RedTomato
Aug 11, 09:31 PM
Apple won't put GPS in unless they can create a whole new 'Apple' interface for it.
I'm no GPS expert, but I'm not sure how they could do that with a simple candybar phone. It would need to be some sort of smartphone / pocketPC thing.
I'm no GPS expert, but I'm not sure how they could do that with a simple candybar phone. It would need to be some sort of smartphone / pocketPC thing.
rezenclowd3
Sep 1, 03:42 PM
I imagine most of the standard cars will be skipped over for multiplayer. Anyone up for a Volvo 240DL race?? I doubt it ;)
I will reserve judgment for the reviews and when I put my dirty paws on it.
I will reserve judgment for the reviews and when I put my dirty paws on it.
Reach9
Apr 11, 04:11 PM
Perhaps solely in the phone part of the equation. Here's the newsflash: the "smart" part of "smartphone" encompasses much more than a voice-driven contact list and actual phone calls.
The iOS ecosystem completely destroys Android, no matter how many widgets you're able to install.
You're right, but here's where i think is the difference. Browsing the Internet, Calendar, Checking Mail, Listening to songs, Texting, Multitasking, Notifications, Cut-Copy-Paste, ability to open and use Office files, Navigation system, basic tools like Currency converters, To-Do lists etc. These are what i believe encompasses in a "smartphone", and here's the newsflash: Android OS meets them perfectly.
I'm not talking about widgets, customization, dynamic wallapers etc
The iPhone was late on MMS, Multitasking, Cut-Copy-Paste, and now it's going to be a notification system. Plus, browsing the internet, checking mail and practically everything is much better on a bigger screen.
I feel the App Store is just an added feature, and that's why i'd get an iPod Touch for.
Imagine your iPhone without the App store and all the apps you downloaded from it. Now imagine the HTC EVO without the Android app store. Which is the better smartphone? It's pretty obvious if you ask me.
Android OS already has the "smartphone" features down, and they're just working on the bonus features such as the Android App Store.
iOS on the other hand is catching up to these "smartphone" features. My old Nokia E63 had a better notification system than the iPhone, and that's pathetic.
The iOS ecosystem completely destroys Android, no matter how many widgets you're able to install.
You're right, but here's where i think is the difference. Browsing the Internet, Calendar, Checking Mail, Listening to songs, Texting, Multitasking, Notifications, Cut-Copy-Paste, ability to open and use Office files, Navigation system, basic tools like Currency converters, To-Do lists etc. These are what i believe encompasses in a "smartphone", and here's the newsflash: Android OS meets them perfectly.
I'm not talking about widgets, customization, dynamic wallapers etc
The iPhone was late on MMS, Multitasking, Cut-Copy-Paste, and now it's going to be a notification system. Plus, browsing the internet, checking mail and practically everything is much better on a bigger screen.
I feel the App Store is just an added feature, and that's why i'd get an iPod Touch for.
Imagine your iPhone without the App store and all the apps you downloaded from it. Now imagine the HTC EVO without the Android app store. Which is the better smartphone? It's pretty obvious if you ask me.
Android OS already has the "smartphone" features down, and they're just working on the bonus features such as the Android App Store.
iOS on the other hand is catching up to these "smartphone" features. My old Nokia E63 had a better notification system than the iPhone, and that's pathetic.
Bill McEnaney
Mar 3, 05:13 AM
Bill, I would love to hear your explanation for the position of the male prostate.
I don't understand the question. Whatever it means, I wouldn't assume that having, say, genitals, means that I'm always morally free to have sex. If everyone with genitals were always morally free to do that, homosexually abusive pedophile priests would have been morally free to molest their victims.
IYou might say, "Bill, if the sex was consensual, maybe there nothing morally wrong with it." But people can coerce others into consenting.
A quick side note: Sexual tension is most often the cause for anger, jealousy and frustration. So, if everyone had at least one good orgasm every day, the world would be a much more relaxed and peaceful place and we wouldn't have the need for silly discussions such as these.
Most often? How many are jealous of others because the others are right, because they drive fancy cars, etc.?
Some may feel relaxed about something because they've deadened their consciences that rightly warned them against it.. In that case, a discussion such as this one may be needed, even if the participants don't feel any sexual tension.
I don't understand the question. Whatever it means, I wouldn't assume that having, say, genitals, means that I'm always morally free to have sex. If everyone with genitals were always morally free to do that, homosexually abusive pedophile priests would have been morally free to molest their victims.
IYou might say, "Bill, if the sex was consensual, maybe there nothing morally wrong with it." But people can coerce others into consenting.
A quick side note: Sexual tension is most often the cause for anger, jealousy and frustration. So, if everyone had at least one good orgasm every day, the world would be a much more relaxed and peaceful place and we wouldn't have the need for silly discussions such as these.
Most often? How many are jealous of others because the others are right, because they drive fancy cars, etc.?
Some may feel relaxed about something because they've deadened their consciences that rightly warned them against it.. In that case, a discussion such as this one may be needed, even if the participants don't feel any sexual tension.
CaoCao
Feb 28, 06:47 PM
Wow. I have never, ever in my life been so tempted to troll a MacRumors thread, nor have I ever been so infuriated by the use of a set of double quotation marks.
Gay marriage is not "marriage." Gay marriage is marriage.
Gay people are not "gay." They are gay.
So a few things:
1) Deal with it.
2) Gays are going to keep on getting married. Whether that means that they have to leave your ass-backwards country to come to a real civilization to do so, or write their own damn marriage contract and hire a rational person to perform the ceremony, they will.
3) As Lee said, what two consenting adults do in the privacy of their own homes (hell, anywhere, in fact) is their own damn business.
4) The claim by Bill McEnaney that gay people living together "should have purely platonic, nonsexual relationships with one another" is outrageous. (NB that this person had just said they must live "as siblings" which is weird, given that platonic love is only reservation from physical romance, not emotional romance...)
5) If you are going to pull the "protect the sanctity of marriage" card on me, think very hard about the institutions of divorce and annulment.
6) Many people (and many of the small number who claim to anyway) do not share your beliefs. Catholics have sex. In and out of marriage. *See Point One.*
7) Please try to be just a smidgen more cultured in your attitudes, and a little less abrasive in sharing them. Though I try to reserve judgment, I am currently not alone in thinking that you are completely insane just by your posts in this thread.
I feel better now. :)
2) okay, they can pretend to get married
3) We don't care what they are doing in there
5) Divorce is a terrible and tragic thing
6) The Catholic Church doesn't pretend that the people in it are perfect.
A) Maybe your feelings on the situation would be different if you actually had a girlfriend.
B) I'm interested to learn what exactly the physical and psychological risks of non-marital sex are?
You're kidding. Right?
No, I'm not kidding. To the Catholic Church sex outside of a valid sacramental marriage is fornication
You can pretend that particular fornication sessions are sacred because some guy wearing a white collar said so.
Definitions are useful
No, it's called "living a human lifestyle".
Why should your hang-ups be of any relevance to anybody else? Perhaps you need to deal with your own perceptions instead of relying on some dusty tome to tell you what to think. You know that Plato was a repressed homosexual, don't you? He spent hours at the gymnasium ogling naked young men, and perhaps like S/Paul, spent a lot of effort telling other people how to love to expiate his guilty feelings.
You are extraordinarily keen to prescribe what other people should do. What's it got to do with you?
You sound like a real catch, but hey, what you choose to do is up to you.
So, you assert that a married non-Christian couple can do nothing but fornicate? What an appallingly demeaning attitude! Do you regard any couple you meet as probable fornicators by default? Do you question them about whether they use birth control, or whether they were married, and if so whether it was in a Catholic church with the proper sacraments? You clearly swallow Catholic dogma hook, line and sinker, so choosing righteous friends must be a real PITA.
Last time I checked when the vast majority of people did such behavior it was with the opposite gender not the same.
Do you have proof that Plato was a repressed homosexual?
That is because to a Christian they aren't married. He probably doesn't because a marriage between two non-Catholic Christians is generally valid.
Lee, I agree with you about what you say, but he clearly did say that this was only his opinion. People are allowed that, even if it is hateful and exclusionist.
inclusivism is not inherently good and that position holds no hatred or malice
They decided not to rehire him, so?
Gay marriage is not "marriage." Gay marriage is marriage.
Gay people are not "gay." They are gay.
So a few things:
1) Deal with it.
2) Gays are going to keep on getting married. Whether that means that they have to leave your ass-backwards country to come to a real civilization to do so, or write their own damn marriage contract and hire a rational person to perform the ceremony, they will.
3) As Lee said, what two consenting adults do in the privacy of their own homes (hell, anywhere, in fact) is their own damn business.
4) The claim by Bill McEnaney that gay people living together "should have purely platonic, nonsexual relationships with one another" is outrageous. (NB that this person had just said they must live "as siblings" which is weird, given that platonic love is only reservation from physical romance, not emotional romance...)
5) If you are going to pull the "protect the sanctity of marriage" card on me, think very hard about the institutions of divorce and annulment.
6) Many people (and many of the small number who claim to anyway) do not share your beliefs. Catholics have sex. In and out of marriage. *See Point One.*
7) Please try to be just a smidgen more cultured in your attitudes, and a little less abrasive in sharing them. Though I try to reserve judgment, I am currently not alone in thinking that you are completely insane just by your posts in this thread.
I feel better now. :)
2) okay, they can pretend to get married
3) We don't care what they are doing in there
5) Divorce is a terrible and tragic thing
6) The Catholic Church doesn't pretend that the people in it are perfect.
A) Maybe your feelings on the situation would be different if you actually had a girlfriend.
B) I'm interested to learn what exactly the physical and psychological risks of non-marital sex are?
You're kidding. Right?
No, I'm not kidding. To the Catholic Church sex outside of a valid sacramental marriage is fornication
You can pretend that particular fornication sessions are sacred because some guy wearing a white collar said so.
Definitions are useful
No, it's called "living a human lifestyle".
Why should your hang-ups be of any relevance to anybody else? Perhaps you need to deal with your own perceptions instead of relying on some dusty tome to tell you what to think. You know that Plato was a repressed homosexual, don't you? He spent hours at the gymnasium ogling naked young men, and perhaps like S/Paul, spent a lot of effort telling other people how to love to expiate his guilty feelings.
You are extraordinarily keen to prescribe what other people should do. What's it got to do with you?
You sound like a real catch, but hey, what you choose to do is up to you.
So, you assert that a married non-Christian couple can do nothing but fornicate? What an appallingly demeaning attitude! Do you regard any couple you meet as probable fornicators by default? Do you question them about whether they use birth control, or whether they were married, and if so whether it was in a Catholic church with the proper sacraments? You clearly swallow Catholic dogma hook, line and sinker, so choosing righteous friends must be a real PITA.
Last time I checked when the vast majority of people did such behavior it was with the opposite gender not the same.
Do you have proof that Plato was a repressed homosexual?
That is because to a Christian they aren't married. He probably doesn't because a marriage between two non-Catholic Christians is generally valid.
Lee, I agree with you about what you say, but he clearly did say that this was only his opinion. People are allowed that, even if it is hateful and exclusionist.
inclusivism is not inherently good and that position holds no hatred or malice
They decided not to rehire him, so?
CaoCao
Mar 1, 05:00 PM
^^ Well maybe, but the Obama administration doesn't believe that law is constitutional.
Gov't seeks to uphold DOMA in gay lawyer's lawsuit
SAN FRANCISCO
The Justice Department says a lesbian federal employee should still be denied permission to add her wife to her health insurance despite the Obama administration's refusal to defend a federal law banning recognition of same-sex marriages.
Government lawyers told a federal judge Monday in San Francisco that the administration will still enforce the Defense of Marriage Act until it is struck down by a court or repealed by Congress. They say its new position on the act's unconstitutionality is irrelevant.
Karen Golinski is a 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals lawyer suing the Office of Personnel Management for not authorizing family health coverage for her wife. The circuit's chief judge has twice ordered the office to allow it.
The Justice Department says the rulings were not binding because they were made in the judge's role as Golinski's boss.
http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9LMIFS80.htm
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.
Right, that's why England is preventing a married couple from adopting.
Gov't seeks to uphold DOMA in gay lawyer's lawsuit
SAN FRANCISCO
The Justice Department says a lesbian federal employee should still be denied permission to add her wife to her health insurance despite the Obama administration's refusal to defend a federal law banning recognition of same-sex marriages.
Government lawyers told a federal judge Monday in San Francisco that the administration will still enforce the Defense of Marriage Act until it is struck down by a court or repealed by Congress. They say its new position on the act's unconstitutionality is irrelevant.
Karen Golinski is a 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals lawyer suing the Office of Personnel Management for not authorizing family health coverage for her wife. The circuit's chief judge has twice ordered the office to allow it.
The Justice Department says the rulings were not binding because they were made in the judge's role as Golinski's boss.
http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9LMIFS80.htm
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.
Right, that's why England is preventing a married couple from adopting.
wizard
Mar 26, 10:35 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
It is pretty incredible that the ignorance around Mac OS releases never stops. For one thing if you loose data on a computer, the only person to blame is the one staring at you in the mirror.
Even the whine about nothing worthwhile for the user is a bit old and reflects what we heard about SL. Yet SL on my early 2008 MBP was a drastic improvement for the user right out of the box and just got better with each update. User facing features are the only reason to update, fixes to underlying facilities can go a long way to justifying the software update.
As to the server integration, it hasn't and never will be a product worth $500. It is great that Apple is adding support to the base install but people need to realize a few things. One is that Mac OS is UNIX, people need to get that through their heads. Thus Apples server product only really adds in what is already seen in many UNIX intallations in a base install. Speaking of which much of that functionality is well established open source. Second the pricing of "server" software seems to be tailored to fit the mentality of the corporate world, where they feel they need to pay big bucks for something trivial. It is no wonder that Linux as established itself as a server OS in the SOHO world and at some of the more forward thinking larger corporations. As others have pointed out the basics of UNIX have been around for ages now, very little new territory is being cleared here, thus little justification for up charges on server software.
Finally it is a bit cowardly to avoid the future because you see nothing of value there for you personally. It is frightenly similar to the attitude seen in those that cut their own wrists.
It is pretty incredible that the ignorance around Mac OS releases never stops. For one thing if you loose data on a computer, the only person to blame is the one staring at you in the mirror.
Even the whine about nothing worthwhile for the user is a bit old and reflects what we heard about SL. Yet SL on my early 2008 MBP was a drastic improvement for the user right out of the box and just got better with each update. User facing features are the only reason to update, fixes to underlying facilities can go a long way to justifying the software update.
As to the server integration, it hasn't and never will be a product worth $500. It is great that Apple is adding support to the base install but people need to realize a few things. One is that Mac OS is UNIX, people need to get that through their heads. Thus Apples server product only really adds in what is already seen in many UNIX intallations in a base install. Speaking of which much of that functionality is well established open source. Second the pricing of "server" software seems to be tailored to fit the mentality of the corporate world, where they feel they need to pay big bucks for something trivial. It is no wonder that Linux as established itself as a server OS in the SOHO world and at some of the more forward thinking larger corporations. As others have pointed out the basics of UNIX have been around for ages now, very little new territory is being cleared here, thus little justification for up charges on server software.
Finally it is a bit cowardly to avoid the future because you see nothing of value there for you personally. It is frightenly similar to the attitude seen in those that cut their own wrists.
Funkymonk
Apr 19, 03:03 PM
Lol if apple was a religion it would have more extremists than Islam, Judaism, and Christianity combined! :eek:
ergle2
Sep 20, 06:44 PM
I should have been more thorough in my previous reply. What I really like about these frequent updates are the following:
1. The motherboard has socketed processors (except for the laptops).
Yeah, an upgradable processor socket is a wonderful thing :)
It's a shame the laptops are soldered, but it makes sense given the design...
2. Even though Intel is updating processors every 6 months or so, the motherboard and chipset seem to support the next processor version.
Yonah can be replaced with Merom.
Woodcrest can be replaced with Clovertown.
Your computer does not become obsolete in 6 months. Instead, it gains new life if you decide that you need the new processor.
Every 12 to 18 months or so a new chipset may become necessary. Only then does your computer lose the upgrade potential. If you buy Merom, you may not be able to upgrade to the next processor. Likewise if you buy Clovertown. New chipsets will be required beyond Merom and Clovertown.
In any event, this is based on trailing history of just 1 year. Future events may unfold differently.
Yeah -- tho' some of this might not please some due to philosophy.
Bear in mind part of the Mac philosophy from the start was "no user servicable parts inside" -- think of it as the computing equivalent of a toaster, in a sense. Jobs and Raskin were both proponents of that concept, and it lives in in some of the userbase.
I suspect that part of the userbase would prefer being able to sell an old system and buy a new one.
Now, that's not my worldview, but it's definitely out there.
Going back, often newer processors are release, at least initially, in multiple forms of package. Take the Pentium-4, which appeared for some versions as both a S478 and S775 (I think? or was there one inbetween?) chip. So even when there's a new chipset, it's not always required, it'll just give you some whizz-band new features.
With Merom, you're likely right, since that's part of the mobile line, and Intel sells the mobile line by platform (well, you can get it OEM too, but it's a lot cheaper if you just buy the platform).
1. The motherboard has socketed processors (except for the laptops).
Yeah, an upgradable processor socket is a wonderful thing :)
It's a shame the laptops are soldered, but it makes sense given the design...
2. Even though Intel is updating processors every 6 months or so, the motherboard and chipset seem to support the next processor version.
Yonah can be replaced with Merom.
Woodcrest can be replaced with Clovertown.
Your computer does not become obsolete in 6 months. Instead, it gains new life if you decide that you need the new processor.
Every 12 to 18 months or so a new chipset may become necessary. Only then does your computer lose the upgrade potential. If you buy Merom, you may not be able to upgrade to the next processor. Likewise if you buy Clovertown. New chipsets will be required beyond Merom and Clovertown.
In any event, this is based on trailing history of just 1 year. Future events may unfold differently.
Yeah -- tho' some of this might not please some due to philosophy.
Bear in mind part of the Mac philosophy from the start was "no user servicable parts inside" -- think of it as the computing equivalent of a toaster, in a sense. Jobs and Raskin were both proponents of that concept, and it lives in in some of the userbase.
I suspect that part of the userbase would prefer being able to sell an old system and buy a new one.
Now, that's not my worldview, but it's definitely out there.
Going back, often newer processors are release, at least initially, in multiple forms of package. Take the Pentium-4, which appeared for some versions as both a S478 and S775 (I think? or was there one inbetween?) chip. So even when there's a new chipset, it's not always required, it'll just give you some whizz-band new features.
With Merom, you're likely right, since that's part of the mobile line, and Intel sells the mobile line by platform (well, you can get it OEM too, but it's a lot cheaper if you just buy the platform).
Gupster
Apr 7, 10:38 PM
:mad:Best Buy told me today that they had them in but Apple would not let them sell them. I have been going for two weeks every other day and they finally tell me they have them and can't sell them. I hate this crap. I want my IPad 2.
littleman23408
Dec 1, 04:41 PM
Well i'm retarded. After all that yelling at the tv, I didn't realize there were two laps. :p. When I looked at the one person's post that gave me a little help, i thought "why is he talking about so many turns?"
After realizing it was 2 laps, I easily beat it.
After realizing it was 2 laps, I easily beat it.
SiliconAddict
Aug 6, 02:54 PM
I have tried the vista Beta, and ran in via BootCamp, so no different hardware. Tiger is miles ahead of vista.
Put simply: Tiger Works.... Vista Crashes and takes 2 years longer than tiger to do the same task.
I don't care how it looks, i don't care about see-through windows. I want something that works. Tiger gives me that.... and i hope leopard makes it even better. Tiger is ahead of the competition, hopefully leopard will be further forward, beating Vista to where it should be... In a beige, boring box:D
Vista is also 6 months out, prob more. This is no different then when Apple released 10.0. There WAS a reason 10.1 was free to 10.0 users. Microsoft will get this cleaned up over the 18+ months it takes Apple to come out with 10.6. Leopard has to go the distance and I two have been using Vista inhouse since early Alpha's for internal app testing. Its come a long way. It still has a long way to go still but the core IS there. MS simply needs to bug fix the heck out of it. Which will happen within 2-4 months of release with SP1 and then SP2 another 6 months after that.
Mac OS X Leopard
Introducing Vista 2.0
http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=207241438&size=l
:D
B
Is that real? PLEASE tell me that is real! :D Priceless.
Put simply: Tiger Works.... Vista Crashes and takes 2 years longer than tiger to do the same task.
I don't care how it looks, i don't care about see-through windows. I want something that works. Tiger gives me that.... and i hope leopard makes it even better. Tiger is ahead of the competition, hopefully leopard will be further forward, beating Vista to where it should be... In a beige, boring box:D
Vista is also 6 months out, prob more. This is no different then when Apple released 10.0. There WAS a reason 10.1 was free to 10.0 users. Microsoft will get this cleaned up over the 18+ months it takes Apple to come out with 10.6. Leopard has to go the distance and I two have been using Vista inhouse since early Alpha's for internal app testing. Its come a long way. It still has a long way to go still but the core IS there. MS simply needs to bug fix the heck out of it. Which will happen within 2-4 months of release with SP1 and then SP2 another 6 months after that.
Mac OS X Leopard
Introducing Vista 2.0
http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=207241438&size=l
:D
B
Is that real? PLEASE tell me that is real! :D Priceless.
LethalWolfe
Apr 10, 09:28 PM
Well, yeah, it will probably make more people happy, but it will be fun to see all the people bitching and moaning around here.
If I think the new FCP sucks I'll be b*tching and moaning too. ;)
Okay, okay, so they have done NAB (they've never done AES, though, that I'm certain). But still: They pulled out of everything in the last couple years. Why come back to NAB? Why not just do a small-scale announcement outside of NAB's timeframe so as to maximize press?
Apple was at the SuperMeet last year but it was totally forgettable. Adobe and Avid blew them out of the water. Why not do it at NAB when the entire industry is focused on what's happening there? All the industry press is at NAB and a ton of your target demo, especially the people that can best 'evangelize' your product, is there as well.
Was the supermeet focused on something else at one point? Because otherwise that sounds a little hard to believe that a usergroup would exist for a product that wasn't out yet...
Not to mention it's the 10th anniversary of the Supermeet and FCP debuted in '99.
Lethal
If I think the new FCP sucks I'll be b*tching and moaning too. ;)
Okay, okay, so they have done NAB (they've never done AES, though, that I'm certain). But still: They pulled out of everything in the last couple years. Why come back to NAB? Why not just do a small-scale announcement outside of NAB's timeframe so as to maximize press?
Apple was at the SuperMeet last year but it was totally forgettable. Adobe and Avid blew them out of the water. Why not do it at NAB when the entire industry is focused on what's happening there? All the industry press is at NAB and a ton of your target demo, especially the people that can best 'evangelize' your product, is there as well.
Was the supermeet focused on something else at one point? Because otherwise that sounds a little hard to believe that a usergroup would exist for a product that wasn't out yet...
Not to mention it's the 10th anniversary of the Supermeet and FCP debuted in '99.
Lethal
Cameront9
Aug 7, 05:46 PM
WHat is he deal with no new displays, but they did drop the prices a little. I think the iPod is long overdue at this point for a makeover. I guess I'm just a victim of my own unfulfilled expectations.
The displays WERE updated slightly...check the main page.
As for iPods...why "makeover" what is working? And this was the DEVELOPERS conference. iPods, if they happen before Christmas, will be either at Paris or a special media event (the latter more likely, IMHO).
The displays WERE updated slightly...check the main page.
As for iPods...why "makeover" what is working? And this was the DEVELOPERS conference. iPods, if they happen before Christmas, will be either at Paris or a special media event (the latter more likely, IMHO).
shamino
Jul 20, 08:18 PM
Hehe, I remember Virginia Tech having built the 3rd fastest supercomputer out of 1100 dual powermacs G5. Back then, the XServe G5 wasn't available. You can see that in the MWSF 2004 keynote (minute 25 ff). They later switched to the Xserve G5 when those came out. It had 10.28 TF for just $5.2M.
And I remember that they were very concerned about the lack of ECC memory, and were extremely eager to replace them with Xserves as soon as the G5 model came out.
And I remember that they were very concerned about the lack of ECC memory, and were extremely eager to replace them with Xserves as soon as the G5 model came out.
spazzcat
Mar 22, 01:44 PM
Lol. So many kid Apple fanboys.
iOS is clearly outdated if compared to Honeycomb and QNX.
The iPad 2 is nice, but it needs more RAM. Multitasking is just terrible with few RAM and bad OS processes handling.
Multitasking in iOS is sometimes a joke, specially if you're web browsing and using some chat app (like IM+, BeeJive etc.).
I'm glad that RIM and Samsung come with those prices.
Next months will be crucial for me to decide the successor of my iPad 1.
I played with Honeycomb over the weekend on tablet, it's toy....
iOS is clearly outdated if compared to Honeycomb and QNX.
The iPad 2 is nice, but it needs more RAM. Multitasking is just terrible with few RAM and bad OS processes handling.
Multitasking in iOS is sometimes a joke, specially if you're web browsing and using some chat app (like IM+, BeeJive etc.).
I'm glad that RIM and Samsung come with those prices.
Next months will be crucial for me to decide the successor of my iPad 1.
I played with Honeycomb over the weekend on tablet, it's toy....
PeterQVenkman
Apr 27, 09:06 AM
Because they hoped people will grow up and educate themselfs. That never happened obviously.
Obviously. ;)
Obviously. ;)
gugy
Aug 17, 12:17 PM
"Sixteen Core Tigerton Setup about $6,000" :eek:
I want one!
I want one!
Eraserhead
Mar 22, 01:47 PM
With regards to Libya without the no fly zone there would have been a massacre, and without bombing Gaddafi's troops there isn't much hope of anything other than a stalemate, which is also unideal.
With the rebels on the ground it seems highly unlikely that we'll be in Libya for years to come or anything like that.
The big difference between Libya and Iraq is that in Iraq there wasn't a large insurgence controlling a decent proportion of the country before the troops went in.
With the rebels on the ground it seems highly unlikely that we'll be in Libya for years to come or anything like that.
The big difference between Libya and Iraq is that in Iraq there wasn't a large insurgence controlling a decent proportion of the country before the troops went in.
KnightWRX
Mar 23, 04:32 AM
Probably someone mentioned before, but "a tablet for professionals" named PLAYbook?
I smell an identity crisis.
Yes, someone did mention it before and that person got told that a PLAYbook is a book of strategies, not some kind of book for kids to play with. Think professional sports, the coach has his "playbook" with him with all the different "plays" in it that he's planning to use.
It translates well to the corporate world where company strategies are made and store on this device and communicated through it.
It's mostly non-english speakers that are trying desperately to find a problem with the name that see any sort of identity crisis. Most of us understand why RIM picked the name.
I smell an identity crisis.
Yes, someone did mention it before and that person got told that a PLAYbook is a book of strategies, not some kind of book for kids to play with. Think professional sports, the coach has his "playbook" with him with all the different "plays" in it that he's planning to use.
It translates well to the corporate world where company strategies are made and store on this device and communicated through it.
It's mostly non-english speakers that are trying desperately to find a problem with the name that see any sort of identity crisis. Most of us understand why RIM picked the name.
Mac-key
Apr 6, 09:25 AM
BRING IT!
Anxiously waiting to see what's coming!
Anxiously waiting to see what's coming!
REDolution
Apr 12, 05:05 PM
For me personally, as a proud Red One owner, I really hope that the new FCP has native RED support without Log and Transfer and can also utilise our RED Rocket.
jonnysods
Apr 6, 08:02 AM
Yikes! Better offload my copy of the current version of FCS before it drops too low.
Any takers? :D
Any takers? :D
~Shard~
Jul 14, 04:55 PM
I wasn't being a smartass.
Reacent Post
0 comments:
Post a Comment