vwcruisn
Mar 23, 07:21 PM
You're telling me drunk driving is on the same level as eating or talking on a cell phone?
Yes.
The study, published in the June 29 issue of Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, found that drivers talking on cell phones, either handheld or hands-free, are more likely to crash because they are distracted by conversation.
Using a driving simulator under four different conditions: with no distractions, using a handheld cell phone, talking on a hands-free cell phone, and while intoxicated to the 0.08 percent blood-alcohol level, 40 participants followed a simulated pace car that braked intermittently.
Researchers found that the drivers on cell phones drove more slowly, braked more slowly and were more likely to crash. In fact, the three participants who collided into the pace car were chatting away. None of the drunken drivers crashed.
Read more: http://news.cnet.com/8301-10784_3-6090342-7.html#ixzz1HTJlDgSO
Yes.
The study, published in the June 29 issue of Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, found that drivers talking on cell phones, either handheld or hands-free, are more likely to crash because they are distracted by conversation.
Using a driving simulator under four different conditions: with no distractions, using a handheld cell phone, talking on a hands-free cell phone, and while intoxicated to the 0.08 percent blood-alcohol level, 40 participants followed a simulated pace car that braked intermittently.
Researchers found that the drivers on cell phones drove more slowly, braked more slowly and were more likely to crash. In fact, the three participants who collided into the pace car were chatting away. None of the drunken drivers crashed.
Read more: http://news.cnet.com/8301-10784_3-6090342-7.html#ixzz1HTJlDgSO
![i love u baby. [I Love U Baby] Heart](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_u53A6foKpMTo2E6Xrdf8QlW3qVV1eAfos7CArAtqI3oSxHXJtLr6jOITpb7eDCXtHSECmO1tHjQN5dWgyfMhnDtNrd7akD5LdYyTjh=s0-d "[I Love U Baby] Heart")
ksz
Jul 14, 11:20 AM
I don't see the connection between overclocking and childishness. Overclocking is done by enthusiasts and power users of all ages. There is nothing wrong with it, and the practice should not be stigmatized.
iMikeT
Sep 19, 04:27 PM
I think that this is a good thing. Hopefully, it will convince other studios to join the iTS for distribution. And on top of that, Apple can sell high(er) definition movies.
brewno
Apr 14, 12:10 PM
Nice. USB3 on a MBP, all I wanted. My '07 MBP C2D is still running perfectly. It can wait a year for it :) I already have a 2Tb USB3 external HD waiting for it.
nospleen
Sep 10, 08:52 AM
My computers will of course not be slower. But the apps, on the other hand, will become more and more demanding. For example, I cant run Aperture on my MDD (2*1.25/2GB RAM/128MB VRAM). Hell, I cant even run Civ IV on it...lol
I think this fact will be more and more emphasized as the "core-war" replaces the "GHz war".
Gotcha! That would get old quick, at least the old apps would work. It is kind of cool now that a G3 can still run Tiger. Oh well, can't have everything! :)
I think this fact will be more and more emphasized as the "core-war" replaces the "GHz war".
Gotcha! That would get old quick, at least the old apps would work. It is kind of cool now that a G3 can still run Tiger. Oh well, can't have everything! :)
Bob Caruthers
Mar 22, 02:07 PM
Great news!
My six year old iMac G5 just gave up the ghost yesterday, so I am eagerly awaiting the new models.
My six year old iMac G5 just gave up the ghost yesterday, so I am eagerly awaiting the new models.
joeshell383
Sep 26, 09:33 AM
Have
Some_Big_Spoon
Sep 10, 11:22 PM
I'm still taken aback by Sun doing what Intel's doing now, but doing it 8-10 years ago. What the heck happened to SUN?
Were you reading propaganda from Sun, or something from an unbiased source?
The P6 systems that you're talking about in the mid '90s were very similar in architecture to today's Intel systems.
The P6 systems had a shared FSB, so memory bandwidth was shared by the two processors. The SPARC systems usually had a crossbar switch, so that in theory each CPU had a private memory path. (The Woodcrest systems have an FSB per socket, to a shared memory controller.)
While the crossbar really shined when you had 32, 64 or more processors with many, many GiB of RAM - for a dual CPU system it really wasn't worth the cost.
Woodcrest, the PPC G5, and AMD aren't using crossbar memory controllers today....
Were you reading propaganda from Sun, or something from an unbiased source?
The P6 systems that you're talking about in the mid '90s were very similar in architecture to today's Intel systems.
The P6 systems had a shared FSB, so memory bandwidth was shared by the two processors. The SPARC systems usually had a crossbar switch, so that in theory each CPU had a private memory path. (The Woodcrest systems have an FSB per socket, to a shared memory controller.)
While the crossbar really shined when you had 32, 64 or more processors with many, many GiB of RAM - for a dual CPU system it really wasn't worth the cost.
Woodcrest, the PPC G5, and AMD aren't using crossbar memory controllers today....
baxterbrittle
Aug 31, 11:39 AM
I don't care what it is, just give us something new to talk about. Mac Pro really nice machine but we saw it coming months in advance. Maybe not he exact spec but yeah we all knew it was coming. Same with Merom, Conroe etc... Give us something new, really new. All we have had for what seems like an age is Intel switch this Intel switch that. I don't care what processor they use as long as they are faster than they were before and it's still a Mac. I want nay, need a new product - something so I know that Apple are still innovating. Switching to Intel, no innovation there just good sense.
seashellz
Nov 13, 01:54 PM
99% of these are in a huff self important 'tempest in a teapot' stories;
its not required-nay not even helpful to be a fanboy to point this out-just 2 good eyes and a brain;
Alway been complainers, always will be;
If the rules are clearly spelled out and they dont follow them-then they shouldnt be crybabies in public
simple
CAREFULLY read APPLEs developers rules
follow them
dont try to breach them
you dont need a PhD to understand this
its not required-nay not even helpful to be a fanboy to point this out-just 2 good eyes and a brain;
Alway been complainers, always will be;
If the rules are clearly spelled out and they dont follow them-then they shouldnt be crybabies in public
simple
CAREFULLY read APPLEs developers rules
follow them
dont try to breach them
you dont need a PhD to understand this
Rigby
Apr 20, 11:52 AM
Unless I'm missing it in the thread, I didn't see anything on this particular question. Does anyone know if this database on the iPhone is accessible by apps? ie. can you download some app that then scans the database and uploads your information elsewhere behind the scenes?Only if the device is jailbroken. Normally, there is a "sandbox" in place that prevents apps from accessing system files (and files belonging to other apps). Jailbreaking effectively disables this sandbox.
DaveN
Apr 22, 01:43 PM
My five year old MacBook is beginning to get screen flicker and dimming so this may be the update for me. I've been debating between the souped-up 15 inch MacBook Pro and an air but depending on the new Air specs, I may go that route. I don't need a backlit keyboard. I've been touch typing for thirty years and know where everything is based on the bumps on the f and j keys.
GGJstudios
Mar 8, 12:13 PM
Safari!
False.
How would Safari be able to install that stuff? Forgive me for not knowing, but I haven't seen anything that allowed you to install software, or any executable code, from iOS Safari. Not with Apple's model. Maybe jailbroken, but that's a different story.
The other poster doesn't know what they're talking about.
False.
How would Safari be able to install that stuff? Forgive me for not knowing, but I haven't seen anything that allowed you to install software, or any executable code, from iOS Safari. Not with Apple's model. Maybe jailbroken, but that's a different story.
The other poster doesn't know what they're talking about.
HecubusPro
Sep 1, 11:38 AM
The way I see it is why buy a product when it is being improved (no matter how little or much) and should be the same price or lower... most likely within the next few weeks?
Unless Apple adds a Blu-ray drive in their MBP's (not gonna happen, at least at this point) I doubt we'll see a price increase in those systems when they get teh C2D upgrade. As far as other computers are concerned, I'm not sure--doubt macbooks will increase either since their price tag is so attractive to consumers and competitve with other brands. It seems that the mini has had the most fluid pricing structure, but I could be wrong.
Unless Apple adds a Blu-ray drive in their MBP's (not gonna happen, at least at this point) I doubt we'll see a price increase in those systems when they get teh C2D upgrade. As far as other computers are concerned, I'm not sure--doubt macbooks will increase either since their price tag is so attractive to consumers and competitve with other brands. It seems that the mini has had the most fluid pricing structure, but I could be wrong.
Stevamundo
Apr 28, 05:43 PM
Well thank you Steve Balmer. Why in the hell did Gates left him in charge I never will understand.
While Steve Jobs is great.
See you have two kinds of Steves, one is an idiot and other one is highly intelligent. :D
While Steve Jobs is great.
See you have two kinds of Steves, one is an idiot and other one is highly intelligent. :D
Maestro64
Oct 27, 10:42 AM
I wrote this on another site so if you heard it before that is why:
I will start by saying groups like greenpeace serve a useful purpose, which is to challenge the status quo in the hopes of improving things in the world.
However, greenpeace is far from being pure in their own methods. Anyone can point out what is wrong, it take people with true willingness to improve thing to find a solution, not just lobbing gernades into the middle of the table and running.
Notice how they never answer the questions about how to solve the problem they just say stop using chemicals like brominated flame retardants, with no regard that Apple does not make, or innovate PCB (printed circuit boards). Apple does not dictate or madate what is used to keep a PCB from going up in flames as does any company who uses PCB. The PCB industry does and the world wide public safey agency who say that the PCB will not catch fire and burn your house down have this responsibility.
Asked yourself, why hasn't the world's governments band bromited fire retardants when it is well know it is bad, really bad. because the best minds in the world have yet to come up with a cost effective alternative solution that will keep a PCB from catching fire and buring your house down. and still pay $200 for your iPod.
Trust me if greenpeace came up with a green PCB having no impact on the environment the world market would beat their door down to get it. Then they could stop having those poor long hair young kids coming around our neighborhoods asking for money to fight all those big bad companies. But that would be part of the solution instead of being part of the problem.
Part of the reason most companies do not listen to greenpeace is because, when they offer a solution many times they come back years later and say hey that is bad too. Prime example they and other groups told McDonalds in the 70's to stop using paper products to package their burgers, and told them to use styrofoam since it did not require the cutting of trees. Only to come back years later and say styrofoam was hurting the atmophere and they should use paper products. I think they forgot they told them using paper was bad too.
BTW, DELL and HP are trying to make the change not because greenpeace told them stop, because it make business sense. The world is changing and people are tired of seeing all this stuff end up in land fills. In Europe they are running out of space and they do not want to see all the nasty stuff end up in their eco system. Europe has said if you can not recycle it, you have to take it back. Again, greenpeace had nothing to do with this, it about trade and the fact that Europe makes less and less products ever year and importors more. It is a trade barrier disguise as protecting the eco system.
My comment to greenpeace and others is when you are naked in the woods living off the land and not impacting the earth yourself then you have room to critized what the rest of the world is doing. Think about how much greenpeace has impacted the earth getting their message out, all the computers, networks , chemicals, fossil fuel, nuclear engery that was used to just get this message to all of us. They never consider this, becuase they feel it is ok for them to impact the earth as long as they are doing it in the name of conservation.
Full disclosure, I own Apple stock and as well as I have given money to organization like greenpeace and the Sierra club
I will start by saying groups like greenpeace serve a useful purpose, which is to challenge the status quo in the hopes of improving things in the world.
However, greenpeace is far from being pure in their own methods. Anyone can point out what is wrong, it take people with true willingness to improve thing to find a solution, not just lobbing gernades into the middle of the table and running.
Notice how they never answer the questions about how to solve the problem they just say stop using chemicals like brominated flame retardants, with no regard that Apple does not make, or innovate PCB (printed circuit boards). Apple does not dictate or madate what is used to keep a PCB from going up in flames as does any company who uses PCB. The PCB industry does and the world wide public safey agency who say that the PCB will not catch fire and burn your house down have this responsibility.
Asked yourself, why hasn't the world's governments band bromited fire retardants when it is well know it is bad, really bad. because the best minds in the world have yet to come up with a cost effective alternative solution that will keep a PCB from catching fire and buring your house down. and still pay $200 for your iPod.
Trust me if greenpeace came up with a green PCB having no impact on the environment the world market would beat their door down to get it. Then they could stop having those poor long hair young kids coming around our neighborhoods asking for money to fight all those big bad companies. But that would be part of the solution instead of being part of the problem.
Part of the reason most companies do not listen to greenpeace is because, when they offer a solution many times they come back years later and say hey that is bad too. Prime example they and other groups told McDonalds in the 70's to stop using paper products to package their burgers, and told them to use styrofoam since it did not require the cutting of trees. Only to come back years later and say styrofoam was hurting the atmophere and they should use paper products. I think they forgot they told them using paper was bad too.
BTW, DELL and HP are trying to make the change not because greenpeace told them stop, because it make business sense. The world is changing and people are tired of seeing all this stuff end up in land fills. In Europe they are running out of space and they do not want to see all the nasty stuff end up in their eco system. Europe has said if you can not recycle it, you have to take it back. Again, greenpeace had nothing to do with this, it about trade and the fact that Europe makes less and less products ever year and importors more. It is a trade barrier disguise as protecting the eco system.
My comment to greenpeace and others is when you are naked in the woods living off the land and not impacting the earth yourself then you have room to critized what the rest of the world is doing. Think about how much greenpeace has impacted the earth getting their message out, all the computers, networks , chemicals, fossil fuel, nuclear engery that was used to just get this message to all of us. They never consider this, becuase they feel it is ok for them to impact the earth as long as they are doing it in the name of conservation.
Full disclosure, I own Apple stock and as well as I have given money to organization like greenpeace and the Sierra club
GGJstudios
Mar 19, 04:26 PM
Maybe you should re-read page 1 of this thread and MisterMe's responses to the thread. It was his posts I was originally replying to and that you chose to then jump on.
Let's re-read them together, shall we?
It makes sense. iProducts are increasingly becoming ubiquitous, therefore they will become more profitable for malware developers to attack. It's not a McAfee sales pitch so much as it's stating the obvious. Same with Android.
No, it is the same nonsense that Microsoft and its apologists have been saying for the past decade. It isn't any truer today than it was a decade ago.
It makes sense. iProducts are increasingly becoming ubiquitous, therefore they will become more profitable for malware developers to attack. It's not a McAfee sales pitch so much as it's stating the obvious. Same with Android.
Sad, but true :(Sad, but false.
Wishing will not make it so.
So please point out in those posts (the only ones made by MisterMe in this thread) where he said anything about Macs being invulnerable or immune to malware, or that threats don't exist? If you really read and understand the posts, you'll see that MisterMe was refuting the false idea that market share is the reason for the lack of malware on Macs. This myth has been debunked many times. He in no way suggested that Macs were immune or that malware threats don't exist.
Trojans are particularly a problem since a lot of programs ask for root password permission to be installed (including Apple software). If the real software has been replaced with a trojan version and the site hijacked, you probably wouldn't suspect a thing.
Again, this problem only exists in pirated software or software from less-than reputable sources. As has been said many times, you can avoid trojans by being careful where you get software and what software you install. No antivirus is necessary to protect against trojans; only some common sense and prudent thinking on the part of the user.
Let's re-read them together, shall we?
It makes sense. iProducts are increasingly becoming ubiquitous, therefore they will become more profitable for malware developers to attack. It's not a McAfee sales pitch so much as it's stating the obvious. Same with Android.
No, it is the same nonsense that Microsoft and its apologists have been saying for the past decade. It isn't any truer today than it was a decade ago.
It makes sense. iProducts are increasingly becoming ubiquitous, therefore they will become more profitable for malware developers to attack. It's not a McAfee sales pitch so much as it's stating the obvious. Same with Android.
Sad, but true :(Sad, but false.
Wishing will not make it so.
So please point out in those posts (the only ones made by MisterMe in this thread) where he said anything about Macs being invulnerable or immune to malware, or that threats don't exist? If you really read and understand the posts, you'll see that MisterMe was refuting the false idea that market share is the reason for the lack of malware on Macs. This myth has been debunked many times. He in no way suggested that Macs were immune or that malware threats don't exist.
Trojans are particularly a problem since a lot of programs ask for root password permission to be installed (including Apple software). If the real software has been replaced with a trojan version and the site hijacked, you probably wouldn't suspect a thing.
Again, this problem only exists in pirated software or software from less-than reputable sources. As has been said many times, you can avoid trojans by being careful where you get software and what software you install. No antivirus is necessary to protect against trojans; only some common sense and prudent thinking on the part of the user.
bbotte
Apr 20, 10:35 AM
It says I have been in Vegas, I haven't been to vegas since the early 90's. Fail
pyroza
Apr 25, 06:19 PM
Getting rid of the optical drive would be stupid. No way to burn CDs (yes, I buy CDs because I like supporting artists and I like higher quality music) and no way to watch DVDs (no DVD player or TV here in my dorm room).
roland.g
Mar 30, 11:33 AM
They hire lawyers. They hire linguists. They hire PR agents. They hire advertising companies. They hire survey companies. All that money and they still don't know that they should invest in doing some real research and development, and innovation instead. Brings me back to that old, tried but true, Apple commercial from the "Get a Mac" campaign...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mjo629JpTyE
I think it is all those commercials that has made M$ say "Let's dump as much $$ at making whatever we can difficult for Steve & Co."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mjo629JpTyE
I think it is all those commercials that has made M$ say "Let's dump as much $$ at making whatever we can difficult for Steve & Co."
AvSRoCkCO1067
Aug 23, 10:24 PM
I hope you're joking about that. iTunes is not about making money for apple
Apple makes money off of iTunes Music Store - they won't tell us how much, but it is a money maker (all be it insignificant compared to the iPod)
Apple makes money off of iTunes Music Store - they won't tell us how much, but it is a money maker (all be it insignificant compared to the iPod)
ViviUO
Apr 25, 01:07 PM
Black as a color option, please.
OR make them out of carbon fiber.
OR make them out of carbon fiber.
kettle
Oct 27, 03:28 PM
What seriously kills me about all this is that those sensationalist chimpanzees from GP rally against a computer company that presently has roughly 6% (or less) of the computer market....almost every throw away computer I've ever seen were Compaqs, HP's, Dells, Gateways/e-Machines, and a few other generic crap boxes from some nameless plastic factory stuffing windoze in a toaster. Seriously, Greenpeace goofballs should stop stargazing up their rectums and take a look at the largest contributors of hardware refuse. Macs as far as I know are not easily tossed out. apple computers have been primarily hand me downs unless some terrible accident happened rendering it useless. seriously, no one throws away a functioning mac, unless they decided lead paint makes for good breakfast cereal.
How many of these sap-chugging numbskulls go after Dell for making computers that generally end up being sidewalk fodder? perhaps they should invest their energies into designing the green computer, since they seem to have so much gloriously skilled scientists at their disposal to expose the evil apple. Go team planet!
yeah, Team Planet.
If it really mattered the chain would be broken at the top of the pyramid, instead they just farm us for every last cent in our pockets.
They quote facts as if they actually believe that people are 'that stupid', it becomes a stumbling block for their statistics. How many people give just 'yeah, whatever' answers to people collecting 'market research' because actually they are too busy to give an honest answer to an 'in reality' a very complex question.
If you ask stupid questions, you get stupid answers.
Popular science 'the GREEN movement' seems to thrive on a consensus of simple answers to very complex questions.
How much of our lives is now governed by a computer model that has trouble predicting tomorrows weather let alone the demise of the human race.
Oh spare me the guilt and the need to confess for my consumer driven instincts, will you forgive me and all the other 'sinners' if we pay for a whole new layer of religion to 'lord it' over our daily doings?
If you look on the fake apple site and look at the pictures, there are apple machines everywhere, how is that likely? About as likely as an apple turning up into some kids pram at a Mac Expo propaganda photo shoot.
Please greenpeace, if you have something to say, tell me the facts straight, otherwise I'm too busy paying my taxes for a work shy troop of pseudo scientists to go around telling me how much further bureaucracy will be required to save the world. (please do not mistake this for stupidity) (oh and get a job, preferably one that doesn't recycle other people's tax into more paranoid and privacy invading bureaucratic waste.)
I think the point that most people are trying to avoid is that at worse, there are too many people using too few resources and there's a whole lot of squawking 'chicken littles' who seem to think if we repent our sins that some how nature will not jump the artificial gap that has been built between us and our environment.
You can't buck the market.
and before someone points out undeniables like the value of making better products for our environment, I say great, lets start this new found efficiency and exercise it top down.
I would gladly pay less tax for a more efficient government and spend the savings on more expensive products resulting from costs passed on to me by highly regulated manufacturers.
I will however, grow tired of paying for this never ending environmental 'gravy train'.
Perhaps, but the sooner man is extinguished from this planet the sooner the planet can recover to it's equilibrium.
The truth kinda hurts.
How many of these sap-chugging numbskulls go after Dell for making computers that generally end up being sidewalk fodder? perhaps they should invest their energies into designing the green computer, since they seem to have so much gloriously skilled scientists at their disposal to expose the evil apple. Go team planet!
yeah, Team Planet.
If it really mattered the chain would be broken at the top of the pyramid, instead they just farm us for every last cent in our pockets.
They quote facts as if they actually believe that people are 'that stupid', it becomes a stumbling block for their statistics. How many people give just 'yeah, whatever' answers to people collecting 'market research' because actually they are too busy to give an honest answer to an 'in reality' a very complex question.
If you ask stupid questions, you get stupid answers.
Popular science 'the GREEN movement' seems to thrive on a consensus of simple answers to very complex questions.
How much of our lives is now governed by a computer model that has trouble predicting tomorrows weather let alone the demise of the human race.
Oh spare me the guilt and the need to confess for my consumer driven instincts, will you forgive me and all the other 'sinners' if we pay for a whole new layer of religion to 'lord it' over our daily doings?
If you look on the fake apple site and look at the pictures, there are apple machines everywhere, how is that likely? About as likely as an apple turning up into some kids pram at a Mac Expo propaganda photo shoot.
Please greenpeace, if you have something to say, tell me the facts straight, otherwise I'm too busy paying my taxes for a work shy troop of pseudo scientists to go around telling me how much further bureaucracy will be required to save the world. (please do not mistake this for stupidity) (oh and get a job, preferably one that doesn't recycle other people's tax into more paranoid and privacy invading bureaucratic waste.)
I think the point that most people are trying to avoid is that at worse, there are too many people using too few resources and there's a whole lot of squawking 'chicken littles' who seem to think if we repent our sins that some how nature will not jump the artificial gap that has been built between us and our environment.
You can't buck the market.
and before someone points out undeniables like the value of making better products for our environment, I say great, lets start this new found efficiency and exercise it top down.
I would gladly pay less tax for a more efficient government and spend the savings on more expensive products resulting from costs passed on to me by highly regulated manufacturers.
I will however, grow tired of paying for this never ending environmental 'gravy train'.
Perhaps, but the sooner man is extinguished from this planet the sooner the planet can recover to it's equilibrium.
The truth kinda hurts.
Steel28
Apr 25, 02:52 PM
Nice. My 17 MBP (Early 2009) will be getting close to the end of its life cycle by then, allowing me to easily slide into a new MBP.
same here, I have late 2008 13" MB and looking forward to the redesign
same here, I have late 2008 13" MB and looking forward to the redesign
0 comments:
Post a Comment