akac
Jul 10, 08:30 PM
Get used to more Inspectors with Tab Views and less Toolbars. Cocoa apps are designed with Inspector Views.
Inspectors are good for certain things. Like a window for working with all the graphic editing that iPhoto provides for an image. It is NOT so good for what Pages uses it for. And inspectors are not a Cocoa thing. I use tons of Cocoa apps and many don't use inspectors. Its a general UI thing - the programming API should have nothing to do with what UI comes out of it.
Inspectors are good for certain things. Like a window for working with all the graphic editing that iPhoto provides for an image. It is NOT so good for what Pages uses it for. And inspectors are not a Cocoa thing. I use tons of Cocoa apps and many don't use inspectors. Its a general UI thing - the programming API should have nothing to do with what UI comes out of it.
dsensi
May 2, 10:16 AM
OK, guys, I think you are right, touch screens are not the most desirable thing to see in an iMac, although I am sure they will implement it sooner or later, because it has an appeal nowadays to many customers - and it�s up to you if you use it or not. Time will answer this question.
But... what do you think about higher resolution screens? Specially for the 21,5 iMac. I currently own a notebook with 15.4 screen that has exactly the same amount of pixels of a 21.5 iMac (1920x1080). When I use the 21.5 iMac, the large pixel size bother me, while at the notebook pixels are almost invisible, and it�s a great pleasure to use it.
But... what do you think about higher resolution screens? Specially for the 21,5 iMac. I currently own a notebook with 15.4 screen that has exactly the same amount of pixels of a 21.5 iMac (1920x1080). When I use the 21.5 iMac, the large pixel size bother me, while at the notebook pixels are almost invisible, and it�s a great pleasure to use it.
iZoom P5
Jul 24, 04:10 PM
Engadget has a pic of it on their website:
http://www.engadget.com/2006/07/24/apples-mighty-mouse-finally-gets-bluetooth/
http://www.engadget.com/2006/07/24/apples-mighty-mouse-finally-gets-bluetooth/
damixt
Mar 13, 05:24 PM
anyone going to Cerritos mall tomorrow morning to try and get one?
trule
Jan 30, 05:09 PM
I understand the theory of what you say, that gold has intrinsic value. However, the theory has never been tested in a true crisis. Trust me, if everything went bankrupt (stocks, bonds, t-bills, banks, etc.), then gold will be of little value as well. The ONLY thing of true value under those circumstances will be food and those things that can be used to barter for food (gold would have some value in that case, but so would a box of ammunition) The fact that someone paid $1000 or $2000 an ounce for gold before a crisis will mean nothing. It will be worth only as much as someone is capable of paying, and that will be very little.
The last run-up in the price of gold in the 80s was met with a rapid drop less than two years later to the $350 range, which is where gold sat for almost twenty years. While I have no idea how much more it will increase in value over the short term, the problem is that when the fall comes it will be quite rapid.
The biggest difference I see between gold and stocks is that one is based on negative gloom/doom thinking, and the other is based on positive/growth thinking. I have little to no interest in investing in gloom/doom, and history is the reason why. Periods of negative thinking tend to be short-lived.
I can only suggest you look at the history of other nations, it happens quite often that complete economic systems collapse. Try Mexico, Argentina, Germany or any war torn nation. In these nations those with gold maintained their wealth, those without had to start from scratch.
Its insurance, just in case...for example when all the things I listed happen at once like they are in the USA right now.
The last run-up in the price of gold in the 80s was met with a rapid drop less than two years later to the $350 range, which is where gold sat for almost twenty years. While I have no idea how much more it will increase in value over the short term, the problem is that when the fall comes it will be quite rapid.
The biggest difference I see between gold and stocks is that one is based on negative gloom/doom thinking, and the other is based on positive/growth thinking. I have little to no interest in investing in gloom/doom, and history is the reason why. Periods of negative thinking tend to be short-lived.
I can only suggest you look at the history of other nations, it happens quite often that complete economic systems collapse. Try Mexico, Argentina, Germany or any war torn nation. In these nations those with gold maintained their wealth, those without had to start from scratch.
Its insurance, just in case...for example when all the things I listed happen at once like they are in the USA right now.
ucfgrad93
Feb 28, 04:37 PM
I feel bad for the rest of the cast and crew that are now not receiving a paycheck because of Sheen's idiocy. :mad:
NATO
Apr 12, 09:43 AM
TheRegister seems to reckon it's not due until 2012:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/04/12/iphone_delay/
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/04/12/iphone_delay/
Psilocybin
Apr 19, 07:47 PM
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)
I had to finally register to comment on the hypocrisy in this and many other threads like it. Because some people want frame rates for gaming on an MBA, then your needs for GPU performance are valid, and others who don't game but could use CPU performance have invalid needs? Rubbish.
A perfect example is the above. So the C2D rates as a 100/100 for CPU performance and thus any improvement is useless? Really?! Nice to see that you framed the argument such that any improvement you don't see as needed is useless.
On Sunday I combined 6 or 8 short 720p video clips into a 7 minute video for YouTube with a simple title screen and transitions. It took the C2D ~40 minutes to process the video and save in a new format. So you're really going to argue that there is nothing to be gained from a significant bump in processor speed?
For me and many other potential MBA purchasers, a CPU bump from the media processing abilities of the Core i processors would be welcome, and GPU performance over and above the ability to play real-time HD video is useless. We shouldn't be saddled with an out-of-date processor or forced to subsidize "unnecessary" frame rate performance just to appease game-players. And that perspective is as valid as yours.
Welcome!
CPU and GPU are both important. There is one critical difference between CPU and GPU though and thats this:
A user can usually wait on on the CPU with no impact other than the fact that they had to wait. Using your example. You waited 40 minutes. A CPU that that was twice as fast might have reduced your wait to 25 minutes. A CPU that was half a fast would have increased your wait time to maybe 75 minutes. The only consequence of CPU speed is time in general. There is rarely a difference in the final product.
GPU is different, GPU is often used to perform realtime calculations (Game or movie frames). Because the frames are related to a specific point in time, a difference is GPU performance can make the difference between usable and unusable. For that reason, people that like, want or need GPU performance tend to be focal.
In my experience, poor GPU performance bugs me more than poor CPU performance. You can't just wait for the GPU to get done, like you can with a CPU. There does have to be a balance though.
Well said
I had to finally register to comment on the hypocrisy in this and many other threads like it. Because some people want frame rates for gaming on an MBA, then your needs for GPU performance are valid, and others who don't game but could use CPU performance have invalid needs? Rubbish.
A perfect example is the above. So the C2D rates as a 100/100 for CPU performance and thus any improvement is useless? Really?! Nice to see that you framed the argument such that any improvement you don't see as needed is useless.
On Sunday I combined 6 or 8 short 720p video clips into a 7 minute video for YouTube with a simple title screen and transitions. It took the C2D ~40 minutes to process the video and save in a new format. So you're really going to argue that there is nothing to be gained from a significant bump in processor speed?
For me and many other potential MBA purchasers, a CPU bump from the media processing abilities of the Core i processors would be welcome, and GPU performance over and above the ability to play real-time HD video is useless. We shouldn't be saddled with an out-of-date processor or forced to subsidize "unnecessary" frame rate performance just to appease game-players. And that perspective is as valid as yours.
Welcome!
CPU and GPU are both important. There is one critical difference between CPU and GPU though and thats this:
A user can usually wait on on the CPU with no impact other than the fact that they had to wait. Using your example. You waited 40 minutes. A CPU that that was twice as fast might have reduced your wait to 25 minutes. A CPU that was half a fast would have increased your wait time to maybe 75 minutes. The only consequence of CPU speed is time in general. There is rarely a difference in the final product.
GPU is different, GPU is often used to perform realtime calculations (Game or movie frames). Because the frames are related to a specific point in time, a difference is GPU performance can make the difference between usable and unusable. For that reason, people that like, want or need GPU performance tend to be focal.
In my experience, poor GPU performance bugs me more than poor CPU performance. You can't just wait for the GPU to get done, like you can with a CPU. There does have to be a balance though.
Well said
daveschroeder
Oct 23, 08:35 AM
Dave,
I understand where you are coming from, but I still don't interpret the EULA as you do. Neither does Paul Thurrott http://www.winsupersite.com/showcase/winvista_licensing.asp. Can you please provide links to others who think like you, preferably if they happen to work for MS. ;)
Coincidentally, I had just emailed Paul.
He already responded:
From: thurrott [at] gmail.com
Subject: RE: Row over Vista virtualization much ado about nothing?
Date: October 23, 2006 8:23:04 AM CDT
To: das [at] doit.wisc.edu
Microsoft told me that the retail EULA forbids the installation of Windows
Vista Home Basic or Home Premium in virtual machines. They said that if
developers wanted to do this, they should get an MSDN subscription, which
has a different license allowing such an install. All that said, there's
nothing technical from preventing users from installing any Vista version in
a virtual machine.
Paul
...to which I replied:
From: das [at] doit.wisc.edu
Subject: Re: Row over Vista virtualization much ado about nothing?
Date: October 23, 2006 8:30:57 AM CDT
To: thurrott [at] gmail.com
Security: Signed
So Microsoft actually does intend the EULA to prohibit someone from, say, buying Vista Home as a retail box and then installing it in Parallels Desktop on a Mac? (I know there is nothing technical preventing that.)
This still seems curious, given that in that scenario, not only does Vista Ultimate allow VM use, but also includes an additional license specifically so that same copy can be installed in a VM on the same device. Why wouldn't Home's license allow a single instance of itself to be used in a VM as long as it's not already installed somewhere else? The language all revolves around "the software installed on the licensed device", and I take that to mean the software *already* installed on that device, but I suppose that could be argued to mean that it can't be installed on *any* device where it would be used in a virtualization environment...
Update: Paul's response:
From: thurrott [at] gmail.com
Subject: RE: Row over Vista virtualization much ado about nothing?
Date: October 23, 2006 8:34:07 AM CDT
To: das [at] doit.wisc.edu
Yeah, that's what they told me. My guess is that they don't want people
purchasing the low-cost versions, installing them on virtual machine
environments they don't understand (like Parallels) and then demanding
support.
You can understand why this is an issue, given that the Business and Ultimate EULAs not only explicitly allow VM use, but also include additional licenses to use that copy a second time in a VM, legally (on the same device). Also, all the language, as I said, revolves around using "the software installed on the licensed device" (implying that it's an installation that already exists on a licensed device) in a VM.
So I'll say that, if this is accurate, I stand corrected. After a few years of reading Microsoft (and other) EULAs, even I thought Microsoft wouldn't be that retarded. ;-)
Given the language, and given the additional-license situation with Business and Ultimate, I still have to say I'm surprised.
I understand where you are coming from, but I still don't interpret the EULA as you do. Neither does Paul Thurrott http://www.winsupersite.com/showcase/winvista_licensing.asp. Can you please provide links to others who think like you, preferably if they happen to work for MS. ;)
Coincidentally, I had just emailed Paul.
He already responded:
From: thurrott [at] gmail.com
Subject: RE: Row over Vista virtualization much ado about nothing?
Date: October 23, 2006 8:23:04 AM CDT
To: das [at] doit.wisc.edu
Microsoft told me that the retail EULA forbids the installation of Windows
Vista Home Basic or Home Premium in virtual machines. They said that if
developers wanted to do this, they should get an MSDN subscription, which
has a different license allowing such an install. All that said, there's
nothing technical from preventing users from installing any Vista version in
a virtual machine.
Paul
...to which I replied:
From: das [at] doit.wisc.edu
Subject: Re: Row over Vista virtualization much ado about nothing?
Date: October 23, 2006 8:30:57 AM CDT
To: thurrott [at] gmail.com
Security: Signed
So Microsoft actually does intend the EULA to prohibit someone from, say, buying Vista Home as a retail box and then installing it in Parallels Desktop on a Mac? (I know there is nothing technical preventing that.)
This still seems curious, given that in that scenario, not only does Vista Ultimate allow VM use, but also includes an additional license specifically so that same copy can be installed in a VM on the same device. Why wouldn't Home's license allow a single instance of itself to be used in a VM as long as it's not already installed somewhere else? The language all revolves around "the software installed on the licensed device", and I take that to mean the software *already* installed on that device, but I suppose that could be argued to mean that it can't be installed on *any* device where it would be used in a virtualization environment...
Update: Paul's response:
From: thurrott [at] gmail.com
Subject: RE: Row over Vista virtualization much ado about nothing?
Date: October 23, 2006 8:34:07 AM CDT
To: das [at] doit.wisc.edu
Yeah, that's what they told me. My guess is that they don't want people
purchasing the low-cost versions, installing them on virtual machine
environments they don't understand (like Parallels) and then demanding
support.
You can understand why this is an issue, given that the Business and Ultimate EULAs not only explicitly allow VM use, but also include additional licenses to use that copy a second time in a VM, legally (on the same device). Also, all the language, as I said, revolves around using "the software installed on the licensed device" (implying that it's an installation that already exists on a licensed device) in a VM.
So I'll say that, if this is accurate, I stand corrected. After a few years of reading Microsoft (and other) EULAs, even I thought Microsoft wouldn't be that retarded. ;-)
Given the language, and given the additional-license situation with Business and Ultimate, I still have to say I'm surprised.
Eriden
Mar 15, 01:06 AM
I'll be heading to Spectrum myself. I've got to pick one up for my wife. She thought she'd be happy with my first gen iPad until she started playing around with my white Verizon 32GB.
Fortunately, for some reason, Spectrum sounds like was much less of a mess than Brea. 2/3 of the people in line on launch day were disappointed.
Fortunately, for some reason, Spectrum sounds like was much less of a mess than Brea. 2/3 of the people in line on launch day were disappointed.
chaosbunny
Apr 27, 03:44 AM
I will not use any cloud stuff anyway, if it's free or not doesn't matter. No need for government and corporations to gather even more data on everybody. It's a sour pill wrapped in a thin layer of sugar. Everybody embracing this cloud stuff seems to either be not very well informed or simply doesn't value freedom and the simple democratic rule of "innocent until proven otherwise".
rever3nce
Apr 22, 04:16 PM
this looks fugly
opeter
Oct 28, 07:11 AM
All I want is a real, good friend.
FireStar
Nov 9, 03:54 PM
More Aero.
http://aero.imageg.net/graphics/product_images/pAERO1-8501265t386x450.jpg
http://aero.imageg.net/graphics/product_images/pAERO1-8359851t386x450.jpg
http://aero.imageg.net/graphics/product_images/pAERO1-8501307enh-z5.jpg
Not sure why this one is huge....
I can't not want this jacket.... :confused:
http://aero.imageg.net/graphics/product_images/pAERO1-7853290t386x450.jpg
And some thermals.
http://aero.imageg.net/graphics/product_images/pAERO1-8501265t386x450.jpg
http://aero.imageg.net/graphics/product_images/pAERO1-8359851t386x450.jpg
http://aero.imageg.net/graphics/product_images/pAERO1-8501307enh-z5.jpg
Not sure why this one is huge....
I can't not want this jacket.... :confused:
http://aero.imageg.net/graphics/product_images/pAERO1-7853290t386x450.jpg
And some thermals.
hansiedejong
Jan 30, 04:01 AM
How much did you pay for the tickets?
Like 300 euros. My father is frequent flyer and has very much Flying Blue points so we only pay the tax....:D
What is the nicest Apple Store in Cali?
Like 300 euros. My father is frequent flyer and has very much Flying Blue points so we only pay the tax....:D
What is the nicest Apple Store in Cali?
thisday
Apr 18, 12:10 AM
What about the heat? MBP are too hot and not in a nice way.
rnelan7
Dec 4, 06:27 PM
hahahah I probably have more experience with guns then most people, I own 9 guns of my own already.
a .223 ruger mini 14 a couple .22's and a couple shotguns a .22 pistol.. and a couple others...
I don't doubt you, but in honor of A Christmas Story I had to say it :D
a .223 ruger mini 14 a couple .22's and a couple shotguns a .22 pistol.. and a couple others...
I don't doubt you, but in honor of A Christmas Story I had to say it :D
dongmin
Aug 15, 03:20 PM
see a little demo animation for search inside the safari app.
http://www.handras.hu/stuff/ani2.movHas that pop-up video flavor, doesn't it??? Stylin...
http://www.handras.hu/stuff/ani2.movHas that pop-up video flavor, doesn't it??? Stylin...
podiki
May 3, 07:53 AM
Meh, she's got sharp knees.
Oh, wait, I'm not on fark bitching about a beautiful woman...
Sweet update. Might consider trading in my Mac Pro.
Oh, wait, I'm not on fark bitching about a beautiful woman...
Sweet update. Might consider trading in my Mac Pro.
wordoflife
Apr 14, 01:00 AM
I originally waited for the white version (back when it was only delayed until "late summer".) but once September rolled around, I just decided to wait until the 5 came out. With the rumors of the 5 being delayed until fall, I might have to seriously consider some backup plans. I'd prefer to stick with an iPhone, but the 3GS is getting long in the tooth and I will not sign a contract for outdated hardware.
It's not really outdated in the sense that it is still the best and latest iPhone out there. But I know what you are getting at.
It's not really outdated in the sense that it is still the best and latest iPhone out there. But I know what you are getting at.
jav6454
Apr 30, 10:14 PM
Ucfgrad93
-aggie- is so called seer. I trust that. Chrmjenkins seems clean. I know I'm not. So it's him left. lbro as well, but I don't get that vibe from him.
-aggie- is so called seer. I trust that. Chrmjenkins seems clean. I know I'm not. So it's him left. lbro as well, but I don't get that vibe from him.
andiwm2003
Jul 24, 03:21 PM
I'll take two, please.
why not four? one for each wheel;)
why not four? one for each wheel;)
lsvtecjohn3
Apr 26, 12:14 PM
Anyone that thought it was going to be free is a fool. I just hope Apple prices it better than everyone else. I think Amazon is $20 for 20 GB a year. Apple should price it $15 for 20 GB a year
eljanitor
Mar 3, 07:44 PM
Sure we are all making jokes about Sheen and his antics. Lets not forget 2 other notable comedians that were huge drug users that showed warning signs, Chris Farley and John Belushi. Sheen is in huge denial and will most likely kill himself at some point.
It's really just sad that he's doing this, and that nobody is trying to stop him, from self destructing. Regardless of what he says or does and how comical all of this may seem to the whole world it's really a terrible thing to watch.
He's completely lost his mind and his kids now. The longer he keeps this up the more he may loose. If this was your best friend or a good family member you would try to stop them from doing this and get them the help they need.
Anyone else who did something like this would end up in jail, or a mental ward and would never work again. He's put many people out of work, and he thinks that he deserves to get paid for all the episodes he's not going to make? His justifications for wanting money are obviously for his expensive drug habit, and lifestyle.
We've lost many good actors and entertainers to drugs and to overindulgence. Not to mention this is what we're bombarded with on a daily basis in music videos, and pop TV. This is the end result of that party lifestyle. It's sad to see, and it's just not funny. I feel really bad for him.
It would be nice if his family would round him up and get him some help before something truly terrible happens.
It's really just sad that he's doing this, and that nobody is trying to stop him, from self destructing. Regardless of what he says or does and how comical all of this may seem to the whole world it's really a terrible thing to watch.
He's completely lost his mind and his kids now. The longer he keeps this up the more he may loose. If this was your best friend or a good family member you would try to stop them from doing this and get them the help they need.
Anyone else who did something like this would end up in jail, or a mental ward and would never work again. He's put many people out of work, and he thinks that he deserves to get paid for all the episodes he's not going to make? His justifications for wanting money are obviously for his expensive drug habit, and lifestyle.
We've lost many good actors and entertainers to drugs and to overindulgence. Not to mention this is what we're bombarded with on a daily basis in music videos, and pop TV. This is the end result of that party lifestyle. It's sad to see, and it's just not funny. I feel really bad for him.
It would be nice if his family would round him up and get him some help before something truly terrible happens.