wordoflife
Feb 27, 09:51 PM
Here at school it is my only computer, and I used it almost exclusively last year because I was on the move so much. So yeah I guess you could say I do a lot of typing on here haha. :)
lol, I just realized how stupid my previous comment sounded :o
lol, I just realized how stupid my previous comment sounded :o
puuukeey
Sep 6, 10:28 PM
not that this is anything new. but ethically, if a company insists that you are buying your little piece of a movie(or music or art) instead of buying a physical copy, then you should be able to procure as many copys as you want from where ever you can for the cost of production materials.
after the first purchase of course
after the first purchase of course
tablo13
Sep 14, 08:22 PM
I got the Belkin Grip Vue in the blue color at bestbuy. Really a toss up between the three colors IMO.
Looks pretty decent from the front, but the blue is a bit feminine.
Looks pretty decent from the front, but the blue is a bit feminine.
Evangelion
Jul 20, 05:00 AM
Gah. The Linux community doesn't want to unify. In fact, not unifying is the core of their philosophy.
You do realize that you are full of crap? There is acautlly quite a bit work being done in order to unify various areas of Linux.
It's why there are 415 distributions (none of which are compatible with each other)
Again: you do realize that you are full of crap? There are handful of distributions that matter, rest are more or lesss niche. The ones that matter are (IMO): Fedora/Red Hat, SUSE, Ubuntu, Debian and Gentoo. Of those, Ubuntu and Debian are quite compatible with each other.
9,843 window managers (none of which have remotely similar configuration options), and 3.43x10^15 terminal emulators (none of which actually emulate terminals any better or worse than any other one).
Maybe they realized that "one size does NOT fit all"? Why should there be just WM, just one editor, just one browser, just one email-client etc. etc.?
Yes, Linux has several options to choose from. And is that a bad thing? Is it a good thing to cram some specific thing down users throatts without gicing them the option to choose? It has two primary GUI's (with several smaller ones floating around as well): GNOME and KDE. And while they are both GUI's, they are both sufficiently different that they do not overlap as much. They have different architecture behind them, different design-goals, different ideology... And they cater to different types of users. I have used both, and I can appreciate the strengths of either of them.
You do realize that you are full of crap? There is acautlly quite a bit work being done in order to unify various areas of Linux.
It's why there are 415 distributions (none of which are compatible with each other)
Again: you do realize that you are full of crap? There are handful of distributions that matter, rest are more or lesss niche. The ones that matter are (IMO): Fedora/Red Hat, SUSE, Ubuntu, Debian and Gentoo. Of those, Ubuntu and Debian are quite compatible with each other.
9,843 window managers (none of which have remotely similar configuration options), and 3.43x10^15 terminal emulators (none of which actually emulate terminals any better or worse than any other one).
Maybe they realized that "one size does NOT fit all"? Why should there be just WM, just one editor, just one browser, just one email-client etc. etc.?
Yes, Linux has several options to choose from. And is that a bad thing? Is it a good thing to cram some specific thing down users throatts without gicing them the option to choose? It has two primary GUI's (with several smaller ones floating around as well): GNOME and KDE. And while they are both GUI's, they are both sufficiently different that they do not overlap as much. They have different architecture behind them, different design-goals, different ideology... And they cater to different types of users. I have used both, and I can appreciate the strengths of either of them.
ccunning
Jul 14, 11:28 AM
I just saw this and though it was pretty interesting:
Sony also introduced their own small-format 90.0 � 94.0 mm disk, similar to the others but somewhat simpler in construction than the AmDisk. The first computer to use this format was the HP-150 of 1983, and Sony also used them fairly widely on their line of MSX computers. Other than this the format suffered from a similar fate as the other new formats; the 5�-inch format simply had too much market share. Things changed dramatically in 1984 when Apple Computer selected the format for their new Macintosh computers. By 1989 the 3�-inch was outselling the 5�-inch.
Here is the source:
Sony's 3.5" Floppy Disk (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floppy_drive#The_3.C2.BD-inch_microfloppy_diskette)
Sony also introduced their own small-format 90.0 � 94.0 mm disk, similar to the others but somewhat simpler in construction than the AmDisk. The first computer to use this format was the HP-150 of 1983, and Sony also used them fairly widely on their line of MSX computers. Other than this the format suffered from a similar fate as the other new formats; the 5�-inch format simply had too much market share. Things changed dramatically in 1984 when Apple Computer selected the format for their new Macintosh computers. By 1989 the 3�-inch was outselling the 5�-inch.
Here is the source:
Sony's 3.5" Floppy Disk (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floppy_drive#The_3.C2.BD-inch_microfloppy_diskette)
kelving525
Oct 6, 11:16 PM
The volume buttons are a little stiff, though the sleep/wake button is perfect. I'm hoping the volume buttons will loosen up a bit over time. I can adjust them pretty easily with my pointer finger when held in my right hand, but I can't do it very well with my thumb when holding in my left hand.
I completely agree with you on this, the sleep/wake button is fine using either left or right, BUT the volume rocker is not convenient when using left hand, but right hand is ok.
I completely agree with you on this, the sleep/wake button is fine using either left or right, BUT the volume rocker is not convenient when using left hand, but right hand is ok.
rmitchell248
Feb 28, 05:26 PM
Nice setup. What's the story behind the "double" windows, I've never seen anything like that before.
Back in the days before double or triple glassed windows, this was the only option for better insulation compared to a single window.
Thank you, Yes my office room here had single pane windows originally. The rest of the house has windows like what is on the outside but they are double pane from when the house was built. For some reason not in here. The house has a lot of history and the windows are beautiful so it would be a shame to take out the originals. They are the very thin glass that you can see the distortion when looking through(I am not sure what to call that). In this room the heat loss was bad but in order to preserve the old glass and original look outside this was a decent option We back up to a river that the american army crossed through during WWII and the last of the bullet holes from the fire fight in the back of the basement were just patched up with the latest renovation work.
Back in the days before double or triple glassed windows, this was the only option for better insulation compared to a single window.
Thank you, Yes my office room here had single pane windows originally. The rest of the house has windows like what is on the outside but they are double pane from when the house was built. For some reason not in here. The house has a lot of history and the windows are beautiful so it would be a shame to take out the originals. They are the very thin glass that you can see the distortion when looking through(I am not sure what to call that). In this room the heat loss was bad but in order to preserve the old glass and original look outside this was a decent option We back up to a river that the american army crossed through during WWII and the last of the bullet holes from the fire fight in the back of the basement were just patched up with the latest renovation work.
imac_japan
Apr 2, 04:39 AM
problem is, what do you cut down in #1 and still make profit? it's clear that dirt cheap computer market is something apple's not interested in. they believe it makes no economic sense. apple is not a charity organization, it is NOT on some mission to spread the goodness of Mac OS... if they don't see an economic merit in offering dirt cheap Macs, they won't, just like any other businesses.
eMac is not meant to be cheap. iMac is not meant to be cheap. they are meant to be all-in-one. if you know enough to foresee that you may need to upgrade in the future, you get a PowerMac because all-in-one is not for you. if you want a cheap, upgradable machine, then, unfortunately, you are not within apple's target market. thus far, apple has been doing well with this philosophy and who's to tell them to change? (do note that "customers" wanting dirt cheap machines have far less economic leverage because, well, they are cheap. if $800 is too much for a complete computer/OS/bundled software, then nevermind what dell's offering, apple believes they are ok without catering to you. if $400 is your budget, then apple believes it won't matter to you whether you get a dell or a Mac. if you want a Mac for sure, apple is betting that you will put down $400 more and get an eMac.)
even if apple offered custom upgrade parts (and only apple parts will work with Macs - otherwise, people will just go out and buy stock parts), i doubt they will be well received - they will be "overpriced" afterall, just like their computers are "overpriced" especially according to these "cheap" customers.
You have some good points here....but the basic arguement is how to survive in the future - How to grow the business....Itms doesn't make any money for Apple, the ipod is going to have too many similar players. So why not go for the lower end of the market - eg: like they did with the old "LC"s machines. People buy software but they don't want to shell out alot of money for hardware.
eMac is not meant to be cheap. iMac is not meant to be cheap. they are meant to be all-in-one. if you know enough to foresee that you may need to upgrade in the future, you get a PowerMac because all-in-one is not for you. if you want a cheap, upgradable machine, then, unfortunately, you are not within apple's target market. thus far, apple has been doing well with this philosophy and who's to tell them to change? (do note that "customers" wanting dirt cheap machines have far less economic leverage because, well, they are cheap. if $800 is too much for a complete computer/OS/bundled software, then nevermind what dell's offering, apple believes they are ok without catering to you. if $400 is your budget, then apple believes it won't matter to you whether you get a dell or a Mac. if you want a Mac for sure, apple is betting that you will put down $400 more and get an eMac.)
even if apple offered custom upgrade parts (and only apple parts will work with Macs - otherwise, people will just go out and buy stock parts), i doubt they will be well received - they will be "overpriced" afterall, just like their computers are "overpriced" especially according to these "cheap" customers.
You have some good points here....but the basic arguement is how to survive in the future - How to grow the business....Itms doesn't make any money for Apple, the ipod is going to have too many similar players. So why not go for the lower end of the market - eg: like they did with the old "LC"s machines. People buy software but they don't want to shell out alot of money for hardware.
kingtj
Sep 7, 02:24 PM
I thought this was a great idea too, except when I mull it over - I'm not so sure Apple will really go there. With the larger variety of Intel iMacs available now, it looks like Apple's really trying to build one for every possible home-user or small office user's need. I agree that it'd be nice to have an expandable, upgradable Mac with no display built-in that doesn't carry the price tag of the Mac Pro line -- but think about users like us who say that. We're in the minority of "power users" or "more advanced users". Apple has made it pretty clear that if you're in that category, they want you to invest in one of their "Pro" systems. Otherwise, they cater to folks who see their computer as an appliance or tool and just want something they can pretty much plug in and use. These customers are not interested or comfortable doing things like opening up a system and upgrading video cards.
The Mini is Apple's answer to any remaining "casual users" who throw a fit because they just want a new computer to plug into their existing keyboard, mouse, monitor, and maybe USB hub they bought before.....
The "void" you talk about in Apple's product line is one I *think* Apple leaves there willfully.
cmon apple. get a clue.
these little mini's are nice but not great. there is a real void in your product lineup.
we need something with like a intel conroe chip, larger case, the ability to put in a better graphics card, and the basics like more ram, bigger hard drive and stuff.
give us a bigger mid sized tower type computer.
we all don't want to buy something with a screen. nor do we want some tiny puny non-upgradeable thing like the mac mini.
give us better options.
The Mini is Apple's answer to any remaining "casual users" who throw a fit because they just want a new computer to plug into their existing keyboard, mouse, monitor, and maybe USB hub they bought before.....
The "void" you talk about in Apple's product line is one I *think* Apple leaves there willfully.
cmon apple. get a clue.
these little mini's are nice but not great. there is a real void in your product lineup.
we need something with like a intel conroe chip, larger case, the ability to put in a better graphics card, and the basics like more ram, bigger hard drive and stuff.
give us a bigger mid sized tower type computer.
we all don't want to buy something with a screen. nor do we want some tiny puny non-upgradeable thing like the mac mini.
give us better options.
archurban
Nov 28, 10:17 AM
zune people don't seem to agree what it is bad. they just deny the true. here what they are ridiculous.
http://www.zunescene.com/forums/index.php?topic=3784.0
http://www.zunescene.com/forums/index.php?topic=3784.0
Tonsko
Jan 7, 04:14 AM
weyhay, another R32 owner! But yeh. Petrol is a killer.
jfr001
Nov 29, 05:51 PM
D) Change the remote- no offense, but this remote needs a few more buttons, considering it may drive a media hub.
Well, then you don't understand Apple's magic. That's precisely where
they are good at: make complicated things simple.
It's like a Sony TV remote control compared to others : when you use it, you find everything else too much complicated...
Well, then you don't understand Apple's magic. That's precisely where
they are good at: make complicated things simple.
It's like a Sony TV remote control compared to others : when you use it, you find everything else too much complicated...
skunk
Mar 28, 11:43 AM
All I'm saying is that behind the scenes when you look at the facts, there's a different story and you can't take everything at face value...and you should know that about politicians too. I think some of you are "glad" that it's finally not purely lead by the US and this is like some "dream team" thing. But I'm just afraid that you are just in denial. :cool:What exactly are you trying to say? Iraq was a US war of choice, and Bush was fortunate to have an equally vainglorious partner-in-crime in Blair or he'd never have been able politically to do it. Afghanistan was also a US thing. Why would anybody else take a lead in those? Libya was a UN thing, and on Europe's border, so naturally the impetus came from Europe, and Europe is taking proportionately much more of the load.
Next you'll be saying that the US won WW1 and WW2.
Next you'll be saying that the US won WW1 and WW2.
WeegieMac
Apr 2, 02:39 AM
As far as I know, Snow Leopard "fixed" what Leopard started. Mac OS X Lion is a completely new OS with new features, most of which are not present in Snow Leopard.
See, I would have to disagree with that.
All of the framework, the underlaying core system changes, were done in Leopard and then refined in Snow Leopard.
All Lion is adding, from what I've seen, is interface changes and some new features that, lets be honest, not every user is going to bother with. Sure, Launchpad looks nice, even in it's frame rate lacking beta form, and Mission Control is a new take on Expose, but other than that it's iOS inspired UI changes, a new version of Safari, and some application interface changes (Mail & iCal come to mind).
I don't think Lion will be a �29/$29 upgrade, but I think given that it'll launch on the Mac App Store, it will follow the example of iLife and Aperture and be cheaper to purchase online than it is off the shelf in a box.
See, I would have to disagree with that.
All of the framework, the underlaying core system changes, were done in Leopard and then refined in Snow Leopard.
All Lion is adding, from what I've seen, is interface changes and some new features that, lets be honest, not every user is going to bother with. Sure, Launchpad looks nice, even in it's frame rate lacking beta form, and Mission Control is a new take on Expose, but other than that it's iOS inspired UI changes, a new version of Safari, and some application interface changes (Mail & iCal come to mind).
I don't think Lion will be a �29/$29 upgrade, but I think given that it'll launch on the Mac App Store, it will follow the example of iLife and Aperture and be cheaper to purchase online than it is off the shelf in a box.
Calbretto
Apr 20, 10:28 AM
I simply can't wait for the refresh. I am ready for my first iMac... and my first home Mac. :) I use a Mac Pro G5 at work that is a few years old but an awesome machine. My home use for a Mac is less demanding than at work so I figure an iMac would be fine for my needs.
guez
Aug 29, 11:04 AM
This is exactly what I predicted would happen when Apple went Intel. Now that Macs can be compared component for component with Wintel machines and new hardware is coming out every month, everyone is worked up about keeping up with latest thing at the best possible price and getting increasingly frustrated with Apple's unwillingness to create a product line with 10000 different machines that each compete with dollar for dollar and component for component with every other machine on the market. Meanwhile, we have people talking about $299 machines with DVD burners (AND Windows? I'd like to see THAT!).
If you're so concerned about keeping up with the Jones, just buy a Dell, already.
If you're so concerned about keeping up with the Jones, just buy a Dell, already.
twoodcc
Feb 13, 11:43 PM
Looks like there is a problem with 6.29 client (at least for mac) where if you get an a1 unit after an a3 one, something goes wrong.
dang. well all my computers are down back at my apartment, so my production will be very little. i just started folding on my mbp with an a3 unit, so we'll see how it goes
dang. well all my computers are down back at my apartment, so my production will be very little. i just started folding on my mbp with an a3 unit, so we'll see how it goes
balamw
Sep 7, 12:58 PM
I'm sure apple engineers can do these same napkin calculations. There would have to be some alternative to the straight dl. Maybe a torrent of some kind built into iTunes 7. I don't know. Just thinking.
The torrent isn't going to increase your DL speed to > 150 kBps (typical for 1.5 Mbps links including overhead) if that's all your pipe can do.
Perhaps what they'll do is more like a TiVo suggestions like service where it'll download movies you might want to watch in the background at night or while you are away and "unlock" them when you start to watch it.
We'll see next week.
B
The torrent isn't going to increase your DL speed to > 150 kBps (typical for 1.5 Mbps links including overhead) if that's all your pipe can do.
Perhaps what they'll do is more like a TiVo suggestions like service where it'll download movies you might want to watch in the background at night or while you are away and "unlock" them when you start to watch it.
We'll see next week.
B
blondepianist
May 2, 05:33 PM
i think I'm horribly wrong here.
You can drag and drop the app (any deletable) in the trash and it will come up with the same pop up. There's no need to hold down on the app to enable deletion. Fair enough on apple's side.
/rant.
That's good! Thanks for sharing before more people went on about Lion being a toy OS.
And if I've said it once, I'll say it again: MacPad cometh. :cool:
You can drag and drop the app (any deletable) in the trash and it will come up with the same pop up. There's no need to hold down on the app to enable deletion. Fair enough on apple's side.
/rant.
That's good! Thanks for sharing before more people went on about Lion being a toy OS.
And if I've said it once, I'll say it again: MacPad cometh. :cool:
SuperMacMan
Oct 4, 01:48 AM
Does anybody know how it will fit in a last gen case?
I have the new iPod Touch, but I am looking for a temporary solution until stores recieve the new cases.
No dice. I have a 1st & 2nd gen touch, tried the cases I have for them on my new one, no way jos�! The new iPod touch is a good 0.5cm narrower, a good bit thinner and shorter than the older models. Old cases just let the iPod slide around in it.
I too am having the problem with a lack of retail stores selling cases. The only store that has them only have a Belkin one I don't like, and it's $35 AUD!! I managed to find a Chinese shopping centre stall that had one for $10, so I got that for in the mean time. It fits, but the volume & sleep/wake buttons don't line up correctly, but I'll deal with it until I get a good one.
I have the new iPod Touch, but I am looking for a temporary solution until stores recieve the new cases.
No dice. I have a 1st & 2nd gen touch, tried the cases I have for them on my new one, no way jos�! The new iPod touch is a good 0.5cm narrower, a good bit thinner and shorter than the older models. Old cases just let the iPod slide around in it.
I too am having the problem with a lack of retail stores selling cases. The only store that has them only have a Belkin one I don't like, and it's $35 AUD!! I managed to find a Chinese shopping centre stall that had one for $10, so I got that for in the mean time. It fits, but the volume & sleep/wake buttons don't line up correctly, but I'll deal with it until I get a good one.
mogwia
Oct 24, 06:21 AM
holland down to :) JEEPIE!!! (dreaming of a 17 inch MBP) :) ;) :o :cool:
yetanotherdave
Nov 25, 07:06 PM
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51O1uMSRhXL._SS500_.jpg
Just got back from seeing him live. Brilliant gig. Bought this DVD at the gig.
Just got back from seeing him live. Brilliant gig. Bought this DVD at the gig.
cube
Mar 24, 04:37 PM
True, but its a wait for the overzealot AMD CPU fan base. AMD is very well behind Intel right now in CPUs. Their 6-core offerings barely match the processing power of a i7-870; which is a 4-core, 1156 socket! They can't even match the 1366 socket yet... not to mention the monster of a CPU that is the i7-980X.
On the server, AMD has inexpensive 12-core, 4-way CPUs since some time. Now going for 16-core with Bulldozer (well, now it will be more like 16-core integer/8-core floating point).
The absolute bargain now are the 8-core, 4-way CPUs. You can have a 32-core machine for very little money.
The the next Atom will have a DirectX 10.1 GPU, meanwhile Bobcat Fusion already has DirectX 11 hardware and OpenCL.
On the server, AMD has inexpensive 12-core, 4-way CPUs since some time. Now going for 16-core with Bulldozer (well, now it will be more like 16-core integer/8-core floating point).
The absolute bargain now are the 8-core, 4-way CPUs. You can have a 32-core machine for very little money.
The the next Atom will have a DirectX 10.1 GPU, meanwhile Bobcat Fusion already has DirectX 11 hardware and OpenCL.
johnalan
Mar 23, 05:27 AM
Correct me if I'm wrong here, but people keep going on about ThunderBolt like it's gonna fill 200gig ipods in a minute and how you can copy 500gig files between computers in minutes...
That may be the case between ThunderBolt connected RAID arrays, and Macbook Pros with lightning fast SSD write rates,
but isn't the case that the 1.8inch HDD in the ipod wouldn't be able to write files to it's disk at anything close to ThunderBolt speeds, I wouldn't be suprised if USB2.0 nearly saturates these 1.8inch drive write speeds.
Another thing, even if you take two brand new MBP's with TB, unless they both have SSD's you're not gonna see anything like 10gbps when transfering between them because even there 2.5inch 7200 disks cannot write at 1Gigabyte a second.
That may be the case between ThunderBolt connected RAID arrays, and Macbook Pros with lightning fast SSD write rates,
but isn't the case that the 1.8inch HDD in the ipod wouldn't be able to write files to it's disk at anything close to ThunderBolt speeds, I wouldn't be suprised if USB2.0 nearly saturates these 1.8inch drive write speeds.
Another thing, even if you take two brand new MBP's with TB, unless they both have SSD's you're not gonna see anything like 10gbps when transfering between them because even there 2.5inch 7200 disks cannot write at 1Gigabyte a second.