matter has. If there's no matter in the case other than the components, then it should be pretty cold in there.
SuperCachetes
Mar 1, 10:48 AM
I refuse to protect others from negative consequences when they need to learn from them.
Negative consequences? :rolleyes:
I believe that people with same-sex attractions are endangering themselves at least physically when they have sex with each other. So I'll post a link to some evidence for my opinion (http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/homosexuality/ho0075.html). Notice, the document's author is a medical doctor.
Endangering themselves? And a Catholic website as backup? :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
Wow. Just wow.
At least we're back to the childhood anecdotes again - so in between reading all the ignorant, antiquated, religion-clouded bollocks you are spewing, we can find a little entertainment value.
Negative consequences? :rolleyes:
I believe that people with same-sex attractions are endangering themselves at least physically when they have sex with each other. So I'll post a link to some evidence for my opinion (http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/homosexuality/ho0075.html). Notice, the document's author is a medical doctor.
Endangering themselves? And a Catholic website as backup? :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
Wow. Just wow.
At least we're back to the childhood anecdotes again - so in between reading all the ignorant, antiquated, religion-clouded bollocks you are spewing, we can find a little entertainment value.
Enigmac
Aug 7, 03:31 PM
Not a glimpse of the Finder...! :eek:
*cough* TOP SECRET *cough* :rolleyes:
*cough* TOP SECRET *cough* :rolleyes:
LagunaSol
Apr 6, 04:10 PM
That didn't actually happen.
But he did mention the iPad does not run a tablet OS (talking point achievement accomplished!), so Google gives him a cookie for that!
But he did mention the iPad does not run a tablet OS (talking point achievement accomplished!), so Google gives him a cookie for that!
Bill McEnaney
Mar 3, 04:20 AM
I'm sorry, Bill, but your logic has one big flaw.
If you decided to live celibately while other heterosexuals are open to have sex in a [monogamous] relationship, that's fine by me but what you're implying is that every homosexual should be celibate, so what's the point of being attracted to the same-sex at all in your logic?
I believe you have to label yourself asexual from now on, since not having or craving sex makes you neither a homosexual nor heterosexual.
I believe that every "gay" person should be celibate. I also think opposite-sex monogamous marriage is the only appropriate context for sex.
I'm heterosexual. I still feel opposite-sex attraction, but my sex drive has been weak for years. I'm grateful for that weakness, too, because I don't see others as mere objects.
I don't see any point in being sexually attracted to anyone of the same sex, since I think homosexuality is a psychological problem caused by nurture, not by nature. My mom used to counsel same-sex-attracted people when she was a nurse and a counselor at a local drug rehabilitation hospital. Her patients liked her, even after he told them that she thought same-sex sex was never okay. They respected her for her honesty. She was brave enough to tell them some things that they didn't want to hear, because she knew that they needed to hear them. Political correctness is evil when it prevents people from saying things that others need to hear for their own good.
In about 1962, Pope John XXII refused to condemn heresies because he thought mercy was better than severity. But he ignored that people sometimes need to be severe to show their love for others. I'm all for tact and gentleness. But I'm against political correctness that protects feeling at the expense of the potentially offended person's physical, psychological, or moral wellbeing. John XXIII was like a doctor who would say, "I don't want to talk about killing bacteria, cancer cells, and so on. I think I should just promote good heath." But what if the patient died because, say, the doctor refused to do chemo or wouldn't tell a patient that without it, she would die of cancer? Is the doctor being kind? Is he being negligent? If he doesn't care enough about his patients to tell them bad news that they need to hear, he should stop seeing them.
Here at the board, the others are welcome believe anything they want to believe about me. If I make some enemies by merely saying what I believe, then that gives me a chance to love them. But I refuse to be politically correct.
If you decided to live celibately while other heterosexuals are open to have sex in a [monogamous] relationship, that's fine by me but what you're implying is that every homosexual should be celibate, so what's the point of being attracted to the same-sex at all in your logic?
I believe you have to label yourself asexual from now on, since not having or craving sex makes you neither a homosexual nor heterosexual.
I believe that every "gay" person should be celibate. I also think opposite-sex monogamous marriage is the only appropriate context for sex.
I'm heterosexual. I still feel opposite-sex attraction, but my sex drive has been weak for years. I'm grateful for that weakness, too, because I don't see others as mere objects.
I don't see any point in being sexually attracted to anyone of the same sex, since I think homosexuality is a psychological problem caused by nurture, not by nature. My mom used to counsel same-sex-attracted people when she was a nurse and a counselor at a local drug rehabilitation hospital. Her patients liked her, even after he told them that she thought same-sex sex was never okay. They respected her for her honesty. She was brave enough to tell them some things that they didn't want to hear, because she knew that they needed to hear them. Political correctness is evil when it prevents people from saying things that others need to hear for their own good.
In about 1962, Pope John XXII refused to condemn heresies because he thought mercy was better than severity. But he ignored that people sometimes need to be severe to show their love for others. I'm all for tact and gentleness. But I'm against political correctness that protects feeling at the expense of the potentially offended person's physical, psychological, or moral wellbeing. John XXIII was like a doctor who would say, "I don't want to talk about killing bacteria, cancer cells, and so on. I think I should just promote good heath." But what if the patient died because, say, the doctor refused to do chemo or wouldn't tell a patient that without it, she would die of cancer? Is the doctor being kind? Is he being negligent? If he doesn't care enough about his patients to tell them bad news that they need to hear, he should stop seeing them.
Here at the board, the others are welcome believe anything they want to believe about me. If I make some enemies by merely saying what I believe, then that gives me a chance to love them. But I refuse to be politically correct.
Bubba Satori
Mar 26, 12:05 PM
Great news.
Hopefully there will be a big computer oriented media event when it's released
along with new Minis, iMacs, Mac Pros and finally some affordable xMacs. :D
No, I won't put the bong down. :cool:
http://boxothoughts.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/bongcat.jpg
Hopefully there will be a big computer oriented media event when it's released
along with new Minis, iMacs, Mac Pros and finally some affordable xMacs. :D
No, I won't put the bong down. :cool:
http://boxothoughts.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/bongcat.jpg
Porchland
Aug 7, 04:11 PM
Looks very nice. Spaces will become a "how did we live without this?" feature as expose already has.
Does anyone know when we can expect a video of the WWDC to be uploaded??:confused:
I can't really tell how Spaces will work the Expose.
Apple's Leopard Sneak Peak says:
Configure your Spaces by visiting the Dashboard and Exposé preference pane in System Preferences. Add rows and columns until you have all the desktop real estate you need. Arrange your Spaces as you see fit, then assign what function keys you want to control them. You can also lock specific applications to specific Spaces, so you’ll always know where, say, Safari or Keynote is at all times.
I could the simulteneous use of both getting a little confusing.
My main concern overall about Leopard is that feature creep is going to cut into ease of use.
Does anyone know when we can expect a video of the WWDC to be uploaded??:confused:
I can't really tell how Spaces will work the Expose.
Apple's Leopard Sneak Peak says:
Configure your Spaces by visiting the Dashboard and Exposé preference pane in System Preferences. Add rows and columns until you have all the desktop real estate you need. Arrange your Spaces as you see fit, then assign what function keys you want to control them. You can also lock specific applications to specific Spaces, so you’ll always know where, say, Safari or Keynote is at all times.
I could the simulteneous use of both getting a little confusing.
My main concern overall about Leopard is that feature creep is going to cut into ease of use.
daneoni
Aug 25, 03:52 PM
Another person who can never be satisfied.:rolleyes:
What is that even supposed to mean?
What is that even supposed to mean?
GQB
Mar 31, 05:09 PM
Thats not at all what this article is saying. The Android project is still going to be "open source".
'Open Source' to the degree that it serves Google's purposes.
The point is that Apple is derided as 'closed' while Google is erroneously beatified as 'open', when in fact there is little difference between the two (other than the fact that I somewhat trust Apple with private info, while I wouldn't trust Google as far as I could throw them.)
'Open Source' to the degree that it serves Google's purposes.
The point is that Apple is derided as 'closed' while Google is erroneously beatified as 'open', when in fact there is little difference between the two (other than the fact that I somewhat trust Apple with private info, while I wouldn't trust Google as far as I could throw them.)
spicyapple
Sep 12, 11:05 AM
I was going to buy the quad-core Mac Pro 3.0 GHz when it hit the mid-price point, but I think I'll wait out for the dual quad-core (8 core) Mac Pro, instead. :) Hopefully by then, FB-DIMM will be cheap enough to buy 8 GB worth of RAM without breaking the bank.
Willis
Sep 13, 07:37 PM
One could run a Folding@Home process on each core :D
ooooor.... use multiple cores to do one fold... 4 days like my g5 would cut down to like 16 hours... thats mental. awesome... but god damn mental!!
ooooor.... use multiple cores to do one fold... 4 days like my g5 would cut down to like 16 hours... thats mental. awesome... but god damn mental!!
Gem�tlichkeit
Apr 25, 01:45 PM
Pathetic.
pyramid6
Apr 6, 03:44 PM
I think it's great that some people like the Xoom, but for me it's a nonstarter.
As a developer, 100,000 units is not even worth considering developing for. I know I'm not the only one. I really don't like the walled garden of the Apple App store, but it is where the tablets are at the moment.
As a developer, 100,000 units is not even worth considering developing for. I know I'm not the only one. I really don't like the walled garden of the Apple App store, but it is where the tablets are at the moment.
11thIndian
Apr 5, 10:14 PM
sorry but that's not the case. While some contend it's jaw-dropping, that's only because they're stacking it up against what FCS is currently. Compared to what Avid and Adobe are doing, Apple now has a mountain to climb. Apple has been too interested in their entertainment business to worry about their "pro" line (hardware/software). I know quite a few studios who have already shifted BACK to Avid and some are taking on the Adobe Suite completely as their software of choice. While some may find the new FCS exciting, and it does have some bells and whistles, it's typical Apple doing an incremental bump to keep up with what others are doing. Sad really.
So if you were one of the 100 people up to now who's seen it and can accurately make this evaluation, let's see your invite....
So if you were one of the 100 people up to now who's seen it and can accurately make this evaluation, let's see your invite....
BeefUK
Aug 27, 05:40 AM
Just looked at the shpping dates for the Core 2 Duo's listed on the dell site. There's an estimated shipping date of 11th September, so maybe the 5th is a more releastic release date for Apple's merom upgrade, whatever form it may come in.
Recently Apple's made new products avaliable to buy immediately they are announced. So looks like a little more waiting.
I'm hoping for a Macbook with Core 2 Duo 2GHz!!
Recently Apple's made new products avaliable to buy immediately they are announced. So looks like a little more waiting.
I'm hoping for a Macbook with Core 2 Duo 2GHz!!
Eidorian
Aug 26, 05:50 PM
Anyone know of benchmarks comparing the core duo with the core 2 duo?http://guides.macrumors.com/Merom#Benchmarks
HelloKitty
Jul 20, 08:52 PM
Well..I wonder if Apple indeed comes up with the Mac Pro update using even the top-of-the-line Xeon, who's gonna buy one knowing that a quad-core processor is coming up in the near future? I mean, I would hold off buying a Woodcrest machine if there's a quad-core is coming up next year..
I know people will always say that "if you need one, buy one. Don't wait for new machines." But hey, it's a 2 grand machine!
Perhaps we won't be seeing a Woodcrest Mac Pro at this year's WWDC at all. Perhaps we'll be seeing a quad-core Mac Pro proto-type that will be available in Novemeber or something like that:D !
I know people will always say that "if you need one, buy one. Don't wait for new machines." But hey, it's a 2 grand machine!
Perhaps we won't be seeing a Woodcrest Mac Pro at this year's WWDC at all. Perhaps we'll be seeing a quad-core Mac Pro proto-type that will be available in Novemeber or something like that:D !
~Shard~
Jul 14, 02:40 PM
They'd better have something in between this and the iMac...
Did you see my above post? Great minds think a like... ;)
Did you see my above post? Great minds think a like... ;)
DisMyMac
Apr 5, 07:11 PM
Is there any hope for good subtitle support? OCR, etc.?
