DualShock
Apr 14, 01:30 PM
I hope this wasn't the guy in charge of the Danger/Sidekick data center...
Vedhead
Apr 5, 11:01 AM
the iPad will be for normal people when you don't have the sync it.
all this syncing ********* needs to stop.
I shouldn't need another computer to use my iPad.
Makes no sense at all.
all this syncing ********* needs to stop.
I shouldn't need another computer to use my iPad.
Makes no sense at all.
Mowgli21
Apr 24, 08:51 AM
have you tried adding the NAS to your login items via system preferences > accounts > login items ?
this will ensure the NAS mounts automatically when you boot your Mac.
Just tried that to no avail. It comes up with a little box saying "Connection failed. The server"nasbox" may not exist or it is unavailable at this time. Check the server name or IP address, check your network connection and then try again"
I have noticed when i go into finder and click on the nasbox it auto logs in but for about 2 seconds it says "connecting" and then works when i launch itunes.:confused:
this will ensure the NAS mounts automatically when you boot your Mac.
Just tried that to no avail. It comes up with a little box saying "Connection failed. The server"nasbox" may not exist or it is unavailable at this time. Check the server name or IP address, check your network connection and then try again"
I have noticed when i go into finder and click on the nasbox it auto logs in but for about 2 seconds it says "connecting" and then works when i launch itunes.:confused:
cherry su
Apr 29, 01:35 PM
They already do. They take our tax money and use it to subsidize the oil companies. And they most certainly approve.
Ah, so the tax is used to subsidize the oil companies? That makes sense. No wonder the oil barons approve.
Ah, so the tax is used to subsidize the oil companies? That makes sense. No wonder the oil barons approve.
more...
bigjobby
Apr 12, 06:26 PM
I've downloaded the update - how do I get ical and Outlook to sync?
I can't get this to work either even when the correct sync services box is checked. :confused:
I can't get this to work either even when the correct sync services box is checked. :confused:
ECUpirate44
Mar 28, 08:41 AM
iPhone 5 :D
more...
whoodie
Mar 19, 12:09 PM
I got in line at Knox at roughly 5am. At 7:30 an apple employee came out to hand out tickets. He got 15 people down the line and then said he was out. I was about 20-30th in line. Sounds like we all got fed a line of BS when we were told they held all shipments from this week for Sat. morning.
Melrose
May 6, 04:41 PM
if maybe if you go spec for spec but often times you end up having to pay for a bunch of crap you do not need or want to get what you want from Apple.
Take this. I needed/wanted a 15in Laptop higher res screen and i7 processor. I bought it for around $1500. Same laptop from Apple over 2 grand. I was willing to give up the alumium body and battery life because they were not as high on my list.
Or try this one. Someone wants a 17 (hell even 15 in) screen but only really need a core duo or a i3 processor. If they went Apple they have to pay a huge tax to pay for all the extra crap they do not want/need just to get that 15 or 17 in screen they want/need.
Apple Tax is in the form of having to buy a bunch of extra crap you do not need/want to get the few items that you do need/want.
Very true - component for component, Mac's are the same as Windows-based PCs. In which case, the only argument that can be tendered about the supposed "Mac Tax" is that Apple simply does not make a low-end computer.
In the end, with prices neutral, it boils down to personal preference and user experiences - in which case, if you use Windows and love it (whether it gives you problems or not), that's what you get. The funny thing is that everybody argues these points over and over but in the end it boils down to what the user prefers, nothing more. I base my opinions on my experience, those of others I know (both who use Macs and who don't), tempered with what I read in legitimate publications, which is all that can be expected of anyone.
:)
Take this. I needed/wanted a 15in Laptop higher res screen and i7 processor. I bought it for around $1500. Same laptop from Apple over 2 grand. I was willing to give up the alumium body and battery life because they were not as high on my list.
Or try this one. Someone wants a 17 (hell even 15 in) screen but only really need a core duo or a i3 processor. If they went Apple they have to pay a huge tax to pay for all the extra crap they do not want/need just to get that 15 or 17 in screen they want/need.
Apple Tax is in the form of having to buy a bunch of extra crap you do not need/want to get the few items that you do need/want.
Very true - component for component, Mac's are the same as Windows-based PCs. In which case, the only argument that can be tendered about the supposed "Mac Tax" is that Apple simply does not make a low-end computer.
In the end, with prices neutral, it boils down to personal preference and user experiences - in which case, if you use Windows and love it (whether it gives you problems or not), that's what you get. The funny thing is that everybody argues these points over and over but in the end it boils down to what the user prefers, nothing more. I base my opinions on my experience, those of others I know (both who use Macs and who don't), tempered with what I read in legitimate publications, which is all that can be expected of anyone.
:)
more...
yankeedoodle
Nov 22, 02:18 AM
Sounds like cold fusion to me... :D
Stella
Mar 28, 11:43 AM
So Lion won't debut on WWDC? Just preview? :confused:
Hum...
No OSX has ever been released at a WWDC - only announced / previewed.
Hum...
No OSX has ever been released at a WWDC - only announced / previewed.
more...
citizenzen
Apr 7, 08:00 PM
50 billion out of a budget of what? A trillion and a bit?
I could remove 25% of your body weight and make you slim and sexy.
On the other hand, I could remove less than 2% of your body weight and render you a useless, comatose, vegetable.
It's not a matter of how much is cut as it is what is cut.
I could remove 25% of your body weight and make you slim and sexy.
On the other hand, I could remove less than 2% of your body weight and render you a useless, comatose, vegetable.
It's not a matter of how much is cut as it is what is cut.
Huntn
Apr 27, 09:51 PM
After listening to the sound bite of Trump asking for both Obama's birth certificate and college records, he strikes me as a political opportunist grasping for straws or he is a raciest.
more...
toddybody
May 2, 01:34 PM
you are quickly encroaching into wild conspiracy theory territory if you think all these people/sites are making this up.
Arn
lol:d
Arn
lol:d
rdowns
Apr 27, 08:37 AM
I am so disgusted with our media for enabling this jackass. Pretty much every thing out of his mouth is a lie. He flip flops on issues and the media ignores it.
more...
MacNut
Apr 5, 12:06 PM
In the snow areas more damage is done to the roads with thawing and freezing than the cars driving over them. Road salts eat through quicker than cars just driving on them. Sure the cars add to the wear but they are not the only factor. As long as we plow and treat the roads they will need to be repaired quicker regardless of how much traffic there is.
ehoui
Apr 27, 06:38 PM
Trump has no moral compass.
That may be, but that does not excuse one from referring to one's own.
That may be, but that does not excuse one from referring to one's own.
more...
robbieduncan
Mar 29, 08:12 AM
from your same source, the VERY NEXT paragraph:
The EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM is a great example of a well designed EF-S series lens. It provides a field of view similar to what Canon�s popular EF 16-35mm f/2.8 L II USM and EF 17-40mm f/4.0 L USM do on a full frame camera like the 5D Mark II.
Yup. So the EF-s lens is providing a field of view of 16-35.2mm in full-frame, 35mm equivalent. So is effected by the 1.6 crop. Which is what I've been saying all along.
The EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM is a great example of a well designed EF-S series lens. It provides a field of view similar to what Canon�s popular EF 16-35mm f/2.8 L II USM and EF 17-40mm f/4.0 L USM do on a full frame camera like the 5D Mark II.
Yup. So the EF-s lens is providing a field of view of 16-35.2mm in full-frame, 35mm equivalent. So is effected by the 1.6 crop. Which is what I've been saying all along.
apolloa
Apr 12, 12:58 PM
aaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhh I want to buy this!!!! But alas I cannot afford it at present, well it depends on if I get a 3DS next weekend or not. But having used the demo of Outlook I love it, much better then Mail IMO.
If anyone knows of a cheaper price then around �160 in the UK let me know cause that's the best I've found.
If anyone knows of a cheaper price then around �160 in the UK let me know cause that's the best I've found.
DoFoT9
Feb 28, 08:47 PM
I have just figured something out in the server admin app that allows you to modify the services i will upload the images of this after i finnish uploading the rest of the images. this will take some time.
have you used osx server before?
have you used osx server before?
Liquorpuki
Mar 11, 04:54 PM
German and Japan are even better.
Which is ok because when the car breaks down, you donate twice as much money to your American mechanic
Which is ok because when the car breaks down, you donate twice as much money to your American mechanic
bretm
Oct 10, 12:10 PM
For those of you saying that we live in a capitalistic society... not by a long shot. Corporate welfare is MUCH MUCH bigger than any fictional welfare queen in Brooklyn. These companies receive tax cuts, loopholes, exemptions far beyond what a middle class suburban couple has access to.
What Target and Walmart are doing is actually against some of the monopoly legistation that was passed in the early 20th century. One of the tenets was that a company coulodn't tell another producer who they could sell to, at what price, etc. This prevented a very large company from gaining to much of an advantage over their competitors.
What Target and Walmart are probably threatening is to just jack up the prices on the DVDs a couple of dollars. This improves their bottom line and reduces the number of impluse buys a consumer makes on a DVD. Or to not put DVD on encaps, in front of the stores next to the checkout. They really do have a myriad of ways of making the studios lose some profit. At tsome point though, the retailers are going to shaft themselves. It really is a game of chicken and the first one to blink, gets the bullet in the head (how's that for mixed metaphors?)
First, no company pays taxes. YOU pay all their taxes. In a capitalistic society it doesn't matter if they are given tax breaks or increases. It is all passed on to the consumer to achieve the bottom line.
You cite it yourself in your misunderstanding that Walmart or Target will just jack up their prices to increase their profit. That's what a company does if your increase their corporate taxes. Decrease them and they can better compete.
Now Walmart and Target jacking up their prices probably wouldn't hurt anyone but Walmart and Target. They may make more per item but obviously they would sell less DVDs. And since they're not in cahoots with each other (THAT would actually be a monopolistic type practice) neither can actually jack the price, because everyone would simply go to Walmart or Target respectively. Or Best Buy, or Curcuit City or whoever. Walmart may be the biggest seller of DVDs, but it they yank them then they won't be. And they won't pull people into their stores to buy stuff they actually make profit on. Another company will glady pickup the slack.
The reason Walmart and Target are all talk is because they have no hand. None. They're backed into a corner. Thier best bet is to open their own online download biz.
This stuff is the same year after year. Companies ride their little economic model for years without looking to the future. Then they complain moan and threaten. If they really had options, they would simply implement them.
What Target and Walmart are doing is actually against some of the monopoly legistation that was passed in the early 20th century. One of the tenets was that a company coulodn't tell another producer who they could sell to, at what price, etc. This prevented a very large company from gaining to much of an advantage over their competitors.
What Target and Walmart are probably threatening is to just jack up the prices on the DVDs a couple of dollars. This improves their bottom line and reduces the number of impluse buys a consumer makes on a DVD. Or to not put DVD on encaps, in front of the stores next to the checkout. They really do have a myriad of ways of making the studios lose some profit. At tsome point though, the retailers are going to shaft themselves. It really is a game of chicken and the first one to blink, gets the bullet in the head (how's that for mixed metaphors?)
First, no company pays taxes. YOU pay all their taxes. In a capitalistic society it doesn't matter if they are given tax breaks or increases. It is all passed on to the consumer to achieve the bottom line.
You cite it yourself in your misunderstanding that Walmart or Target will just jack up their prices to increase their profit. That's what a company does if your increase their corporate taxes. Decrease them and they can better compete.
Now Walmart and Target jacking up their prices probably wouldn't hurt anyone but Walmart and Target. They may make more per item but obviously they would sell less DVDs. And since they're not in cahoots with each other (THAT would actually be a monopolistic type practice) neither can actually jack the price, because everyone would simply go to Walmart or Target respectively. Or Best Buy, or Curcuit City or whoever. Walmart may be the biggest seller of DVDs, but it they yank them then they won't be. And they won't pull people into their stores to buy stuff they actually make profit on. Another company will glady pickup the slack.
The reason Walmart and Target are all talk is because they have no hand. None. They're backed into a corner. Thier best bet is to open their own online download biz.
This stuff is the same year after year. Companies ride their little economic model for years without looking to the future. Then they complain moan and threaten. If they really had options, they would simply implement them.
roach
Mar 23, 10:34 AM
That's why you can buy that case as an accessory, it holds the iPad upright.
While I don't think the iPad is a device for schools and serious stuff, it's awesome for when you want to watch a movie in an airplane or bus. In an airplane, you can't use your laptop since there isn't enough space to open it because of the seat in front of you, so the only way you could watch a movie on a plane is either by taking an iPhone/iPod Touch, or using a portable DVD player (yuck!). But if you want a bigger screen, you can get the iPad and it will fit in the 10cm space between your head and the seat in front of you perfectly.
Watching a movie on a laptop would drain the battery within 1 or 2 hours anyway, while on the iPad you can easily watch 3 movies and still have some battery left (if the 10 hour battery life is true).
Using case to prop up an iPad has a very limited angle viewing. Just hope the angle available will allow you to view movies from airplane seat to lying on a bed.
Hate to say it but netbook is a better option. You can't use screen size or cramp keyboards (which is better than iPad's screen thumb input) argument because there are tons out there ranging from 10 inch and up. And they are getting more powerfull (ions).
While I don't think the iPad is a device for schools and serious stuff, it's awesome for when you want to watch a movie in an airplane or bus. In an airplane, you can't use your laptop since there isn't enough space to open it because of the seat in front of you, so the only way you could watch a movie on a plane is either by taking an iPhone/iPod Touch, or using a portable DVD player (yuck!). But if you want a bigger screen, you can get the iPad and it will fit in the 10cm space between your head and the seat in front of you perfectly.
Watching a movie on a laptop would drain the battery within 1 or 2 hours anyway, while on the iPad you can easily watch 3 movies and still have some battery left (if the 10 hour battery life is true).
Using case to prop up an iPad has a very limited angle viewing. Just hope the angle available will allow you to view movies from airplane seat to lying on a bed.
Hate to say it but netbook is a better option. You can't use screen size or cramp keyboards (which is better than iPad's screen thumb input) argument because there are tons out there ranging from 10 inch and up. And they are getting more powerfull (ions).
themacthinker
Oct 26, 11:32 PM
I would have like to see more of a boost on the storage side as well. It would be nice .Mac could give 5GB of storage for instance for the 99bucks.
What do you guys think?
What do you guys think?
NamJangNamJa
Nov 14, 12:15 PM
What is a Zune? :D :eek:
I don't know, either. :D :eek:
I don't know, either. :D :eek:
0 comments:
Post a Comment