leekohler
Apr 27, 02:49 PM
Are you calling me a liar? I literally went to WhiteHouse.gov, opened the file in Illustrator, and moved the text around myself. :rolleyes:
Some things never change. Laughably bias.
Oh- and you're always objective. You are arguably one of the most abrasive and biased people here, and proud of it.
BTW- just opened the same file- no layers. So you tell me what I'm missing here.
Some things never change. Laughably bias.
Oh- and you're always objective. You are arguably one of the most abrasive and biased people here, and proud of it.
BTW- just opened the same file- no layers. So you tell me what I'm missing here.
Manic Mouse
Aug 27, 04:54 AM
Yup, heat is no problem. :) Cost on the other hand is. Going from a 2.4 GHz Conroe from a 1.83 GHz Yonah on the low-end is roughly a 30% increase in cost JUST for the CPU. As for your "iMac Ultra"...
$1000 - 2.93 GHz Conroe
$800 - 23" Display
$300 - X1900
$400 - Hard Drive, Optical Drive, RAM etc.
+ Build costs, marketing costs, logic board cost, casing costs etc.
+ Apple's profit margin
And you are easily looking at a $3000 machine.
I want to see:
Derrick Rose
Derrick Rose
Knicks now Home video derrick
Chicago Bulls#39; Derrick Rose
Derrick+rose+dunks+on+kobe
Dunk+on+derrick+rose
$1000 - 2.93 GHz Conroe
$800 - 23" Display
$300 - X1900
$400 - Hard Drive, Optical Drive, RAM etc.
+ Build costs, marketing costs, logic board cost, casing costs etc.
+ Apple's profit margin
And you are easily looking at a $3000 machine.
I want to see:
2IS
Apr 7, 12:26 AM
I'm getting tired of Apple Mac's being INTEL's BIATCH!
Integrated graphics on a laptop costing THAT MUCH? PLEASE!
Steve Jobs should threaten to switch to AMD/ATI solutions even if just for leverage with Intel to get discreet graphics chips in these machines.
If this is true, this is a pathetic technology compromise in my opinion.
lol... You really think Intel is the reason Apple laptops cost what they do? Really?
Integrated graphics on a laptop costing THAT MUCH? PLEASE!
Steve Jobs should threaten to switch to AMD/ATI solutions even if just for leverage with Intel to get discreet graphics chips in these machines.
If this is true, this is a pathetic technology compromise in my opinion.
lol... You really think Intel is the reason Apple laptops cost what they do? Really?
Carlson-online
Nov 29, 09:03 AM
Play it over the weekend - My biggest problem is theres nothing ground breaking about it. Kind of "more of the same" but with updated graphics (VERY good graphics mind you). My mate Jason wrote a pretty fair review, although some people REALLY didn't like it. It's a shame people cant write honest and fair reviews these days without people moaning and saying "why didnt it get 10/10 merrrrrr" - See Gran Turismo 5 Review (http://gamestyle.com/reviews/2012/gran-turismo-5/)
ccrandall77
Aug 11, 04:07 PM
I think there are several people who have felt "screwed" by their wireless company, regardless of which company they chose to sign with. I have used Cingular from day one of my cell usage, and I have nothing but good things to say about their service. Of course, you're 4x more likely to get screwed, I guess. ;)
I guess you are lucky. My wife had Cingular (old TDMA plan). She wanted to get a GSM phone and bought one off Amazon. We went to a local Cingular store (not a Cingular AUTHORIZED store, but a bona fide Cingular store) and the manager there cussed her out when she asked him to help her port her old number over to the new phone... all because he was mad that she didn't buy the phone from his store.
A few months later I received a bill with a $1395 charge for a 440MB data transfer that supposedly happened on a Saturday morning at 3am. If I wanted to download that much, which would be stupid since I already had SBC DSL, I would've just paid an extra $50 to upgrade to unlimited data. Everyone I talked to with Cingular were rude except for 1 tech guy and 1 person from the President's Office. But they still refused to do anything about the obviously bogus charge... and I refused to pay. :)
On my team at work, there are 22 Indian developers who have T-Mo and/or Cingular. All of the Cingular customers are either switching to Sprint (and getting the hybrid phone) or moving to T-Mobile. All of them complain about the rude customer service.
Back in 2004 or can't remember, some consumer magazine had Cingular rated deadlast in customer satisifaction. T-Mobile was #1... but sadly their satisfaction rating was only like 60-some-%, IIRC.
YMMV. But I've found Sprint to be the best. Customer Service is pretty good, but not as good as T-Mo. Coverage is decent, but not as good as VZW or Cingular. But while they may not be the best at anyone thing, they seem to be #2 in just about every category.
I guess you are lucky. My wife had Cingular (old TDMA plan). She wanted to get a GSM phone and bought one off Amazon. We went to a local Cingular store (not a Cingular AUTHORIZED store, but a bona fide Cingular store) and the manager there cussed her out when she asked him to help her port her old number over to the new phone... all because he was mad that she didn't buy the phone from his store.
A few months later I received a bill with a $1395 charge for a 440MB data transfer that supposedly happened on a Saturday morning at 3am. If I wanted to download that much, which would be stupid since I already had SBC DSL, I would've just paid an extra $50 to upgrade to unlimited data. Everyone I talked to with Cingular were rude except for 1 tech guy and 1 person from the President's Office. But they still refused to do anything about the obviously bogus charge... and I refused to pay. :)
On my team at work, there are 22 Indian developers who have T-Mo and/or Cingular. All of the Cingular customers are either switching to Sprint (and getting the hybrid phone) or moving to T-Mobile. All of them complain about the rude customer service.
Back in 2004 or can't remember, some consumer magazine had Cingular rated deadlast in customer satisifaction. T-Mobile was #1... but sadly their satisfaction rating was only like 60-some-%, IIRC.
YMMV. But I've found Sprint to be the best. Customer Service is pretty good, but not as good as T-Mo. Coverage is decent, but not as good as VZW or Cingular. But while they may not be the best at anyone thing, they seem to be #2 in just about every category.
hyperpasta
Nov 28, 06:27 PM
And I don't understand why they should...Can somebody explain it?
The rationale is that iPods are used only for stolen music (which they aren't) and this will help offset the losses (which it won't).
The rationale is that iPods are used only for stolen music (which they aren't) and this will help offset the losses (which it won't).
Popeye206
Mar 31, 03:47 PM
Adobe showing how the iPad is only for consumption and not worth their time. (http://www.electronista.com/articles/11/03/30/adobe.photoshop.for.ipad.to.get.layers/)
Yeah... that's why they are "wasting their time" building a prototype. :rolleyes:
Adobe see's 15 million seats and growing fast.
Yeah... that's why they are "wasting their time" building a prototype. :rolleyes:
Adobe see's 15 million seats and growing fast.
Peterkro
Mar 24, 02:08 PM
The vast majority of conservatives are WASP-ish,
Derrick+rose+dunking+on+
dunk Derrick+rose+dunk
Dunk+on+derrick+rose
Derrick+rose+dunking+on
Derrick+rose+dunking+on+
toney Dunk+on+derrick+rose
Derrick Rose
Derrick Rose, Luol Deng,
Derrick+rose+dunks+on+kobe
now Derrick+rose+dunk+on+
derrick rose dunking. derrick
Reacent Post
bedifferent
Mar 26, 02:54 PM
My bet is on distribution on custom design USB drives, like this one (http://molotalk.com/new-macbook-air-ships-with-custom-printed-software-reinstall-usb-drive/).
Great for now, but Apple wants to keep going green by slowly eliminating DVD/physical media as done with CD's. ISP's are improving bandwidth (slowly), companies are decreasing the size of their software (some like Adobe and Apple breaking Suites for individual applications) so wireless downloading may prevail.
I do not have any installation DVD's aide from the two which came with my 2010 Mac Pro.
1. All my applications are on another hard drive (3rd SATA bay on my 6-Core Pro, but can easily use an external drive).
2. "Time Machine" backs up all the applications
3. Purchased software almost always emails you a receipt with download links in case you need to re-download an application (plus allowed updates)
4. Instead of installing from a DVD, mount the .dmg and install, much faster.
5. I replace applications with their online updates in lieu of adding another DVD
I've got 150+ applications (Mac and Windows) totaling 187 GB. As with a media library, images are shrinking, downloads are faster (if you can download a 1.5+ movie through Netflix or iTunes, you can easily download software, OS X updates are large sizes as well).
In short, DVD's and USB drives for application installations will eventually fade out. If you need to install an OS from scratch, I'm certain Apple will still package the original DVD's with your computer (or in this case a thumb drive). I'm interested in learning what Apple intends to do with that new server farm in N.C. Storage of applications and/or the rumored storing of your media for access anywhere with an iDevice or Mac/OC.
Great for now, but Apple wants to keep going green by slowly eliminating DVD/physical media as done with CD's. ISP's are improving bandwidth (slowly), companies are decreasing the size of their software (some like Adobe and Apple breaking Suites for individual applications) so wireless downloading may prevail.
I do not have any installation DVD's aide from the two which came with my 2010 Mac Pro.
1. All my applications are on another hard drive (3rd SATA bay on my 6-Core Pro, but can easily use an external drive).
2. "Time Machine" backs up all the applications
3. Purchased software almost always emails you a receipt with download links in case you need to re-download an application (plus allowed updates)
4. Instead of installing from a DVD, mount the .dmg and install, much faster.
5. I replace applications with their online updates in lieu of adding another DVD
I've got 150+ applications (Mac and Windows) totaling 187 GB. As with a media library, images are shrinking, downloads are faster (if you can download a 1.5+ movie through Netflix or iTunes, you can easily download software, OS X updates are large sizes as well).
In short, DVD's and USB drives for application installations will eventually fade out. If you need to install an OS from scratch, I'm certain Apple will still package the original DVD's with your computer (or in this case a thumb drive). I'm interested in learning what Apple intends to do with that new server farm in N.C. Storage of applications and/or the rumored storing of your media for access anywhere with an iDevice or Mac/OC.
aegisdesign
Sep 13, 12:05 PM
Also, the iMac is a 32-bit computer, and these are 64-bit chips, reducing any possiblity to zero.
Only the Yonah based Core Duo iMacs are 32bit (Well, and the G3/G4 too). G5 and the new iMac Core 2 Duo models on sale now are 64bit. Not that it matters per se.
Only the Yonah based Core Duo iMacs are 32bit (Well, and the G3/G4 too). G5 and the new iMac Core 2 Duo models on sale now are 64bit. Not that it matters per se.
Blasterzilla
Apr 27, 08:24 AM
Great, glad Apple did something. Hope we can all move on now to bigger and better things.
Thanks again Apple.
Thanks again Apple.
Mike84
Apr 25, 03:29 PM
As I pointed out in my earlier blog posting (LINK (http://markshangout.com/blog/2011/4/25/apple-gets-sued-yes-again.html)), until somebody proves that Apple is both collecting the to their servers AND using the data in a manner that allows them to personally identify a specific user, this lawsuit is meritless and a waste of the court's time.
Mark
The lawsuit would still be meritless unless Apple was violating some act of Congress or state law. It seems these two idiot lawyers have not alleged that, therefore the lawsuit would still be meritless.
Mark
The lawsuit would still be meritless unless Apple was violating some act of Congress or state law. It seems these two idiot lawyers have not alleged that, therefore the lawsuit would still be meritless.
twoodcc
Aug 11, 09:35 PM
My point is, earlier you were saying that they only have 4 games and they sold 57M copies. If you look at that link, which is right from Polyphony themselves, you will see that if you only count the 4 main games, as you were eluding to, that only totals 46M.
let's see, my original post:
yes it has been out for awhile, but they still haven't released the 5th game yet (not including demos). so either way, there's only 4 versions of the game out. at over 57 million copies sold, i'd say they sold a fair few...
noticed i said, "not including demos". which all other versions are, except for the psp game. granted, the last demo, or prologue, is a PS3 greatest hits.
So, you don't count NFS? Ok then. If I'm understanding you correctly, you are really only comparing GT to 1 other console game; Forza. It is the only other console game of any similar type. But, using your own logic, is it fair to compare GT to Forza, since GT has been out much longer and has many more games in the series? I mean, if we don't get to compare GT to NFS because of that, then surely you shouldn't compare GT to Forza for the same reason.
well let's compare it to NFS then, shall we? NFS debuted in 1994, and has their 16th release scheduled for release about the same time as GT5. so almost double the amount of games, if you include the prologues, or demos. and on top of that, NFS isn't just PS3. and it's available on a pc as well.
is it still a fair comparison? even though they are different games, they are both racing games. but if we go off number of sales (since you seem to think b/c i mentioned it, it's the only thing i take into consideration) NFS: 15 games, available on some 10 platforms, if not more. and over 100 millon.
GT5: 8 titles, 3 of which are prologues (demos). debuted in 1997. only playstation. over 57 million.
i'd say GT5 stacks up very well with NFS, considering everything. again, just looking at sales here
I really like you're choice of quoting.
hey, nothing wrong with wikipedia. they have links there for reference. i mean, all anyone else is gonna do is google stuff. how is that better?
...of which about 1/3 of them are various Civics, Skylines and Imprezas.
that's still not the point. having that many cars adds to the game, and adds up in data on that one disk. i'm sure many players drive those same cars in real life
...ok, that one is good. That says something.
yes it does. GT5 is only on playstation. it has been on every version now, including the psp.
...that no one ever drove, because it couldn't even get up the hilly parts of some tracks. Total waste.
again, that's your opinion. there might be some that liked those things. i personally didn't see much use either though
...really? Oldest car and Largest guide?? REALLY?? Yikes.
with so many cars, and so many races, some need a guide. some races are very difficult.
Um, according to your OWN link, the car was cancelled. And really, that isn't surprising. It is a concept car, plain and simple. So again I ask, what REAL cars have ever ACTUALLY been made just to be in this game??
nice catch. i'd say that's a pretty recent cancellation. but i did see a video of one somewhere, so i believe they made one somewhere.
but again, it still is a real car. and the intention of producing 6 of these cars was for this game. that is clear.
let's see, my original post:
yes it has been out for awhile, but they still haven't released the 5th game yet (not including demos). so either way, there's only 4 versions of the game out. at over 57 million copies sold, i'd say they sold a fair few...
noticed i said, "not including demos". which all other versions are, except for the psp game. granted, the last demo, or prologue, is a PS3 greatest hits.
So, you don't count NFS? Ok then. If I'm understanding you correctly, you are really only comparing GT to 1 other console game; Forza. It is the only other console game of any similar type. But, using your own logic, is it fair to compare GT to Forza, since GT has been out much longer and has many more games in the series? I mean, if we don't get to compare GT to NFS because of that, then surely you shouldn't compare GT to Forza for the same reason.
well let's compare it to NFS then, shall we? NFS debuted in 1994, and has their 16th release scheduled for release about the same time as GT5. so almost double the amount of games, if you include the prologues, or demos. and on top of that, NFS isn't just PS3. and it's available on a pc as well.
is it still a fair comparison? even though they are different games, they are both racing games. but if we go off number of sales (since you seem to think b/c i mentioned it, it's the only thing i take into consideration) NFS: 15 games, available on some 10 platforms, if not more. and over 100 millon.
GT5: 8 titles, 3 of which are prologues (demos). debuted in 1997. only playstation. over 57 million.
i'd say GT5 stacks up very well with NFS, considering everything. again, just looking at sales here
I really like you're choice of quoting.
hey, nothing wrong with wikipedia. they have links there for reference. i mean, all anyone else is gonna do is google stuff. how is that better?
...of which about 1/3 of them are various Civics, Skylines and Imprezas.
that's still not the point. having that many cars adds to the game, and adds up in data on that one disk. i'm sure many players drive those same cars in real life
...ok, that one is good. That says something.
yes it does. GT5 is only on playstation. it has been on every version now, including the psp.
...that no one ever drove, because it couldn't even get up the hilly parts of some tracks. Total waste.
again, that's your opinion. there might be some that liked those things. i personally didn't see much use either though
...really? Oldest car and Largest guide?? REALLY?? Yikes.
with so many cars, and so many races, some need a guide. some races are very difficult.
Um, according to your OWN link, the car was cancelled. And really, that isn't surprising. It is a concept car, plain and simple. So again I ask, what REAL cars have ever ACTUALLY been made just to be in this game??
nice catch. i'd say that's a pretty recent cancellation. but i did see a video of one somewhere, so i believe they made one somewhere.
but again, it still is a real car. and the intention of producing 6 of these cars was for this game. that is clear.
fastlane1588
Jul 27, 12:19 PM
thats a pretty cool concept i must say
Surreal
Aug 27, 02:11 PM
jeez, i thought the thread might cool off in a day or so, but there is no sign of that happening, is there?
well, i have wondered for some time, how many people have had problems with the 17" mavbook pros?
i have one...it's fine. i heard a few small scale problems about it, but nothing on the scale of the 15"
well, i have wondered for some time, how many people have had problems with the 17" mavbook pros?
i have one...it's fine. i heard a few small scale problems about it, but nothing on the scale of the 15"
manu chao
Aug 27, 05:31 AM
You're screwing up, intel. We don't want 300 trillion transistors on a 1 nm die. We want longer battery life. Idiots.
Don't blame Intel, blame Apple for not using the ULV versions of the Core Duo chips. There are other manufacturers which use them (otherwise it would not make much sense for Intel to offer them).
However, the battery life of these machines is maybe in the order of six hours only, for once because the screen, HD etc. still need the same amount of power. Making the screen smaller, using Intel graphics, maybe even a 1.8" HD, you can reduce power consumption further, most often manufacturers also reduce battery size at the same time to make the laptops lightweight, preventing you to see battery life numbers of ten hours.
Moreover, reports about machines using the ULV versions (and sometimes 1.8" HDs) do complain about the performance.
Don't blame Intel, blame Apple for not using the ULV versions of the Core Duo chips. There are other manufacturers which use them (otherwise it would not make much sense for Intel to offer them).
However, the battery life of these machines is maybe in the order of six hours only, for once because the screen, HD etc. still need the same amount of power. Making the screen smaller, using Intel graphics, maybe even a 1.8" HD, you can reduce power consumption further, most often manufacturers also reduce battery size at the same time to make the laptops lightweight, preventing you to see battery life numbers of ten hours.
Moreover, reports about machines using the ULV versions (and sometimes 1.8" HDs) do complain about the performance.
Steviejobz
Apr 8, 05:22 AM
This story fails the smell test. A reader told MacRumors? You mean a disgruntled fanboy who has gone iPad-less for two weeks has turned conspiracy theorist?
All I can say is that there was an inventory tracker on one of these threads and each time it said "in store only" I was able to walk into that store and buy one.
The second time I bought a unit there were guys carrying boxes of iPads that had just arrived and sold them freely until gone.
All I can say is that there was an inventory tracker on one of these threads and each time it said "in store only" I was able to walk into that store and buy one.
The second time I bought a unit there were guys carrying boxes of iPads that had just arrived and sold them freely until gone.
~Shard~
Jul 14, 02:37 PM
To charge $1800 for a system that only has 512MB is a real disappoitment. 1GB RAM oughta be standard, especially with Leopard being on the horizon.
Agreed. I can make an argument for the consumer machines, where perhaps 512 MB is sufficient for basic users. Specifically, why force them to pay more for 1 GB if they don't need it. But when it comes to the Pro machines, as if anyone buying one of these beasts is not going to require at least 2 GB of RAM, let alone 1 GB. No one buys a quad Xeon Powermac to just surf the Internet and check their e-mail. :cool:
Agreed. I can make an argument for the consumer machines, where perhaps 512 MB is sufficient for basic users. Specifically, why force them to pay more for 1 GB if they don't need it. But when it comes to the Pro machines, as if anyone buying one of these beasts is not going to require at least 2 GB of RAM, let alone 1 GB. No one buys a quad Xeon Powermac to just surf the Internet and check their e-mail. :cool:
srxtr
Apr 11, 01:19 PM
You guys know the average Joe don't go shopping for a new smart phone every other month?
This is a big deal to some of you guys only because you obsess over this topic almost daily.
This is a big deal to some of you guys only because you obsess over this topic almost daily.
KnightWRX
Apr 6, 03:41 PM
double.
Dr.Gargoyle
Aug 11, 03:59 PM
Only if you have an active subscription on all of them. That's the number the graph behind the link shows.
I have three subscriptions. Two in europe, one in US. How does that count?
I have three subscriptions. Two in europe, one in US. How does that count?
KnightWRX
Apr 20, 02:11 PM
Of course, had the case been deemed totally unfounded by Apple Legal and their bunch of advisors, it wouldn't have been brought to court at all.
At the same time, if there is any chance that the case has some merit, a company will sue for sure, if points 1 and 2 above are not considered to do more damage than good.
There is probably some merit to some of the claims, so are probably more ambitious and some are probably completely sure to get thrown out. The thing is, the more claims they throw in there the better they have a footing for eventual settlement negotiations.
Just like you never open with your lowest price, you never open with only the claims you are 100% sure are going to win. ;)
At the same time, if there is any chance that the case has some merit, a company will sue for sure, if points 1 and 2 above are not considered to do more damage than good.
There is probably some merit to some of the claims, so are probably more ambitious and some are probably completely sure to get thrown out. The thing is, the more claims they throw in there the better they have a footing for eventual settlement negotiations.
Just like you never open with your lowest price, you never open with only the claims you are 100% sure are going to win. ;)
intlplby
Nov 28, 09:53 PM
i would love if the government changed the royalty law to extend only to the artists and not the record companies.....
i.e. "okay, we'll extend the copyright to 50 years or the life of the artist, but the catch is that only the artists gets the royalties"
i'd love to see the big record companies cut out.....
it's totally possible for artists to get more and for us to pay less.....
i'd include the mastering technician in there too.... they are very important as well
i.e. "okay, we'll extend the copyright to 50 years or the life of the artist, but the catch is that only the artists gets the royalties"
i'd love to see the big record companies cut out.....
it's totally possible for artists to get more and for us to pay less.....
i'd include the mastering technician in there too.... they are very important as well
freebooter
Nov 28, 09:39 PM
Just greed, plain and simple.
0 comments:
Post a Comment